De-zone the whole greenbelt

[Zeitgeist]

13 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Who is "handing over" anything? As i have asked numerous times, who owns the greenbelt It is not government. They have not expropriated the land. A developer would have to buy the land form the owners.

Oh, you mean pay property taxers like everyone else??? Houses on the land pays more property taxes to the province, region and municipality than if left greenbelt or farmland so...it would benefit all levels of government. LOL

So, in essence,build smaller homes instead of the 3000 to 5000 sq ft homes which are now being built and sell like hotcakes?? Not sure why they should not be permanent though. Oh and be on acreage instead of smaller lots?? Makes the neighbourhood exclusive does it not??

Quickly built homes and for sale only? No rentals? What about the folks that cannot afford to buy homes? That is the problem.

Lastly, you want it to be OK for folks to be wandering around your homes unhindered???

 

 

 

 

Clearly there would be a lease fee for land use to property owners, and providing the land wouldn’t be imposed.  My bet is that most property owners would jump at the chance to collect lease money, and I do think annual caps on lease increases, like rent controls, would be necessary. Permanent dwellings sold and built by developers would swallow the entire Greenbelt in 10 years and these would largely be exclusive sprawling communities.  It’s not worth it.  The Province should reserve the right to rescind dwelling permits, perhaps with a minimum 2-5 year notice to owners.

The reality is that developers and the government should be focusing development in areas beyond the Greenbelt and in other parts of Ontario.  The southwestern peninsula of Ontario between Lake Huron and Lake Erie is ripe for this.  So is eastern Lake Ontario and north of the Greenbelt.  

Edited September 15, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[ExFlyer]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Clearly there would be a lease fee for land use to property owners, and providing the land wouldn’t be imposed.  My bet is that most property owners would jump at the chance to collect lease money, and I do think annual caps on lease increases, like rent controls, would be necessary. Permanent dwellings sold and built by developers would swallow the entire Greenbelt in 10 years and these would largely be exclusive sprawling communities.  It’s not worth it.  The Province should reserve the right to rescind dwelling permits, perhaps with a minimum 2-5 year notice to owners.

The reality is that developers and the government should be focusing development in areas beyond the Greenbelt and in other parts of Ontario.  The southwestern peninsula of Ontario between Lake Huron and Lake Erie is ripe for this.  So is eastern Lake Ontario and north of the Greenbelt.  

A pure NIMBY reaction.

People want to live in the areas close to cities and that is where the greenbelt is.

The greenebelt was a kneejerk reaction to some noisy tree huggers and now it is a problem for everyone.

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

A pure NIMBY reaction.

People want to live in the areas close to cities and that is where the greenbelt is.

The greenebelt was a kneejerk reaction to some noisy tree huggers and now it is a problem for everyone.

I’m in the middle on this.  I think some development on the Greenbelt makes sense, but it has kept Toronto from becoming an endless sprawling Atlanta.  It’s concentrated development much like Mt. Royal Park in Montreal or the water around Manhattan in NY.  That’s also turned Toronto into an intensely urban Manhattanized city with sky high real estate.  Now vertical sprawl is threatening the most beautiful neighborhoods in the city as Victorian streetscapes are bulldozed to build nondescript high rises that lack character and could be anywhere.  Sure it makes transit more efficient, but quality of life and efficiency aren’t the same thing.

The Greenbelt does provide local natural recreation and aquifers for clean air and water, not to mention a permanent local food supply.  Over time we will value this natural treasure, but it means looking beyond the GTA for housing development and reconsidering endlessly high immigration levels.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’m in the middle on this.  I think some development on the Greenbelt makes sense, but it has kept Toronto from becoming an endless sprawling Atlanta.  It’s concentrated development much like Mt. Royal Park in Montreal or the water around Manhattan in NY.  That’s also turned Toronto into an intensely urban Manhattanized city with sky high real estate.  Now vertical sprawl is threatening the most beautiful neighborhoods in the city as Victorian streetscapes are bulldozed to build nondescript high rises that lack character and could be anywhere.  Sure it makes transit more efficient, but quality of life and efficiency aren’t the same thing.

The Greenbelt does provide local natural recreation and aquifers for clean air and water, not to mention a permanent local food supply.  Over time we will value this natural treasure, but it means looking beyond the GTA for housing development and reconsidering endlessly high immigration levels.

Mtg Royal is an official park. You have them in the GTA too.

Waters around Manhattan??? I fail to see the comparison. The waters edge is not accessible for decades, except doe a few vantage points.

