allengeorge
Senior Member
Same article stated that Oakville did the same?
|
|
|
- Thread starter A Torontonian Now
- Start date
rdaner
Senior Member
I stand corrected!
rdaner
Senior Member
So did today's announcement include the raising of units per lot to 6?
allengeorge
Senior Member
No. Only that the city would “study” it. I’m skeptical.
Then again, the money is only released in tranches, and Council doesn’t make progress the next tranches won’t be released. Let’s see what happens.
Northern Light
Superstar
Gregg Lintern, the outgoing (Chief) City Planner has an exit interview of sorts in The Star.
I think he acquits himself quite well in it.............
Intriguingly........its clear that he's not quite done in public life and is almost certainly mulling over offers as I type.
www.thestar.com
I think he acquits himself quite well in it.............
Intriguingly........its clear that he's not quite done in public life and is almost certainly mulling over offers as I type.
'If you always think the same way, you will get the same results': Toronto’s retiring chief planner on 40 years of city housing rules — and the need to change
As he nears retirement after four decades in municipal politics, Gregg Lintern says the city needs to keep opening up neighbourhoods for more homes.
www.thestar.com
evandyk
Senior Member
I usually liked most of what Gregg had to say. He had a lot of good ideas, and pushed through a bunch of stuff which is helpful and achievable. Obviously a lot of us around here want more, but he was pretty effective in playing the hands that he got dealt and setting up his next moves. It can't be easy working on planning in a city that produces people like Doug and Stephen Holyday!
rdaner
Senior Member
Halifax and Ajax signed Accelerator Fund agreements. I am not sure of the overall numbers (over 23) but a large proportion of the country's population may now be covered by these significant zoning reforms. I did a quick search of zoning reform in The States and though widespread it seems to be concentrated in fewer cities and there is much more push back. Next will be a search of what is happening in Australia as we all are aware of the initiatives in New Zealand. I am now of the opinion that this program will be as significant to the evolution of the Canadian city as the lack of a national highway program after the war. Jane Jacobs must be pleased. lol
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
Zoning Reform Idea:
Turn Draper Street into a fully pedestrianized bar/restaurant street. Retain heritage buildings and allow for patios built out onto the street. It's still close enough to King St to benefit from the current foot traffic in the area.
Just add a nice stone-paved street with benches and a few more trees and you would have an extremely charming street that could attract a ton of foot traffic.
The city needs a Kensington Market-like area for fully pedestrianized nightlife.
As for feasibility, I'm not sure rezoning the street and allowing bars to pop up sporadically is realistic.
Realistically, a developer would probably have to do a land assembly here to make this happen.
Ideally, a cash-loaded land trust could buy lots as they come on the market. The city is exploring nightlife policies after all.
And before the heritage purists get all upset, London mixes nightlife and heritage just fine; why not do it here?
Turn Draper Street into a fully pedestrianized bar/restaurant street. Retain heritage buildings and allow for patios built out onto the street. It's still close enough to King St to benefit from the current foot traffic in the area.
Just add a nice stone-paved street with benches and a few more trees and you would have an extremely charming street that could attract a ton of foot traffic.
The city needs a Kensington Market-like area for fully pedestrianized nightlife.
As for feasibility, I'm not sure rezoning the street and allowing bars to pop up sporadically is realistic.
Realistically, a developer would probably have to do a land assembly here to make this happen.
Ideally, a cash-loaded land trust could buy lots as they come on the market. The city is exploring nightlife policies after all.
And before the heritage purists get all upset, London mixes nightlife and heritage just fine; why not do it here?
Last edited:
Towered
Superstar
Wonderful idea - it's obvious and I fully support it. Draper doesn't make sense anymore as a purely residential street. Would it simply be a case of re-zoning the street to make retail/nightlife viable in the historic houses?
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
That would be one way to do it, but would probably have more restrictions on night activity as residents would still be on the street for years to come.
The better way would probably be for a developer to do a huge land assembly here. Which then would probably mean mixed use development with condos above the historic houses, retaining the facades at street level.
I would assume there is at least a sizeable group of owners on the street currently looking to head out for greener pastures, considering all the construction and density going up all around them.
evandyk
Senior Member
Better yet, put no restrictions on night activity, which would encourage the residents to sell to someone who will use the property more appropriately without assembling them. Assembling them would ultimately destroy the uniqueness of the street and become just an extension of the Well itself.
That route may lead to assembly anyways, but would have a chance at creating the atmosphere described above.
Northern Light
Superstar
Many of you will have made note of the recent spate of applications to take on material new height, post zoning, via the CoA (Committee of Adjustment).
You may also have made note that some of the more extreme additions +8s, or greater than a 15% bump in height were mocked by me as being entirely 'not minor' and not properly before the CofA.
In many cases, I'm happy enough to support the added height, my issue is merely that it should go through the correct process, and not get by the back door, that which could not be had through the front.
I see that as a subversion of the system; and going back on a deal.
Well, I'm not the only one who thinks so. Councillor Saxe has a report request before Planning and Housing Ctte this morning with an eye to curtailing what can go before CofA
From the above:
Edit to add: This passed at Committee. Its only a report request, so changes nothing for the moment. The tone of Chair Perks was he wasn't really comfortable w/the change being sought, but he also agreed that residents are losing faith in a process in which deals are seemingly undone within months of being made.
I get the sense that large scale curtailment of CofA is not in the cards here; but something may be recommended to make extreme height increases a bit less likely and/or to add clarity as to what would be expected of anyone asking for such. @HousingNowTO was deputing on this item and while taking a position pro-height and pro-density, made the case that tying some of that to the provision of affordable housing may be a worthwhile goal.
You may also have made note that some of the more extreme additions +8s, or greater than a 15% bump in height were mocked by me as being entirely 'not minor' and not properly before the CofA.
In many cases, I'm happy enough to support the added height, my issue is merely that it should go through the correct process, and not get by the back door, that which could not be had through the front.
I see that as a subversion of the system; and going back on a deal.
Well, I'm not the only one who thinks so. Councillor Saxe has a report request before Planning and Housing Ctte this morning with an eye to curtailing what can go before CofA
From the above:
Edit to add: This passed at Committee. Its only a report request, so changes nothing for the moment. The tone of Chair Perks was he wasn't really comfortable w/the change being sought, but he also agreed that residents are losing faith in a process in which deals are seemingly undone within months of being made.
I get the sense that large scale curtailment of CofA is not in the cards here; but something may be recommended to make extreme height increases a bit less likely and/or to add clarity as to what would be expected of anyone asking for such. @HousingNowTO was deputing on this item and while taking a position pro-height and pro-density, made the case that tying some of that to the provision of affordable housing may be a worthwhile goal.
Last edited:
rdaner
Senior Member
Doug Ford government approves three MZOs — with Olivia Chow's blessing
Premier Doug Ford's government has quietly issued three minister's zoning orders for key Toronto projects with Mayor Olivia Chow's approval.
www.thestar.com
Northern Light
Superstar
Article in Today's Star outlining that Bill 109 has demonstrably had the effect lengthening timelines and increasing costs for developers notwithstanding its claims to do the opposite.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/do...cle_7e0da3a0-bf35-11ee-b24a-9b57fa95c49b.html (behind the paywall)
I think that's a sufficient except to get the entire gist of the article.
It is also hinted at that current Minister Calandra is considering yet another overhaul of the process as he's aware this one is not performing as advertised.
****
Comment: This is the direct result of extremist thinking. When you say 'Aha' what we need is to thwart city planners or nimbys; instead of asking how we work with them.
Shocker here, but the above are often well educated and well heeled and their response to such in-your-face tactics is to go..."Two can play that game, watch this"
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/do...cle_7e0da3a0-bf35-11ee-b24a-9b57fa95c49b.html (behind the paywall)
I think that's a sufficient except to get the entire gist of the article.
It is also hinted at that current Minister Calandra is considering yet another overhaul of the process as he's aware this one is not performing as advertised.
****
Comment: This is the direct result of extremist thinking. When you say 'Aha' what we need is to thwart city planners or nimbys; instead of asking how we work with them.
Shocker here, but the above are often well educated and well heeled and their response to such in-your-face tactics is to go..."Two can play that game, watch this"
jje1000
Senior Member
My opinion is that a good part of the pre-war downtown residential neighborhoods should be rezoned as mixed-use to allow people to open up businesses on the ground floors and expand from the existing typologies, as was the case until the sanitary regime took over in the post-war era.
Places like Cabbagetown would greatly benefit from an injection of Kensington Market into its urban fabric, IMO.