Northern Light said:
The Star with an article on the proposal above, just a day late, and with a bit less detail than my post. LOL

www.thestar.com

Plans to rebuild a condemned west-end public housing complex would see it quadruple in size

Tenants of Swansea Mews were forced out of the roughly 150 townhomes when a piece of concrete ceiling fell in 2022.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com
Click to expand...
The “next-steps” that the TCHC report has LISTED are in the wrong order.

A ballpark “Financial Feasibility” needs to be FIRST — because otherwise you are just wasting money and time / energy / community goodwill (or badwill) on creating designs and density models that will actually need to be 30 - 300% larger, like we have seen on HOUSING NOW sites like 140 MERTON and 1250 EGLINTON AVE W. — and Phases 4 and 5 at Regent Park.

This all seems far too small, to realistically replace all those Rent Geared to Income (RGI) units, unless TCHC has BILLIONS of available capital and subsidy dollars that we don’t know about..?

IMG_8214.jpeg
 
Last edited:
HousingNowTO said:
The “next-steps” that the TCHC report has LISTED are in the wrong order.

A ballpark “Financial Feasibility” needs to be FIRST — because otherwise you are just wasting money and time / energy / community goodwill (or badwill) on crew designs and density models that will actually need to be 30 - 300% larger, like we have seen on HOUSING NOW sites like 140 MERTON and 1250 EGLINTON AVE W. — and Phases 4 and 5 at Regent Park.

This all seems far too small, to realistically replace all those Rent Geared to Income (RGI) units, unless TCHC has BILLIONS of available capital and subsidy dollars that we don’t know about..?

View attachment 597857
Click to expand...
From the TORONTO STAR story -

The proposal still has many hurdles to clear, including a consultation process, with Perks saying that funding and financing remain key questions. His hope is to see the property stay entirely in public hands, rather than having parcels sold to developers.

"I’ve been very clear in talking to staff from TCHC that I’ll support something that keeps the land in public or social ownership."
 
HousingNowTO said:
The “next-steps” that the TCHC report has LISTED are in the wrong order.

A ballpark “Financial Feasibility” needs to be FIRST — because otherwise you are just wasting money and time / energy / community goodwill (or badwill) on creating designs and density models that will actually need to be 30 - 300% larger, like we have seen on HOUSING NOW sites like 140 MERTON and 1250 EGLINTON AVE W. — and Phases 4 and 5 at Regent Park.

This all seems far too small, to realistically replace all those Rent Geared to Income (RGI) units, unless TCHC has BILLIONS of available capital and subsidy dollars that we don’t know about..?

View attachment 597857
Click to expand...

I agree, though I think its critical to reinforce that unwillingness of the City (CreateTO, or TCHC) to look at strategically adding to their owned parcels, be that willing buyer/seller or expropriation undermines what can be achieved.

My suggested version, in which all land eastward along The Queensway within the block, back up to the new E-W road is included, allows far higher potential unit count, and market return if that's used as part of the finance model. In the latter case, Gord have TCHC retain as much land as they now, but sell off any net land not used for roads/parks to a partner developer.
 
...how long has this place been sitting empty here while they navel gaze their way into finding a tentative solution for it?
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...how long has this place been sitting empty here while they navel gaze their way into finding a tentative solution for it?
Click to expand...

Its been about 2 years.

In fairness, given that the issues here arose suddenly, I don't think a rebuild plan would have arrived much faster, unless the decision was to replace the site as-is/as-was.

The certainly should have carried out demolition in a more timely manner, as not doing so has been quite costly.

My bigger concern here is that in two years while they were thinking, they were thinking without sufficient ambition, and that has wasted at least some portion of that time.
 
HousingNowTO said:
From the TORONTO STAR story -

The proposal still has many hurdles to clear, including a consultation process, with Perks saying that funding and financing remain key questions. His hope is to see the property stay entirely in public hands, rather than having parcels sold to developers.

"I’ve been very clear in talking to staff from TCHC that I’ll support something that keeps the land in public or social ownership."
Click to expand...
In related news -

Coun. Gord Perks, chair of the city's planning and housing committee, says the city is "pulling out all the stops" but can only go so far.

"If they don't come to the table," Perks said of the federal and provincial governments, "we will never get out of the housing affordability crisis for people with low incomes, but also for people with middle incomes."

He points to public lands the city is turning into affordable housing. Currently, he says, the city has five such projects underway and another dozen expected to start in the next 18 months.

"There are another 70 sites we've identified that we could do if we had a funding partner," Perks said.

NOTE : Our City Hall is not, in fact --- "pulling out all the stops" on this site or any of the others.

 
HousingNowTO said:
In related news -

Coun. Gord Perks, chair of the city's planning and housing committee, says the city is "pulling out all the stops" but can only go so far.

