Thus far in our DenseCity series, we have examined the Official Plan policies that manage growth in Toronto, and have gotten a glimpse of what happens behind the scenes in the development application process. Throughout the series, the aim has been to expand the conversation around development in our city, and to foster a deeper dialogue that is more reflective of the realities of a rapidly growing city. There is more than meets the eye when it comes to city building, and the complex chain of decisions that occurs before the shovels hit the ground and the cranes graze the sky has many challenges that cannot be reduced to a simple solution.

In this final instalment of our series, we will use the lessons learned from the previous articles to compile a list of relevant topics and issues that we collectively need to confront in the coming years as this spurt of development continues. These items highlight the needs of the city through its rapid growth, and attempt to identify key issues heading forward into the future.

Downtown Toronto skyline at night, image by Dustin William.

Planning is more than just the numbers.

As we sit here and argue in the comment section over the height of a development, or shout angry words at public consultations regarding the number of units in a proposal, it has become clearer that a development cannot simply be reduced to a handful of character-defining numbers. It is true that these numbers give a tangible quality to the renderings presented to us, and present comprehensible facts through which we base our understanding of the building, but this list of numbers needs to be viewed from a broader perspective that considers all parameters as a whole, rather than isolating and fixating on a select few quantities.

When we analyze an initial proposal and watch as it is modified and altered through the planning process, it is important to try and understand the reasons behind each of these decisions before passing judgement. Perhaps the height of the building was reduced because it allowed greater sunlight exposure in a nearby park, or cut down on the wind tunnel effect at the intersection. Or perhaps the height of the building increased as there are two other towers under construction nearby, and more space was needed at ground level to expand the public realm. Maybe the shockingly high floor count of a proposal was deemed appropriate by the developers and the City, as it actually does fit within the Official Plan policies. Then again, maybe a proposal happens to be in direct violation of several Official Plan policies, despite being a seemingly reasonable height.

City planning is complex, and is much more nuanced than a simple black and white analysis. As we discovered in Part 4, the market often times takes this overly simplistic approach to planning that may lead to a negative outcome. Our understanding of city building has evolved significantly since the post-war days; it is now just a matter of making sure that the market, and society, catches up.

View over the rail corridor to Downtown, image by Marcus Mitanis.

Land value is shifting patterns of growth in the city.

While the immediate impact of the current housing crisis in Toronto is being felt in the bank accounts of residents, there are farther-reaching effects of rising land values that will gradually materialize over time. These are not necessarily negative nor positive at this point; only time will determine that. The higher land values will manifest themselves in the city's built form, and will transform what Toronto will look like in the coming decades.

For one, height is the new norm. Our tall neighbourhoods will continue to grow taller, as Official Plan policies designate these areas for intensification, and density will consequently increase. However, there may be an ease in population density, as a shift toward larger units to compensate for the lack of affordability of houses will translate into height, but not necessarily quite as many people.

The Avenues will continue to grow with gentler density, however, there is some question as to whether this development will proliferate beyond its current pace. In many cases, the size of the lots along the Avenues are not conducive to supporting greater density, and therefore may not always be a safe investment for developers. There are instances, such as Danforth Avenue and Queen Street West—both designated as Avenues in the Official Plan—where the lots are not deep enough—or too numerous—to allow for easy development, not to mention the many heritage buildings existing on these streets. There is greater promise for the Avenues outside of the city's core, where strip malls and detached homes line arterial roads, which may kickstart an urbanization of the suburban fabric. The future of the Avenues remain to be seen.

As for the Neighbourhoods, these are set to remain relatively unchanged in terms of their built form. However, there is a quiet transformation that has been happening in the "stable" Neighbourhoods for some time now that is likely to accelerate as land values continue to climb. Trends show a steady decline of population in the Neighbourhoods, corresponding with a dramatic increase of population in our high-rise districts, a phenomenon which leads into our next topic. 

Storefronts on Bloor Street, image by Michael Monastyrskyj.

Density of people and density of buildings don't always correlate.

