The Ford government wants to open up the Greenbelt for housing. Here's what it's proposing | CBC News

  1. Anybody have access to land registry to find the owners of the following lands? Thanks in advance

  2. This is the proposal under the omnibus bill 23 and it's not just the Greenbelt that is at stake, the provinces wetlands and many smaller watercourses will be open for development under Bill 23. Here is an excerpt that I posted on another thread in the past week:

  3. The amount of data that shows the population of the GTA could be more than doubled by simply opening up existing neighbourhood zoning to allow for more than 1-3 units per lot is evidence alone this disastrous approach is not needed (

  4. Paving over the Greenbelt will have flood insurance effects for more than the rubes who buy houses on land that's normally marsh. One of the many important things the Greenbelt does is it retains water, slowing it down from reaching places downstream. This smooths out the surge in flow rate from things like heavy rainstorms.

  5. Comments can actually be submitted before November 17 directly through the OLA website to be considered by the standing committee:

  6. I support these changes. Parts of Halton Hills are built on floodplains. Should these homes have never existed? You have tens of thousands of people living good lives there.

  7. The worst is that "the housing problem" might not even exist, they could be using it as a campaign to profit with developers. Look around there are so many new developments (condos, town houses, etc.) going on all around the GTA.

  8. So stupid, get rid of one storey strip malls, shopping malls, giant parking lots etc. There’s so much wasted building potential to make liveable, walkable communities

  9. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  10. Yesterday on a walk through the marsh I saw a bunch of mushrooms, some deadly, some edible. I saw flowers that still in bloom. I saw some bugs. Hell, even saw bees recently out getting what they can.

  11. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  12. Absolutely not . Get rid of the empty office space and make room for new living quarters instead. Leave the green belt alone

  13. I read somewhere years ago that the GTA could easily triple it's population while staying within it's current foot print.

  14. I mean yeah just look at the size of GTA on Google maps and compare it to European and asian cities. Its fucking massive.

  15. Our 400 series highways are clogged as it is. There's no room to expand them further. Adding more sprawl would just make things worse. We need more density and more transit which are actual viable solutions to the housing crisis.

  16. Our entire country could hypothetically live in Toronto if we did it properly. We just suck at planning, architecture and saying no to millionaires

  17. I find it interesting that the largest swath of land proposed to be removed from the Greenbelt is in west Pickering near Highway 407. I'm not entirely surprised though. I grew up in Pickering (Durham Region), and sprawl is still the status quo. Pickering is working on the Seaton development and it's expected to house 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs. I suspect the lands east of York-Durham Line (proposed to be removed from the Greenbelt) will ultimately end up looking like the Seaton development.

  18. It wouldn't even take massive high-rise condos. 3-4 story apartments, duplexes, town houses or just efficiently using the space for single detached homes would open up so much more housing.

  19. Yeah but the elites would have to buy those properties and redevelop them, whereas the Ford government will arguably give land to his elite friends.

  20. Replace all single family zoning with a new general residential zoning that allows apartments and tax land more and improvements and sales and purchases less.

  21. You know, even two of Toronto's main public golf courses ... Don Valley and Scarlett Woods ... are perfectly fine, because they're on flood plains that could be dangerous to housing during heavy rains, as during Hurricane Hazel. They exist where it makes sense for them to exist. They're the result of actual urban planning, not land grabs. But Doug & Co. don't seem to give a fuck that plans exist for practical reasons, not just for them to make a buck.

  22. There are so many plots of land to go after before golf courses. Sure golf courses aren't the gold standard of green space usage but they are still green space and support a significant amount of wild life. You would be surprised the wild life I have seen on golf courses directly in the city. I have seen deer, foxes, coyotes, beavers and other animals on the urban courses.

  23. him and his real estate buddies are just sweating at all the land they can buy up and sell.

  24. One day I hope I can show my grandchildren the vast fields of houses that used to be the green belt. When they ask why we got rid of the green belt, I’ll tell them it was so that a man named Ford could make some money for his friends.

  25. If the current federal government continues with its plan to get the nation's population up to 100 million, your grandchildren may live in a GTA of 25 million.

  26. All bc city councils are chock full of NIMBYs who think it’s okay for an international city to be zoned 70% SFH.

  27. Yeah this is the biggest problem. We don't want housing anywhere. But we need housing. And greenspace by definition doesn't have any voters.

