News   Oct 03, 2024
 137     0 
News   Oct 03, 2024
 232     0 
News   Oct 02, 2024
 5.3K     1 

Star: Mondo Condos Push TO Growth

A

AlvinofDiaspar

Guest
From the Star:

Mondo condos push T.O. growth
City halfway to goal of 500,000 new residents, but it comes at a cost
January 19, 2007
Jim Byers
CITY HALL BUREAU CHIEF

The surge in downtown condominium towers has, in a few short years, helped the city of Toronto get halfway to its goal of adding a half-million residents by 2031.

It's a result that's supposed to save invaluable farm land from being paved over in the 905 and help battle climate change, but Toronto officials say it's proving costly to keep up with the demands that growth has placed on the city.

The city's official plan called for Toronto to grow from roughly 2.5 million residents in 2001 to about 3 million by 2031. Census data for 2006 won't be given to the city for a few months, but chief planner Ted Tyndorf yesterday said that existing buildings and a large list of approved new homes in the downtown core and other parts of the city will bring another 250,000 new residents for Canada's most populous city over the next few years.

It's mostly good news, said Councillor Brian Ashton (Ward 36, Scarborough Southwest), chair of the city's planning and growth management committee.

"It's good that Toronto can accommodate that degree of intensification," he told the Star. "The question is whether our infrastructure in areas like public transit can support that into the future.

"The province asked us to help stop urban sprawl by making room for a lot of new people, and we're happy to do that. We've saved the province hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure costs such as new highways in the 905," he said.

"But we want a share of that savings, which speaks to the mayor's call for a new deal for Toronto and a share of the wealth," from the federal or provincial sales tax, he added.

Tyndorf said some 15,000 to 20,000 housing units are being completed in the city every year, ranging from bachelors to two-bedroom apartments.

"Even if you assume only 1.2 people per unit, you're still looking at 20,000 to 30,000 people a year," he said.

Tyndorf said planners didn't think it was a reach to attract 500,000 new residents to the city over a 30-year span. But Ashton said he was one of many politicians who arched an eyebrow when they first heard talk of the goal.

"I have to confess I was one of the skeptics. I remember asking former planning commissioner Paul Bedford about it. I said to him, `Can we accommodate all these people?' and he said, `Sure we can, and we have to, because they're coming.'"

"I think the city's growth shows that staying the course is the right approach," said Glenn Miller of the Canadian Urban Institute. "The city has been adding new units for well over a decade. The current, torrid pace however, is relatively new. It has amazed a lot of observers.

"To me, the challenge will be a better distribution of the type of units so we have more family units," Miller said. "The city has to continue to intensify but be more family oriented."

Miller said it's very difficult to say if the city development is actually halting urban sprawl. But he agreed that having people move into a 250-unit condo on King St. W. means it's less likely that a 250-home subdivision will be built in Stouffville.

"We've been saying for a while that what's happening in Toronto is great," said Stephen Dupuis, CEO of the Greater Toronto Home Builders Association/Urban Development Institute. "Look at some of the American cities that are hollowing out and are dead at night. Toronto is the opposite."

Tyndorf said it won't be an issue if the city grows faster than the official plan suggested, explaining that it's merely a target and not a fixed number.

As well as adding 500,000 new residents between 2001 and 2031, the city of Toronto's official plan called for the same number of added jobs.

Reaching that goal is proving a lot tougher than boosting the population, Tyndorf said.

City officials say that surveys taken last summer indicate the city added another 13,000 jobs last year, or about 1.1 per cent more than the year before. That put Toronto at roughly 1.277 million workers. But officials cautioned those numbers aren't official census figures and that they don't include people who work at home or who move from place to place such as construction workers.

The city official plan says Toronto wants to encourage "compact growth" and intensification of existing city land. There have been conflicts between residents of nearby residential areas and developers who want to put up bigger buildings on streets such as Avenue Rd. or Sheppard Ave. in North York.

But the city says adding more people to Toronto improves energy and land conservation, maximizes use of existing infrastructure and reduces reliance on the automobile, which helps battle climate change and other environmental problems.

Toronto gets added development fees and property taxes when it allows new buildings, but Ashton said that doesn't make up for the cost of supplying transportation, water and other necessities.

"It's great to help stop urban sprawl but it puts a strain on the city," he said.

"The province can't walk away from that. The city's property tax system simply can't support our infrastructure requirements."

