Part 5: Pushmi-Pullyu

This is Part 5 in a series on the Parkmount/Craven garden suite debate. If you haven't already, you can check out:

• Part 1: "Rumble on Craven Row"
• Part 2: "How About a Craven Row Challenge?"
• Part 3: "Thoroughly Modern Through-Lots" 
• Part 4: "In Yer Face"
  
  

---

The Planners Proffer a Proposal 

On September 9th, the City planners held a community consultation meeting titled "Zoning for Garden Suites: Parkmount Road / Craven Road."

Photo: More Neighbours Toronto

I wanted to wait till the City mailed out their presentation slide deck, so I could post it here for those who weren't able to make it to the meeting. 

I also thought it would be good to sit with the arguments raised in the Q&A so I could consider them more deeply, rather than posting a hot take. 

Social media platforms score a quick buck from your outrage. Personal blogs can give you space to breathe and digest. 

Last September when the garden suite issue first blew up, and again this month, I've seen some stuff on Reddit, Tiktok and X that I kinda wish I hadn't. 

I'm not going to link to it, because over the past year (...decade ...week), it has felt more and more vital to make a deliberate effort to discuss a political issue like this without letting the algorithms polarize us further. 

Social media billionaires take the money and run. 

But the rest of us have to continue to live side by side once the flashpoint-of-the-moment has passed. 

Quite literally, in this case. 

So it's good practice to see if we can disagree, discuss, and even argue heatedly, without hating each other. 

[More after the jump... lots more, but I think the ending is worth it...]

Why

Anyone who lives, drives or walks along Toronto's Craven Road eventually has two questions:

1. Why the tiny houses?
2. Why the huge fence?

View Larger Map

To find out, read on!

Here's a list of all posts to date, in order of publication:

• Origin Stories (2013-8-7)
  

• Fun with Math (2013-8-8)
  

• The Media Discover "Tiny Town" (2013-8-9)
  

• On the Fence (2013-8-23)
  

• Craven Road in Archive Photos  (2013-8-24)
  

• Early Maps of the Area (2013-9-14)
  

• A Century-Composite Map (2013-9-15) 
  

• Map Art (2013-10-20)
  

• Once Upon a Time in Shacktown (2013-12-28)
  

• Build-It-Yourself (2013-12-30)
  

• Weird Street (2014-2-20)
  

• "For" vs "By": Affordable Housing Back in the Day (2014-03-18)
  

• Both Edgy and Homey (2014-09-18)
  

• Craven Railroad? (2015-02-26)
  

• Aw, Shucks (2015-11-22)
  

• Duggan Develops a "Shacktown" (2016-02-11)
  

• Take a Jane's Walk along a 100-Year Fence (2016-04-11)
  

• Joanne's Talk, Jane's Walk (2016-05-08)
  

• Craven Road by the Numbers (2016-05-09)
  

• Rumble on Craven Row (2024-09-21)
  

• How About a Craven Row Challenge? (2024-09-21)
  

• Thoroughly Modern Through-Lots (2024-09-27)
  

• In Yer Face (2025-02-24)
  

• Under the Fence (2025-07-18)
• Pushmi-Pullyu (2025-09-20)

Posting is sporadic, but comments are always welcome: oncravenroad [at] gmail [dot] com.

Under the Fence

In 2024, an Ashdale Avenue resident submitted a planning application to the City to build a back deck. The documents include a site plan that mentions a "BOARD FENCE", which anyone who's walked along Craven below the train tracks will recognize as a hallmark of the street.

The site plan also refers to the "WIDENING" of the road in 1913 (when Craven was called Erie Terrace) and a "1 FOOT RESERVE" on which the board fence stands: 

This blog hasn't looked at that one-foot reserve before, but we can follow these clues down the rabbit hole under Craven Road's famous wooden fence. 

Let's start with this note mentioning By-law No 6633, Instrument No. OR50531:

A search for PIN (Property Information Number) 21034-0498 on Teranet Express turns up this "best copy" (!) of By-law 6633, passed on September 15, 1913: 

"To acquire lands for the widening of Erie Terrace… to 33 feet from Queen Street to the right of way of the Grand Trunk Railway Company."

The closing paragraph of the by-law says, "The westerly one foot of the said lands shall not be used for the purpose of said highway, and no building intended for human habitation shall be erected on the west side of Erie Terrace as hereby widened."

This reflects the definition of a one-foot reserve as "a strip of land, owned by a municipality, preventing legal access from a private parcel to a public highway."

If you haven't read the 2013 post "On the Fence," it explains in detail how the mile-and-a-half-long fence on the west side of Craven was created when the City of Toronto decided to widen the road over a century ago, and why that one-foot reserve was established to make sure the fence was kept inviolate. 

Read on for a summary:

Part 4: In Yer Face

This is Part 4 in a series. If you haven't already, you can check out: 

• Part 1: "Rumble on Craven Row" 
• Part 2: "How About a Craven Row Challenge?"
• Part 3: "Thoroughly Modern Through-Lots"

---

I've approached a few architecture profs and departments with the idea of a Craven Row Challenge, but haven't had a bite yet. 

In the meantime, the video below highlights a fascinating initiative in Vancouver called Decoding Density, an "international contest [that] addresses two of the most existential problems today: climate change and housing affordability."

Here's a clip explaining the setback rule for new housing:

The full video "How Breaking Rules Could Create Better Apartments" includes some very cool thought experiments. 

Here's another. 

Imagine how Parkmount Road might look if its front-yard setback rules changed to match those currently governing the west side of Craven Road. 

This is 331 Coxwell Ave, which was "a shoe repair shop in the 1970s, and a tattoo parlour in the 1980s": 

The rules for garden suites and laneway suites both assume that the new suites are back to back with their neighbours, which is why the distance to the side and rear lot lines can be so small (1.5 metres).

By contrast, the front side of houses are normally given more space to breathe, with decent setbacks from the street and sidewalk (4.5 to 6.0 metres).

Now, it's understandable when Parkmount's residents think their gardens are normal backyards like everywhere else in Toronto...

...and often treat Craven as their back alley.

However narrow it may be, though, Craven Road is a city street, not a laneway. 

Which means Parkmount lots are through-lots. 

Which means a structure built in their backyard is also, technically, a structure fronting on a city street. 

As garden suite homes begin to be built fronting the west side of Craven Road, then, wouldn't it seem fair that the same setback rules should be applied to them as to new homes fronting on Parkmount and the east side of Craven? 

________

Continue to Part 5: Pushmi-Pullyu.