[HousingNowTO]

I think they're at 20% affordable rental housing...or very, very close, as the numbers below come out to 19.46%. I'm guessing that's intentional and you're allowed to round up, and that developers therefore do the math to not be even a single affordable unit over what is required. (Or maybe they're not allowed to round up, in which case they'll just need to add a little more to get there.)

View attachment 611666
Source

It is interesting that to qualify for these City incentives though construction needs to start by end of 2026. That's not that far away. And I wonder if it means all 4 buildings (three towers and the mid-rise timber) would be built at once. Seems unlikely in this environment, but maybe the incentives are too good to pass up (which would be a good thing IMO, as the whole purpose of them is to cause developers to build when they otherwise wouldn't).

Counting and comparing UNIT COUNTS is not always useful, because the City prefers larger units in their "Affordable Housing" allocation -- than the regular "Market Rental" units.

20% of total R-GFA is what the City usually enforces in these agreements, but then requires more 2 & 3 Bedroom units than the Market-Side of the buildings, and more accessible units.

 

[RCEO]

I think they're at 20% affordable rental housing...or very, very close, as the numbers below come out to 19.46%. I'm guessing that's intentional and you're allowed to round up, and that developers therefore do the math to not be even a single affordable unit over what is required. (Or maybe they're not allowed to round up, in which case they'll just need to add a little more to get there.)

View attachment 611666
Source

It is interesting that to qualify for these City incentives though construction needs to start by end of 2026. That's not that far away. And I wonder if it means all 4 buildings (three towers and the mid-rise timber) would be built at once. Seems unlikely in this environment, but maybe the incentives are too good to pass up (which would be a good thing IMO, as the whole purpose of them is to cause developers to build when they otherwise wouldn't).

The vote is about to be live now, here:

A supplemental was released saying priority will be given to those that can start construction the fastest. See EX18.2A supplemental for all details.

In other words, if Quayside will be a part of this, they will need to start building ASAP to get funding.