News   Jun 28, 2024
 2.6K     3 
News   Jun 28, 2024
 1.5K     1 
News   Jun 28, 2024
 594     1 

Greater Toronto's Sprawl

Who really cares if a city is on pace? What matters more is whether they are building the right type of development, and whether the infrastructure is there to support the growth. Case in point: Vaughan is bottom of the barrel in terms of planning and is utterly failing to change development patterns to reflect having a new subway line. Its growth may be on track, but it's so poorly planned that it's doing more harm than good.

At the other end of the spectrum is downtown Toronto...but not in a good way either. The right kind of growth may be occurring, but because the transit system is so critically underdeveloped, there will no doubt be major issues in the next 10 years unless more heavy rail is constructed just to service the new growth.
 
Who cares? Um, that should be everybody.

First off if there were 300,000 more jobs in Toronto than there are, the TTC could expect ridership to increase by many millions per year. Justifying more service. Instead we got Transit City. which increased transit into areas of the city where jobs have been fleeing and residents increasingly travel outside the city for employment (via car).

What this means is that the the city has forgone about 100 million in revenue per year that would have resulted in the increased amount, and value, of the non residential assessment base which would have been needed to accommodate these workers.

What this means is that instead of having an increase in the portion of the assessment base that produces excess revenue, it has only seen an increase in residential, which produces operating losses.

What this means is that for many people in Toronto, the distance between their home and place of employment has increased.
 
Who cares? Um, that should be everybody.

First off if there were 300,000 more jobs in Toronto than there are, the TTC could expect ridership to increase by many millions per year. Justifying more service. Instead we got Transit City. which increased transit into areas of the city where jobs have been fleeing and residents increasingly travel outside the city for employment (via car).

What this means is that the the city has forgone about 100 million in revenue per year that would have resulted in the increased amount, and value, of the non residential assessment base which would have been needed to accommodate these workers.

What this means is that instead of having an increase in the portion of the assessment base that produces excess revenue, it has only seen an increase in residential, which produces operating losses.

What this means is that for many people in Toronto, the distance between their home and place of employment has increased.

Here here!
 
I think those trends will continue. Toronto will continue to under shoot their targets and surrounding municipalities over shoot. The difference is I think the forces driving these trends are demographic and structural, meaning policy, including taxation, have had and will have little influence on the outcome.
 
Who cares? Um, that should be everybody.

First off if there were 300,000 more jobs in Toronto than there are, the TTC could expect ridership to increase by many millions per year. Justifying more service. Instead we got Transit City. which increased transit into areas of the city where jobs have been fleeing and residents increasingly travel outside the city for employment (via car).

What this means is that the the city has forgone about 100 million in revenue per year that would have resulted in the increased amount, and value, of the non residential assessment base which would have been needed to accommodate these workers.

What this means is that instead of having an increase in the portion of the assessment base that produces excess revenue, it has only seen an increase in residential, which produces operating losses.

What this means is that for many people in Toronto, the distance between their home and place of employment has increased.

Have you contacted Rob Ford yet?
 
I think those trends will continue. Toronto will continue to under shoot their targets and surrounding municipalities over shoot. The difference is I think the forces driving these trends are demographic and structural, meaning policy, including taxation, have had and will have little influence on the outcome.

Yes I agree ... regardless of the reasons it's likely this trend will continue indeed.

Something important to consider here is the overall opportunity cost involved. I know I go on and on about the tax differential between the 416 and the 905 but completely forget that for a second - the amount of job growth we see in the GTA is simply a function of the total demand for new workforce. This is a fixed amount for the entire Toronto region (i.e. the GTA) - yes there's lots of talk about international factors (and national, Canada wide) that play an important role in attracting new business to the region that hadn't previously existed - but I don't think this is a very important issue at all, probably a none issue. That's not to say this doesn't matter, but simply a company will decide to come to the GTA - the decisions that happen after regarding where they locate are all due to local factors and likely play no role in the original decision. If you argue gross rental rates in Toronto / or GTA are significantly higher or less then other far away cities then sure it matters, but I doubt this is the case.

Anyway, the point is - there are only X number of new jobs, even if Toronto's tax situation (or whatever you believe the problem to be / or not) could be alleviated today thousands of new jobs in Toronto will mean thousands less in the 905. So these local job targets are rather elementary figures and probably mean little - a growth % for the entire region likely makes more sense. For the 905 to meet it's current targets probably means Toronto can't reach it's own - and the same the other way.
 
