6/3/2019

Researched and written by Adam Singer, Douglas Turner, and Sheliza Esmail for the Rotman City Lab Fellowship

1

Table of Contents 1. Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................ 2

2. The Toronto Context.............................................................................................................................................. 3

3. Issues Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4

4. Case Study: Downtown-Yonge Neighbourhood and BIA ......................................................................... 7

5. Case Study: Entertainment District Neighbourhood and BIA ..................................................................... 10

6. Case Study: St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood and BIA ........................................................................ 13

7. Issues Deep Dive ........................................................................................................................................................ 15

8. Best Practices ............................................................................................................................................................. 26

9. Next Steps ................................................................................................................................................................... 30

10. Addendums ............................................................................................................................................................... 31

11. Reference List............................................................................................................................................................ 32

2

1. Acknowledgements

We would like to especially thank and acknowledge all of the partners who contributed to the

research process for this project, including:

Bloor-Yorkville BIA

Center for Industrial Relations and Human Resources, University of Toronto

Cityplace Resident Association

Condostore Marketing Systems

Councillor Mike Layton and staff

Downtown Yonge BIA

Geography and Planning, University of Toronto

St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA

St. Lawrence Residents Association

The Eglinton Way BIA

The Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto

The Waterfront BIA

Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas

Toronto Entertainment District BIA

We appreciate the guidance, insights, and opportunity that each of these research partners gave in

order to complete this project.

Additional thanks to our personal networks who contributed to sharing and discussing their ideas

over the last year to while we worked on this project.

Sincerely,

Adam Singer, Douglas Turner, and Sheliza Esmail

3

2. The Toronto Context

High-density developments are dominating the residential planning environment in the City of

Toronto. Over 80,000 residential units were completed in Toronto between 2012 and 2016, of which

83% were condominium units - an all-time high in Toronto’s development history. Furthermore,

the average size of a condominium unit has decreased from 1087 square feet to 885 square feet.

The decreasing physical size of Toronto condominiums, among other things, is also contributing to

increasing pressures on Toronto’s downtown spaces as Business Improvement Areas (BIA). As a

result of the exceptional degree of development taking place, there is increasing pressure on

Toronto BIA’s to be prepare for both increasing population density and shifting community needs.

The Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas (TABIA) is interested in developing a

better understand of the impact of high-density condominium development in Toronto on

members of the affected communities and has partnered with the Rotman CityLab Fellowship class

to study this issue.

In an effort to better understanding the impacts of high-density development in Toronto the

following steps were taken: a) An academic literature review on Toronto’s business community and

the impacts of high-density development; b) A scan of past and current planning studies in

Toronto including TO Core, Intensification in the Downtown Core, and How Does the City Grow; and

c) a collection of semi structured interviews with representatives from Toronto BIA’s, local resident’s

associations, and a City of Toronto councilor and member of the development community.

The insights in the Issues section of this report are intended to be a high-level overview of the

experiences of BIA’s and their community members, and the successes and challenges that they

have experienced in light of Toronto’s booming population and development.

-

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2017

Number of Units Added

Year

Condominimum Units Added to the Toronto Housing Market

4

3. Issues Summary

This is a high-level summary of the issues that have been identified. Each of the issues are

comprehensively addressed further on pages 13-23.

3.1 Unsustainable Property Tax and Rising Rent

The increasing land values in Toronto are affecting commercial tenants and local business owners.

Rents in high-density areas have become unaffordable for many mom-and-pop businesses.

Tenants that are not major brands or big box retailers tend to have difficulties affording these

increasing rates, leading many local and independent businesses to be driven out of

neighbourhoods. There is a lack of diversity in the mixture of business types due to the increasing

rents that is likely to continue as high operating costs in downtown Toronto continue to grow.

Commercial value assessments have risen by as much as 500% in parts of downtown Toronto, and

property taxes have also significantly increased.

3.2 The Erosion of Main Street Character

The main streets of most downtown neighbourhoods across the city have seen a fundamental shift

away from small, independent, and local businesses towards chains, franchises, and big-box stores.

