[afransen]

Lowering development fees / restructuring municipal finances

• they say only possible if they are alternate revenue streams for cities besides fees, development charges and property taxes for all municipal funding
  • some ideas they float are: getting a portion of HST generated in city back, putting road infrastructure fees on cars instead of housing
• Ontario Home Builders advisor says of $1.3 million avg house 500k is in government fees (taxes, charges, fees, etc.). Moffat mentions development charges have increased from 5k to 100k in 20 years.

I am partial to just funding development out of the property tax base. But if that is politically difficult, I could see having municipalities finance those development charges and amortizing them over 15-25 years as a surcharge to property taxes on the new units.

 

[rdaner]

Interesting.

4-storey stacked townhouses permitted on London 'neighbourhood connector' streets

A majority of council has ruled that London’s Official Plan should be changed to permit four-storey stacked townhouses on neighbourhood connector streets across the city.

london.ctvnews.ca

 

[Northern Light]

I've been meaning to do a write-up on the midrise design guideline changes, as proposed to the last meeting of the Design Review Panel.

I'm still a bit pressed for time, but I'm going to bring a few of the slides forward, and provide a link to the recording.

* I need to add a note to the above, while I favour a wider, more streetscaped condition for development, we need to be mindful that the above does impact development viability, whereas many main street sites currently have only ~2M sidewalks, you now need to remove 4M from the lot depth to transfer that to the City. This a substantial issue on shallower sites. I'm not arguing against this as such, though a 6M minimum is quite beefy for some extant conditions. I think this may merit further discussion.

* Let me pop in here and say that while I broadly support the slide above.........what's missing is a clear discussion of the need for additional rear laneways in blocks where none exist today. That is not necessarily the way we need to treat every street or block, but it is a crucial part of the ability to consolidate loading/servicing/parking in many contexts.

Link to recording, with any luck, right at the beginning of the above presentation, which is timestamped 1:53

 

[just east of the creek]

I've been meaning to do a write-up on the midrise design guideline changes, as proposed to the last meeting of the Design Review Panel.

I'm still a bit pressed for time, but I'm going to bring a few of the slides forward, and provide a link to the recording.

View attachment 602849

View attachment 602850

View attachment 602852

View attachment 602853

View attachment 602854

View attachment 602855

View attachment 602856
* I need to add a note to the above, while I favour a wider, more streetscaped condition for development, we need to be mindful that the above does impact development viability, whereas many main street sites currently have only ~2M sidewalks, you now need to remove 4M from the lot depth to transfer that to the City. This a substantial issue on shallower sites. I'm not arguing against this as such, though a 6M minimum is quite beefy for some extant conditions. I think this may merit further discussion.

View attachment 602857

View attachment 602858

* Let me pop in here and say that while I broadly support the slide above.........what's missing is a clear discussion of the need for additional rear laneways in blocks where none exist today. That is not necessarily the way we need to treat every street or block, but it is a crucial part of the ability to consolidate loading/servicing/parking in many contexts.

Link to recording, with any luck, right at the beginning of the above presentation, which is timestamped 1:53

Completely agree with your * paragraph, and so should every cyclist and pedestrian.

 

[Northern Light]

A report to next week's Planning and Housing Ctte will see 190 properties in Toronto/East York district included in the City-Wide Zoning by-law.

The most notable tweak is that this will cause them to no longer be subject to parking minimums; though various other changes occur on a site-specific basis.

The Report is here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-249569.pdf

Maps showing the location of the affected properties can be found in the above link should someone wish to view them or bring them forward into the thread.

 

[Northern Light]

Also up at next week's Planning and Housing is the Final Report on changing the mid-rise design standards and enhancing as-of-right permissions on some Avenues (generally those not yet covered by an Avenue Study or a Secondary Plan).

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-249535.pdf

There's a fair bit in there, in line w/previous expectations, this generally achieves, more flexible and reasonable rear-transitions (no more angular plane as such); and also provides, in many cases, greater as-of-right height and density.

The report above has the effect of being more permissive for the properties seen below (red dots)

I won't copy/paste all the details, as I suspect that's a bit weedy for most.........and for others, you likely already know, or will read the report.

but I will copy the new height/density permissions as I think that's fairly straight forward for the typical forumer.

 

[just east of the creek]

This popped up in my email box. Anyone with an interest in growth in the Burlington area should be interested. The Burlington Mayor's series of events has been far more interesting then anything held in Oakville or the Region to date.

