Is CityPlace Toronto’s next ghetto?

[UNO3003]

It's not jealousy. This idea didn't receive an adequate response. The traditional neighbourhoods that you mention have substantial concentrations of stores and businesses, and also a high density of people. People come from around the city and sometimes even from other cities to visit these places for different reasons, be it the shopping, retail, culture, food, or just to explore. The built form comprises well over a century of interesting buildings in diverse styles. The sidewalks are often full of people. Cultural works may be produced as well as good food and design. These neighbourhoods have a mix of working class and middle class people. There is some poverty, and sometimes you may see some buildings or infrastructure that isn't in the best of shape. (Certainly not streets full of homeless people like your hyperbole. It should be also be noted at this point that Cityplace will age too and have public housing.) In defending Cityplace, don't denigrate these great neighbourhoods, even if it's just "superficially". They aren't even close to ghettos.

The people writing for these publications often know the vibrant traditional neighbourhoods best and see their merits right away. Jane Jacobs has been very influential in Toronto with her work defending these kinds of neighbourhoods. And when visiting other cities for tourism, it's places like these that people love to find in cities. The popular traditional neighbourhoods can provide a certain joie de vivre if you enjoy what they have to offer. Some neighbourhoods are more working class in character and may have many recent immigrants, but they remain successful area. Some immigrants start business, people buy homes and slowly improve them, the public transit is decent, and the streets are filled with people at various times of the day discouraging crime.

Cityplace is different, and writers might not know what to make of it. It's mostly vertical. Its potential for diverse uses like businesses and residential in the same spaces seems more ambiguous, and it's not on one of the traditional corridors which link many neighbourhoods like the major streets in Toronto. Similar mass housing projects have had varying levels of success. These aren't points of criticism of Cityplace; they're just facts. They may be used in erroneous and sensationalistic claims by people who don't know what to say about something so different than what they've loved and grown accustomed to. To say it's jealousy and then to denigrate these great old neighbourhoods is misguided and foolish.

I love those neighbourhoods and am also sceptical about the doomsayers when it comes to Cityplace. Just continue to point out criticisms based on faulty reasoning or which aren't based on anything concrete. Noting the diversity in Cityplace and the efforts for better retail is good. Cityplace needs to be fashioned in a way that reaches out to the tastemakers who swear by the traditional nabes. Amenities like an annual street festival, farmer's markets, charity events, and getting the streetcar line built may be effective in ending the disconnect and anchoring the area in the city's culture in a positive way. Make the naysayers' hearts melt. The public art alone isn't going to cut it.

The point was not to mock those areas. As I note, "I love those areas...". I am also a fan of Jane Jacobs. I feel my point has been mis-interpretated. I have lived/visited in a lot of those areas and absolutely enjoyed them. Personally, I dont believe any area in Toronto is a ghetto at all. I am not the kind of person who goes around denigrating areas as ghetto at all. It just happens to be this article's focus. I love most areas of this city, even "Parkdale", "Regent Park" etc. I do not even consider anywhere in Toronto "bad areas". In fact, I have frequently had intense arguements with friends, making the precise opposite arguement - that Toronto has no "real" ghettos.

But I was trying to articulate (which is difficult), that if the attention to "ghetto-ization" were the same and more practical, plenty of those areas would recieve worse or just as negative reviews. CityPlace is so scrutinized that there used to be a site called "Cityplace-ghetto" where "dog-poop"or any signs of vandalism (minor vandalism) was given entire articles. My point was if all these other areas in Toronto were given that level of scrutiny that CP recieves, they would all be deemed "ghetto". My point was that this is more about picking on the percieved "big guy" (or the area that screwed up Toronto's skyline) as opposed to picking on the perceieved "underdogs" or the "small guy". I feel that this Toronto habit of picking on CP - the "big guy" - is just getting more and more disproportionate to the reality. Music-wise, for an anology, it strikes me as the equivalent to how reviewers will rip apart an average album by a very popular artist but elevate the average album by some unknown independent artist. That is all fine and dandy, I tend towards independent artists anyways but it just gets out of hand when we start to actually take it as seriously as this is getting. Criticizing somewhere because it is the most popular, the most high-profile area is not necessarily accurate. Id argue with CP that this is the case. CP has problems, sure, but to me, they have been insanely exagerrated by the article for sensationalist purposes. The article is not very balanced either as it does not show the "other side" of the arguement.

