Zoning Reform Ideas

[Northern Light]

What I read in the article sounded reasonable. Unfortunately I do not think this country has a stomach for the prescriptions.

And yes - zoning reform is slowly happening, but going full-force to intensification........

750,000 homes (maybe) achieved through the Housing Accelerator you say......

While a Task Force looking at the housing issue suggests we need 5,800,000 new units by 2030. (not remotely possible).

Sometimes the problem isn't merely the facts, its the idea that the facts are disconnected from reality and no one is pointing that out.

, restricting building in areas prone to climate-risk - I don’t think any (maybe BC?) provinces are really hot on doing that.

Ontario already does this, that's what the Conservation Authorities have done for generations in restricting building in the regulatory floodplain

Though, its been decades since they were funded properly to buy-out housing that's already at-risk, because it was built before such regulations were in place.

In Toronto, the residences of Hogg's Hollow are one of the more obvious pockets of housing entirely within a flood-risk area. The TRCA originally wanted to buy out that very well-heeled pocket of housing, decades ago, but it was fought, and today doesn't have the acquisition budget to buy more than one house every few years in that area.

The homes atop the Scarborough Bluffs all have a fairly high risk profile over time, and are being bought out very slowly; curiously, we don't even restrict re-sale of these properties, and that's because the TRCA doesn't have the budget to buy all that come up for sale every year.

Outside the City, in respect of flood/erosion, there are a number of properties at high risk on the shores of Lake Erie that really should be bought out and added to/made into a National or Provincial Park.

Fire risk is a different story. In the north and west, there really isn't alot one can do to escape a general relationship with fire-prone forest.

What one can do is mitigate by changing building materials (for buildings and fences); and adopting vegetative restrictions (banning conifers within or immediately adjacent to urban areas); and changing forest management practices. Forestry companies currently use pesticides to curtain growth of deciduous trees such as Aspen in the midst of conifer forests to which they have logging rights.,

Those deciduous trees form natural firebreaks. While not immune to fire, they are much slower to catch than conifers and they slow the growth of forest fires, both naturally limiting them in size, but also buying time for intervention.

We've known this stuff for ages..........but changing it...........don't hold your breath.

 

[Undead]

Will build? That's a bold statement. Public announcements need to avoid counting chickens that haven't hatched, lol.

 

[Northern Light]

Will build? That's a bold statement. Public announcements need to avoid counting chickens that haven't hatched, lol.

While that alone is true; its the disconnection between the 'accomplishment' (as yet unrealized) and the actual need that to me stands out most.

 

[afransen]

Ontario already does this, that's what the Conservation Authorities have done for generations in restricting building in the regulatory floodplain

Though, its been decades since they were funded properly to buy-out housing that's already at-risk, because it was built before such regulations were in place.

In Toronto, the residences of Hogg's Hollow are one of the more obvious pockets of housing entirely within a flood-risk area. The TRCA originally wanted to buy out that very well-heeled pocket of housing, decades ago, but it was fought, and today doesn't have the acquisition budget to buy more than one house every few years in that area.

The homes atop the Scarborough Bluffs all have a fairly high risk profile over time, and are being bought out very slowly; curiously, we don't even restrict re-sale of these properties, and that's because the TRCA doesn't have the budget to buy all that come up for sale every year.

Isn't the problem with development in these areas government-backed or mandated insurance? One would think many of these properties should be uninsurable.

 

[afransen]

750,000 homes (maybe) achieved through the Housing Accelerator you say......

While a Task Force looking at the housing issue suggests we need 5,800,000 new units by 2030. (not remotely possible).

Sometimes the problem isn't merely the facts, its the idea that the facts are disconnected from reality and no one is pointing that out.

What we need is a plan to grow the construction industry's capacity and productivity. There are things the federal government can contribute on the former, namely prioritizing skilled trades immigration, on the latter, some of the power of the purse could be brought to bear there similar to housing accelerator. Funding for municipalities that achieve KPIs in terms of timeline from application (that is in order) to approval being under a certain target, or rewarding simplification of approval processes, especially for small scale multi-unit residential. This could help to produce housing at a faster rate. One would think we could divert some of the low-rise construction capacity that builds SFHs and Semis to build missing middle typologies and have the same workforce produce more, smaller units.

 

[abovegrade]

This is a great idea, and in the long term it will almost inevitably happen. A street of small buildings with mixed uses is a magnet.

Kensington and Yorkville are two of the most vital and economically productive places in the whole city.

Geary Avenue is heading the same way despite being ugly and poorly located.

I think geary is going to be the next Ossington. I was recently in the artsy Bushwick neighbourhood in Brooklyn, NY and it had a lot of similarities to Geary. Very ugly but part of the charm.