DID YOU KNOW...​ By 2051, Burlington’s population is expected to reach 265,000 people. How will we adapt to this growth while building a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable community? As Burlington continues to grow, we’re looking ahead to ensure we can manage this expansion, maintain our quality of life, and ensure no one is left behind. You’re invited to join Mayor Meed Ward and industry experts for an engaging panel discussion as part of our Innovation to Action – Mayor’s Speaker Series. This is a unique opportunity to hear insights on growth management, ask questions, and learn about the exciting future of our city. The Mayor will be joined by three expert panelists: Jesse Helmer, Senior Research Associate at the Smart Prosperity Institute; Jeff Neven, CEO of Indwell; and Terri Johns, President & Founder of Landwise. WHEN: November 12, 2024 DOORS & TRADESHOW: 6 PM PANEL: 7 PM LOCATION: Burlington Performing Arts Centre, 440 Locust St, Burlington, ON This is a FREE event. Registration is required to attend. https://burlingtonpac.ca/events/mayors-speaker-series/

 

[T-Bor]

Apologies it this has already been posted elsewhere. Not entirely zoning reform, but it falls under the umbrella of 'making it easier/cheaper to build'

Poilievre promises to eliminate the sales tax on homes under $1m. While obviously impacting the condo market, it could also help nudge more development towards for-sale multiplex units. I.e. it may be easier for a developer to sell 4 x 1,000SF units under $1m, than 2 x 2,000SF units over $1m

Poilievre promises to abolish federal sales tax on new homes under $1 million

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says if his party forms government, it will scrap the federal sales tax on new homes sold for less than $1 million and push provinces do to the same.

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

 

[Cambry Ardship]

That's one half of it. The other half is funding cuts to housing and infrastructure.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-gst-new-homes-cut-1.7365339

Poilievre said he would pay for the plan by cutting two government programs — the Housing Accelerator Fund and the Housing Infrastructure Fund — programs the Conservative leader described as costly bureaucracies.

The Housing Accelerator Fund, first announced during the 2021 election campaign and introduced in the 2022 federal budget, allocates $4 billion until 2026-27 to encourage home building in cities. In April, the Liberal government topped up the fund with an additional $400 million.
[...]
The $6 billion Housing Infrastructure Fund, announced in the last budget, will be rolled out over 10 years, starting in 2024-25. Its purpose is to accelerate construction by funding water, wastewater, stormwater and solid waste infrastructure to reduce the costs of building new housing.

It's not at all clear that this would end up being a reduction of costs in the end. Infrastructure will need to be paid for one way or another, and costs that the federal government doesn't pay might just be added on to municipal development charges.

 

[MrGoose]

A report to next week's Planning and Housing Ctte will see 190 properties in Toronto/East York district included in the City-Wide Zoning by-law.

The most notable tweak is that this will cause them to no longer be subject to parking minimums; though various other changes occur on a site-specific basis.

The Report is here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-249569.pdf

Maps showing the location of the affected properties can be found in the above link should someone wish to view them or bring them forward into the thread.

Are we really doing elimination of parking minimums on a case-by-case basis?

That would be really disappointing.

 

[Northern Light]

Are we really doing elimination of parking minimums on a case-by-case basis?

No.

The City Wide Zoning by-law which applies to the majority of properties has addressed the issue of parking minimums (they're gone).

But....

A relatively small percentage of properties were exempt from the City Wide Zoning by law eons ago (from its introduction), for assorted reasons, and their zoning regime is still generally tied to the pre-amalgamation era.

This addresses a number of those properties (but not all of them).

 

[MrGoose]

No.

The City Wide Zoning by-law which applies to the majority of properties has addressed the issue of parking minimums (they're gone).

But....

A relative handful of properties were exempt from the City Wide Zoning by law eons ago (from its introduction), for assorted reasons, and their zoning regime is still generally tied to the pre-amalgamation era.

This addresses a number of those properties (but not all of them).

How many properties are exempt from the City Wide Zoning bylaw ?

 

[Northern Light]

How many properties are exempt from the City Wide Zoning bylaw ?

From: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-249569.pdf

The reasoning was thus:

 

[christiesplits]

This popped up in my email box. Anyone with an interest in growth in the Burlington area should be interested. The Burlington Mayor's series of events has been far more interesting then anything held in Oakville or the Region to date.

​

​ DID YOU KNOW...​ By 2051, Burlington’s population is expected to reach 265,000 people. How will we adapt to this growth while building a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable community? As Burlington continues to grow, we’re looking ahead to ensure we can manage this expansion, maintain our quality of life, and ensure no one is left behind. You’re invited to join Mayor Meed Ward and industry experts for an engaging panel discussion as part of our Innovation to Action – Mayor’s Speaker Series. This is a unique opportunity to hear insights on growth management, ask questions, and learn about the exciting future of our city. The Mayor will be joined by three expert panelists: Jesse Helmer, Senior Research Associate at the Smart Prosperity Institute; Jeff Neven, CEO of Indwell; and Terri Johns, President & Founder of Landwise. WHEN: November 12, 2024 DOORS & TRADESHOW: 6 PM PANEL: 7 PM LOCATION: Burlington Performing Arts Centre, 440 Locust St, Burlington, ON This is a FREE event. Registration is required to attend. https://burlingtonpac.ca/events/mayors-speaker-series/

Brampton, like Oakville, have been significantly pushing for development in their "new downtowns" next to their GO Stations, while quashing high-rise development in their older downtown areas, although Burlington has seen some exceptions.

 

[Northern Light]

Brampton, like Oakville, have been significantly pushing for development in their "new downtowns" next to their GO Stations, while quashing high-rise development in their older downtown areas, although Burlington has seen some exceptions.

Brampton's downtown is still in a regulatory floodplain and is subject to restrictions on residential development until the related works to remove it from the floodplain are complete.

Brampton very much envisions building up their downtown, there is just an order to these things.