Let me give an example: In my CP building, they widened the driveway leading into my garage ramp by 2 feet to make it easier for two cars to pass each other when entering or exiting the garage. To me, living in multiple condos in Toronto and New York - not a big deal. In fact, I have lived in a much more expensive building with less of a luxury of this kind in New York. In my experience, newer buildings often make changes as residents move in and realize that certain infrastructure is inadequate, so changes are made. I feel new buildings do infra-structure changes like this all the time. In fact, my experience in Manhattan, a change like that would be only driven by a very higher-end wealthy residential building. To me, this is a minor change which I would argue that in any other nieghborhood would be just dismissed - no attention at all from the public - but guess what? There was a whole news segment regarding this on CTV at the time. I couldnt even believe it. They had a reporter come to our building and do an entire segment on how Concord is running into problems with their condo residents. They used the 2-feet being added to widen a ramp for the garage, as an example of this. The extra 2-feet for the ramp was not even necessary or needed. It was just a preference championed by our board.

Dont get it twisted. I dont think of CityPlace as a perfect area or the envy of Toronto by any means. Im not saying everyone is jealous in brutal or literal terms. The area has alot of problems especially if one is a perfectionist. It is not my number-one place to live. But I have always found that the biggest criticism of the area comes from people who live in areas which if held to the same magnified-glass, they would have just as many issues or more revealed.

All the needs for CityPlace you list are true. Absolutely. But realize some of the people quoted in that article are just vehemently anti-CityPlace. Like David Flemming, just hates the area. It doesnt matter if there was a great mixed community there or not, he would be writing negative articles about CityPlace. Adam Vaughan has worked against CP interests often. Destination retail has always been wanted by Concord but the city has rejected it
because they are afraid of more traffic problems for Spadina and the Gardiner.

In my frank opinion, CityPlace is not the best neighborhood in Toronto nor the worst one. I think Concord deserves some credit for trying to do something with the area, even if it is not perfect. It is not the best area by any means, the park is cheesy if you ask me and some parts of it are badly designed. In the years to come, I dont think CP will be some super upscale area nor impoverished like a ghetto. The problem is the development is just getting so much attention, like TMZ following around Lady Gaga, that they are starting to develop distorted future projections for the area because of minut observations. At the end of the day, media attention is a nuisance right now but inevitably, it will end up improving the area and help pave the way for the developments everyone wants here - more retail, more diversity etc.

 

[AKS]

If it had a few homeless bumming around, it would also have the ills associated with street people. This would show that residents in the area are willing to deal with the BS of city life and that the neighbourhood is not simply a suburb nestled downtown. It also points to an area with varied demographics, zoning, and again, less likely to experience uniform depreciation of its similarly-aged buildings.

This isn't a good idea especially with schools going up. Some homeless people are homeless because they have a mental issue. It wouldn't be a safe area for kids. Also kids learn from what they observe. If teens draw graffiti everywhere and aren't punished. Kids will grow up thinking it's okay to do the same. Then you have a new generation of kids drawing everywhere they please. If people want to make graffiti in public, they should get permission first unless they own it. It's like going to a neighbours house and spray painting it. That's vandalism. Spray paint your own place.

For your information, there are teens in the neighbourhood. I'm not sure if they are owners or tenants, but once when I was heading to the lockers, I noticed a family with 3 boys who seemed awed by the locker room. One of them at least was in his teens. From their accent, they sounded European (Russian, German or neighbouring area).

 

[Thanos]

An interesting article on the fall of the suburbs during the housing crash down south.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/opinion/the-death-of-the-fringe-suburb.html?_r=1

It's interesting how neighborhoods that were slums 20 years ago are now "the place to be". Real estate is funny industry.

 

[taal]

Right but Toronto suburbs are not your typical American suburbs.
Even today by far and large they are much more dense.

Also, look at all the urban intensification plans for Markham Center / Yonge and Hi-way 7, Vaughan, and MCC.

