The province currently has proposed zoning/regulatory changes out for comment.
Those changes would eliminate requirements for shadow studies, wind studies, exterior lighting plans and Urban Design plans.
Toronto's City Planner Jason Thorne is not amused:
Ontario is proposing to remove urban design review from development applications, saying it adds to red tape. Toronto’s Jason Thorne thinks that’s a mistake.
www.thestar.com
Should you wish to comment (officially), the comment period ends June 26th.
You can comment here:
ero.ontario.ca
You don't have to log-in there is an unregistered comment option.
***
For my part I think the measures go too far.
Anyone who has walked at Bloor/Yonge on a moderately windy day is aware of how uncomfortable, challenging and dangerous high winds can be. Its not just annoying or unpleasantly cold in winter, high winds pick up dust and debris and throw
it. Sometimes off high floors on a constructions site, and that can seriously injure or kill someone.
I have no difficulty with some scoping (if we can show that below a certain height risks of creating dangerous winds are minimal, then by all means exempt such applications)
On shadows, everyone knows I think access to sunlight is important, not just as a preference, but for mental and physical health, and that of trees and vegetation. I therefore take no issue with shadow studies per se, but again, I do think there's some room for scoping and exempting anything that's as-of-right, and generally, shorter, smaller buildings, particularly if not next to parks.
On exterior lighting, I'm not sure we need a study/full dedicated plan for every development, but it really isn't a big burden to produce it given that lighting is going to be part of any architectural plan or landscape plan anyway.
On Urban design, I think there's room to exempt smaller proposals (which often are already)........we all know there are problems with Urban Design unit in Toronto currently. Everyone pretty much agrees on this, but I think under Jason Thorne, I'm hopeful this may change. That said, ditching it as an option entirely seems ill considered.
Overall, this seems too much like a shill to cheap and lazy builders and not considerate enough of the public interest.