Large-scale developments in the downtown prefer large retail chains and big box retailers to small

and independent businesses because they have the capacity to sign long term leases and act as

anchor tenants. There is also a barrier to entry with large renovation costs for retailers to create

suitable spaces for retail because retail space design and amenities are not prioritized for

5

investment nearly as much as residential units. There is an emerging trend towards creating large

retail spaces rather than a variety of small and large retail spaces that tend to attract certain types

of businesses. While the City of Toronto often preserves facades, there is no mechanism in place to

preserve cultural attributes, retail diversity, and main street character.

3.3 Insufficient Transportation Infrastructure

Toronto’s transit infrastructure, including its highways, parkway, and transit services that service the

Toronto downtown are over capacity at peak hours. Additional transit services including public

transportation options are needed to facilitate the flow of traffic in the downtown core as well as

24/7 service. The increasing density and development is going to create more pressure on already

at capacity services. BIA’s also struggle to maintain adequate parking supply to service visitors to

the area. In addition to the limited parking supply, there is also a shortage of space for business

and residential delivery services which are becoming increasingly popular.

3.4 Absent Community Services and Facilities

High-density areas of development in

Toronto are increasingly seeing more

diverse mixes of residents, including

families living in 3-bedroom condos,

but the growth and development of

community and public services often do

not keep pace with these demographic

changes. Many high-density areas of

the city are experiencing a shortage of

community spaces, such as schools,

libraries, community centers, and other

social services. Many of these areas

have insufficient outdoor space for pets

and physical activity. Many other areas

require faster development of facilities

and support for homeless populations,

which is often cited as a safety concern

for residents. These can be facilitated through public and private centers that act as community

anchors and recreation spaces for families.

3.5 Aging and Underserviced Utilities

The Province of Ontario, the City of Toronto, and other public and private actors have proposed

many solutions and policy interventions to help facilitate sustainable development of high-density

areas in Toronto. However, many of the critical public services, utilities, and infrastructure are

nearing or exceeding capacity and are reaching beyond their expected lifetime. Because of this,

6

massive upgrades to existing infrastructure and utilities are needed, and the development of new

public infrastructure should be promoted. Critically though, the cost of these improvements is

increasing significantly as they deteriorate further. Timely and immediate upgrades are crucial to

ensuring and promoting sustainable and long-term high-density development.

3.6 Lacking Diverse Housing

Due to the increasing costs of development in the Toronto’s downtown, developers are

endeavoring to maximize their profits through higher margins. This has resulted in high-priced

condominium development and the standardization of housing price points and unit types.

“People living in the downtown have a need for green spaces and parks. You need more spaces for

activities.” – Downtown Resident

7

4. Case Study: Downtown-Yonge Neighbourhood and BIA

Each of the following case studies will address the themes listed

1. Successes and Challenges for the Neighbourhood

2. History of the Neighbourhood

3. History and Mandate of the BIA

Successes and Challenges for the Neighbourhood

Unsustainable Property Tax and Rising Rent

o Businesses in this neighbourhood must make a trade off: high foot traffic on Yonge

Street or lower rent somewhere else.

Absent Community Services and Facilities

o With the rapid development of condominium towers in the downtown core,

community service organizations such as the Yonge Street Mission have left the

neighbourhood.

Aging and Underserviced Utilities

o The water pipes and electric transformers feeding and powering Yonge Street are in

some places over 100 years old. It is only a matter of time before a failure of one of

these systems shuts off the taps or lights of

hundreds of thousands of residents.

The Fall and Rise of Yonge Street

Yonge Street has been an integral part of

the city since the early 1800s when the town

of York first began seeing expansion. Yonge

Street in the early 1800s was a haven for

immigrants, and was known to have a

strong community of recent immigrants

from the Old World and refugee slaves from

the United States living, working, and

socializing alongside one another. At first

considered further outside of the town than

8

the more developed area near the waterfront, the city grew around this thriving neighbourhood

until the Great Fire in 1850 demolished most of the buildings across what is now the downtown

core of Toronto. While the city rebuilt, the character of this neighbourhood remained forever

changed and this was the catalyst for the "city of neighbourhoods" Toronto is now known for

today; when the diverse cultures began moving away from Yonge Street, they settled into their

own neighbourhoods and created

strong cultural communities across the

city that thrive to this day.

