Dream has oustered (voluntarily) the last of the office tenants here.

The building is now unencumbered in industry speak........or 'vacant' as ordinary folk would say. LOL

renx.ca

Dream sells 438 University office tower in Toronto for $105.6M

Dream Office REIT (D-UN-T) has confirmed it has an agreement to sell its 438 University Ave., office tower in the heart of downtown Toronto for $105.6 million as office transaction activity in the city seems to be on the upswing.
renx.ca renx.ca
 
Northern Light said:
Decision Report - Approval recommended, incredibly dumb park and all, to the next meeting of TEYCC:


@HousingNowTO will have to review the affordable housing conditions here........the report is a bit convoluted on the subject.

There's definitely at least 19 units proposed......but....
Click to expand...
"Affordable Rental" deal is remix.

The old Section-37 deal from 2020-ish was for 26 x affordable rental apartments (consisting of 19 one-bedroom, and 6 two-bedroom units) for 31 x affordable bedrooms.

That has now been reshuffled in the unit mix to align with the City of Toronto's preference for more larger units, so it is now 19 x affordable rental apartments (consisting of 4 studio units, 8 one-bedroom units, 4 two-
bedroom units, and 3 three-bedroom units) for 29 x affordable bedrooms out of the old Section-37 deal.

Then with the added density -- and the reduction in the "Office Replacement" requirement they are giving the City another 15 x additional affordable rental apartments (consisting of 2 studio units, 6 one-bedroom units, 4 two-bedroom units, and 3 three-bedroom units) for 25 x net new affordable bedrooms being added to the original Section-37 deal.

Therefore, the new TOTAL on Affordable Rental apartment delivery is 34 units out of 719 total apartments, so this is an approx. ~5% of R-GFA deal, with a total of 54 affordable bedrooms -- and it all appears to be under a 99-year term of affordability.
 
innsertnamehere said:
That park is insane. ESPECIALLY Since Toronto Parks is getting another little mini-useless park literally a block to the west
Click to expand...
IMG_2606.jpeg
I still can’t believe the city let them demolish those buildings on the corner, it feels less like a little village now. The coffee shop on the corner had an original coffered ceiling. (Sigh)
 
Towered said:
Especially ones in charming historic buildings that should have been saved...
Click to expand...
I will happily trade away "Cozy Cafes in Toronto's (*not really) Historic Buildings" for new Affordable Rental Apartments with a 99-year term of affordability when they are located within the catchment area of high-order transit, every day of the week.

1740076509674.png

So much of Toronto's "Heritage" stuff is just a fetish for old Bricks... and the usual aversion to change from incumbent area home and condo-owners.
 
HousingNowTO said:
I will happily trade away "Cozy Cafes in Toronto's (*not really) Historic Buildings" for new Affordable Rental Apartments with a 99-year term of affordability when they are located within the catchment area of high-order transit, every day of the week...
Click to expand...
We could have had both, they could have built the tower exactly where it is and left the historical buildings.
HousingNowTO said:
So much of Toronto's "Heritage" stuff is just a fetish for old Bricks... and the usual aversion to change from incumbent area home and condo-owners.
Click to expand...
You should take a History Of Architecture 101 course, might rock your world, start seeing the beauty around you, see the world differently.
 
Red_Bulmer said:
We could have had both, they could have built the tower exactly where it is and left the historical buildings.
Click to expand...
At a HUGE additional cost -- which directly impacts the ability to deliver the "Affordable Rental" apartments on the project.

We have been thru the "Heritage" stuff on the HOUSING NOW site at 140 MERTON AVE -- and the famous "Heritage Soy Sauce" factory in Leslieville, the cost impacts of retaining Old Bricks while trying to build new "Green" buildings is exceptionally high, and eats into all of the other things that our City Council has clearly defined as Toronto's Housing Priorities.

"Affordable Housing & Green Buildings" -OR- "Heritage Retention of Low-Rise Retail", you only get to pick ONE of those options in 2025.