AoD
 
As sites get gobbled up it's going to get increasingly difficult to keep up the pace of densification because land assembly is so difficult compared to brown-lands / green-fields development. Then again there are still a number of places in this city where you can stare off into the distance across empty wastelands of unused land. I did a rough calculation a while back and figured that you could have approximately 5 million people in the city without any buildings over 3-storeys high if all residential districts had population densities similar to the inner-city neighbourhoods (mixes of single-family homes and rentals with 2-6 units).
 
It should be possible physically to get another 1/2 million or 1 million into the city, without disrupting existing neighbourhoods of single-family detached housing and without converting much if any of the existing industrial employment base, which the City wants to preserve as much as possible. The challenge isn't so much to find sites, it's to pay for the infrastructure, which is increasingly under strain (aging water pipes, inadequate transit, recreational facilities, etc. etc.)
 
Looking at the empty Canadian Tire lands, West Don Lands, East Bayfront, and the Portlands which are pretty much completely empty and then looking at all the underused lands at malls, suburban intensification of the avenues, etc... there is a long way to go before things get really tight.
 
I agree with Enviro - there's still quite a bit of land and more empty lots that one tends to imagine in the city, if you really look around. Bring em in.
 
New jobs in the city are of utmost importance. Without them, the 500,000 new residents to Toronto will result in 500,000 new auto trips as they are forced to drive to their jobs in the surrounding area. The fact that the Gardiner and DVP are carrying record numbers of reverse commuters shows that the downtown core is producing a record number of drivers who are still faced with 30 km, hour long commutes each way each day. It's completely counter productive.
 
New jobs in the city are of utmost importance. Without them, the 500,000 new residents to Toronto will result in 500,000 new auto trips as they are forced to drive to their jobs in the surrounding area. The fact that the Gardiner and DVP are carrying record numbers of reverse commuters shows that the downtown core is producing a record number of drivers who are still faced with 30 km, hour long commutes each way each day. It's completely counter productive.
We can hope in the long term people will live closer to where they work, thereby cutting down on automobile commutes and allowing for other modes of transportation to be utilized.
 
It's already happening... Condos are being built in 905 to accomodate people who want to live closer to where they work. Quite frankly, the provinicial government is completely clueless when it comes to addressing the sprawl issue vis a vis job creation.
 
blixa:

Living closer to where they work doesn't tell us anything about the modal split of trip generaton; besides, I am not sure if one can come to the conclusion of people buying into condos in the burbs do so due to proximity to workplace.

One thing I am concerned is the quasi-sarcosanct status given to single detached housing neighbourhoods wherever they are. Yes, it's difficult to retrofit or otherwise deal with them, but that's also one of the main reason why the urban system is as dysfunctional as it is.

AoD
 
High Rise Kids

Here come the high-rise kids
As more families choose to live in condos, are schools and the city ready to accommodate them?
JOHN LORINC

Special to The Globe and Mail

Although it may not seem that way when she's schlepping her kids by subway to school, Sherri-ann Stringer is one of Toronto's urban pioneers -- a parent determined to raise a family amid the high-rises springing up everywhere in the downtown core.

Ms. Stringer and her husband Darren, a gemologist, live in a two-bedroom condo in a tower on Bay Street with their two sons, Luca, 4, and Milo, 19 months. "People are always telling us, 'You should move; there's no backyard.' We feel like we're fighting to defend why we chose to live here."

The Stringer family is determined to stay downtown because they like the convenience and the buzz. But they also know, firsthand, that their new vertical neighbourhood isn't exactly kid-friendly. The apartment complexes weren't designed for families with small children and all their gear. The Downtown YMCA is packed. Queen's Park could use some playground equipment. And as for the schools, don't get Ms. Stringer started.

The Stringers' dilemma raises tough questions about the city's intensification strategy -- which is rapidly creating populous high-rise communities in traditionally commercial areas, including Bay Street, the railway lands and the Fort York area. The downtown today is leading the city in population growth, with a heady 7 per cent increase between 1996 and 2001.

Print Edition - Section Front
Enlarge Image

More Arts Stories
Imagining Her Majesty
Blame America . . . and oh yeah, the Jews
The action lama's miracle wrinkle cream
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
One really fat Englishman
The gulag and its children
Go to the Arts section
Contrary to the marketing stereotype of the twentysomething single buyer, Councillor Pam McConnell (Toronto-Centre) says a growing number of downtown condo dwellers now have children. Parents like Ms. Stringer -- who chose to send her older son to an out-of-district school in an enclave near the Summerhill subway -- are skeptical about whether the city and the school boards are truly prepared to deal with future enrolment growth in these high-rise communities.

