Here are a couple of cut-up snippets from a recent post by Seth Godin titled: “Waste and the new luxury.”
Luxury goods are built on a foundation of waste.
The front lawn is a luxury good, a sign that you don’t need to graze your cows on every square inch, and that you’re willing to waste the lawn.
There’s a new luxury that’s occurring, though, one that’s based on efficiency.
A luxury that’s based on investing in renewables, in resources that might be seen as endless, in smart design, in the satisfaction of knowing that others are benefitting, not paying, for the experience or the object you’re buying.
Waste vs. efficiency.
(Above is a photo I took this week in Dundas Square.)
On Monday the province of Ontario posted a draft regulation intended to establish a framework for inclusionary zoning. It builds on a bill that passed last year allowing municipalities – should they choose – to require affordable housing in new developments and redevelopments.
superkül (architects) recently added a new project to their website, namely the renovation and addition to Proper TV’s headquarters at Bloor and Dovercourt here in Toronto.
The original single-storey building dates back to the middle of the 20th century and used to house a Canada Post Office and distribution facility.
But why send letters when you can instead send emails and instant message that are immediately tracked for the purposes of later bombarding you with ads for things you may want to buy?
The post office closed in 2013.
The main facade along Dovercourt was constructed of limestone and that remains today. Here is photo of the building looking north on Dovercourt from Bloor:
Here are a couple of cut-up snippets from a recent post by Seth Godin titled: “Waste and the new luxury.”
Luxury goods are built on a foundation of waste.
The front lawn is a luxury good, a sign that you don’t need to graze your cows on every square inch, and that you’re willing to waste the lawn.
There’s a new luxury that’s occurring, though, one that’s based on efficiency.
A luxury that’s based on investing in renewables, in resources that might be seen as endless, in smart design, in the satisfaction of knowing that others are benefitting, not paying, for the experience or the object you’re buying.
Waste vs. efficiency.
(Above is a photo I took this week in Dundas Square.)
On Monday the province of Ontario posted a draft regulation intended to establish a framework for inclusionary zoning. It builds on a bill that passed last year allowing municipalities – should they choose – to require affordable housing in new developments and redevelopments.
superkül (architects) recently added a new project to their website, namely the renovation and addition to Proper TV’s headquarters at Bloor and Dovercourt here in Toronto.
The original single-storey building dates back to the middle of the 20th century and used to house a Canada Post Office and distribution facility.
But why send letters when you can instead send emails and instant message that are immediately tracked for the purposes of later bombarding you with ads for things you may want to buy?
The post office closed in 2013.
The main facade along Dovercourt was constructed of limestone and that remains today. Here is photo of the building looking north on Dovercourt from Bloor:
Below are some, but not all, of the things that are being considered in the draft regulation. Some of these items were recommendations made by the development industry through the Ontario Home Builders’ Association (OHBA) and the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD).
- The total number of affordable units or gross floor area dedicated to affordable housing units would not exceed 5% of the total units or 5% of the total gross floor area (excluding common areas). This number increase to 10% in high density transit station areas.
- The affordable period would be a minimum of 20 years but no greater than 30 years.
- There may be opportunities to provide the inclusionary zoning units off-site.
- The policies would only apply to developments / redevelopments with 20 or more units.
- The affordable component could not be used to determine community benefits under Section 37. Section 37 would also not apply if the proposed development (with IZ) is in a location where a development / community planning permit is used.
- Municipalities would be required to offer incentives to help offset the IZ cost burden, but only if the development is not subject to a development / community planning permit. The incentives could include a waiver or reduction in application fees, parkland dedication fees, development charges, and so on. These offsets are very important to the industry and the affordability of the market rate units. But interestingly enough, increases in height and/or density are not being contemplated as a possible incentive or financial contribution.
- The financial contribution would be based on the following formula: (A - B) x 0.4. A is the total sum of the average market price for all of the affordable housing units and B is the total sum of the affordable price for all of the IZ housing units. In other words, the intent is that municipalities would be required to offset 40% of the costs associated with providing the affordable units.
Click here for the rest of the draft regulation. The OHBA also published this media release following the draft. They like the “partnership model” but were advocating for a 50/50 public/private cost share on all government-mandated units.
Photo by Omair Khan on Unsplash
Notice how the road (Dovercourt) curves and the building becomes almost a view terminus.
Here is the east elevation:
And here is a close-up of the bright reddish-orange powdered coated triangulated fins that adorn the second floor:
Apparently the fins are also lit up at night with programmable LEDs. I don’t have a picture of that to show you, but I am sure they look very cool. I’ll have to do a drive-by one night.
All images from superkül.
Below are some, but not all, of the things that are being considered in the draft regulation. Some of these items were recommendations made by the development industry through the Ontario Home Builders’ Association (OHBA) and the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD).
- The total number of affordable units or gross floor area dedicated to affordable housing units would not exceed 5% of the total units or 5% of the total gross floor area (excluding common areas). This number increase to 10% in high density transit station areas.
- The affordable period would be a minimum of 20 years but no greater than 30 years.
- There may be opportunities to provide the inclusionary zoning units off-site.
- The policies would only apply to developments / redevelopments with 20 or more units.
- The affordable component could not be used to determine community benefits under Section 37. Section 37 would also not apply if the proposed development (with IZ) is in a location where a development / community planning permit is used.
- Municipalities would be required to offer incentives to help offset the IZ cost burden, but only if the development is not subject to a development / community planning permit. The incentives could include a waiver or reduction in application fees, parkland dedication fees, development charges, and so on. These offsets are very important to the industry and the affordability of the market rate units. But interestingly enough, increases in height and/or density are not being contemplated as a possible incentive or financial contribution.
- The financial contribution would be based on the following formula: (A - B) x 0.4. A is the total sum of the average market price for all of the affordable housing units and B is the total sum of the affordable price for all of the IZ housing units. In other words, the intent is that municipalities would be required to offset 40% of the costs associated with providing the affordable units.
Click here for the rest of the draft regulation. The OHBA also published this media release following the draft. They like the “partnership model” but were advocating for a 50/50 public/private cost share on all government-mandated units.
Photo by Omair Khan on Unsplash
Notice how the road (Dovercourt) curves and the building becomes almost a view terminus.
Here is the east elevation:
And here is a close-up of the bright reddish-orange powdered coated triangulated fins that adorn the second floor:
Apparently the fins are also lit up at night with programmable LEDs. I don’t have a picture of that to show you, but I am sure they look very cool. I’ll have to do a drive-by one night.
All images from superkül.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog