Whoops I made a mistake in last videos comment. Seeings your video on bill 23, My last comment I meant bill 44 and 45 that was proposed by Mike has been under the radar. It's set to end exclusionary zoning province-wide, allow multiplexes of 4 units and 4 stories as of right everywhere and permit 6-11 story buildings on every major road. Obviously I haven't read the bill in detail so I would like to hear your take on it.
At the 5:55 mark you said: "The people who were the most certain about what the bill means were the most political and the first to crumble under specific questions, revealing that they didn't actually know what was in it. On the other hand the most technocratic people with the greatest knowledge of the legislation were much more likely to humbly say they 'just didn't know yet'." Wow! This quote isn't just true for housing; you've captured something essential about almost every policy debate I've ever witnessed in my adult life!
Interesting video as always! Exciting to see my old home province finally doing something different the past couple years rather than kicking the bucket down the road! Also your comedic timing is way too good “it’s unlikely that the feds intended for generations of Canadians to suck on sacks, that’s how I do it” caught me off guard haha
Wow. You made housing legislation interesting! Nice to see you in the Hammer, my wife is proud! Looking forward to the rest of these, gotta go, someone just "bagged me" and I need to find some scissors for my cereal.
Loved this video. This is the first video that actually addressed the nuances of the legislation. But I'm still waiting for someone like yourself to realize that if a developer submits crap, they do not deserve to get approval on tight timelines, especially don't deserve to get a refund. Neither bill 109 or 23 recognize this, which is why Hamilton and others are beefing up the pre-consultation process. If the province isn't going to address this then we'll never see faster approval times. The new consultation processes by municipalities as least forces developers to talk, which they never wanted to do beforehand. They just submit plans without regard to municipal considerations, and then complain and appeal to the Tribunal.
Paige! You might want to check out Victoria’s new missing middle policy that was just passed - all single family lots have now been up-zoned to allow for up to 6 units. I think this is one of the most substantial housing amendments yet for a city in Canada.
Let's be real, Site plan and architecture design sign offs aren't really done by city staff. They get appealed to the Ontario land Tribunal and get approved or settled there. Sometimes not worth fighting every piece of design. And if the city did fight, they'd by accused of slowing down housing supply. City's just can't win can they.
Great serries can't wait to see the installments. Great work as always! would love to see a video on our downtowns in a post covid, work from home (sorta?) world. I think we are sitting on some great opportunity to re-envision commercial centers as places and spaces to live.
Beautiful drone shot of the Minnesota capitol in here. If only it was among the states that's considering zoning reform on a state level. (not a critique of you - great video!)
Great video! As someone interested in politics but with no relation to Canada I was wondering a bit about the politics behind the bill. Are the liberals and NDP against or for the bill and if so are they more or less NIMBY/YIMBY?
First, the Green party wanted the government to do more in some ways. They provinces own task force said 4 units and 4 storeys, but the government went with 3 units. Liberals and ndp only really have concern with the impact on the development charges that will be changed how they're calculated resulting in shortfalls for municipalities and reduction in ability to fund capital projects. The government is also making very false statements publicly such as how the cities are sitting on tons of money already, which is obviously not true. Imagine you have to build a $20 million bridge, a $60 million sewage plant and $100 train line. you have to save for a long time to collect that money. Then the provincial government comes and says you have collected $90 million, why didn't you spend it you're just sitting on money, it wouldn't make sense. You need $180 million and can't just spend some of it just because. It's also false that development charges are out of control, they've actually kept pace with actual capital costs of infrastructure. If it costs a developer a lot more than 5 years ago for materials, why is it surprising it costs the city a lot more for materials for community centres libraries, fire halls, bridges, roads, park equipment, etc.
I wish my local government would give housing legislation a good sticky squeeze. Its interesting seeing this legislation from across the pond. Very curious how this all plays out. It makes me furious reading my local planing permission requests as local residents and planning law are ludicrously restrictive. It seems that many nimby's perception of "freedom" goes out of the window when it comes to housing. Also, please fix your milk. I know you are not personally responsible, but you seem authoritative enough to get it done. Its stressing me out watching it leak onto your jacket.
You missed out talking about the massive hikes to property tax as a result of the removal of developer fees from municipal budgets. At least one municipality has hiked property tax by 100% just to cover the loss of those fees. Also I think its worth pointing out the obligation Durham Region is being saddled with to build a trunk sewer and water system into the middle of what's currently farm land....my biggest fear with that is that infrastructure being used to build unprofitable car dependent suburbs. Durham Region doesn't have a massive source of tax revenue like Metro Toronto did when it was forced to do the same thing into York Region in the 50s and 60s. Like that is seriously concerning and that concern is furthered by Doug Fords comments shortly after the bill was tabled saying "everyone wants a white picket fence" or whatever. As for the property subdivision thing. 100% that's amazing and I love it. Like you say Bill 23 is a mixed bag. But the bad in it? Dear God. It's gonna bankrupt some municipalities...theres also like 15 pages worth of ammendments to the conservation act in Bill 23.
Also, there's no way on earth Durham or other regional municipalities are going to be in a position to service these greenbelt areas within 2 years whether the developer is funding it or not. Instead of building 10,000 homes in Seaton in Pickering which needs servicing, we'll get 10,000 in the duffin greenbelt lands instead. Makes no sense. There was a great article in the Star recently talking about this in some detail.
As a libertarian, I really don't think the bill goes far enough. I feel that if it's my property, I should have the right to build whatever the hell I please, be it a skyscraper or a missal silo. I won't be happy unless I'm able to build a casino where everyone carries AR-15's on a 0.2 acre lot.
![Gunna - HIM ALL ALONG [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w7Wf0h1Q8a4/mqdefault.jpg)
Part 2: ruclips.net/video/pu7GlBNBRT8/видео.html
Whoops I made a mistake in last videos comment. Seeings your video on bill 23, My last comment I meant bill 44 and 45 that was proposed by Mike has been under the radar. It's set to end exclusionary zoning province-wide, allow multiplexes of 4 units and 4 stories as of right everywhere and permit 6-11 story buildings on every major road. Obviously I haven't read the bill in detail so I would like to hear your take on it.
Ils sont tous les deux bons et Mike semble être le meilleur député de l'Ontario: ruclips.net/video/ODh3lY8acNY/видео.html
Paige can you fix the order of this series playlist which currently goes 2-1-3-4-5 🙂
2 in 2 days? You're on fire. Quality and quantity.
Another excellent video on such a critical topic! The depth and insight you show is really impressive!
At the 5:55 mark you said:
"The people who were the most certain about what the bill means were the most political and the first to crumble under specific questions, revealing that they didn't actually know what was in it. On the other hand the most technocratic people with the greatest knowledge of the legislation were much more likely to humbly say they 'just didn't know yet'."
Wow! This quote isn't just true for housing; you've captured something essential about almost every policy debate I've ever witnessed in my adult life!
Such a good video Paige! Pleeeeaseeee make this happen in BC
+1 for monstercat in the outro
Thank you for covering Bill 23 (and friends). I appreciate your analysis and nuanced take on the subject!
Interesting video as always! Exciting to see my old home province finally doing something different the past couple years rather than kicking the bucket down the road!
Also your comedic timing is way too good “it’s unlikely that the feds intended for generations of Canadians to suck on sacks, that’s how I do it” caught me off guard haha
7:13 Your bag of milk is leaking on you!!!!
Good video as always! Didn’t expect to see Pleasure Pier in Galveston, Texas in a video about Ontario lol.
Wow. You made housing legislation interesting! Nice to see you in the Hammer, my wife is proud! Looking forward to the rest of these, gotta go, someone just "bagged me" and I need to find some scissors for my cereal.
Great video Paige!
The karens going to court lmao, I'd have so much fun watching it
Simply amazing, how do you not have more subscribers
help him out by posting it on reddit and twitter
You have a way of making these laws and policies feel just as hype as they should. The music and editing is on point. 😊
Loved this video. This is the first video that actually addressed the nuances of the legislation. But I'm still waiting for someone like yourself to realize that if a developer submits crap, they do not deserve to get approval on tight timelines, especially don't deserve to get a refund. Neither bill 109 or 23 recognize this, which is why Hamilton and others are beefing up the pre-consultation process. If the province isn't going to address this then we'll never see faster approval times. The new consultation processes by municipalities as least forces developers to talk, which they never wanted to do beforehand. They just submit plans without regard to municipal considerations, and then complain and appeal to the Tribunal.
City planner?
@@PaigeMTL sadly, yes. Lol
Great work, Paige!
Paige: ....Bag of milk
Americans : Ok, I'm out *click to a monster truck reel*
Love to see the Ontario videos!
Congrats on the 10k subscribers! Keep up the good videos, I really enjoy them.
I LOVE your videos! They're so well made and your style is so compelling. Don't stop!
Paige! You might want to check out Victoria’s new missing middle policy that was just passed - all single family lots have now been up-zoned to allow for up to 6 units. I think this is one of the most substantial housing amendments yet for a city in Canada.
Current property owner: This is great! The bill just added a minimum $300K to the value my property
You're so fucking funny dude. Thank you
Why is it soooo many ppl cant get their head around milk in a bag........
Let's be real, Site plan and architecture design sign offs aren't really done by city staff. They get appealed to the Ontario land Tribunal and get approved or settled there. Sometimes not worth fighting every piece of design. And if the city did fight, they'd by accused of slowing down housing supply. City's just can't win can they.
Great serries can't wait to see the installments. Great work as always!
would love to see a video on our downtowns in a post covid, work from home (sorta?) world. I think we are sitting on some great opportunity to re-envision commercial centers as places and spaces to live.
Beautiful drone shot of the Minnesota capitol in here. If only it was among the states that's considering zoning reform on a state level. (not a critique of you - great video!)
minnesotareformer.com/2021/08/10/state-rep-looks-to-drive-down-housing-costs-by-overriding-local-zoning-laws/
@@PaigeMTL big fan of Rep Elkins' work on this but I suspect we're still a few years away from this actually moving. Would love to be wrong!
Yer brilliant, Saunders!
Btw this unlisted video is on the playlist
Tu as de la chance! Ouais, j'attends juste la musique pour libérer les droits d'auteur. .. et attends... et attends.
How has no one commented about the leaky milk bag
The whole housing situation in North America is a strong counter-argument against decentralized government
Why did the urban NDP/LPC MLAs oppose the bill? Does it actually support density or is it more meant to encourage sprawl?
C'est leur travail, ils sont l'opposition
Great video! As someone interested in politics but with no relation to Canada I was wondering a bit about the politics behind the bill. Are the liberals and NDP against or for the bill and if so are they more or less NIMBY/YIMBY?
First, the Green party wanted the government to do more in some ways. They provinces own task force said 4 units and 4 storeys, but the government went with 3 units. Liberals and ndp only really have concern with the impact on the development charges that will be changed how they're calculated resulting in shortfalls for municipalities and reduction in ability to fund capital projects. The government is also making very false statements publicly such as how the cities are sitting on tons of money already, which is obviously not true. Imagine you have to build a $20 million bridge, a $60 million sewage plant and $100 train line. you have to save for a long time to collect that money. Then the provincial government comes and says you have collected $90 million, why didn't you spend it you're just sitting on money, it wouldn't make sense. You need $180 million and can't just spend some of it just because. It's also false that development charges are out of control, they've actually kept pace with actual capital costs of infrastructure. If it costs a developer a lot more than 5 years ago for materials, why is it surprising it costs the city a lot more for materials for community centres libraries, fire halls, bridges, roads, park equipment, etc.
I think building height and building area would be better zoning tools instead of a maximum number of dwelling units.
Fascinating video as always. I'm just glad i don't live in Ontario.
I wish my local government would give housing legislation a good sticky squeeze.
Its interesting seeing this legislation from across the pond. Very curious how this all plays out. It makes me furious reading my local planing permission requests as local residents and planning law are ludicrously restrictive. It seems that many nimby's perception of "freedom" goes out of the window when it comes to housing.
Also, please fix your milk. I know you are not personally responsible, but you seem authoritative enough to get it done. Its stressing me out watching it leak onto your jacket.
Milk bags are fine and don't leak unless they get dropped on gravel. But that's also true of jugs or cartons.
You missed out talking about the massive hikes to property tax as a result of the removal of developer fees from municipal budgets. At least one municipality has hiked property tax by 100% just to cover the loss of those fees.
Also I think its worth pointing out the obligation Durham Region is being saddled with to build a trunk sewer and water system into the middle of what's currently farm land....my biggest fear with that is that infrastructure being used to build unprofitable car dependent suburbs. Durham Region doesn't have a massive source of tax revenue like Metro Toronto did when it was forced to do the same thing into York Region in the 50s and 60s. Like that is seriously concerning and that concern is furthered by Doug Fords comments shortly after the bill was tabled saying "everyone wants a white picket fence" or whatever.
As for the property subdivision thing. 100% that's amazing and I love it. Like you say Bill 23 is a mixed bag. But the bad in it? Dear God. It's gonna bankrupt some municipalities...theres also like 15 pages worth of ammendments to the conservation act in Bill 23.
il s'agit d'une série de vidéos, il y a 3 autres parties
Also, there's no way on earth Durham or other regional municipalities are going to be in a position to service these greenbelt areas within 2 years whether the developer is funding it or not. Instead of building 10,000 homes in Seaton in Pickering which needs servicing, we'll get 10,000 in the duffin greenbelt lands instead. Makes no sense. There was a great article in the Star recently talking about this in some detail.
As a libertarian, I really don't think the bill goes far enough. I feel that if it's my property, I should have the right to build whatever the hell I please, be it a skyscraper or a missal silo. I won't be happy unless I'm able to build a casino where everyone carries AR-15's on a 0.2 acre lot.