The area around Yonge Street took on

much of the same industrial

characteristics as the rest of the

downtown area of Toronto in the first

half of the 20th century; industrial

manufacturers and housing blocks

helped propel the economic engine of

the city. However, with the decline of

downtown industrial manufacturing in

the early 1950s, Yonge Street became

one of the poorest neighbourhoods

and was considered a slum. Through

the 1970s, Yonge Street was littered

with brothels, strip clubs, and head

shops, and was known to be a

destination for vinyl record shops. This characterization as a seedy neighbourhood existed

alongside another view of Yonge Street at the same time: an entertainment destination. Yonge

Street was also known for the countless record shops and movie theaters along the strip, some of

which are still there: Legacy theaters still exist all up Yonge Street, such as the Winter Garden,

Massey, Panasonic, and Elgin.

The people of Toronto however became tired

of this poor characterization of the Yonge Strip,

and there was a new push for revitalization

through the neighbourhood. Yonge Street had

been on a terrible path, and this came to a

head in 2005 when gang violence on Yonge

Street caught national news attention. Suddenly

new efforts began to shift away from this seedy

past, and this is when Yonge and Dundas

Square was first conceived as the Canadian

Times Square. Since then, the economic

development efforts have taken off. The

Downtown Yonge neighbourhood has

exploded with development, and is home to

9

around 180,000 people. In the last 18 months, 45 new international brands have opened their doors

within the neighbourhood, and the pace will only keep accelerating. For Downtown Yonge, the

future is bright.

What the BIA does:

The Downtown Yonge BIA encompasses a wide area of the busiest section of the downtown core;

with 180,000 residents, nearly 600,000 daily commuters, 40,000 students, and around a third of all

TTC traffic every day, this is the beating heart of Toronto. The BIA thus puts a large focus on data

collection on the patterns and behaviours of residents, commuters, visitors, and businesses

throughout the neighbourhood in order to effectively deliver and advocate for the services

needed. To further deal with this rapid development throughout the neighbourhood, the BIA has

adopted a proactive strategy for developer engagement to ensure that the needs of current and

future businesses are dealt with when the new buildings are proposed, under construction, and

finished. A twin focus of the BIA is of course the promotion of the neighbourhood as the premiere

destination within Toronto; with Yonge-Dundas Square and the Eaton Center two landmarks,

maintaining the distinct 'feel' of the neighbourhood is equally important for all of Toronto.

10

5. Case Study: Entertainment District Neighbourhood and BIA

Successes and Challenges for the Neighbourhood

Erosion of Main Street Character

o Toronto's Entertainment District has seen a massive shift away from local theaters,

nightclubs, and restaurants, towards big-box stores and franchises

Insufficient Transportation Infrastructure

o While there is subway and street car service to the BIA, the service levels do not

meet demand as the neighbourhood has a 24/7 pace and public transportation

services are offered at a limited time.

Lacking Diverse Housing

o While there is rapid development in the Entertainment District, many community

members complain that developers largely cater to one-bedroom condos, leading

to hollow neighbourhoods

An Ever-Changing Neighbourhood (History)

The neighbourhood that now makes up the

Entertainment District has seen huge changes

in their nearly 200-year history. In the early

1800s, this neighbourhood was home to

some of the wealthiest Torontonians. David

Pecaut Square and Roy Thomson Hall was

the former location of York House at the

corners of Wellington and Simcoe. Upper

Canada College was originally built here in

1830, with dorms located at Duncan and

Adelaide, before moving to their current

location in 1891. Most of the neighbourhood

was considered upscale, and the population

was limited and mostly living in larger homes

and estates.