It's a glaring error that's been made before in Toronto. Though initially geared at retirees, the towering luxury condos in the Yonge-Sheppard corridor have seen an influx of young families, many of them recent immigrants from dense Asian cities where high-rise living is the norm.

Initially, says Councillor John Filion (Willowdale), North York board of education officials insisted all the new development wouldn't bring children into the area. As it turned out, the demand was such that one of the local schools, McKee Public School, had to be completely rebuilt, its capacity tripled to 630. Despite that expansion, says Mr. Filion, McKee "was immediately full. It's obviously not a good situation."

Alan Tam, a parent who co-chairs McKee's School Council, says he's aware of families who bought apartments in the area expecting to send their children to the school -- only to be told it was full. "They were really disappointed they couldn't bring their kids to McKee," says Mr. Tam. These children are bused to schools out of the local district, including Lillian Public School, about three kilometres to the north.

The board, in fact, is grappling with similar development-related mismatches in nine other high-growth areas, including near Dundas and Bloor in Etobicoke. In the Morningside area of Scarborough, some developments went up in areas with no local schools at all. The board had to build two new schools to accommodate the demand.

Similar planning failures occurred in 1960s-era high-density apartment complexes, where existing schools and community centres couldn't accommodate the large numbers of families -- many of them low income or recent immigrants -- who were eventually drawn to these areas. In Thorncliffe Park, for example, the elementary school had more than 40 portables until an expansion last year. St. James Town only got its own library and community centre in 2004.

Is Toronto going to see a reprise of these problems? In 2001, 154,000 people lived in the area bounded by the CPR tracks, Bathurst Street and the Don River. The migration to the core outpaced the 4 per cent growth rate recorded for the city overall, and it shows little sign of ebbing. In this decade, the city has approved 18,000 new residential units downtown, 97 per cent of them in high-rises. That figure could generate another 27,000 downtowners, although a few others will likely move out. Toronto's chief planner, Ted Tyndorf, said this week that approved new homes in the downtown and other fast-growing parts of the city will bring 250,000 new residents within the next several years.

With all the high-rise development, the city's planning staff has been pushing builders to think more seriously about families. Rookie councillor Adam Vaughan (Trinity-Spadina) made that issue a pillar of his campaign, and has been pushing builders to add more three-bedroom units.

How many condo buyers will be families with young children remains to be seen. So far, there's been limited demand. As Martha Friendly, co-ordinator of the University of Toronto's Childcare Resources and Research Unit, explains, "People with young kids have to move because there are no facilities for children." Downtown condo owners agree: "Nobody wants to put down roots downtown because there aren't any amenities here," says May Chow, chair of the Bay Corridor Community Association.

Toronto District School Board officials insist there's room in the handful of elementary schools serving the core -- most are 70 to 80 per cent full, according to current enrolment data. As well, earmarked funds for new schools and community centres are part of the city's plans for the railway lands and the West Donlands. As Mr. Vaughan puts it, "The capacity is there. What isn't there are the kids."

Not yet anyway. But North York's experience suggests the board could find itself facing space shortages sooner than expected. Indeed, Ms. McConnell says the TDSB will likely need to build another elementary school to serve the high-rises going up along the lower reaches of Bay Street. And Mr. Filion says officials with both the school boards and the city need to work much more closely to prepare for the demographic changes sweeping these communities.

Ms. Stringer also feels the city needs to retrofit the core to provide other child-oriented amenities, such as playgrounds and recreational facilities geared to kids, rather than the after-work exercise set. But from her experience of raising small children in the towers of Bay Street, she doesn't see much evidence of change. "There isn't a vision," she says. "It's about how many people we can cram in this space."
 
Re: High Rise Kids

This ties in with what Adam Vaughan talked about during the election. It's great to have people living downtown, this is possibly one of the biggest reasons that Toronto has a downtown with some life in it after 6 pm., unlike some large cities in other countries. But if there's no room for kids, young couples will simply move to the single-family neighbourhoods (in the central city or more likely in the burbs). Diversity and stability in the downtown core areas will be harder to achieve.
 
Re: High Rise Kids

"Nobody wants to put down roots downtown because there aren't any amenities here," says May Chow, chair of the Bay Corridor Community Association.
What is this "Bay Corridor Community Association"? I can't find a website and have never heard of it before.
 
Re: High Rise Kids

They're the ones protesting the St. Mike's College site redevelopment proposals, right?
 

Back
Top