rdaner
Senior Member
This chart demonstrates a great tool to show the wider public what happened post war and what is (sort of) happening now. If anyone knows of a similar graph for Canada (Toronto) please let me know. Thanks!
|
|
|
Zoning Reform Ideas
- Thread starter A Torontonian Now
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
A year ago, the City of Toronto hived off the reviewing of development applications from City Planning, and created a new unit called Development Review.
The Star has an article today, looking at that's going.
www.thestar.com
From the above:
***
The Star has an article today, looking at that's going.
One year ago, Toronto launched a division to speed up development approvals. Here’s how it’s going
The division has reduced wait times on major application types by 80 per cent, and approved more than 46,000 homes, says its executive director.
www.thestar.com
From the above:
***
Midtown Hank
Active Member
Except that 4 plexes are now allowed as of right.
rdaner
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
Its a bad idea that keeps re-treading again and again.
afransen
Senior Member
I for one am willing to accept some experimentation. You have argued that you don't expect it to result in any cost savings. I'd be open to allowing development to take place and evaluate how it performs in practice. This plus allowing the EU elevator standard to be used in NA, even if only for small midrise buildings that would benefit from single stair.
Cambry Ardship
Active Member
MTSAs have been finally approved
bsky.app
Toronto City Planning and Development Review (@cityplanto.bsky.social)
Today, the Province of Ontario approved, with modifications, 120 Major Transit Station Areas and Protected Major Transit Station Areas in #Toronto. The decision increases building heights and densities near transit and supports more housing options for these areas. Learn more: toronto.ca/OurPlan
bsky.app
enter username
Active Member
The Ontario press release said they will keep working on 14 other transit station areas... I think we can infer these missing stations to be
TTC: Royal York, Glencairn, Chaplin, Avenue, Milliken, Don Valley, Finch West, Sentinel, Mount Dennis
GO: Guildwood, Rouge Hill, Long Branch, Exhibition, Scarborough
Mostly in pretty affluent neighborhoods so I’m not surprised.
TTC: Royal York, Glencairn, Chaplin, Avenue, Milliken, Don Valley, Finch West, Sentinel, Mount Dennis
GO: Guildwood, Rouge Hill, Long Branch, Exhibition, Scarborough
Mostly in pretty affluent neighborhoods so I’m not surprised.
guavadelic
Active Member
They're allowing building heights of up to 30 storeys within 200m of a transit station and 20 storeys within 200-500m of transit station, but ONLY for sites that can accomadate three or more towers.
What's the reason that they would limit those allowable building heights to only those sites?
What's the reason that they would limit those allowable building heights to only those sites?
evandyk
Senior Member
To make it really difficult to actually build bigger buildings near the stations.
cateran
New Member
OPA 778 (expanding Avenues, removing Avenue Studies, and allowing mid-rise as-of-right on Avenues) made progress at the OLT with the appelants allowing the unappealed sections to go into effect
The only city-wide section that is still being appealed is the required ground floor activation for buildings on avenues in mixed-used areas which is being appealed by the TCDSB. Outside of that, it is only the appelants' specific sites that are being blocked for now
Case Information
They also tried their best to include a table but instead they included images of multiple parts which is why I have to do the same here because I am not typing this all out
The only city-wide section that is still being appealed is the required ground floor activation for buildings on avenues in mixed-used areas which is being appealed by the TCDSB. Outside of that, it is only the appelants' specific sites that are being blocked for now
Case Information
They also tried their best to include a table but instead they included images of multiple parts which is why I have to do the same here because I am not typing this all out
Last edited:
afransen
Senior Member
I've mentioned this before, but Ray Delahanty just posted a video essay exploring the questionable ethics of locating intense residential uses in proximity to high traffic roadways and particularly highways. Something for folks in Toronto to think carefully about. I can think of countless high density residential communities being located in close proximity to highways in the city, from Langstaff Gateway, 2150 Lakeshore, STC redevelopment, etc. And beyond that, the City policy of concentrating density on arterials, which is also questionable, as it maximizes the number of people who are at risk from poor air quality in addition to noise pollution, traffic violence, etc. I can't help but wonder if in 30 years these decisions will be cursed as the poor urban planning decisions made by this generation.
Last edited:
chrisw
Active Member
Article today on the MTSAs.
Hamiltonian
Active Member
I’m not sure if this has been raised before, but I was recently wondering: just as we maintain rental units when a building is demolished and replaced with a condo, why don’t we do the same for retail units... or at least give former retailers the right to return to their space at a comparable rent? This would go ways to reduce the loss of fine-grained retail and also maintain the unique retail mix that are much less likely to move into new condo ground floor units.
T-Bor
Active Member
Can someone help clarify some of these zoning reform changes from yesterday? Here's my understanding:
-Within 200m of most subway stations, developers can now buy single-family homes and, as long as other requirements are met (set-backs, etc), they can turn it into a 6 storey apartment. This is true even on side streets
-Across the city, 4-storey buildings are now permitted. I'm assuming this will be most common in the yellowbelt, where developers could likely buy two SFHs with larger lots, then turn it into a 4 storey apartment
Is this accurate, or am I missing something? If so, this seems to be a way larger reform than permitting sixplexes across the entire city would have been
-Within 200m of most subway stations, developers can now buy single-family homes and, as long as other requirements are met (set-backs, etc), they can turn it into a 6 storey apartment. This is true even on side streets
-Across the city, 4-storey buildings are now permitted. I'm assuming this will be most common in the yellowbelt, where developers could likely buy two SFHs with larger lots, then turn it into a 4 storey apartment
Is this accurate, or am I missing something? If so, this seems to be a way larger reform than permitting sixplexes across the entire city would have been