The greenbelt property is primarily private property. As a matter of fact, I cannot figure out is any is public property at all. here is no recreational property.

Far,m]ms are farms and if owners can make more money selling to developers than farming, what do you think they would do? Plus, farm land is a once a year venture and it supplies only local area once a year. Don't make it sound like it is a big industry.

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Mtg Royal is an official park. You have them in the GTA too.

Waters around Manhattan??? I fail to see the comparison. The waters edge is not accessible for decades, except doe a few vantage points.

The greenbelt property is primarily private property. As a matter of fact, I cannot figure out is any is public property at all. here is no recreational property.

Far,m]ms are farms and if owners can make more money selling to developers than farming, what do you think they would do? Plus, farm land is a once a year venture and it supplies only local area once a year. Don't make it sound like it is a big industry.

Unfortunately the planning for the GTA has to happen at the regional level because without cross-municipal planning for transit, land use, placement of hospitals, etc., the whole region fails.  We already see this with congestion on highways, sprawl, lack of housing, etc.  Simply bringing in millions of people without sensible planning is making life worse.   The problem is that the agencies set up to take on this task are late to the game.  Metrolinx is a prime example.  Too little too late.  

[BeaverFever]

On 9/6/2023 at 6:31 PM, I am Groot said:

Terrance Corcoran makes some very valid points you won't see elsewhere in the media. Like reminding readers the 'green belt' is not some ancient holy site but was invented by the Dalton McGuinty Liberals and slapped into place with almost no consultation. People who owned the land within it were simply notified that their land could no longer be developed. And if that cost them money, well so what?

For months, the people of Ontario have been called to worship the Greenbelt Holy Land, a massive 810,000-hectare (two-million-acre) land mass that entraps the 6.7 million residents of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Canada’s largest metropolis. Voters have also been led to believe — by media, activists and political hackers — that the Greenbelt area that sprawls around the GTA is the hallowed product of a sacred text known as the Greenbelt Act to protect what is known as The Golden Horseshoe.

The call to worship at this modern-day version of the Golden Calf began when it was revealed that Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government planned to breach the commandments of the 2005 Greenbelt Act by allowing 2,995 hectares (about 0.4 per cent of the sacred territory) to be released into the hands of devilish and corrupt real estate developers to build new homes.

Oh, the anguish, the shock, the horror and the sorrow. In the months that followed came political hellfire, including an auditor general’s report and an integrity commissioner’s report along with endless moralizing editorials and media commentary. All condemned the Ford government’s sacrilegious plan to allow a marginal encroachment into the Green Holy Land.

https://financialpost.com/opinion/dezone-ontario-greenbelt-greentrap-free-toronto?

Well fortunately the opposite has happened and no amount of conservative-friendly op-eds in the conservative-friendly National Post can cover up the stench of corruption. 

Now not only was this dirty developer cash-grab scheme dismantled but soon the Ford government, desperate to sanitize its image, will pass legislation that will forbid any changes to the greenbelt without an act of legislation. Which means no more secretive massage parlour deals whenever some land speculator wants to buy and flip a piece of land for ten times so someone else can use it to build a warehouse or a Walmart. 

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well fortunately the opposite has happened and no amount of conservative-friendly op-eds in the conservative-friendly National Post can cover up the stench of corruption. 

Now not only was this dirty developer cash-grab scheme dismantled but soon the Ford government, desperate to sanitize its image, will pass legislation that will forbid any changes to the greenbelt without an act of legislation. Which means no more secretive massage parlour deals whenever some land speculator wants to buy and flip a piece of land for ten times so someone else can use it to build a warehouse or a Walmart. 

The developer friends will make plenty of cash as prices for rent and new homes rise, as they will now that not enough homes to meet the needs of the population are built.

What people like you never realize is that the rich are going to get rich one way or another.  The smart people make that work FOR them instead of against them.

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

they will now that not enough homes to meet the needs of the population are built.

False. As has been pointed out REPEATEDLY on this forum and in tje AG’s, report, no greenbelt land is needed to build the needed housing.    Doug Ford even said that himself when he announced the land was going back in the greenbelt, they will meet their housing goals without using greenbelt land. Yet people like you just keep deleting it from your brain because it’s an inconvenient truth. Building housing is just the excuse these land-flipping, warehouse-building scammers use to try to avoid scrutiny 

Edited September 26, 2023 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

False. As has been pointed out REPEATEDLY on this forum and in tje AG’s, report, no greenbelt land is needed to build the needed housing.  

This has been explained to you. If you're too stupid to understand such a simple concept then fine, but the end result will be the same. Not enough homes will be built, Developers will still get rich and the poor will suffer because you can't do some fairly simple math.

