Maybe i'm off base here but this building proposal looks absolutely ridiculous. 0/10. I'd rather the building be restored and left alone or demolished. This is the the worst of all worlds.
 
This one is getting a Final Report that recommends approval, going to the Feb 24th mtg of TEYCC.


22 affordable rental units secured as part of the development, for a period of 20-40 years.

Aside from my other reservations about this proposal that many here share, I'm not particularly keen on such short terms in respect of the affordable rental component.
 
Article in The Star concerning this development and opposition to it.


Of note, while some neighbours are complaining about it being a potential eyesore (I think most would agree),,,,,,,,,

The loudest objection, and the one that matters most insofar as its backed by Councillor Cressy, is the need for more, and more deeply affordable housing.
 
Northern Light said:
.

The loudest objection, and the one that matters most insofar as its backed by Councillor Cressy, is the need for more, and more deeply affordable housing.
Click to expand...
Hey i''m all for affordable housing, but what's going on in this area has anyone on UT even noticed or just closed your eyes?...people begging. all over the middle of these busy streets at any given time, also they're all over the gas station and nearby businesses,
...i don't get it?.. these people are mentally ill and need the city to give them more than affordable housing to make their life's more comfortable
 
Automation Gallery said:
Hey i''m all for affordable housing, but what's going on in this area has anyone on UT even noticed or just closed your eyes?...people begging. all over the middle of these busy streets at any given time, also they're all over the gas station and nearby businesses,
...i don't get it?.. these people are mentally ill and need the city to give them more than affordable housing to make their life's more comfortable
Click to expand...

You're right; You don't get it.

SMH 😩
 
Automation Gallery said:
Hey i''m all for affordable housing, but what's going on in this area has anyone on UT even noticed or just closed your eyes?...people begging. all over the middle of these busy streets at any given time, also they're all over the gas station and nearby businesses,
...i don't get it?.. these people are mentally ill and need the city to give them more than affordable housing to make their life's more comfortable
Click to expand...
...perhaps this a sign we need much better income redistribution programs? Non?
 
Automation Gallery said:
the city to give them more than affordable housing to make their life's more comfortable
Click to expand...
There’s increasing research that shows that providing stable, affordable (for the person’s income level) housing significantly improves people’s chances of improving their lives. If we can pair that with extensive social supports, the chance of a positive outcome improves even more. That’s not ‘cheap’, but it may be more cost-effective than what we’re doing today.

Also, what you’ve said is true: we do have to do more than simply supply affordable housing - but we haven’t even done that yet.
 
Northern Light said:
Article in The Star concerning this development and opposition to it.


Of note, while some neighbours are complaining about it being a potential eyesore (I think most would agree),,,,,,,,,

The loudest objection, and the one that matters most insofar as its backed by Councillor Cressy, is the need for more, and more deeply affordable housing.
Click to expand...

I find it somewhat odd that the neighbours would complain this is a potential eyesore. It's next to an auto body / rental truck lot, a gas station, two of possibly the worst PoMo office buildings in the City, and nothing else very special. If anything, I think restoring the Parkdale Arms would massively improve the neighbourhood.
 
mcornett said:
I find it somewhat odd that the neighbours would complain this is a potential eyesore. It's next to an auto body / rental truck lot, a gas station, two of possibly the worst PoMo office buildings in the City, and nothing else very special. If anything, I think restoring the Parkdale Arms would massively improve the neighbourhood.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the nondescript row of buildings next door (which serve their function fine).

Besides the affordable housing angle (which seems to be getting figured out) and possibly the aesthetic of the new tower (which is always in the eye of the beholder), it's hard to argue against this development.

- creates added density to a main street w/ transit right on the door step, w/ other types nearby (Ontario line, GO transit, 501 streetcar)
- no permanent parking
- doesn't create shadowing on park space nearby
- restores an old building that gives this intersection a bit of character
- creates two retail areas

Could they add more affordable housing? Sure they could. But it seems like the type that's existing isn't equal to what is being designed, so I get the issue w/ replacing it 1:1, as it'd take up more space.
Could the massing be nicer? Sure it could. But I get that the owner also has a budget. Not every building can be A+. It's a difficult site due to the style of the existing building. I'd argue that adding more detail to the new portion would have it clash even more, drawing more attention to it.
Could the mix of units and sizes be better? Sure it could. But that's a financial decision made by the developer.
Could it be shorter? Yup, but the surrounding area gives precedent to a similar size. DNA 3 is what, 14 storey high? The complex at King/Niagara is 13 storey high. The office building south of it isn't that far off. We're a growing city, we can't have 2-3 storey buildings everywhere, especially in downtown.

I'm my mind, more positives than negatives.
 
Last edited:
I think this could be one of the best outcomes for this building?
It's getting restored to close to its original design?
 
Automation Gallery said:
Hey i''m all for affordable housing, but what's going on in this area has anyone on UT even noticed or just closed your eyes?...people begging. all over the middle of these busy streets at any given time, also they're all over the gas station and nearby businesses,
...i don't get it?.. these people are mentally ill and need the city to give them more than affordable housing to make their life's more comfortable
Click to expand...
Palace Arms always seems to get the rap for this unfortunate situation but it is much more related to the Homes First Strachan House shelter/welfare centre at Wellington and Strachan and not Palace Arms. Either way, the area needs much more in the way of accessible services to assist as much as we can.
 

Securing Affordable Housing in the Palace Arms Redevelopment

City Councillor, Ward 10, Spadina-Fort York
www.joecressy.com

Commentary from Councillor Cressy about the affordable housing component in the redevelopment.

Main part:

Under the City’s Dwelling Room Replacement Policy, this would mean a full replacement of the 12,000 square feet currently on site as new affordable housing.

I am glad to be able to report that not only did we achieve full replacement of the 12,000 square feet currently on site, we continued to push hard, and by identifying funds from other development sites that I had allocated to affordable housing, we achieved an additional 3,000 square feet — bringing us to a total of 15,000 square feet of new affordable housing. That’s 25% more than what exists today.

With City Council’s pre-approval of housing benefits for all the future tenants in the new affordable units, the rent paid by tenants will be tied to income, and thus deeply affordable to people on social assistance. In other words, these units will be rent-geared-to-income (RGI) and truly affordable.

Working with non-profit affordable housing providers, housing experts, and City staff, the next step is to design the best program model for the affordable space, including designing and laying out the exact number of units.

For the existing tenants of the Palace Arms, the affordable housing replacement includes their right to return, and securing units in the redevelopment at similar rents to what they are currently paying, receiving a monthly Rent-Gap Payment from the date that they move out and until the new affordable units are ready for moving back in; compensation including moving costs, and having access to Housing Support Services to help tenants locate, secure and move into alternative housing during construction.

None of these vital supports for existing tenants are an automatic legal requirement. They could only be secured through our persistent efforts over the past two years.

This is a first in the City of Toronto, and a significant achievement.

What does all this mean? Frankly, despite not being able to legally require full replacement of all dwelling rooms at the developer's expense, we fought hard to meet the spirit of the Dwelling Room Replacement Policy. We were able to achieve an increase in affordable housing space, an improvement in the quality of this housing — from rooms with shared washrooms and kitchens to fully self-contained units — and truly deeply affordable units that people on social assistance can afford.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top