Toronto 1366 Yonge | 159.3m | 49s | Bazis | Rosario Varacalli

renx.ca

BAZIS buys midtown Toronto property, plans 41-storey tower

BAZIS has closed on the acquisition of a Yonge St., site in midtown Toronto where it has already submitted an application to construct a 41-storey mixed-use development.
renx.ca renx.ca

King said BAZIS submitted its development application to the City of Toronto in mid-September, before the property’s sale officially closed, to avoid having to deal with inclusionary zoning requirements that came into play on Sept. 18.

“It’s a really good asset as it is,” said King. “It’s a good holding property.

“They’re obviously going to do everything they can to push zoning along, but it has great income and a great tenant mix in a great neighbourhood. They’re satisfied with it from that point of view as well as on the investment side of things.”

What BAZIS is proposing​

BAZIS has submitted applications for official plan amendment, zoning bylaw amendment and site-plan approval for a building that would have a 33-storey tower above an eight-storey podium which steps back at the fifth floor.

BAZIS has proposed to build a 489-unit mixed-use condo designed by Rosario Varacalli on the northwest corner of Yonge Street and Balmoral Avenue.

The developer is proposing a mix of 176 studios, 78 one-bedroom units, 162 two-bedroom units and 73 three-bedroom units supported by a variety of amenities on the second through sixth floors.

The MBTW Group is the landscape architect and GBCA Architects is the heritage architect for the proposed development.

The proposal includes approximately 1,100 square feet of retail space across three units at grade.

BAZIS is also proposing just two vehicle parking spaces, which would be reserved for car-share purposes, along with 500 bicycle spaces – 489 for residents and 11 for visitors.
Click to expand...
 
yup, and the policies approved by council will have to be modified now anyway as the Province is proposing to limit inclusionary zoning to 5% of units now, which is substantially lower than the policy which was originally approved by Council.
 
innsertnamehere said:
yup, and the policies approved by council will have to be modified now anyway as the Province is proposing to limit inclusionary zoning to 5% of units now, which is substantially lower than the policy which was originally approved by Council.
Click to expand...
Why even have municipal governments if the province is going to micromanage everything they do?
 
TossYourJacket said:
Why even have municipal governments if the province is going to micromanage everything they do?
Click to expand...
Because municipal governments have abjectly failed at their role with respect to housing provision, and the course must be corrected. We are in a housing crisis of epic proportions and there is too much NIMBY regulatory capture of municipal governments. It's appropriate for the province to step in as this is a matter of provincial interest requiring provincial coordination.

I do not agree with all of their past changes or proposed changes. But I do agree that municipalities cannot be left to keep ruining our province's economic and social future by making housing too difficult to develop.
 
Kenojuak said:
Because municipal governments have abjectly failed at their role with respect to housing provision, and the course must be corrected. We are in a housing crisis of epic proportions and there is too much NIMBY regulatory capture of municipal governments. It's appropriate for the province to step in as this is a matter of provincial interest requiring provincial coordination.

I do not agree with all of their past changes or proposed changes. But I do agree that municipalities cannot be left to keep ruining our province's economic and social future by making housing too difficult to develop.
Click to expand...
I think this is one of the most nervous /upvotes I ever committed because it ultimately involves Doug....

...but in principal, I agree...if the cities can't get their fingers out over this, then the Province should. So in effect they're doing their job.
 
Kenojuak said:
Because municipal governments have abjectly failed at their role with respect to housing provision, and the course must be corrected. We are in a housing crisis of epic proportions and there is too much NIMBY regulatory capture of municipal governments. It's appropriate for the province to step in as this is a matter of provincial interest requiring provincial coordination.

I do not agree with all of their past changes or proposed changes. But I do agree that municipalities cannot be left to keep ruining our province's economic and social future by making housing too difficult to develop.
Click to expand...
While I generally agree that municipalities overall have done a poor job with housing, how does capping the amount of affordable housing in inclusionary zoning help lower-income people with the housing crisis. The province is actively making it harder for people below certain incomes to afford a home with this policy. If they had simply set a minimum amount within inclusionary zoning then that would be reasonable, but to override the city policy with one that is actually worse for people who cannot afford a home is short-sighted and regressive.
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
I think this is one of the most nervous /upvotes I ever committed because it ultimately involves Doug....

...but in principal, I agree...if the cities can't get their fingers out over this, then the Province should. So in effect they're doing their job.
Click to expand...
They're doing their job by making less inclusionary zoning than the city wants? I guess if you're rich they are.
 
TossYourJacket said:
They're doing their job by making less inclusionary zoning than the city wants? I guess if you're rich they are.
Click to expand...
I defer back to the Doug problem I mentioned at the beginning...

...and I'm what Mr. Musk refers to as a "peasant". So no, lol.

Edit/Update: As I also said, I agree in priciple for the province stepping in when cities won't...but I will also say in lieu of our government's behavior of late, I have absolutely no confidence in them to make the right decisions in execution of their authority here. So I'll be retracting my /upvote for the post in question....as I feel I am enabling the bads running our government otherwise. /bleh
 
Last edited:
Kenojuak said:
Because municipal governments have abjectly failed at their role with respect to housing provision, and the course must be corrected. We are in a housing crisis of epic proportions and there is too much NIMBY regulatory capture of municipal governments. It's appropriate for the province to step in as this is a matter of provincial interest requiring provincial coordination.

I do not agree with all of their past changes or proposed changes. But I do agree that municipalities cannot be left to keep ruining our province's economic and social future by making housing too difficult to develop.
Click to expand...

As others have noted, there are certainly reforms in zoning we can all get behind; many of which Toronto has been adopting (ie. removing parking minimums), but which are years late in arriving; and further there are some issues not yet fulsomely tackled (yellowbelt, particularly when facing major arterial roads).

That said, the industry is extremely taxed for labour supply and I'm not convinced that if you abolished zoning entirely tomorrow we would see a material increase in unit construction. Would we see some cost decrease? I think so, but not at a level that would be material to lower middle income earners, let alone those who are homeless or on the cusp thereof.

Which is not to say there isn't room to use provincial tools to nudge certain reforms along more quickly; but rather one shouldn't over estimate their value or underestimate their consequences; including any counter re-action.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top