11

The neighbourhood began changing again in 1850 following the aftermath of the first great fire,

which destroyed a large part of the current downtown. Beginning in this period and continuing

into the mid-1900s, the Entertainment District became a manufacturing hub in Toronto. Light

manufacturing factories existed across King and Adelaide streets, and this neighbourhood became

focused almost exclusively on industrial production. Many old Victorian homes in the

neighbourhood were converted to boarding houses for workers and labourers, and this is when

the neighbourhood thrived as a residential community supporting the local industry.

With the decline of competitive manufacturing felt across North America in the 1980s and rising

rents in the downtown, many manufacturers left and were followed by their workers. This left a

vacuum in the neighbourhood, with many factories falling into disrepair and the residential

population bottoming out. This allowed the rapid spread of restaurants and nightclubs in the

neighbourhood because of the low residential population and availability of large open buildings,

and in the 1990s there were over 80 large nightclubs in the area between Adelaide and Richmond

streets in the Entertainment District. Since then, little by little these properties have been bought

out and developed into mixed-use residential and commercial buildings, giving the Entertainment

District the characteristic downtown feel it has today.

Some of this legacy of the

neighbourhood still exists today

despite the rapid development

throughout the Entertainment

District. The old Victorian homes

along King Street that make up

restaurant row were originally built

in the 1850s after the great fire for

the wealthy Torontonians that lived

there through the 1800s. The

manufacturing workers of the first

half of the 20th century lived there

as well, and while most of their

former employers have since left the

neighbourhood, two light

manufacturers still persist: a furrier

and an outerwear coat maker. Of

course, many theaters, restaurants,

and clubs still exist throughout the Entertainment District that make it a destination neighbourhood

for many people throughout the city, but new mixed-use developments with strong commercial

and residential mixes is a tribute to the character of a thriving industrial downtown; remnants of

the Entertainment District's ever-changing past and integral role in the city of Toronto still remain.

12

What the BIA does:

The Toronto Entertainment District BIA was founded in 2006 as the Entertainment District was

undergoing another major shift in its makeup and history. With the decline of the entertainment

scene and the rapid development in the downtown core, there was a clear need to have a cohesive

advocacy organization to represent the needs of the rapidly shifting neighbourhood business mix.

With rising prices for rent and property taxes as a by-product of the rapid residential development,

many of the smaller local businesses and restaurants were priced out. The Entertainment District

BIA is particularly strong at developer engagement, and has developed a process map that can be

simplified to be seen their Urban Growth and Development guide. This model for developer

engagement allows better consultations with residents and ensures the new developments keep

pace and style with the neighbourhood. With future expansions of the BIA boundaries expected,

this neighbourhood is still experiencing transition and slowly losing more of the Entertainment

culture along the way.

13

6. Case Study: St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood and BIA

Successes and challenges for the Neighbourhood

Erosion of Main Street Character and Culture

o The BIA has made great efforts to successfully preserve the historical nature of the

St Lawrence Market through events that highlight the unique heritage of the

neighbourhood

Lacking Diverse Housing

o The St. Lawrence community was Toronto’s first mixed use community due to its

integration of market and affordable housing, and still embodies this vibrant

mixture today

Absent Community Services and Facilities

o Residents of the neighbourhood are increasingly families, but schools and

community centers have not kept up pace. Residents may want a 20-minute walk to

work, but not at the cost of an hour drive to their kids’ schools.

Toronto's Oldest Anchor

The St Lawrence Market neighbourhood is

arguably the oldest continuous

neighbourhood in the City of Toronto,

dating back to a declaration in 1803 as the

Market Block and as the first permanent

community market in the town of York.

Since then, the neighbourhood has been

continuously anchored by the landmark St

Lawrence Market, which has been rebuilt

and expanded many times through its

history. Between 1803 and 1820, it was an

open-air market, but the popularity of the

market grew beyond their capacity. With the

construction of a structure in 1820 followed

by a well in 1823, the community gathering

space began taking shape. By 1831, this led

14

to further expansion, demolishing the old wooden building and replacing it with a brick building

that filled the entire city block. This was soon replaced again in 1850 after the Great Fire that

devastated a large part of the city, becoming the largest building in the Town of York, able to

accommodate 1,000 people and acting as a market, art gallery, public meeting space, theater, and

even the city hall in the late 1800s.

