Density bonus policy in the city of Toronto: analysis and recommendations for change
| dc.contributor.author | Amborski, David | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-09T11:16:39Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-10-09T11:16:39Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | en |
| dc.description | Proceedings of the IV World Planning Schools Congress, July 3-8th, 2016 : Global crisis, planning and challenges to spatial justice in the north and in the south | en |
| dc.description.abstract | A number of major cities in North America including New York and Chicago have implemented density bonus polices. This group includes Canadian cities such as Vancouver and Toronto. The application in Toronto, and the surrounding jurisdictions in Ontario are applied under Section 37 of the Ontario Planning Act. The longest running and greatest number of applications have been undertaken in the city of Toronto. More recently surrounding jurisdictions such as Vaughan, Burlington and Oakville have adopted Section 37 policy applications. Basically in both Toronto and Vancouver increased density is granted in exchange for contributions to community amenities. The contribution by the developer is either made in cash or on an “in kind” basis. In both cities there is a list of community amenities for which the contribution may be requested. One of the key items on the list is affordable housing. In the Toronto context it is the local ward councillor who plays a key role in both identifying the community benefits for which the contribution is to be made as well as the quantum to be requested. Furthermore, the councillor plays a role in the negotiations. If the developer is unsatisfied with the contribution required, they have the right to appeal to a quasi-judicial body known as the Ontario Municipal Board. The approach applied in Toronto has been controversial in terms of equity and transparency. This has also led to concerns about how the policy may be applied in the surrounding jurisdictions. This in part has led to a Provincial government review of the application of this tool along, with a review of other exactions including Parkland dedication and development charges (impact fees). | |
| dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en |
| dc.identifier.isbn | 978-85-7785-551-1 | en |
| dc.identifier.pageNumber | 1001-1003 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14235/2073 | |
| dc.language.iso | English | en |
| dc.publisher | AESOP | en |
| dc.rights | openAccess | en |
| dc.rights.license | All rights reserved | en |
| dc.source | Proceedings of the IV World Planning Schools Congress, July 3-8th, 2016 : Global crisis, planning and challenges to spatial justice in the north and in the south | en |
| dc.title | Density bonus policy in the city of Toronto: analysis and recommendations for change | |
| dc.type | conferenceObject | en |
| dc.type.version | publishedVersion | en |