1740079898792.png


The local Councillor in University-Rosedale is very clear about what her priorities are on these kind of sites.
 
HousingNowTO said:
I will happily trade away "Cozy Cafes in Toronto's (*not really) Historic Buildings" for new Affordable Rental Apartments with a 99-year term of affordability when they are located within the catchment area of high-order transit, every day of the week.

View attachment 632099
So much of Toronto's "Heritage" stuff is just a fetish for old Bricks... and the usual aversion to change from incumbent area home and condo-owners.
Click to expand...
your obsession with affordable housing is the real fetish here. who decided that everyone is entitled to afford housing in Toronto? Besides, there are plenty of affordable housing at Jane/Finch, Flemington Park, Throncliffe Park, Brampton, Innisfil, Orillia. Those places aren't desirable enough?
 
HousingNowTO said:
At a HUGE additional cost -- which directly impacts the ability to deliver the "Affordable Rental" apartments on the project.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

That's not what was being discussed by the other posters, you're reading it incorrectly. That's the problem here.

HousingNowTO said:
We have been thru the "Heritage" stuff on the HOUSING NOW site at 140 MERTON AVE -- and the famous "Heritage Soy Sauce" factory in Leslieville, the cost impacts of retaining Old Bricks while trying to build new "Green" buildings is exceptionally high, and eats into all of the other things that our City Council has clearly defined as Toronto's Housing Priorities.
Click to expand...

That's not what was being discussed here.

HousingNowTO said:
"Affordable Housing & Green Buildings" -OR- "Heritage Retention of Low-Rise Retail", you only get to pick ONE of those options in 2025.

View attachment 632111

The local Councillor in University-Rosedale is very clear about what her priorities are on these kind of sites.
Click to expand...

Yes, and Councillor Saxe, who draws the ire of some people you quite like in the development community (and I do to) with stuff like this............... and who I happen to like, notwithstanding that, won't end up getting most of what she's asking for here. It ends up being performative.

*****

No one here is advocating preserving crap partially grafting facades onto new builds from second-rate buildings.

You get so angry at the idea, you don't realize that's not the idea.
 
northyorker1 said:
your obsession with affordable housing is the real fetish here. who decided that everyone is entitled to afford housing in Toronto? Besides, there are plenty of affordable housing at Jane/Finch, Flemington Park, Throncliffe Park, Brampton, Innisfil, Orillia. Those places aren't desirable enough?
Click to expand...

This is not a good argument.

1) I think you might expect a Housing advocate to advocate for affordable housing. While I think he's wrong on the details here, because no one, yourself excepted was opposing affordable housing....... It's still not unreasonable he should view development through that lens.

2) Whether you think it should be or not......and as a society we really don't treat affordable housing as a right......that's why we have 14,000 homeless in this City on any given day and another ~150,000+ households reliant on food banks, because they can't afford groceries after paying the rent............

It turns out Canada has already signed conventions which imply a right to affordable, adequate housing.

Housing as a human right | Canadian Human Rights Commission

The Canadian Human Rights Commission is Canadas national human rights institution. The Commission helps ensure that everyone in Canada is treated fairly, no matter who they are.
www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca

From the above:

1740083073287.png
 
Northern Light said:
This is not a good argument.

1) I think you might expect a Housing advocate to advocate for affordable housing. While I think he's wrong on the details here, because no one, yourself excepted was opposing affordable housing....... It's still not unreasonable he should view development through that lens.

2) Whether you think it should be or not......and as a society we really don't treat affordable housing as a right......that's why we have 14,000 homeless in this City on any given day and another ~150,000+ households reliant on food banks, because they can't afford groceries after paying the rent............

It turns out Canada has already signed conventions which imply a right to affordable, adequate housing.

Housing as a human right | Canadian Human Rights Commission

The Canadian Human Rights Commission is Canadas national human rights institution. The Commission helps ensure that everyone in Canada is treated fairly, no matter who they are.
www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca

From the above:

View attachment 632133
Click to expand...
That's cool, but why can't those households live in those affordable places I've listed in my previous post?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top