Following the great fire, the neighbourhood surrounding the St Lawrence Market developed into

an industrial center for Toronto that stretched between the Don River across to Spadina Crescent.

This neighbourhood was the core of Toronto's industrial manufacturing and hit peak employment

and production in the late 1940s. However, after this peak of industrial manufacturing, the

neighbourhood began to decline in influence as manufacturers moved outside of the downtown

core, leaving many decrepit buildings and parking lots empty surrounding the St Lawrence Market.

The neighbourhood began another shift again in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when new efforts

began to revitalize the St Lawrence neighbourhood as the industrial era had declined. The market

was originally set to be demolished in 1971 due to declining use and questionable structural

integrity, but citizen groups across the city fought for reconstruction and redevelopment of the site

instead. A citywide effort began to revitalize the neighbourhood, with contributions from world-

renowned urban planners such as Jane Jacobs helping to grow the St Lawrence Market

Neighbourhood into the vibrant community it now hosts today.

What the BIA does:

The St Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA first

encompassed a small area surrounding the St

Lawrence Market, as the landmark was the strongest

anchor for the neighbourhood. However, as the

neighbourhood grew and developed, the need for

stronger advocacy for local businesses outgrew the

ability of the BIA to serve the neighbourhood. The

BIA boundaries have since pushed these limits,

expanding twice to achieve its current size. The BIA

promotes four pillars for the neighbourhood: food

and cuisine, history and heritage, design, and arts

and culture. This focus for the neighbourhood

ensures that the core mandate and focused efforts of

the BIA can highlight the unique heritage and culture

of the city's oldest neighbourhood.

15

7. Issues Deep Dive

7.1 The Erosion of Main Street Character

Independent, local, and

grassroots businesses play an

important role in the Canadian

economy and job market, and

remain a defining feature within

the City of Toronto. The so-

called City of Neighbourhoods is

characterized by local

neighbourhood Business

Improvement Areas and Main

Street thoroughfares that

welcome visitors to unique

experiences. However, as

densification in the Toronto

downtown core has increased,

the character of Main Street has

been eroded to a whisper of

former days of the thriving main

street neighbourhoods.

While changes in neighborhoods’ business and retail mixes has been happening for decades

across the city, the effects are most evident in highly developed areas. Developers in downtown

Toronto are approaching traditional two-story main streets as opportunity areas for high-rise

developers. Notably, many main street areas in the City of Toronto have been zoned as Avenues

and areas for development. The highly competitive Toronto real estate market means high prices

for real estate which has a trickle-down effect on developer strategies and the resulting main street

businesses. Due to the high investment on the part of developers, there is a pressure to maximize

value at all stages of development and achieve the greatest returns on their investments.

The result on Main Street is that developers have been prioritizing acquiring anchor retail tenants.

These anchor tenants tend to have two key characteristics. First, they are capable of making

significant investments into the design and renovation of their business spaces, but at the cost of

creating highly tailored and potentially unworkable space. Second, they are able produce high

revenues per square foot compared to both other similarly sized tenants and smaller retailers. This

reduces the diversity of business types that are more likely to be sustained within neighborhoods,

and shifts the balance in favor of major retailers over independents.

16

Small, local, and independent businesses’ demand and production are limited and are not able to

compete with major retailers in the downtown retail environment. What gets lost in this shift is not

just the diversity in retailers, but also the retail character and culture that makes these communities

unique. “The City is great at saving a façade, but the cultural attributes get lost,” was one comment

from a local leader. “Where once there was a unique mix of local nightlife venues, ethnic food

stores, nail salons, convenience stores, and the like, now there are Booster Juices, Shoppers Drug

Marts, and David’s Teas.” Local landmarks and cultural heritage are being lost in the development

wave.