 

[rdaner]

I think geary is going to be the next Ossington. I was recently in the artsy Bushwick neighbourhood in Brooklyn, NY and it had a lot of similarities to Geary. Very ugly but part of the charm.

I agree! And I think that Geary is that way because of where it is located. I was on Geary today and noticed for the first time that activity is creeping north along Dufferin, Dovercourt and Ossington. The entire area between the rail line and St. Clair seems to be a pocket of affordability and suitable for niche businesses. Btw The Brick building on the west side of Dufferin would have made an excellent Artscape project. Hopefully TAS is able to find a mix of uses and density that helps them as well as Geary.

 

[Northern Light]

What we need is a plan to grow the construction industry's capacity and productivity. There are things the federal government can contribute on the former, namely prioritizing skilled trades immigration, on the latter, some of the power of the purse could be brought to bear there similar to housing accelerator. Funding for municipalities that achieve KPIs in terms of timeline from application (that is in order) to approval being under a certain target, or rewarding simplification of approval processes, especially for small scale multi-unit residential. This could help to produce housing at a faster rate. One would think we could divert some of the low-rise construction capacity that builds SFHs and Semis to build missing middle typologies and have the same workforce produce more, smaller units.

I have no difficulty w/supporting targeted immigration that fills Canada's labour force needs; until recently that has been the focus for 2 or 3 generations, albeit w/some problems w/credential recognition.

**

However, ability to deliver on that is suspect for a host of reasons too long for this post.

**

On the subject of diverting those building SFH to some form of multi-res, its already been done, SFH in major centres is an increasingly small percentage of construction.

Anything multi-unit, but particularly equal to or greater than 4s, will eat more labour time than it will save. Its still a great idea, btw, I''m not opposed in the least. Its just the nature of the work from design to construction is more labour-intensive than SFH.

 

[Northern Light]

Isn't the problem with development in these areas government-backed or mandated insurance? One would think many of these properties should be uninsurable.

Gov't does not back home insurance; it backs mortgage insurance.

But yes, it may back mortgage insurance in places it should not; a problem I would prefer to fix by not backing mortgage insurance at all.

 

[afransen]

Why $31.7M for national flood insurance in Budget 2023 is ‘just the start’ | Globalnews.ca

Hurricane Fiona, which battered Atlantic Canada last year, and the increasing instances of catastrophic weather demonstrate the need for a national flood insurance program.

globalnews.ca

Also, there is some ad hoc national flood insurance through federal assistance provided after major floods.

Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA)

Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA)

www.publicsafety.gc.ca

Examples of provincial/territorial expenses that may be eligible for cost-sharing under the DFAA:​

• Evacuation, transportation, emergency food, shelter and clothing;
• Emergency provision of essential community services;
• Security measures including the removal of valuable assets and hazardous materials from a threatened area;
• Repairs to public buildings and related equipment;
• Repairs to public infrastructure such as roads and bridges;
• Removal of damaged structures constituting a threat to public safety;
• Restoration, replacement or repairs to an individual's dwelling (principal residence only);
• Restoration, replacement or repairs to essential personal furnishings, appliances and clothing;
• Restoration of small businesses and farmsteads including buildings and equipment; and
• Costs of damage inspection, appraisal and clean up.

 

[evandyk]

Banks are starting to make this move already, and it will probably become a stampede at some point. Or at least, mortgage rates will do the same thing as expensive insurance will.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/quebec-desjardins-flooding-mortgage-1.7129986

 

[Northern Light]

Banks are starting to make this move already, and it will probably become a stampede at some point. Or at least, mortgage rates will do the same thing as expensive insurance will.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/quebec-desjardins-flooding-mortgage-1.7129986

Quebec has not managed flood risk nearly as well as Ontario (in the south).

As I've noted, CAs never did buy up all the at-risk properties as their acquisition funding started to dwindle by the 80s. But at least we bought up a great deal of it; and largely prevented problematic new builds from the late 50s onward.

 

[evandyk]

The governments should tag a premium on the transfer, mortgaging or insurance of these properties and use the proceeds to fund more voluntary buybacks. Buy them back cheaply after they've been flooded and can't be reinsured

 

[allengeorge]

Florida is starting to face a reckoning re: natural-disaster insurance, with major insurers freezing policy acceptances, some attempting to leave the state and overall, increasing the rates substantially. The risk isn't fully priced in yet though. I don't think it's fully priced-in in Canada either. We have different challenges in different provinces: flood risk here from increasingly unpredictable storms, wildfires in the west, and so on.

 

[allengeorge]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in Toronto the major impediments to building small-scale apartments (4-6 storeys) outside of zoning are building codes and cost of land, no?

I know that City Planning is still working on the Major Streets Study (looks like consultation is over, unfortunately) and I truly hope something good comes out of that.