I think those trends will continue. Toronto will continue to under shoot their targets and surrounding municipalities over shoot. The difference is I think the forces driving these trends are demographic and structural, meaning policy, including taxation, have had and will have little influence on the outcome.

You may want to believe that taxation has had little effect, but that is not the case. Have a look at Mayor Miller's MEAC report;
http://www.toronto.ca/prosperity/pdf/mecac-year-one.pdf
The Time is Now

Our Vision
It’s 2015, Toronto has established a reputation as the model city for global
competitiveness; a vibrant, forward thinking local economy; the envy of its
peers. A ranking as the top city in the world for job creation and employment
attraction. Being touted worldwide as the place to be! This is what Toronto
could become in the next 10 years. But to reach that goal, there is work to
be done and it must be done as a community guided by a shared vision and
common sense of purpose..

To achieve this vision, we must act NOW and we must act boldly, or we will
achieve a very different future ...

It started as a whisper, “Did you hear, that multi-national software company
just announced a major investmentâ€â€“ but it wasn’t in Toronto. We shrugged
and life went on. Next, there was an occasional article in the daily paper,
“Major corporations merge to expand market-share†– but it wasn’t in
Toronto. We shrugged and life went on. Until, finally, the whispers became
a roar and suddenly everyone was talking about employment sprawl, traffic
congestion, and under-employment in Toronto. If we continue to shrug and
ignore these warning signs of economic decline, we do so at our peril.

As members of the Mayor’s Economic Competitiveness Advisory Committee,
we, like many other Torontonians, are noticing some disturbing trends in our
city. The economic success that characterized Toronto during the latter half
of the twentieth century has become a historical fact rather than a constant
characteristic of our city. We’ve seen other cities that years ago were playing
catch up to our lead, surpass us in terms of economic growth.

Toronto is at a critical juncture in its ability to retain and stimulate new
investment. In order to create a long-term positive economic growth spiral
that will provide additional jobs, increase assessment, and improve the quality
of life for residents, business owners and workers, we must more strategically
direct our energy, resources and contacts toward collective success. It has
often been said that ‘a good job is the best predictor of good health’.

Our quality of life which includes our social, environmental and economic well-
being, is inextricably linked to today’s global market economy. They are part
of a cycle of sustainable economic growth in which strong positive social and
environmental attributes are key to maintaining and attracting investment.
Sustainability, by definition, requires a long-term vision and a holistic,
integrated and collaborative approach. In the short-term, it is possible
to achieve benefits in one area at the expense of the others. But experience
has taught us that, in the longer-term, all three elements will spiral in the
same direction – virtuously upward or perilously downward.

he Status Quo is Not Sustainable

Some Good News and Some Bad News

Our first order of business upon being charged with charting a new course
for Toronto’s economic prosperity was to do an environmental scan. What’s
good about Toronto’s economy, what’s working and why and, on the flip side,
where and what are the markers of trouble ahead.

First, the good news: Toronto is the core city of the second-fastest growing
…the good news is Toronto is the core city of the 2nd fastest

The bad news is that the job growth is happening in the region surrounding
…but job growth is accruing in the ‘905’ region,
Toronto, not in the city itself. not in the City …

Employment growth within the city is important for fiscal, social and
environmental reasons. A shrinking business and property tax base diminishes
Toronto’s ability to adequately provide the social services and other public
amenities that are the hallmark of a just and caring society.

Environmental Impacts of Office Location

Annual Impact Downtown Toronto Surrounding Regions
Transit trips 634,800 57,363
Auto kms. 3,259,300 11,153,700
Fuel use (l.) 291,025 995,925
Emissions (kg.) 940,800 3,129,500

Then, there are the personal stresses of long commutes stuck in traffic gridlock
to drive to a job that go hand in hand with increased fuel consumption and
increased emissions that contribute to environmental stress. It also means that
people who do not have access to a car have reduced access to job opportunities.

Toronto runs the riskof becoming a “bedroom community†if we don’t take
action now.
 
Uh huh. Except Miller's no longer mayor. Has Ford said anything about the problem yet? He needs to address the issue.

They're just facts : ) - I don't think it matters much who says what.

I'm curious to know Ford's stance on the matter though as well. Everyone will say it's an issue - that's not going to tell us anything, the real question is what anyone is willing to do about it.
I'm predicting Ford will agree it's an issue but not do anything about it - his response will likely be along the lines of: " Yes, this is indeed an issue, it stems from the gross overspending the city has done over the last many years and I will fix this"
In other words, he may work toward lowering the budget and the like but I don't think he's going to directly address anything specifically in regards to creating jobs.