17

7.2 Unsustainable Property Tax and Rising Rent

The foundation for property taxes in Toronto is the land assessment process. The Municipal

Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) is a provincial agency whose role is to evaluate

commercial and residential land in the province. MPAC relies on sales transaction, historical data,

property inspections, and trends in development as key factors to assessing the value of a

property.

A key factor is the concept of “highest and best use,” which is a determination of the physically and

legally permissible use of a property according to planning policies, zoning, and the previously

mentioned factors. The “highest and best use” appraisal has skewed Toronto’s main street

neighbourhoods. In areas of growth such as Toronto, properties are assessed for what a space

could be rather than what the current use of a building. As a result, main street businesses in

Toronto property values have been increasing rapidly. MPAC assessments are the basis for

property tax calculations in municipalities, and as a result commercial property tax rates have been

intensifying. The outcome of the land values assessments and property taxes has been costly to

main street businesses in Toronto.

In 2018, the Ryerson City Building Institute presented an exhibit centered around the property tax

issues in the City, which highlighted a case study on Wellington Street in downtown Toronto. A

local restaurant was adjacent to a development site. Not only did the business have to manage the

nearby construction, their property taxes are projected to increase 239 from 2016 – 2020.

This case study used an example on Wellington that is a two-story restaurant, assessed based on

similar properties in the area slated for development. The Current Value Assessment, a metric used

by MPAC, increased by 243% precisely because of this potential for high-rise condominium or

office towers. This phenomenon is occurring across the Toronto downtown and trickling into

neighbourhoods across the City such as the main street businesses on Eglinton Avenue. The

resulting property taxes put extreme pressure on small businesses in these neighbourhoods to sell

their properties to developers, and the increased land values and property taxes are creating

commercial spaces that are no longer accessible to diverse business models. Only businesses with

the capacity to endure these high operating costs are willing to lease commercial spaces in the

Toronto downtown.

MPAC Property

Assessments

Highest and Best Use

Current Value

Assessments

Property Taxes

Rental Prices

18

7.3 Absent Community Services and Facilities

Toronto's rapid development in the downtown core has been

unprecedented in Ontario and these areas of high-density

development are increasingly seeing a more diverse mix of

residents. Most perceive these condo developments to cater

exclusively to young, working, and often single and childless

professionals, but many condo buildings now see families and

retired or 'empty-nester' couples moving in. Many of these

residents explain that there is a trade-off they have accepted:

smaller space for shorter commutes. The smaller space

however means that residents must shift their space out of

living rooms, dens, basements, and backyards that suburban residents would use for hosting

friends, spending time with family, and getting fresh air. This creates a need for additional

community space that can be facilitated by a range of stakeholders.

The rapid development seen in downtown Toronto has also not kept pace with 'typical' publicly-

funded community services such as schools, daycares, local health clinics, libraries, community

centers, and other social services. A common explanation of this is that these publicly-funded

community services are still accessible for residents in the downtown core, but this misses the

bigger picture and does not reflect daily practices of residents.

Community members expressed frustration that they "can live a fifteen minute walk from work, but

every morning they have to drive forty minutes to get their kids to school. Similar frustrations arose

for daycare availability; some downtown neighbourhoods have nearly no daycare space available,

and waitlists for local daycares can take years.

Community residents face similar issues accessing communal spaces. Libraries and community

centers exist throughout the city, but neighborhoods’ stocks of these spaces have not scaled at the

same rate as their populations. Many libraries and community centers that are accessed by

residents of the downtown core are close to transit lines, but not within walking distance of their

homes. One parent explained how they want spaces "to go on Saturday mornings to let my kids

run around and I can drink coffee with other parents." During summer this could mean a park, but

during winter, residents must find school gyms or community centers; both of these options are

hard to find in the densely-built downtown core. Most large condo buildings now offer a 'party

rooms' as rentable spaces, but these come with additional fees, limited availabilities, and strict rules

for use. Party rooms may be well-suited to host birthday parties for young professionals, but not

parties of eight year-olds.