Such suburbs don't exist in the US. Moreover, we have tons of employment in the 905 region, more then the 416 ...

If anything, the outer 416 (less anything with subway access) will be the next giant ghetto, some may argue it already is.

 

[Thanos]

As Ontario moves to a more services based industry the 905 will loose employment unless they act now.
Also, Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Pickering are all struggling to find corporations for their business parks. Not all of the 905 is as rosy as Mississauga.

 

[taal]

As Ontario moves to a more services based industry the 905 will loose employment unless they act now.
Also, Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Pickering are all struggling to find corporations for their business parks. Not all of the 905 is as rosy as Mississauga.

I disagree, though I have a question for you below

1) GTA, for the most part, is already service based industry. The majority of new industrial space in the 905 is simply warehousing, there will always be a growing demand for such space.

2) This is the question, Markham has a bunch of commerical projects pending for Hi-way 7 (I'm not referring to downtown markham); There's a huge parcel of land around the 404 and Hi-way 7, and a couple others. I think development has been slated for this plot for a long time now.

What do you mean they're struggling to attract tenants though ? Granted they actually haven't had too much new construction in the last little while, but there's been a decent amount (go back 3 or 4 years even more so), it will probably pick up in the next couple of years.

Do you have any information regarding there inability to find tenants ?


Honestly, I find some of their plans scary (for the 416), downtown Markham / Buttonville airport / Hi-way 7 - are planning on adding office space in the 10/15+ million range ... that's a crazy amount and that will undoublty require tenants from the 416 to relocate. This is just Markham alone too !

I'm not saying they'll achieve those goals in the next 10 years, though from listening to some of them, that is there goal !

 

[AKS]

Honestly, I find some of their plans scary (for the 416), downtown Markham / Buttonville airport / Hi-way 7 - are planning on adding office space in the 10/15+ million range ... that's a crazy amount and that will undoublty require tenants from the 416 to relocate. This is just Markham alone too !

I'm not saying they'll achieve those goals in the next 10 years, though from listening to some of them, that is there goal !

That's scary. I wonder if they did their market research. If it doesn't get filled, those office spaces are going to be like ghost towns. There's articles saying companies are relocating to 416. Are there going to be many 416 relocating back to 905 again?

 

[taal]

That's scary. I wonder if they did their market research. If it doesn't get filled, those office spaces are going to be like ghost towns. There's articles saying companies are relocating to 416. Are there going to be many 416 relocating back to 905 again?

No no to be fair, if they don't get filled they simply won't be built
i.e. you'll see a lot of vacant land around Markham center for 20+ years ... which is fine.

I mean 10+ million square feet in a long time frame should be OK (the problem being that the outer 416 has essentially been stagnant for the last 10 years, but that's besides the point).


I honestly don't think we'll see a lot of relocation out of the 416 anymore. The core is very attractive for whatever reason. The outer 416 has already been hammered with relocations, you'll see more I'm sure, but nothing significant.

No the scary part is the lack of growth.

Office space in the outer 416 is in pretty poor shape overall too (less on the Yonge line), I mentioned this in another thread but to compete with the 905, the rental rates are actually lower in the outer 416 ! - So gross rents are comparable in some ares (even with the tax difference), but the building owners have no incentive to keep them up to date

 

[AKS]

No no to be fair, if they don't get filled they simply won't be built
i.e. you'll see a lot of vacant land around Markham center for 20+ years ... which is fine.

This might not be the case. I've seen Chinese malls that were built but it's pretty empty. There are stores there, but not many people walking into the mall. I don't know how shops even earn money to pay the rent if they can't make sales. The most successful so far is Pacific Mall. Tiny stores, but tons of people shopping and eating there. It's hard to find parking spaces even. Remington plans to expand the place which I think is a great idea. More parking spaces and retail plus residential.

 

[taal]

This might not be the case. I've seen Chinese malls that were built but it's pretty empty. There are stores there, but not many people walking into the mall. I don't know how shops even earn money to pay the rent if they can't make sales. The most successful so far is Pacific Mall. Tiny stores, but tons of people shopping and eating there. It's hard to find parking spaces even. Remington plans to expand the place which I think is a great idea. More parking spaces and retail plus residential.

Nah I doubt it, not with class A office space. I say this because there are a few plots of land that have had leasing signs for the last 10 year or so : ).
Developers in GTA would rarely go ahead with a project unless they have tenants. Maybe you'll see some smaller ones go ahead but that's about it.

In regards to Chinese malls, if you stop and think about it, are there really that many in the GTA the fit your description ? The splended tower thingie maybe ? But for the most part no, though it can be a completely different element at play: There are some malls that just die out over time (but they were busy at some point) a couple little malls in downtown china town are a good example of this.

 

[AKS]

Yes, I was thinking of Splendid Tower. I read a post they're building phase 2. Their phase 1 isn't even working out. As for Chinese malls, there's many of them scattered around. There's one that's pretty dead is midland and sheppard area where Dragon Centre is located. Also I don't know what that mall is at Brimley and Sheppard. That one is pretty dead too I think. I think there's more than those but those are the ones I recall. I recall going to Ruby Palace at Woodside mall. That place isn't that busy other than the restaurant. However the restaurant has closed down.

 

[Thanos]

Aren't their rumors that they'll be adding 2 more Pacific type malls? I don't know what koolaid their drinking up in Markham.
The Markham downtown and Pickering plans are exactly what i meant. They, the city and developers, won't admit this but they've tried to take some businesses away from Mississauga and downtown Toronto but non have budged. I can tell you that one of the banks had several "benefits" thrown to it by moving a lot of it's operations over there. However, they refused.
Calgary also tried to woo one of the big banks of moving it's head office over there. This is what worries me about Toronto.
The city needs to act now to bee more business friendly. The Queensway is just screaming for commercial intensification.

 

[taal]

Aren't their rumors that they'll be adding 2 more Pacific type malls? I don't know what koolaid their drinking up in Markham.
The Markham downtown and Pickering plans are exactly what i meant. They, the city and developers, won't admit this but they've tried to take some businesses away from Mississauga and downtown Toronto but non have budged. I can tell you that one of the banks had several "benefits" thrown to it by moving a lot of it's operations over there. However, they refused.
Calgary also tried to woo one of the big banks of moving it's head office over there. This is what worries me about Toronto.
The city needs to act now to bee more business friendly. The Queensway is just screaming for commercial intensification.

hmm, that's scary thought for Toronto ...

I could see it happening as well, I'm not too concerned about Calgary for some reason, but moving to downtown markham (or the like) can happen I'd imagine ...

They approached one of the big banks and were asking about all their operations ? That's pretty significant.

I mean in the recent past, hummingbird, or the like (forgot the name) moved from 404/Sheppard to the downtown Markham area.

 

[AKS]

I don't think the big banks will move their operations north. Maybe smaller parts of their operation. But they will keep their major operations downtown because that's where the money is, the financial district. I can't imagine financial district relocating uptown.

 

[Jonny5]

hmm, that's scary thought for Toronto ...

I could see it happening as well, I'm not too concerned about Calgary for some reason, but moving to downtown markham (or the like) can happen I'd imagine ...

They approached one of the big banks and were asking about all their operations ? That's pretty significant.

I briefly worked for one of the big banks and during that short time there was always rumours about offices moving to the suburbs. Aside from the multi-floor operations in the King and Bay towers, there were small offices of 100 or so support staff at Bay and Bloor, Yonge and St.Clair and Yonge and Sheppard and some others sprinkled around. These were mostly legacy spaces from the mergers of the 80's. They were ripe for consolidation, and, combined with another few hundred form financial district towers, they could be easily be farmed out to the 905 as a 1000+ person office in a modern, custom build and with space to grow.

But! It was difficult to pull off as the leases were all on different timelines and the staff essentially would have none of it. People who lived in York and Durham didn't want to commute to Mississauga and people in Mississauga didn't want to commute to York or Durham. Many employees in the midtown offices lived nearby and had no way of getting to a 905 site. These are problems the banks could push through but it would create a lot of upset employees and a fair bit of turnover. Having the right incentive from a municipal government would make it easier to swallow.

Does anyone know what the employment law says about moving offices somewhere that some of your staff can no longer reach? I can see that being a great tool to shed jobs without the bad press of layoffs.