Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 1d

…But that central TO should be the only place in the region for growth, leaving other areas to their “inferior transit and amenities” as you say, and not address inequities by adding pop and investing is… an interesting take?

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 1d

Over time, densification planned in conjunction with transit investment as suburban areas age and pops fall… be it Scarborough or Mississauga, as well as growth in central TO. That’s how city-regions evolve. ….

Mississauga.in

1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 1d

Restrictive land use policies in the core may be a factor but I think you are underestimating real demand outside the core. Plus policies in places like Mississauga are even more restrictive than TO, limiting growth and densification there, despite virtually all neighbourhoods losing pop.

2 2

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 1d

How does liberalizing land use policy outside Toronto threaten development in the core? Development will go where there is demand, if permitted.

Did rezoning along Eglinton in Scarborough for the LRT fail?

1 2

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

agreed

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

Kinda crazy that you think people have to be “forced” to live in neighbourhoods outside Toronto.

How is it equitable to have large areas outside Toronto with “inferior transit and amenities” not get those improved by adding population?

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

It’s not “forcing” growth - it’s no different than allowing new growth in Toronto. Remove the obstacles, zoning and otherwise, which exist in places like Mississauga too. So too does demand for housing, believe it or not. Target threshold areas near jobs, eg allow housing in business parks, for one.

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

Transit needs density. I’m arguing adding pop strategically where it will push density over the threshold to make transit viable.
And yes, that’s how it works and how cities evolve.

So you’re arguing to just ignore all areas outside of TO and let those areas continue to be car-centric GHG drivers?

2 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

Not to mention the equity argument… much worse access to jobs by transit outside of Toronto, except NE Scarborough which is also bad.

1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

In order to expand the blue areas of that GHG map, you need to get people out of cars.

Adding pop to already-transit served areas does nothing to address the millions of current daily car trips in the yellow and orange areas.

It’s simply a much bigger up side to focus on threshold areas.

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

That may be true, but the biggest gains to reducing GHGs, at the lowest costs, are to be found in areas at the threshold of transit-supportiveness where we can get people out of cars.

All the orange areas below lost population 2016-2021.

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

I’m talking outer 416 and especially beyond, eg Mississauga where virtually all neighbourhoods have lost population in recent years, improved transit would benefit all, and capacity exists.

Otherwise we are just ignoring the carbon emissions elephant in the room when it could be addressed.

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

More people need to live in the yellow and orange zones in order to move them out of auto dependency and into transit-supportive densities. That is where the biggest marginal gains are presently.

2 3

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

Agreed, but that is already happening to some extent (eg Golden Mile). But very little attention to places like Mississauga, eg, where almost every residential area has lost population in recent years.

2

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 2d

It’s an issue of how we grow the city. We are adding population where it’s already pretty dense ie central Toronto. And not densifying in the vast swathe of yellow and orange areas outside of that where it would have most impact, eg pushing densities to be transit-supportive, adding pop near jobs…

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 14d

Apparently there are a few. Would be good to compare notes.
#singlestair

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · 14d

Anybody else have an ASP application for a single stair building in Toronto under review rn?

1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 5

Exactly… plus start-up space, shops, studios….

1 1 3

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 5

Could get behind converting office buildings into spaces for small businesses:

vietnamnews.vn/economy/5360...

Old is gold: once-shunned decrepit buildings find new commercial uses in Viet Nam’s cities

Going to old buildings to shop and have coffee and food has become popular with young people in major cities looking to find somewhere chic and attractive to relax.

vietnamnews.vn

1 3 12

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 2

The MTSA zoning could, in theory, address these other issues (garbage, bike maintenance, visitor parking etc. etc.) eg for newly-permitted 4 storey buildings in Neighbourhoods; it should, but it probably won’t.

1 2

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 2

Up to and including 10 units is exempt from site plan control, I believe.

1 1

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 2

One of the issues is as soon as you exceed 6 units (until recently 4 units) apartment regs apply, same for 7 units or 100, incl. visitor parking, enclosed garbage etc., increasing the number of variances. Small building regs needed.

1 1 3

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 2

www.toronto.ca/city-governm...

Application Details

www.toronto.ca

1 3

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Sep 1

Single exit stair people: What would/should be considered a reasonable stair width in a single stair bldg? BC Code says 1500 mm up to 6 storeys. City of Toronto guidance report says maybe 1650 mm up to 4 storeys.
What’s reasonable for a small footprint 3 storey 6plex? For a 6 storey apt building?

Pamela Blais @pamelablais.bsky.social · Jun 28

… which itself is what is allowed for a single-detached house (with a small tweak to allow a bit more height in areas where limit is less than 10.5 m). So we were talking about a net addition 2 units within the same, already permitted form. 2/2