How can the development permit system be used to achieve residential intensification outcomes in the suburbs?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Province of Ontario made the Development Permit System (DPS) available to all municipalities in 2006, with the hope that municipalities could use this new tool to achieve various policy objectives, including intensification. Under the Growth Plan, municipalities have been instructed by the Provincial government to identify areas for redevelopment in order to meet the 40 per cent intensification target. Many suburban municipalities have been challenged to meet this target, and have requested Provincial assistance, and/or new regulatory tools. The DPS is one tool that has seen little use. This Major Research Paper explores the viability of the DPS for achieving intensification objectives in Port Whitby. The four existing DPS by-laws are compared, and other alternatives to zoning from different jurisdictions are reviewed. Lessons learned are incorporated into a set of recommendations to inform the Town of Whitby’s approach to their upcoming Port Whitby zoning review. Key words: Land use planning, intensification, policy implementation, planning tools
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".