> The place where construction has to stop because you’re not allowed to uproot

Strange take for Toronto where houses are being torn down and rebuilt as larger houses or high rises everywhere

The reason this happens is that effectively anything except a single family home is banned.

So when a multifamily project is approved on a lit, developpers are thrilled to put a high rise - there's so much pent up demand they know it'll sell out.

On the other end, the ultra rich want bigger mcmansions.

What's still lacking is sane 2-8 unit zoning.

I would argue that what is missing is mixed-use medium-density buildings. Blocks of exclusively residential buildings discourage people from walking to do their daily errands, because shops are too far from their home. This in turn increases the amount of car traffic in our neighborhoods, which sucks for everybody but especially for people outside of the vehicles that are causing that traffic.

My understanding of what's happening here in Toronto: it is such a hassle to fight for any new construction, that the only projects that are "worth it" are highrises. This means that 4-5 storey residential condos/rentals are not being built. Only the biggest buildings.

I might be out of touch, my read on Toronto some 14 years ago was that the city was dominated (at arms length) by the Toronto TSX - the single largest mineral resources exchange on the globe.

Mining mining was behind large law and accounting firms, underpinning the professional service layers, and driving the demand for high end mansions, out of town el ranchos, tax write off hobby projects for spouses etc.

On a pie chart for cash flow I'm guessing minerals and energy are still the big tickets there?

My original comment was only focused on construction approvals and the challenges with the City' Committee of Adjustments. Things are changing, where power to approve projects is moving more towards the Provincial level (which has pros: a saner, faster process. And cons: less ways for you to shape your local community, industrial-strength corruption)

In terms of economics, I'm not an expert. It looks like much of the local economy is based on reselling the same houses to each other at ever increasing prices.

How does a "surprise heritage listing" come up?

I don't know that I'm always a fan of heritage designations, but they're not exactly a surprise to a buyer, right?

They absolutely can be. Often the designation process can be started by a complaining neighbor, who won't act until notified about construction.

surprise heritage listing?

that's not a thing, you would 100% know when buying that a building was listed

Where I live, an administrator can decide that there is insufficient evidence that a property is not historic to permit unrestricted changes.

I've read someone mentioning that in the UK such matters often resolve themselves by means of an accidental fire.

They seem to be getting wise to this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-68...

I'm of the opinion that if something is a sort of "heritage site," the government should be required to purchase it, and it should not be owned by private parties.

Not true. Many buildings are on the heritage “of interest” list and remain there for decades and as soon as someone goes in for permit to do something drastic, it gets moved to the heritage protection list and your rights are severely limited. Sometimes just being in a heritage district but not having a specific listing is enough to get classified when you want to do work.

This is from direct experience in Canada working in this industry.

I am the post's author, and I was referring to a specific building [1]. My understanding is that the owners bought it, unlisted, with the intent to develop it into something else. The City then suddenly made a case for designating it as a heritage property.

This is an area with powerful neighbours who have a lot of time on their hands.

I actually think there's a strong case for preserving this property. I love the look. The architecture is very unusual for Toronto and it looks striking. But, it is always a bummer when you purchase a property with plans to do X, and then get a surprise designation after you pay the money.

[1] https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/cc/bgrd/backgroundf...

Yeah it's an exaggerated rant, including the idea that you can't uproot a tree on your property which is only somewhat true, but it's not much different than most developed countries including the U.S.

With little exception, there is a heck of a lot of construction in Canada. Canada has among the highest construction per capita in the world.

It may be a little exaggerated, but not by much.

> With little exception, there is a heck of a lot of construction in Canada. Canada has among the highest construction per capita in the world.

Construction of what and where and what does highest mean? If we're talking residential, we're mostly talking about McMansion style new suburbs where there wasn't anything to complain except nesting waterfowl. Vancouver is only barely an exception, and I'm sure others do exist, but it's hardly characteristic of the nation

the amplification makes one wonder was it all in the books all along or was it a real movement in the first place?