Several different models for businesses and services exist to address these issues, which can

broadly be categorized based on their funding and ownership. Most accessible community services

are publicly owned and operated, such as schools, libraries, and community centers. Other models

exist in which these services are developed through public-private partnerships, purely private

businesses that can act as community spaces, and even newer models for development such as

19

privately-owned public spaces. The most distinct models are public community services and private

community services. Many public services are insufficient in the high-density neighbourhoods of

downtown Toronto, for example in the Downtown-Yonge or Cityplace neighbourhoods, and

residents, businesses, developers, and government agencies are seeking new ways to develop

these spaces. This is where public-private partnerships and privately owned public spaces can fill

necessary gaps.

Certain 'traditional' public services are

increasingly bridging this divide. Daycares

are a prime example of these public-private

partnerships developing in different ways.

Finding local and affordable daycare is a

frequently cited need of most residents, and

new condo developments are increasingly

incorporating these amenities in their

buildings, either run privately by another

organization or through a transfer of

ownership agreement with the city of Toronto. One key example stands out in Liberty Village,

where a condo development arranged with the City of Toronto to transfer a $5,000,000 daycare

facility on the ground floor of the condo building in exchange for an additional three floors to their

building. This exchange was accepted after public consultations and planning negotiations,

providing value for the city, the developer, and the community residents who now had a much-

needed new daycare in their community.

An alternative model is the privately-owned public spaces (POPS). Examples of these spaces are

typically park or outdoor spaces. These spaces are still privately owned, and typically charge

modest fees, but could for example be open space available in any variety of business. Bookstores,

churches, and restaurants have traditionally served as these venues, but an increasing number of

purpose-built spaces are being offered, allowing alternatives to condo party rooms that are

restricted to use by residents only. Beyond these meeting spaces, many businesses or privately-

owned organizations include some green space within their footprints that can serve as community

park spaces.

Certain community services and facilities will still require public ownership - schools, libraries, and

health clinics must be built in the high-density neighbourhoods of Toronto to keep pace with the

growth in demand, density, and residents. However, other community spaces can be developed

and operated faster and more efficiently through creative ownership structures. Residents do not

necessarily care whether their daycare, organizing space, or parks are owned publicly or privately,

as long as they are still accessible.

"When I'm already travelling down 50 stories in an elevator, I want public services nearby. With

tens of thousands of people living on a single block, there should be more available than what we

have." – Downtown Resident

20

7.4 Insufficient Transportation Infrastructure

Toronto’s traffic and congestion issues have four interconnected problems: public transit at

overcapacity; public transit service shortages; road congestion; and parking shortages. The

transportation systems that the city relies on have co-dependency issues, and with rapid

development through the downtown core, it only exacerbates the problems of the overall system.

While the population in Toronto has

been increasing, public transit services

have not been keeping pace with this

growth. Toronto transit services are well

over capacity at peak periods and

commuting times are longer for Toronto

residents than anywhere else in Canada.

The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC)

estimates between 28,000 – 30,000

commutes traveling through Yonge and

Bloor, an important transit node, during

peak hours. The overcrowding on the

Toronto Line 1 and Line 2 subways has

led the TTC to investigate solutions for

service and capacity improvements.

Across Toronto, many industries and

services, including medical institutions, hotels, clubs, office cleaners, and food facility operators

finish their shifts outside of the TTC service hours (6:00am to 1:30am), leaving these people without

access to sufficient transit options. Many interviewees noted that City services need to better

accommodate people trying to access subway and transit services outside of the subway’s hours of

operation.

Toronto also has a strong culture around cars, primarily pushed because of lack of transit access

from some of the further suburban areas of the city. Public transit can only service so many

residents, and many people prioritize the convenience of their own vehicles, creating higher road

congestion. The expressways into the city absorb most of the commuter traffic, which has partly

prompted a city-wide mobility strategy to be considered in 2019. Overall, the city has fallen behind

in investments to transit infrastructure and managing road congestion.