He may lower or not hike commercial tax rates but if you look at the data you'll realize this won't amount to much (it'll take many many many years of tax increases in the 905 to make them close to similar). Something more immediate must be done if instance results are desired.

I do think a lot of firms will happily pay more in taxes if services are better (and they actually state that directly) - but I have no idea what this means in practice - is garbage not picked up enough ? Streets not clean enough ? and how much can / will this really differ from the 905 to the 416 ... not much at all I'd suspect.

Anyway so yea that's my prediction - other then maybe no new increases (or very small increases) to the commercial rate Ford will not do anything else rather focus on his larger goal of trimming the budget.
 
Last edited:
Hasn't the city been lowering business property taxes annually over the past four or five years, as part of the rebalancing of the tax burden?
 
When Ford talks about wanting to make Toronto 'open for business,' I have to wonder what kind of business he means. Given his experiences, it sounds like he means the city should be attractive to light-industrial, semi-skilled businesses whose requirements are basically fungible -- some land to build a warehouse, access to a highway, a supply of easily trainable workers who don't command super-high wages, etc. A label-printing company, let's say.

I have a feeling he doesn't mean the kind of knowledge-economy companies and entrepreneurs that fuel Toronto and cities like it. Plenty of businesses choose to locate without giving a damn about property taxes--because access to talent, network effects, local amenities to attract bright staff and so on are so much more important. The idea that, say, Mayfair in London needs to lower its property taxes lest hedge funds pack up and move is absurd (income tax may be another matter). Does Ford understand this? I don't want to be unfair to the guy, and I stress the above is based on hunches rather than concrete evidence. But understanding it means also understanding why, for example, arts grants that help make a city a fun place to live are also important to being 'open for business' as he says he wants Toronto to be.
 
Urban sprawl rules choking Toronto development: building industry STEVE LADURANTAYE
Globe and Mail Update
Published Thursday, Jan. 20, 2011

Provincial guidelines intended to contain urban sprawl in the Greater Toronto Area are choking development, according to the building industry, pushing the value of single-family homes above $500,000 in 2010 as developers struggled to find land they are allowed to build upon.

Data from RealNet Canada released on Thursday show that 36,803 new housing units were sold in the GTA in 2010. And although the condo and resale markets were strong, it was the second worst year in a decade for the sale of new houses.

“You can’t sell what you don’t have,†said RealNet president George Carras. “Sales have been flattened by a lack of supply.â€

The government brought in legislation in 2005 that restricts development in a so-called greenbelt around the city and tightened the way developers could plan their projects. Forty per cent of all development is supposed to be infill by 2015, and the supply of new land is limited until 2031.

It isn’t that the developers want to flatten playgrounds and farmland - the executive vice-president of Empire Communities said the approvals needed to build on land that is intended for housing are slow to come. This has pushed prices higher and made it more difficult for new projects to break ground.

“The growth policies are working a little too well,†said Paul Golini, executive vice-president of Empire Communities. “We don’t have enough inventory of lots.â€

The sale of low-density housing, such as single-family dwelling and townhouses, fell by 10 per cent in 2010 as the average price hit $503,190. Meanwhile, units in condo towers averaged $441,663. Condo sales accounted for 55 per cent of all activity last year, and the second best year of the decade for the sector.

The industry has met with the province to attempt to speed up the approval process, said Stephen Dupuis, the president of president of the Building Industry & Land Development Association of Toronto.

“We need to reduce the red tape,†he said. “Governments are really afraid to open land for development. They may just have to say yes more than they have been.â€

Developers are busier in the 905 area codes that surround the city, Mr. Carras said, with 55 per cent of sales last year.

However, the condo boom has new home growth in the 416-region almost double what it was 10 years ago. And while many market watcher have expressed concern about the amount of inventory in the city, at the end of 2010 the supply was 35 per cent lower than it was at the peak of the market in 2008.

“Since 2000, the residential development industry in the GTA has seen apartment condominium product increase it total market share by 30 per cent, while over the same period the industry has seen a 16 per cent drop in market share of detached homes.â€

There were 233 residential land sales in 2010 totalling $1.4-billion in the various residential land types, including long term land, low density land, medium density land and high density land. The high-density land sector saw the largest investments accounting for 46 per cent of the transactions by dollar volume, as investments in residential land investments in 2010 increased by 77 per cent over 2009
 
Plenty of businesses choose to locate without giving a damn about property taxes-- SNIP

Except those that build or own the space that is getting taxed.

This report might be interesting to you. Start at page 13.
 

Back
Top