  28. 70% SFH, and with a ton of additional constraints that greatly restrict how much building can be done on a given piece of land: maximum height, minimum setback, minimum parking, ...

  29. The consultation is still open on the Environmental Registry of Ontario, leave your comments if you want them to rethink

  30. Under the guise of more housing supply, Doug Ford is ramming through massive changes that limit how cities collect fees to pay for sewers, parks and amenities, deleting a bunch of important plans that help coordinate planning and public dollars with new private development, proposing to build in wetlands and flood zones, and removing regions from planning altogether. Lazily handed majority emboldening all the shitty ideas this government had from the get go…

  31. it's not just laziness. A lot of the opinion pieces forwarded by a lot of the big media guys were suggesting that "maybe ford has changed"

  32. Nobody wants to "waste" their valuable vote on a loser. Better to vote for a winner and know that you are superior to the losers who wasted their time.

  33. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  34. It infuriates me when people complain about new condos on Bloor Street and Yonge Street, when such sites, right on top of fucking subway lines, are precisely where condos belong. I live near Bloor & Jane, and a decade ago locals were bitching about a new condo. You know what it replaced? A car dealership lot that'd been there since the fucking 1930s! They preferred a parking lot to a reasonable apartment building. Because it was what they were used to, and no better reason than that.

  35. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  36. There’s a ton of empty office spaces in the downtown core now that so many people are work from home. Convert those into condos and you’ve got a good start without touching a piece of the Greenland.

  37. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  38. I want to see the Yellow Belt opened up first. People should be able to profitably build dense non-high rise housing in every neighbourhood of Toronto. If someone wants to buy the house next door to mine and put in a stacked fourplex, they should be allowed. If someone wants to buy a $8 million mega mansion on Forest Hill Road and put in 10 townhouses, they should be allowed. I live in the Yellow Belt and want to say loudly YES IN MY BACKYARD. It’s good for cities, good for local businesses, good for housing accessibility (largely without harming property values), good for traffic and transit. The only people it’s bad for are:

  39. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  40. https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/01/25/tomtoro03_wide-61a4632d4f490c9942423d9e780ab089d11ef029-s1400-c100.jpg

  41. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  42. Drive through any city and see all the wasted space ripe for mid-rise. Even Toronto has so many old, crumbling, energy-guzzling brownstones steps to subway and LRT. And the amount of underused single story commercial and parking is obscene everywhere.

  43. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  44. There is something called urban sprawl, and this to me sounds like urban sprawl. Basically, bad for the environment, bad for transportation, good only for people who have their mind set on owning a house with a backyard in a dull suburban neighbourhood where they commute 1 hour by car to work (Toronto) every day.

  45. I was just reading a Narwhal article and it said that Ontario’s Housing Affordability Task Force did not recommend opening up the green belt. Here’s the task force’s

  46. I don’t care what it is proposing. Hard no. We have plenty of vacant lots or lots in much more central locations that should be used for higher density buildings for rent. That is what will help with the housing crisis: housing people can afford to live in. That is not the housing that Ford is enabling. We don’t need more people living in the middle of nowhere, commuting for even longer, to get to the city centres where they work. We need affordable housing IN city centres so that people can spend less money on gas and less time commuting. Unfortunately, Doug Ford won’t go for that because the developers that fund him don’t want to.

  47. Let's pave the whole province. All of it. Have the neighbourhood naming rights be owned by corporations.. you could live in the Rexall neighbourhood on Pepsi street. Have everyone work for minimum wage except managers, who should all be paid many times what their collective staff make. Get rid of hospitals, if someone gets sick they can be replaced by a new immigrant who will vote for the OPC as long as they promise to keep sex ed a secret in the age of the Internet.

  48. Why bother even voting when these clowns just flip flop on their own promises. Its bullshit to say they didn’t realize we would need more houses as we go forward and increase the size of our population.

  49. We have these clowns precisely because people DON'T vote; the only demographic that turns out in large numbers are the Boomers who have nothing else to do but vote for whoever is going to change things the least/make them more money

  50. Because you can vote for alternatives to these particular clowns. Anyone believing Ford’s promises or thinking he won’t just sell out the province to developers hasn’t paid any attention.

  51. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  52. If you don’t know about the importance of the green belt PLEASE I’m begging you to look into it. Someone of Canada’s oldest ecosystems in that area and it needs to be protected.

