Subway presents jobs dilemma

[alklay]

This is an interesting article on the importance of employment v. residential uses of land, job growth and the impact of the subway and zoning instruments. Enjoy:

Subway presents jobs dilemma
TheStar.com - News - Subway presents jobs dilemma

Consultants suggest that York U extension may open doors to homes, not employment, if developers put pressure on city

May 09, 2007
John Spears
City Hall Bureau

Extending the Spadina subway line to York University and Vaughan could promote job growth along the route – or it could lower employment levels.

That's one of the dilemmas facing the city if it hopes to reach its ambitious job-growth targets, according to a consultants' report that suggests Toronto can't afford to see much more of its office and industrial space replaced by housing.

Pressure to build housing on commercial and industrial land along the line is likely to grow once the extension gets final approval, says the report by Hemson Consulting, which goes to the city's economic development committee today.

According to March employment figures, Toronto has 1.34 million jobs, many of them in its prime "employment lands" – 16 areas with industrial or commercial zoning, mostly in the city's old suburbs.

To meet the goal set out in its Official Plan – 1.84 million jobs by 2031 – the city must find places to put workspace for about 500,000 more jobs.

But it also faces a steady stream of proposals from developers to build houses, apartments and condominiums in the very areas that now supply jobs.

The Spadina subway represents both an opportunity and a potential pitfall, the report says. The route runs along the edge of one of the city's biggest employment areas, running north from Sheppard Ave. W. between Dufferin and Keele Sts.

The subway will provide an ideal chance to grow more jobs, the Hemson report says. But it will also appeal to residential developers, who will find the subway an attractive selling point. They'll pressure the city to convert industrial land to housing, the report warns.

"One of the most common arguments in support of applications to convert employment land to residential is that it would support transit use," Hemson notes.

"A new subway line along the edge of the employment district would therefore provide many opportunities for landowners to argue for conversions to residential."

Property owners' main motivation for converting their land won't be concern for the subway's welfare, but the fact that residential land is "quite a bit" more valuable than industrial-zoned land, said study co-author Russell Matthews.

Giving in would put the city on a slippery slope: "Once the first conversion is approved, it would be very difficult to refuse others."

Hemson says the belief that it takes densely populated areas to support transit isn't necessarily true.

"Transit actually works best where destinations include concentrated employment opportunities, such as central Toronto and other nodes along the Yonge St. corridor."

The report says the city has to do more than simply protect employment lands from conversion to housing.

And Toronto will also need to provide tax incentives to spur new construction in the employment districts because developers can make more money building office and industrial projects outside the city.






These are interesting problems in light of the fact that the city has not grown either its residential or working population during the last decade.

 

[unimaginative2]

I think the problem is exaggerated. While I'm sure there will be pressure to redevelop sites near subway stations and along major arterials, most of those industrial parks won't be touched. One warehouse with a couple dozen employees could be redeveloped for hundreds of residential units.

 

[dowlingm]

unimaginative

where is that warehouse going to be relocated to? We still need warehouses, especially for all the stuff the people in the residential need!

Steve Munro has been yelling that this is too much money for too little benefit especially when you take York's projected ridership from the EA into account. I disagree with him to some extent - I would build the extension to Yonge+Steeles to cater for York traffic and extend the proposed Jane LRT to Vaughan - but more and more this is looking like a billion dollar counterproductive disaster in the making.

 

[simply Dan]

For all of this talk of urban intensification - there is still TONS of underutilized land within the City of Toronto that can be redeveloped.

 

[Edward Skira]

Even the business parks that will be impacted by the subway could be made much denser. Most are warehouses in the park/parking lot. Put the warehouses closer together and they could still function as industrial while allowing some lands along the margins to be coverted to high density residential or office.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Considering that the city continues to raise property taxes on residences while not increasing property taxes on businesses by the same rate, the city should be glad to have more homes.

 

[EnviroTO]

That is because the residential property to business property ratio is favours residences far more than neighbouring municipalities. The Toronto property tax rate is far lower in Toronto than in most Ontario locales.

 

[afransen]

Homes are expensive to service. By comparison, commercial and industrial bankroll the city.

 

[Observer Walt]

^ Exactly, afransen. Toronto made the decision to raise residential rates at a faster pace than industrial and commercial in order to keep the latter in the city. It's easy for many of them to migrate to the burbs where taxes are lower.