The
draft proposals for zoning reform along 'major streets' is out.
@HousingNowTO will want to make note.
The high-level link first:
Agenda Item History 2023.PH6.4
secure.toronto.ca
This is the key bit:
Six storeys as-of-right is actually more than I was expecting; I wonder if Planning did that so that the compromise on the floor of Council will still be 5.
The 30-unit limit seems odd to me.
If I had a choice, I'd rather lose a floor and pick up as-of-right permission for 60 units.
The highlighted area reflects portions of Major streets currently designated 'Neighbourhoods'
Maps link:
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-239321.pdf
I'll edit this as I read further, lots of reports to weed through.
UT went down while I was editing this post and took down content that it took me 15 minutes to add.
I will add it back later, work to do!
****
Back to this between slurps of lunch-time soup.
The main detailed report is here:
From the above:
Here's the rationale on the unit count:
Not sure I agree on the above.; I see the loading requirement is identified as an issue; but I'm inclined to think about elevators being amortized over only 30 units. Hmmm
*****
@ADRM 's favourite unit in City Planning; Urban Design got their teeth into this too.
They did conceptual modelling.
That can be found here:
****
Comments, overall, very much the right direction, in the above images, the setback from the sidewalk is gratuitous, Even if you wanted 6M in every case, for argument's sake, I'd much rather have a 2-3M blvd that can support trees, and buffer pedestrians from traffic and then a smaller area in front of any building w/o retail that afforded room for some landscaping.
That said, the 6M doesn't make universal sense; I'm not clear if its the intent to require this across the board, or in areas where this is the current norm.
Example: Woodbine Avenue:
Even in more suburban locales, I'm concerned that a deep set back like this precludes adding additional retail areas; and stifles the 15-minute city idea.
I'm open to setbacks like this if there's a clear understanding that retail is not viable and will not be in the foreseeable future on a stretch of road; but lets not start from the premise that we're insisting on all residential ground floors.