  53. I’m sure we can delay development until we can get a new competent government (I use that term loosely as the bar is pretty low) that just repeals the bill before any real damage is done. If there is one thing I know we can all be good at it’s being lazy…making this legal would take the municipalities a long time to actually change their official plans and zoning…that’s a lot of work that has to be done by a lot of individuals with invested interest in preserving their communities safe drinking water, flood protection, and ecological features…let’s all just be turtles…it takes a village.

  54. So developers' motivations is making money. They are certain expansion will generate them profit. What if we collectively not give in.

  55. Don’t forget to submit your comment for this action on the green belt! NIMBYs get shit like this shut down all the time during consultation! Scroll to the bottom and be heard!

  56. No, then you’re ruining the work culture. Commuting an hour each way, minimum, teaches people discipline and a love for their colleagues.

  57. Thousands of condo units are being built for the investor class already. Families want SFHs. Preferably with large yards.

  58. Is this similar to how people think adding lanes will reduce traffic, but all it does is induce demand? Does building out the greenbelt matter if you add 800,000 immigrants looking for housing?

  59. Its not a cure but a band aid. Of course, when you're bleeding out a band aid is still better than nothing.

  60. Building more density in our already existing massively low density sprawl. The idea that this is the only developable land is a complete lie, even if it was it’s so inefficient it wouldn’t be a good idea anyways.

  61. The most impactful, fastest solutions would be creating policies and taxation to disincentivize real estate speculation and Airbnbs.

  62. To turn our parks into condo spaces. For example, do we really need the rouge and don valley parks? Imagine how many high-end condos we could put there. Science centre - a waste of space. Imagine how many more people you could cram into this gem of a city if you demolish the schools and hospitals too and replace them with beautiful high-rises.

  63. What if... only the province could build on the greenbelt using a provincially owned and operated development company. Remove the profit incentive and cut out the greedy developers. We have billions of dollars in that slush fund, lets do something interesting with it.

  64. Destroying the greenbelt increase flood risk as majority of southern Ontario is a floodplain. This also makes our natural environment less resilient to environmental degradation. Don't get me started on impacts to small farms..

  65. You can buy a missing middle and more density without going through the greenbelt. Lots of major cities have bigger population for less land usage than the GTA. Having an affordable house that takes you 2.5 hour a day of commute to get to isn't really what most find a nice life to live. When people ask for more affordable houses, they don't ask to live 100km from Toronto.

  66. I’ve heard a few times before that a measure of intelligence is the ability to hold 2 seemingly contradictory beliefs simultaneously while still being able to function.

  67. So "removing about 7,400 acres in 15 different plots of land and adding 9,400 acres in other areas" means 2,000 acres more of Greenbelt. Seems reasonable to me.

  68. Until you realise the added land is useless at providing any of the benefits the existing greenbelt provides. It's just smoke and mirrors.

  69. So when there was that press release a few weeks ago about Dougie overriding municipalities to build triplexes, this is the real bill. Yes, we may get a couple more triplexes in the GTA where previously there weren't, but ultimately resources are limited. Projects are going to be selected by companies based on profitability, and what do you think is more profitable? Buying up handfuls of lots to build triplexes for rentals across the city? Or buying up now freed tracks of land to dump oodles of cookie cutter subdivisions?

  70. Hell No!!! Convert other spaces within the city….there are tons of abandoned schools and office building around…..we don’t need more housing outside the city to just cram more cars in the roads to get to the city….the environment shouldn’t be paying the price…..

  71. Another simple idea is to alter property tax assessments to encourage hirise development. Or build better transit to less populated areas. Not many families of 4+ are able to live in the sea of condos downtown.

  72. Every time Doug Ford adds “ And let me be clear” to a sentence, it means that he’s about to spit out a stupid idea or a bullshit idea

  73. The problem is the ponzi/ pyramid scheme Canada has become. We can only sustain the economy by letting 8n hoards of people...they'll have to live somewhere

  74. Great let build more suburban dystopia housing where nobody wants to live! Why not just add more density ? Oh wait it’s because they would actually have to pay to put in proper public transit. Fucking stupid idiot conservatives.

  75. People we cannot have it both ways! You can’t complain about the price of housing only for ford to want to open the green belt to lower prices. Keep the green belt prices stay high!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin