rdaner
Senior Member
Putting this here as funds are tied to zoning reform.
|
|
|
- Thread starter A Torontonian Now
- Start date
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
Growing communities and building more homes, faster
One of the biggest pressures on young people right now is housing. Faced with a shortage of housing options and increasingly high rent and home prices, it feels like the deck is stacked against them.www.pm.gc.ca
The university/transit station density radius might finally force MTSAs into reality?
rdaner
Senior Member
I like the university/college density radius but wonder if there is a size limit. For example would the new but most likely small medical school in Vaughan qualify or does it take a large campus like St. George or MacMaster?
Admiral Beez
Superstar
The garages are essential for keeping vehicles parked off the streets. I wish Toronto had the same rules as Tokyo, where you cannot own a car unless you have an off-street place to park it. Of course Tokyo has far better public transit, and almost no one in Tokyo needs a car, so it's not a fair comparison I admit. So, for now, I'm glad these laneway houses have parking.
afransen
Senior Member
@AlexBozikovic was on Mike Moffat & Cara Stern's 'Missing Middle' podcast discussing the use and abuse of Heritage designations and how that impacts housing availability.
allengeorge
Senior Member
This visualization is making the rounds today. Found it super interesting:
schoolofcities.github.io
TOD 1996 - 2021
Visualizing demographic changes along Toronto's major transit lines.
schoolofcities.github.io
Northern Light
Superstar
About 50% accurate and thoughtful; about 50% erroneous either in fact, or in that the vast majority of the population would disagree (on a subjective point).
***
The statement that you can only build an apartment in 4% of Toronto is utter nonsense, seeing as EHON just allowed rental tenure and fourplexes as of right in all neighbourhoods.
What was true to some degree 2 years ago is no longer.
Though the 4% statement wasn't really correct even then.
Now if he meant high density, tall buildings that's a different question, but its still a lot more than 4% in practice.
****
Alex's broad take that demolishing things people love is fine, its modernism that needs saving, because Alex loves history that other people hate.
Sorry, not a legitimate take. The reason you (should) save a building is limited to two things:
1) People like the way it looks
2) It contributes to the vibe of a community/street people love.
*****
Much of modernism is cold, simplistic, and dull. It shouldn't have been built in the first place and its removal will be welcome. By all means lets save some of the better examples, some Prii and the like. Even 350 Bloor would not really have been a loss, but I love the project because of HPs vision which adds variety to the skyline and is frankly more interesting than the extant structure.
****
Heritage designation has not seriously impeded any downtown development that in the City that is the king of facadism. We continue to tear down 19thC history apace.
****
Yes, the Danforth and Mt. Pleasant and Little Jamaica are all examples of the misuse of heritage designation. Zero question. But that, I would argue, is because of a lack of tools for the City to preserve the illusion of human scale at street level and so you grab the heaviest tool you have. What people care about on Danforth is brick, cornices, small storefront retail, a 3-storey streetwall, few care about a six or eight, or twelve storey building set behind same. But it requires a more empowered City, a more creative city and a more creative and less greedy development community to build that out.
****
The suggestion that houses are off limits at Yonge/Eglinton is also nonsense, two dozen have been taken down and two dozen more (probably a lot more) have been assembled for development.
Last edited:
allengeorge
Senior Member
No comments on the rest of your response, but I believe here, that he's referring to small-scale apartment buildings, not fourplexes.
Northern Light
Superstar
I actually tweaked my post to allow for his possible mis-speaking.
***
That said, the next round of EHON will approve those apartments up and down most arterial and collector roads, the only real question will be the final rules on height, loading spaces and unit counts.
The City's Amroth proposal is also six storeys on a side street, we've talked extensively about how that site is sub-optimal in its massing.
Regardless, I don't see six-storey as-of-right, on (most) side streets, but I think you will see, greater permissiveness, and most of that should be passed by Council by end of year.
rdaner
Senior Member
I posted this as a really rough attempt to visually explain how the zoning change for areas around post-secondary institutions would look on the ground.
Northern Light
Superstar
There will be potential impacts at some of the sites you show, but none at many.
UTM is surrounded by parks and regulatory floodplain, along with land already owned by the University. A sliver of land on Dundas, some on the Collegeway may be effected at the margins, and perhaps a tiny bit to the north
The Golden Mile has already been upzoned to the moon; to the point where studies show a serious lack of sufficient infrastructure to support what's already in the pipeline.
While Centennial Scarborough is also surrounded by valley on two sides, existing high density further south and the 401 to the north.
So its important to realize that while there is some potential for additional intensification at some sites, it will turn out not to be most. It will also depend on where one draws the radius from.
As example, from the dead centre of York U, the majority of the land is actually already York U owned and on campus. East of Keele is employment lands, north of Steeles is employment lands, west is valley space and south is a hydro corridor.
The only good sites there is really the single family homes built on land York U sold off to a developer a generation ago; and some of the townhomes on Shoreham.
Close to the City, the most high-impact potential is Humber College South.
The Centennial one-building campus off Mortimer could be another interesting one, if that's treated as a campus for the purpose of the rules.
rdaner
Senior Member
Great response! In my next iteration I will adjust boundary to only include lots where densification is possible.
Still not clear is if there is a size threshold to activate new zoning. Owen Sound has a very small campus for training of coast guard personnel. Would that trigger a zone covering much of the city?
Still not clear is if there is a size threshold to activate new zoning. Owen Sound has a very small campus for training of coast guard personnel. Would that trigger a zone covering much of the city?
Northern Light
Superstar
I'm waiting to hear this as well, as I noted that may be an issue for Centennial's one building campus in East York.
****
Sheridan College in Oakville is another problematic one, in that the college owns tons of land that is used for surface parking.
Parking that actually fronts the only road with transit service in the area (Trafalger).
Maybe the lift on density could occur on the east side of Trafalger; but it won't work until Oakville Transit runs frequent service (at the very least every 15M all-day, 7-days per week).
Last edited:
goodcitywhenfinished
Active Member
Announcement of new housing legislation scheduled for today:
news.ontario.ca
I’m expecting some pretty bare-minimum reform. I hope I am wrong and MTSAs are moving forward.
Ontario Newsroom
news.ontario.ca
I’m expecting some pretty bare-minimum reform. I hope I am wrong and MTSAs are moving forward.