And of course doug is going to say things people want to hear.  Doug said there was nothing particularly shady about the land deal - you didn't believe that but now everything he said is gospel?

Honestly. People like you are why we can't have nice things.

[BeaverFever]

22 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

This has been explained to you. If you're too stupid to understand such a simple concept then fine, but the end result will be the same. Not enough homes will be built, Developers will still get rich and the poor will suffer because you can't do some fairly simple math.

And of course doug is going to say things people want to hear.  Doug said there was nothing particularly shady about the land deal - you didn't believe that but now everything he said is gospel?

Honestly. People like you are why we can't have nice things.

No people like YOU are why we can’t have nice things. People like YOU want to defund, deregulate, privatize and sell off every public service and asset until everything and everyone looks like downtown Hamilton or Oshawa.  You’re just not smart enough to realize the consequences of your ideology. 
 

It has been explained to YOU many times that the greenbelt isn’t needed to meet housing goals. The Auditor General said it, Doug Fords own published housing plan didn’t call for it, and now Doug Ford himself is admitting it.

As has been repeatedly explained to you, opening the greenbelt was NEVER in Doug’s housing plan which is an actual published document.   It’s something his government did on the side, mostly in secret, falsely associating it with the housing plan whenever they had to. Just like when George Bush would falsely associate Saddam Hussein with 911 by always mentioning the two in the same breath even when he knew they had nothing to do with each other, Ford did the same thing with housing whenever his greenbelt moves would attract public attention. And like an unquestioning sucker you fell for it. Now go wipe your memory of these inconvenient facts YET AGAIN so you can keep living in your false narrative.  

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

No people like YOU are why we can’t have nice things. People like YOU want to defund, deregulate, privatize and sell off every public service and asset until everything and everyone looks like downtown Hamilton or Oshawa.  You’re just not smart enough to realize the consequences of your ideology. 
 

People like me want to build enough homes so that people will have somewhere to live without paying 75 percent of their income to do so.

Apperently you think that's wrong

Quote

It has been explained to YOU many times that the greenbelt isn’t needed to meet housing goals.

Of course it was. And i explained clearly why you were wrong and what would need to happen. 

Again - if you're just too stupid to understand, i get it. This IS grade 7 level math after all.  But - lets wait and see if the goal is met, or if  they wind up distracting from it or claim that the homes are 'under construction' when we get there   There's a million ways to spin it and i'm sure he'll find a good one but - at the end of the day there won't be the homes and rent prices will be even higher, 

Sigh, , You're a constant reminder that 50 percent of people are below average.

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

People like me want to build enough homes so that people will have somewhere to live without paying 75 percent of their income to do so.

Apperently you think that's wrong

No people like you just refuse to accept the facts and so you present your these false choices. Many places around the world that are fare more densely populated than us have figured out how to live without destructive and wasteful urban sprawl and “Apperently” we can too. 
 

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Of course it was. And i explained clearly why you were wrong and what would need to happen. 

Again - if you're just too stupid to understand, i get it. This IS grade 7 level math after all.  But - lets wait and see if the goal is met, or if  they wind up distracting from it or claim that the homes are 'under construction' when we get there   There's a million ways to spin it and i'm sure he'll find a good one but - at the end of the day there won't be the homes and rent prices will be even higher, 

Sigh, , You're a constant reminder that 50 percent of people are below average.

Nope you didn’t explain anything, from what I recall you just repeated your debunked claims and pretended you never heard it was debunked.

Who knows if Doug will build his target homes with or without greenbelt land?   Remember from the beginning the accusation has been that its all just a land grab scheme and it’s not really about houses at all  Remember one of the AGs observations was that there were no tangible development plans for any of the land he took out of the greenbelt and The Star found that one of the developers was already trying to resell their land and promoting it as an ideal location for a corporate park  

The only way you could be proven right is if all the non-greenbelt land gets developed for housing and used up and still not enough homes are built. But if a whole bunch of that nom-greenbelt land goes undeveloped  it doesn’t prove that greenbelt land was needed, it proves the opposite in fact. There’s actually a good incentive for Doug to purposely sabotage his housing plan now and and blame the greenbelt for it  , depending how the ongoing scandal plays out 

BTW speaking of grade 7 logic I forgot to congratulate you on your earlier argument which was basically “If you didn’t believe Doug Ford when he denied your accusations, why would you believe him when he finally admits your accusations were right?”   Lol like a 3 stooges bit there, you can’t write this stuff!

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by BeaverFever