The properties are listed on the heritage registrar which means an Heritage Impact Assessment is required prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. A development proposal is not required for a demolition permit to be issued. Because the properties are listed, the City has 60 days to issue the permit (increased from 14 days). I don't see any demolition permits being submitted on the City's Building Permit Status webpage. I don't know if the MZO precludes a demolition permit, but my hunch is that the permit is still needed.
 
province doesn't need a permit, that's the thing.

Typically the province gets one anyway for its projects as an act of goodwill, but legally it's not required. If a private builder wanted to build a new roadway it would need city approval, but MTO goes and builds large new structures all the time on 400 series highways without even talking to the city, for example. They shifted the Oriole GO platform and are building a new bridge structure there for the 401 for example and it has never been front of the city formally.

Same thing with the Credit River Bridge in Mississauga. Last summer there was a big huff from Mississauga because MTO proposed to demolish the heritage designated bridge to save a few bucks. Legally there was nothing the City could do despite it being on the heritage register. Eventually MTO backed off with enough pressure applied to the ministry from the local MPP, but it was a political decision, not set forth by the legal system that the heritage register falls under.

Metrolinx recently has been filing Site Plan applications for its new stations and other works, but it is absolutely not required legally.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Now we know why the MZO happened.

AoD
Click to expand...
Technically the MZO wasn't needed to demolish them. Any project led by the province is exempt from building permit and site plan control requirements.

A site plan application will still be required here from my understanding, as that will ultimately be led by a private sector developer (who will be bound by the city). The Ministry does have the ability to issue an MZO for site plans as well (a new power the PCs introduced), but the initial MZO didn't address that, only zoning. There isn't really a need as much for that much power as the city is duty bound to process a site plan application that meets the zoning requirements set out in the MZO.
 
Admittedly, stuff like this gets me really torn. As in, it really makes me want to show up screaming about this at Queens Park. But as the same time I need to differentiate to the public that I'm not one those yahoo...I mean, "protesters" who occupied Capitol Hill of late. But none the less, stuff like this really "Bleeps!" me off! /sigh
 
https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-2811
Apparently, the government wants to expand the minister's authority by letting him remove Site Plan Approval (SPAs) as part of an MZO. This project could be affected by this and this regulation would be even more destructive for our cities. Please submit your comments through the link before the government guts our planning system!
 
Can we stop with the doom and gloom? we all know perfectly well how much red tape there is within the city's building application process. Any ambitious project gets in front of the OMB/LPAT and for the most cases gets its wishes despite the city's objections. Meanwhile, years have passed, construction costs have risen and countless consultants/lawyers got paid.
Edit: I do understand some of your anger stems from the hate for Doug and his government.
 
abovetoronto said:
Meanwhile, years have passed, construction costs have risen and countless consultants/lawyers got paid.
Edit: I do understand some of your anger stems from the hate for Doug and his government.
Click to expand...
And developers pass on the increased construction costs right to the consumer. What's your point?

At the end of the day, developers are profiting handsomely with the increased rents they are now allowed to charge, the increase in density they are now allowed due to the government's change in "transit-oriented" development, relaxed environmental regulations, the gradual opening up of the greenbelt, and countless other measures that have been introduced over the past 2 years. Im sorry but I dont sympathize with developers one bit.

They have been whining about their ability to make profits for years, and now they're getting there way at the expense of cities and consumers.
 
Can you detail me the gradual opening of the green belt? I have seen no such policy. The PCs actually explicitly amended the planning act so that the province could not issue MZOs in the green belt.

most of the PCs policy changes have been aimed at increasing housing supply. The MZO for this site is a solid miss on their part, but much of their policy changes have mostly done exactly that, encouraging greater supply. More supply = more houses for people, and greater options / affordability.
 
Theres a difference between wanting a more efficient process for approving development applications and how the province has gone about this site.

In fact we could move things a lot faster if the province actually used its power to
- Upzone the yellowbelt to allow multifamily homes on properties designated single family
- Upzone sites within reasonable distance to public transportation (Especially Rail/Subway)) for higher density development

This would go a long way to reducing the cost of development in the medium/long term and increase the supply of housing.

That being said, we shouldn't see development occur where people do not have any information on what is being built. We can and should build more. But we need it to be done transparently rather than opaquely and arbitrarily.
 
Someone’s gonna put the front of that bulldozer through the building before the end of the weekend then shrug and say “can’t turn back now” - see Stollery’s for reference
 
lomeri said:
Theres a difference between wanting a more efficient process for approving development applications and how the province has gone about this site.

In fact we could move things a lot faster if the province actually used its power to
- Upzone the yellowbelt to allow multifamily homes on properties designated single family
- Upzone sites within reasonable distance to public transportation (Especially Rail/Subway)) for higher density development

This would go a long way to reducing the cost of development in the medium/long term and increase the supply of housing.

That being said, we shouldn't see development occur where people do not have any information on what is being built. We can and should build more. But we need it to be done transparently rather than opaquely and arbitrarily.
Click to expand...
I didn't say this site was the right way of doing things. A lot of the MZOs the province have been issuing are generally effective and rightfully used, but this one is a miss. Especially the heritage aspect. The province is doing it here to try and push through as much affordable housing as possible here, which is the right idea, but plowing it through without a reasonable amount of review and at least some sort of public process is problematic.

The province has made moves on those those points, actually. The province forced second dwelling units to be permitted in all residential zones across the province for the first one (though there is definitely more they could do on that front).

The largest land use change the PCs have made is placing minimum densities around transit stations that are extremely aggressive and allowing for no real exceptions. Municipalities are now in the process of updating their planning documents to align with these changes, but there is a reason you are seeing 40 storey proposals around GO stations and BRT stops now when 20 storeys was the max for that type of development 2 years ago.

Toronto is staring down the barrel of this right now as it has to revise its official plan to meet a minimum density of 200 people/jobs per hectare along the Bloor Danforth line - which is essentially impossible without having major impacts on the precious existing neighbourhoods along the line.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Can you detail me the gradual opening of the green belt? I have seen no such policy. The PCs actually explicitly amended the planning act so that the province could not issue MZOs in the green belt.

most of the PCs policy changes have been aimed at increasing housing supply. The MZO for this site is a solid miss on their part, but much of their policy changes have mostly done exactly that, encouraging greater supply. More supply = more houses for people, and greater options / affordability.
Click to expand...
The policy isnt formally in place, but the procedures are in motion and this Con government is positioning themselves to use MZO's in the greenbelt. Of course they wont do it it one full sweep (unless they are stupid enough which is fully possible), so it's being done in a piecemeal manner so it wont stir a massive controversy:

www.theglobeandmail.com

Globe editorial: The Ford government is harming Ontario’s environmental future

The defanging of Ontario’s conservation authorities could open the door to more projects in the Greenbelt – two million largely undeveloped acres that ring the Greater Toronto Area
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com
 
Kristyn Wong-Tam's statement on all this:

www.kristynwongtam.ca

Statement on West Don Lands Foundry Demolition

I have learned today alarming news that the Province is actively on site with the intention to demolish the buildings on the Foundry Site (known as 153 to 185 Eastern Avenue or Blocks 17 and 26) in the West Don Lands. The lands contain the Dominion Foundry Complex, the largest concentration of...
www.kristynwongtam.ca www.kristynwongtam.ca
1610665905171.png
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top