top of page

VOLUNTEER OR REQUEST A LAWN SIGN

Thank you for your interest in Vote4ValerieGrdisa. Please send an e-mail to vote4valerie.grdisa@rogers.com for any questions or comments related to her candidacy or blog content. Remember, please complete this e-form to volunteer or request a lawn sign.

Your details were sent successfully!

Search

Section 37 and Current Practices of Councillors - We Need Change and Bold Leadership!

  • Writer: Voice of Valerie Grdisa
    Voice of Valerie Grdisa
  • Oct 15, 2018
  • 2 min read

My response to the following question from a Ward 4 resident, 

"Do you believe Section 37 belongs in our laws or would you make changes to Section 37 to ensure it is not used as a justification for inappropriate development?"


Let's start with the first part of the question, do you believe Section 37 belongs in our laws? 


With the original Planning Act being passed in 1946 and the first version of Section 37 (Section 36 at the time) not being introduced until the 1983 Planning Act when development in Toronto was shifting from horizontal (plans of subdivision) to vertical (height and density) - it is remarkable that this 35 year old section is being used as a 'tool' to drive 'just in time', ad hoc and inconsistent decision-making across the City of Toronto, threatening sustainable urban development, livability for Toronto residents and viability of entire ecosystems.   


I believe that the current 1990 Planning Act needs to be repealed or substantively modernized rather than amended year over year (or government to government) and that the new provincial legislation should focus on Sustainable Urban Planning/Development - based on leading practices from around the world.  As I mentioned at the debate, I served as a Senior Government Official for the Province of Alberta and I did have responsibility for legislative and regulatory reform for provincial priorities - I don't think as one City Councillor I could influence the provincial government to modernize/repeal the provincial legislation - however, it is the role of local government to partner with other levels of government to ensure the well-being of its residents and its heritage (built and ecosystem) and we should immediately change the way we are interpreting Section 37 within our municipal by-law. 


For the second part of the question, would you make changes to Section 37 to ensure it is not used as a justification for inappropriate development?

I would definitely work tirelessly to make changes regarding how Section 37 is operationalized within Section 5.1.1 of the City’s Official Plan.  When reviewing the independent report by the University of Toronto (Go to link: 

https://munkschool.utoronto.ca/imfg/uploads/220/imfg_no_13_moorer3_online_final.pdf) and the commissioned report for the City (Go to link:  https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-66994.pdf), the findings are alarming, especially the obscure role of City Councillors and the lack of transparency and consistency regarding the chosen community benefits. It is clear that City Council can do better in the way it has operationalized Section 37. 


Height and Density over Sustainability

I fully commit to making changes to Section 37 to ensure it is not used as a justification for inappropriate development and I would push for a more visionary, strategic approach to sustainable urban planning/development that truly benefits our communities.  

Also, I would embrace the opportunity to better understand this issue and I commit to working with the Mayor, my Councillor colleagues, planning experts, residents of Ward 4 and other stakeholders to shift towards a new focus on urban sustainability and collaborate with other municipalities and other levels of government. 

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All

Comentarios


bottom of page