Areas like the Annex and Parkdale have been showing a steady decline in population stretching back nearly two decades. This trend can largely be attributed to the fact that many houses that are divided into multiple apartments are being bought up, gutted, and converted into single-family homes. Perhaps this is best encapsulated in Toronto Life's recent gaffe that incited the ire of many Torontonians, detailing a gentrifying family's purchase and renovation of a Parkdale rooming house that went awry.

There is also a general trend in Canada toward an aging population, where family sizes are growing smaller, and baby boomers far outnumber youth. Smaller families are occupying these single-detached homes that previously housed multiple families, and the baby boomers with empty nests in their lifelong homes are contributing to the population decline. Furthermore, a drive through neighbourhoods like Leaside or Forest Hill shows nearly as many new constructions as old; older homes are increasingly being levelled and rebuilt, often with new houses nearly twice the size. The density of built form, in terms of floor area compared to site area, is increasing, but the population density is decreasing.

Meanwhile, our growth centres, Avenues, and Apartment Neighbourhoods are showing huge increases in population density, as new residents flock into the city, and the flurry of development adds soaring towers in concentrated clusters. Currently, the units are small, but as discussed earlier, this may change. Still, it appears that those who wish to live (or have no choice but to live) small are living smaller, and those who wish to live big are living bigger, while the middle ground is slowly eroding.

View of a Toronto Neighbourhood, image by Keith Armstrong.

We need to make room for the missing middle.

The missing middle refers to the range of housing sizes wedged in between single-detached homes and apartment or condo units, and includes detached houses divided into apartments, duplexes or triplexes, and low-rise apartment buildings. Stacked and freehold townhouses can also be included in this category, though the size of current freehold townhouses may demote them into the single-detached category.

This 'missing middle' is so-called missing as it has slowly been disappearing since the post-war period. New building construction is not replacing these typologies, instead focusing on either single-detached houses, or denser mid-rises and tall buildings. This, perhaps, is a result of the market, which might dictate that either detached or condos are more economically feasible. It may also be a result of planning policies in Toronto, which constrain residential growth areas to less than 25% of land in the city, translating into the need for higher density, and a consequent increase in land value. The middle ground has seemingly been lost in the mix.

There have been some efforts recently to address this issue. The City is currently undertaking a study on laneway housing (a second version of a similar study carried out in 2006 which never translated into policy and was subsequently dropped) that could see a densification of some of the Neighbourhoods with a compatible built form. However, the city's laneways are constrained to a small portion of the Neighbourhoods, all within close proximity to the Downtown, and this idea does not address the newer suburbs farther from the core. These seem destined to remain unchanged for the time being.

In the meantime, and until the missing middle is addressed, the trend of the emptying of the Neighbourhoods and flocking into the towers will continue. The missing middle may present a solution to the affordability crisis, and may work to preserve our current housing stock, though it remains to be seen how this might be implemented either through planning policy or within the market.

Old houses on Lappin Avenue, image by Micahel Monastyrskyj.

Infrastructure is the future.

Hand-in-hand with the current housing crisis, Toronto is currently faced with mounting pressure to provide adequate infrastructure. At this point, everyone is painfully aware of Toronto's increasingly urgent public transit issues, but it still must be said that there is a dire need for more transit in this city. An interesting point to mention, however, is that Toronto has had a nearly excellent track record of transit-oriented development - that is, concentrating development within close proximity to public transit - and this trend is continuing within our Official Plan. The concentration of density along the Avenues and in the Centres will aid in this by building on existing transit lines, and by providing a clearer direction of where new transit projects should be located.

Other infrastructure in the city often finds itself in the same situation as public transit. Notwithstanding the necessary upgrades to stormwater and sewage management, Toronto is also pushing to provide adequate schools, parks, and community centres in areas of rapid growth. Neighbourhoods like Yonge-Eglinton have schools bursting at their seams, while areas like Downtown are severely lacking in parks and public spaces.

