News   Apr 25, 2024
GTA 2024 BILD Award Finalists Announced — and You Can Vote!
 374     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
Brightwater Resubmission Proposes Increased Density and Height in Port Credit
 1.1K     4 
News   Apr 25, 2024
Wyse Meter Solutions Encouraging Sustainability Through Submetering Technology
 1.1K     0 

Zoning Reform Ideas

t54zhao said:
Sprawl Repair Manual by Galina Tachieva

Its a big file, and download speeds are slow.

Basically, the author advocates for transect based zoning, based on urban density. Within transects a variety of built forms are allowed. Several case studies are shown at different scale on how suburban sprawl can be intensified.

Usually this means demolishing cul-de-sacs and building "places"
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing, I'll give it a read (or skim at least--over 300 pages).
 
SunriseChampion said:
Yeah, I can see why people might buy into it, but the outer suburbs are increasingly denser than the inner suburbs, at least if you compare swathes of SFHs, so I'm not sure it can't be unlearnt or easily discouraged.

Why is the system so stuck on it though? Surely our city planners aren't SFH cultists. I know the politicos might be and I guess that's why we're stuck on stupid.

Why does good policy always have to run through a "pilot project"? Get out of here with this incrementalist approach and aversion to positive change.

Well, as with everything else, I guess it's all down to base human psychology; in this context familiarity and comfort derived therein.
Click to expand...
On this, I get the feeling that it is due to very conservative political and planning culture in Toronto. People are not willing to rock the 'yellow belt' boat. All the innovation gets funneled to narrow areas where there isn't critical mass of NIMBYs.
 
SunriseChampion said:
Why does good policy always have to run through a "pilot project"? Get out of here with this incrementalist approach and aversion to positive change.
Click to expand...
Thin edge of the wedge. Just like the 'temporary' King St Pilot, 'temporary' bike lanes, etc. It's a jiu jitsu redirection of opposition by deflecting rather than directly confronting. It seems to work, albeit slowly. Better than not at all.
 
afransen said:
Thin edge of the wedge. Just like the 'temporary' King St Pilot, 'temporary' bike lanes, etc. It's a jiu jitsu redirection of opposition by deflecting rather than directly confronting. It seems to work, albeit slowly. Better than not at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'll give it that. Putting them down gently.

To be fair though, King Street still looks temporary. :(
 
SunriseChampion said:
Cheers for posting that. It was an interesting read.

I'd love to see half those recommendations put into action here in Toronto. That'd be the day! :D
Click to expand...
You can see some of the recommendations put into place.

Things like Square One and Promenade Mall being redeveloped. Or the condos/tower block immediately south of Fairview Mall. Or midtown Oakville. If you take a look at those plans, the ideas espoused in that book shine through. Place-making, intensification etc. Also, newer suburban builds are more gridlike in nature, being functionally, giant rowhouses so some of the suburban redesign ideas don't apply as much.
 
t54zhao said:
You can see some of the recommendations put into place.
Click to expand...

I'd be more interested in seeing the cul-de-sac destruction and intensification of existing SFH lots. Intensification of parking lots is also beautiful as they are the most egregious waste of space known to mankind, but are low-hanging fruit and the least "offensive" option to the NIMBYot crowd.
 
SunriseChampion said:
I'd be more interested in seeing the cul-de-sac destruction and intensification of existing SFH lots. Intensification of parking lots is also beautiful as they are the most egregious waste of space known to mankind, but are low-hanging fruit and the least "offensive" option to the NIMBYot crowd.
Click to expand...
Toronto’s suburbs don’t even have that many cul de sacs. The most American-Mcmansion-y suburbs are way up in York Region. Around King and Aurora.

Most Toronto suburbs are grid-ish.
 
I personally think that where subdivision collector roads meet arterials is a prime place for intensification.
 
Northern Light said:
The permanent changes to King are coming..........patience. LOL
Click to expand...

Patience? It's like the only streetcar I use (ok, ok, 509 and 510 as well a bit) and my fav high street in this town (ok, ok, Roncesvalles is decent as well but).

It's been depressing. You get all stoked for improvements and then get stuck tripping over lowest common denominator manifestations of said improvements for years.

*looks at chain link fence pollution to make sure nothing's changed in the last ten minutes*
 
SunriseChampion said:
Patience? It's like the only streetcar I use (ok, ok, 509 and 510 as well a bit) and my fav high street in this town (ok, ok, Roncesvalles is decent as well but).

It's been depressing. You get all stoked for improvements and then get stuck tripping over lowest common denominator manifestations of said improvements for years.

*looks at chain link fence pollution to make sure nothing's changed in the last ten minutes*
Click to expand...

I understand. I wish it would improve faster too.
 
t54zhao said:
Toronto’s suburbs don’t even have that many cul de sacs. The most American-Mcmansion-y suburbs are way up in York Region. Around King and Aurora.

Most Toronto suburbs are grid-ish.
Click to expand...

Just wait, the redevelopment proposal for Canada Square seeks to add a cul-de-sac and not apply a grid across its super-block!
 
t54zhao said:
I personally think that where subdivision collector roads meet arterials is a prime place for intensification.
Click to expand...

There is so much opportunity on arterials........vast amounts of it..............

Look up and down Coxwell, Greenwood, Donlands etc. in the core (ish) area.

Look up and down Pharmacy, Warden, McCowan and Bellamy........

And so many more.

Which is not to diminish any other intensification scheme.

A quick sample of the older portions of Warden suggest that as-of-right zoning of a mere 5 storeys would result in 400 new units every 500m.

If one were to examine Warden, and remove areas of industry, or those that already intensified, this could apply to at least 10km within City of Toronto boundaries.

Which is to say, not less than 8,000 units (roughly, housing for 20,000) on but one single street.

Apply that across the City and we're well into accommodating 500,000 or more, all without any intensification of interior neighborhoods or a single tower.

Lots of opportunity!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top