Lots of people actually object to those; however, they are often permitted anyway.
They can sometimes be built as-of-right, so there is no opportunity to object; other times developers compensate immediate neighbours and/or buy out those properties.
You don't have to go to BlogTO to learn about this model. Unless I am incorrect, it is by outstanding longtime UT member @steveveSome good renderings to demonstrate just how ridiculous Toronto zoning is:
A Toronto man has created a 3D visualization showing how dramatically the city will change over the next 10 years and its generating some discussio...www.blogto.com
It doesn't look crowded at all, other than in a few city blocks. Most of it has almost no one living there!
Those population+employment minimums for Line 2 are ridiculously low.
I see TO Planning still hasn’t changed that huh.
As minimums, not maximums, I'm not necessarily phased by that.
I do not have the time at the moment to go over each map, I'm sure I would find a few places where Planning and I would not agree!
What I do find unfortunate is that the report maps don't show before/after, so you have to look that up yourself!
They also don't show how close the areas are to meeting or exceeding the targets. Is there any point in the exercise if, for argument's sake
you impose a 200 resident + job density and you're already at 300 within the map area?
I suspect some streets may be lined with heritage homes and big trees and any bump in minimum density is likely only to encourage/permit multiplexing within said buildings.
That's something I'd probably be fine with in many cases, but again, I (you/everyone) would need to look street by street to see what has or has not been upzoned and what reasoning Planning provides for same.
In the end, I find the reports to be insufficiently informative to easily evaluate the proposed changes, and I object to that being added to my work program! LOL
What I do not understand, not being an expert in land use planning, is how the minimums would be enforced. Do they only come into play when a site plan application is submitted for a new development at a site, or are they enforceable whenever there is an application for a building permit (including for interior renovations of existing structures), or is there some plan/method to enforce it on property owners who do not make any application to make any changes to their properties?
Someone asked this question at the 5th Jan community consultation meeting, and was told that an addition to their SFH would not trigger a requirement for a density increase. Presumably, an amendment as Northern Light suggests, would do so.Others are better suited to answer this; but my take is that they would be in play on any Planning or Zoning amendment, for sure; and probably a Site Plan Amendment as well.
Building permits cover far too wide a range of maintenance projects to be a vehicle for compliance.
I’m gonna interpret this as “talking to residents associations and Councillors along Line 2” - none of whom are interested in any sort of density increase at all. The province should just throw this out the window, unilaterally double density minimums along the line and specify dates at which they’ll be met.informally consulting with others