The City is taking strides in addressing these matters, with several high-profile projects currently in the works. Rail Deck Park tops the list as the most ambitious, but two other smaller sites have been earmarked for new public parks in the Downtown Core, at Front and Bathurst and on Richmond Street West. Furthermore, the City is continuing its overhaul of many landmark public spaces, with the revitalization projects at Berczy Park, Barbara Ann Scott Park, Grange Park, and Moss Park, among others. New, expanded schools are popping up in Regent Park, Yonge-Davisville, and soon in CityPlace. Meanwhile, Union Station is being refurbished and expanded to accommodate a greater number of transit users. These projects all tie in to development not just in the sense that the building boom has created the need for them, but also in the sense that the money generated from development, particularly the benefits from Section 37 money, are in large part funding these projects.

If the increasing scope and importance of these infrastructure projects are any indication, it is clear that a livable, healthy vision for Toronto is largely dependent on its supporting infrastructure. If we want to sustain this development and continue to grow into a global city, then infrastructure is the way of the future.

View of the tunnel of the Spadina Subway Extension, image by Jack Landau.

Master planning infill projects is an urgent need.

As we discovered in Part 4, one of the pressing issues that the City is facing is trying to coordinate between multiple landowners wishing to develop their properties within close proximity to each other. This issue is exacerbated by the fact that most of these sites already have existing buildings on them; in some cases, existing resources are being erased and not always replaced. Without a clear vision for these concentrated areas, development might have the negative impact of diminishing the quality of life in these neighbourhoods by focusing too closely on individual sites, while ignoring the necessary cohesiveness of the whole.

It is mainly the job of the City to ensure the coordination of development, but the recent surge in applications is making the process more difficult, and it is still impossible for the City to predict the outcome when applications are submitted years apart. Master plans for infill contexts must be put in place proactively, to ensure that development is kept in check, and that our communities are complete and continue to thrive regardless of how much is being constructed in the area. A clearer vision will also help developers to include the necessary allowances and infrastructures in their designs prior to submitting a formal application. Some onus should also be taken by private industry, as working together in the early stages of the design will expedite the process and lead to a more successful product.

The City is currently undertaking planning studies in an effort to address this issue—particularly with TOCore and the Yonge-Eglinton study—and are making strides in preparing the Avenues for growth. But at this stage it is clear that the City is still playing catch-up to the development industry. Figuring out a streamlined method of master planning infill development will ensure that the city's existing resources are preserved and its infrastructure needs are met regardless of the development timeline, and will work to preserve heritage buildings, ensure adequate public space, and provide for appropriate community facilities. Healthy growth is very much dependent on collaboration amongst the community, the City, and its landowners. 

View looking north on Yonge Street circa 2015, image by Marcus Mitanis.

You have a say! Get involved.

Both the City and developers place a high value on community input, and despite popular cynicism, they actually do listen. Community input has had real impacts on the design of proposals, and has helped to shape our city. For example, the upcoming development at Church and Wellesley has had several public consultations seeking input on the podium design, and the designers have responded to the comments provided. These consultations have preceded the development application, which has yet to be submitted.

Public outreach is becoming more varied beyond simply consultations. The City has many online surveys for various planning studies, such as what is being done for TOCore, and developers occasionally host community events, such as a heritage walk that was done for Mirvish Village. There are many opportunities to get involved, and these will likely expand in scope into the future.

Whether you oppose a development or fully support it, it is important to make your voice heard. So get in contact with your local Councillor, City Planning, or the relevant landowners and tell them what you think! Just make sure that, given the complexity of the planning process and all the factors involved, the ideas conveyed are informed and educated, and based firmly on facts and policy analysis; emotional reactions on their own are not so helpful.

View of Downtown Toronto, image by UrbanToronto Flickr Pool contributor Empty Quarter.

This list is by no means exhaustive, and is only suggestive of what may come as a result of our current pace of growth. What is important to take away is the complexity of the issues at hand, and the necessity for open and educated dialogue between all parties involved. The conversation around this topic is vast, and we have only touched the surface, but as development continues to ramp up in the city, keep in mind that there is much more than meets the eye.

This concludes our DenseCity series examining the many facets of density in Toronto. Have something to say on the topic, or think we missed something on our list? Tell us what you think by leaving a comment in the space provided on this page, or by joining the many conversations happening in our Forum. In the meantime, keep checking back on UrbanToronto to get updates on all the developments happening across the city, and join the discussions by checking out their respective Forum threads.