Yet this anti-development preservationist explains the importance of housing supply 2/
Never mind the last paragraph, this time is different 3/
This is to defend a regime of heritage preservation that a) protects rich people’s houses and b) makes sure that main street buildings are replaced by short condos rather than tall ones. 4/
It’s almost as if this issue is complicated, and requires citywide strategic thinking that’s attentive to housing economics. 5/
FTR, I think new growth here should 1) replace single-family houses, with robust tenant protections 2) stay away from the main street 3) where it does go on sites like strip malls, it should be very dense. 7/
This is exactly the opposite of what the city is doing. 🤷♂️ 8/
Oh, the preservationist author is a neighbourhood landlord charging $2800 for a one-bedroom. 9/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here’s the city of Toronto, without anyone much noticing, banning tall buildings in most of its eastern downtown. Max heights mostly 30m or less. 1/ app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgen…#topoli
This very consequential policy was finished through public consultation that attracted fewer than 300 people, total. 2/
This is profoundly bad policy in terms of economic development, efficient use of infrastructure, housing supply, climate resilience. 3/
A New Urbanist development in Ontario: Replacing a farmers’ field to build homes for retirees who will drive everywhere. theglobeandmail.com/business/indus…
This looks like it will be marginally better than the usual sprawl. But even in this drawing you can see it’s on the edge of farmland. 2/
“People should be able to take care of their ordinary needs within walking distance,” says Andres Duany 3/
Crucial point about what's happening: big pools of capital are buying old (often decrepit) buildings and pushing hard for higher rents and new tenancies
This is totally different from *building* new housing, which is what developers often get called out for.
“Cities are places of opportunity and cohesion, and people want to live there. Yet our planning and politics make this far too difficult. The COVID-19 pandemic is the moment to change that.” My piece @globeandmail: theglobeandmail.com/opinion/articl… 1/
Cities aren’t dead. More of us should live there. 2/
Our society has experienced dramatic demographic changes, and planning policy isn’t catching up. 3/