"If they don't come to the table," Perks said of the federal and provincial governments, "we will never get out of the housing affordability crisis for people with low incomes, but also for people with middle incomes."

He points to public lands the city is turning into affordable housing. Currently, he says, the city has five such projects underway and another dozen expected to start in the next 18 months.

"There are another 70 sites we've identified that we could do if we had a funding partner," Perks said.

NOTE : Our City Hall is not, in fact --- "pulling out all the stops" on this site or any of the others.

Click to expand...

Reality-Check...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1837514447520174330
 
This is on the agenda for next week's Planning and Housing seeking a mandate to push the last version of the proposal we saw forward.


It hasn't changed at all. No increase in units, no proposal to acquire additional land, terribly laid out useless parks.............

Are there supposed real estate professionals at TCHC and CreateTO that this is what they propose?

@HousingNowTO we have to derail this dumb idea before it goes any further.

They don't have to be as ambitious as I suggested up thread; but they certainly can and should do much better.

****

The recommendations from the above:

1743688171784.png

1743688197379.png
 
L:et me be clear on what's wrong above, once more.

1) Too few units

2) By using only the existing land base, they force 'transition' policies which demand lower heights on what's contemplated. If you buy out the most likely to object where the transition would be most awkward, you get hundreds more units.

3) The TRCA suggestion I assume, relates the to the small, isolated, treed slope at the eastern extent of the site. I wouldn't propose building on the slope, except for pushing one road through. While that does do some marginal ecological damage, I propose delivering new parkland next to an existing body of water where you can obtain greater ecological value instead.

I did a very quick map through of my ideas, with only 1 30 storey tower, 1 20s tower, and nothing else exceeding 12s, and transitioning to 4s a the western end of the site, I can easily model out 1,200 units. That's very conservative.
 
Last edited:
I believe the city should take a more ambitious approach when developing this area and its surroundings. Its proximity to the lake, High Park, and a busy GO transit line makes it a prime location for thoughtful and denser urban planning. We should aim to create a neighborhood similar to the one around Mimico GO Station or the former Christie's site.
 
UrbanDan said:
I believe the city should take a more ambitious approach when developing this area and its surroundings. Its proximity to the lake, High Park, and a busy GO transit line makes it a prime location for thoughtful and denser urban planning. We should aim to create a neighborhood similar to the one around Mimico GO Station or the former Christie's site.
Click to expand...

Make sure and share that view w/your Councillor.

You can be sure my view is known.

They really have to buy up adjacent properties, particularly in the block next to Queensway to make it happen.

They also need to push the E-W street down the slope to meet up with Ellis Gardens.
 
From CBC:



A Toronto city council committee has approved a proposal to redevelop a west end public housing complex that was condemned three years ago because of a ceiling collapse.

The planning and housing committee decided at its Thursday meeting that it will recommend that city council seek federal funding for the "initial development proposal" to rebuild Swansea Mews, a Toronto Community Housing Corporation property located at the intersection of the Queensway and Windermere Avenue.

Tenants were forced to leave Swansea Mews in May 2022 after a ceiling collapsed, injuring a woman. The complex was marked for demolition after the collapse, when engineers found all of the buildings unsafe for habitation, and it has since been vacant.

The redevelopment proposal calls for not only the replacement of the 154 rent-geared-to-income units that made up the original complex, but also the building of 550 to 700 new units, according to a city staff report from last month.

This redevelopment will include "three residential development blocks, a large open space, a new road network and an overall design that will promote community safety and sound planning principles," the report reads.

Coun. Gord Perks, chair of the planning and housing committee, said the approval is "a giant step forward."

"This is going from talking about how one day we'll build something there to actually having a proposal … We're off to the races now," he said.

Funding talks to happen after federal election ​

If city council approves the proposal, which Perks said he is confident will happen, the city will need to secure federal funding first before applying for a builder's permit to allow the site to be demolished.

But the timeline on securing federal funding is unclear, he said, as the city will need to wait until after the federal election to engage in funding conversations.

"Nobody can guess what the housing program will look like after the election," Perks said.

The land the property is on will also have to be rezoned to build the three residential development blocks. Rezoning will require public consultation with those living in the surrounding neighbourhood.

Perks said the city will work to secure federal funding and change zoning permissions in parallel. The city has also begun conversations with former tenants of Swansea Mews to get their input in the design of the new community.

Everybody who lived in the property has a right to return at similar rents and similar unit sizes to what they had before the city condemned the building, Perks said. But the exact mix of rent-geared-to-income units versus those at market rates depends on federal funding.

Once shovels are in the ground, he said it may take about two to three years before tenants move in.

The proposal will be considered by city council on April 23.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top