[Edllguy]

With the housing now planning currently going through the process for six points, how is the skyrocketing costs of construction and building budgets going to impact the roll out of these projects?

Huge projects are being scaled back or outright cancelled!

 

[Northern Light]

With the housing now planning currently going through the process for six points, how is the skyrocketing costs of construction and building budgets going to impact the roll out of these projects?

Huge projects are being scaled back or outright cancelled!

Outside of the housing component of the TMU Science building, what projects are you thinking of?

 

[HousingNowTO]

With the housing now planning currently going through the process for six points, how is the skyrocketing costs of construction and building budgets going to impact the roll out of these projects?

Huge projects are being scaled back or outright cancelled!

Excellent question. Essentially, our assumption is that is WHY zero of the approved and RFP'd sites under the "Housing Now" program have actually broken-ground yet.

Projects like WILSON and VICTORIA PARK --- are stuck with the same problem as the OPEN DOOR sites that have been in the media recently.

The only viable fix - is if one of the Banks (w/ CMHC support) starts to offer below-market long-term construction loans for new-build Affordable Rental... otherwise these projects will go idle.

‘These projects can’t proceed if the numbers don’t work’: Interest rate hikes put Scarborough affordable housing project at risk

City officials fear rising costs could put other desperately needed housing projects on hold.

www.thestar.com

 

[Northern Light]

Excellent question. Essentially, our assumption is that is WHY zero of the approved and RFP'd sites under the "Housing Now" program have actually broken-ground yet.

Projects like WILSON and VICTORIA PARK --- are stuck with the same problem as the OPEN DOOR sites that have been in the media recently.

The only viable fix - is if one of the Banks (w/ CMHC support) starts to offer below-market long-term construction loans for new-build Affordable Rental... otherwise these projects will go idle.

‘These projects can’t proceed if the numbers don’t work’: Interest rate hikes put Scarborough affordable housing project at risk

City officials fear rising costs could put other desperately needed housing projects on hold.

www.thestar.com

Worth noting here is that CHMC has been kind enough 'ahem'. to finance REITs in expanding their portfolios by way of buying existing units from other landlords, and in so doing driving up the price of said units .........

While its support of actually building new, affordable units is............somewhat less fervent.

https://www.focus-consult.com/the-perverse-math-of-homeless-investment/

***

I would also add, the City/CreateTO's turnout time on the Phase 1 sites was less than ideal. Financing/construction costs would have been somewhat less of an issue for the phase 1 sites had the turnaround time on those projects been better.

 

[HousingNowTO]

I would also add, the City/CreateTO's turnout time on the Phase 1 sites was less than ideal. Financing/construction costs would have been somewhat less of an issue for the phase 1 sites had the turnaround time on those projects been better.

Yeah, the City took a long time to find its feet on the Phase-1 sites... which was expected and why we asked them to fast-track ALL of them (via MZO's) at the first Executive meeting about them in JAN. 2019...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1087402907434024961

 

[ADRM]

While its support of actually building new, affordable units is............somewhat less fervent.

This is worth unpacking (in addition to @HousingNowTO's previous alluding): it's not hyperbole to suggest that, shy of CMHC dramatically and immediately amending its approach to the incentivization of affordable housing, we will see next to no affordable housing built in the current rate and cost environment.

To put @Northern Light's statement in slightly different terms, if you assume that RCFI and the Co-Investment program the two most significant ways in which CMHC participates in the delivery of affordable housing at scale, it is then also true to say that CMHC only participates in the delivery of affordable housing at scale in a way in which it makes money off of it!

The harsh reality in today's environment is that some combination of three levels of government are going to have to start doing things differently immediately if they want to see a meaningful amount of affordable housing built in the GTHA. The City of Toronto is worse than broke, the Province doesn't really give a hoot about affordable housing, and the Federal Government doesn't currently have a program that suits the market -- that is the state of play today.

 

[HousingNowTO]

This is worth unpacking (in addition to @HousingNowTO's previous alluding): it's not hyperbole to suggest that, shy of CMHC dramatically and immediately amending its approach to the incentivization of affordable housing, we will see next to no affordable housing built in the current rate and cost environment.
.

Our volunteers have been having the discussion above regularly with 416-Liberal MPs since the last Federal Election.

Everyone KNOWS the Math, but nobody likes the Numbers / Costs for projects that (at best) won't be Move-In ready until 2028-ish.

They like the RAPID HOUSING sites because they will be real and Move-In ready before the next Federal election in 2025... and there are fewer ways for those kinds of projects to get derailed.

 

[Amare]

The towers should be much taller then what we're seeing, but this is Toronto where we do things backwards and build things extremely dense where either there is no transit or access to transit is not straightforward. Then we turn around and do this where there are transit hubs literally next door.

This city never ceases to amaze in the mistakes we make when it comes to "planning". Nevertheless, the proposal looks outstanding so far (minus the density issues).

 

[HousingNowTO]

The towers should be much taller then what we're seeing, but this is Toronto where we do things backwards and build things extremely dense where either there is no transit or access to transit is not straightforward. Then we turn around and do this where there are transit hubs literally next door.

This city never ceases to amaze in the mistakes we make when it comes to "planning". Nevertheless, the proposal looks outstanding so far (minus the density issues).

There were lots of constraints placed on BLOCK 1 so that it didn't Shadow sections of the new Etobicoke Civic Centre (Block 4) to the North...

That's why the low heights on the towers - and the WIDE gap between the towers on BLOCK 1.

 

[fanoftoronto]

There were lots of constraints placed on BLOCK 1 so that it didn't Shadow sections of the new Etobicoke Civic Centre (Block 4) to the North...

That's why the low heights on the towers - and the WIDE gap between the towers on BLOCK 1.

View attachment 430936
View attachment 430935
View attachment 430934

Thanks for the explanation. It is very helpful to have a representative to navigate the requirements of a project like this.

Is there any reason for limiting the total number of towers in the other blocks? Blocks 3 and 6 both have only 1 tower each. Block 6 is literally the largest block at 3.27 acres. Block 7 is envisioned with a school, so 1 tower in that block isn't surprising.

 

[HousingNowTO]

Thanks for the explanation. It is very helpful to have a representative to navigate the requirements of a project like this.

Is there any reason for limiting the total number of towers in the other blocks? Blocks 3 and 6 both have only 1 tower each. Block 6 is literally the largest block at 3.27 acres. Block 7 is envisioned with a school, so 1 tower in that block isn't surprising.

View attachment 430960

There are many "reasons" as described in the Design Principles & Approach that were required by Toronto City Planning - BUT honestly I don't think there are many GOOD ones...

Since the outcome of reasons like - "Concentrate Towers to the North", etc - results in put more people and apartment units further away from the Transit-Hub.

It's the core of the whole City of Toronto Urban Design priorities-problem - that their #1 priority & focus is about the people OUTSIDE of the new buildings, rather than the new people who will be living INSIDE the new buildings.

 

[interchange42]

There were lots of constraints placed on BLOCK 1 so that it didn't Shadow sections of the new Etobicoke Civic Centre (Block 4) to the North...

That's why the low heights on the towers - and the WIDE gap between the towers on BLOCK 1.

View attachment 430936
View attachment 430935
View attachment 430934

Recent posts about the 5207 Dundas St W site in particular (Block 1) have been moved off to their own thread, while this thread will be continued to be used as a master thread for the various blocks around the old six points interchange site.

42