The final issue facing Toronto’s transportation system is parking. The high volumes of traffic

entering into the downtown core need a place to park. Car parking spaces in the downtown core

are limited, often at capacity, and expensive. While there are some policies in place to have

developers supply parking for the public and residents, business improvement areas in the

downtown core perceive parking supply as a key issue to the vitality of their neighbourhoods and

ability to attract customers to the area.

21

The transportation network in Toronto must be strengthened in order to support high-density

development and the growing needs of the Toronto downtown. The Relief line, Waterfront East

LRT, and incentives for active transportation and transit rather than vehicle use are important

considerations for transit planners in the City of Toronto. Emphasis in transit planning needs to be

placed on the Toronto downtown because of the rapidly increasing population size in this area.

22

7.5 Aging and Underserviced Utilities

With rapid densification and development in the downtown, Toronto must continue to upgrade

and improve existing utilities infrastructure while searching for and developing new public

infrastructure projects to help keep pace with 21st century technology and innovations. While most

residents and businesses think of public utilities as water and power distribution, this can cover

other aspects when examining high-density areas of the city. There is one additional infrastructure

category that was identified as especially important to the development of a well-functioning high-

density downtown core - a modern and centralized waste disposal system. Improving and

maintaining this public infrastructure will be critical to maintaining a thriving downtown.

23

Water and power infrastructure in the downtown core have often been neglected and not

upgraded since their initial construction. The water pipes that feed Yonge Street begin at the

waterfront and branch out from Davenport Road. They were initially installed in 1878 and have

seen only maintenance improvements since - no major development to upgrade the capacity of

these pipes has happened in 140 years. Considering the stretch of Yonge Street from Queen Street

to College Street is experiencing an average of 5% growth every year and has nearly 200,000

residents, major upgrades to capacity are long overdue. While a major capacity issue hasn't arisen

yet, this remains an ongoing concern that should be addressed as soon as possible, since the price

of reconstruction will only increase.

A new area of concern surrounds the existing waste disposal infrastructure in in high-density

neighbourhoods. Currently, garbage trucks drive along each street and laneway, collecting waste

from each building; however, some of the newer developments in the downtown do not have

laneway access for garbage trucks, while congested streets prevent curbside pickup from many

locations.

A newer proposal for infrastructure development in the downtown core is a centralized vacuum

waste disposal system, which would be particularly useful in the high-density areas of the city.

Perhaps the most well-known example of a waste disposal system like this is within the Disney

Parks in Orlando, Florida, but some major urban centers have begun experimenting with these

systems. High-density residential neighbourhoods in London, New York, Copenhagen, Barcelona,

and Stockholm currently have automatic vacuum waste disposal systems that service downtown

areas, so models exist that could be implemented in Toronto's downtown core as well.

24

7.6 Lacking Diverse Housing

Whereas 10 years ago, new condos represented roughly 20% of Toronto’s new housing stock each

year, they now represent roughly 70%. According to the developer community the lower the price

of the unit, the faster they sell, even if those lower prices come at a cost of smaller units, odd floor

plans, or other trade-offs in the design of a unit. This has incentivized developers in many cases to

build and sell as many small units as they can. As a result, the average square footage of a

condominium in Toronto fell from 892 square feet in 2007 to 789 square feet in 2015.

As a consequence of the market

trend towards condominium

development, “People are buying

condos not just as first homes, but

also as permanent homes” and “now

condos are the first choice for new

immigrants and families” according

to one developer we spoke with.

Whereas 5 years ago, roughly 70%

of new condominiums would be 1-

bedrooms and roughly 30% would

have 2 bedrooms or more, 2-3 years later, that ratio dropped to 50/50. “Going forward, the sweet

spot is 1-bedroom + dens or 2-bedrooms” for developers because these are the smallest units that

can reasonably accommodate families. 1-bedroom + den units are becoming increasingly popular,

particularly for people who cannot afford larger condominiums or houses, but still want space to

start families. According to a downtown community resident, in many cases, the dens of 1-

bedroom + den units are converted into second bedrooms through installing walls or curtains in

order to increase their livability for families. As a result of this trend, the average square footage of

a condominium in Toronto rebounded to 814 square feet in 2017.

With the exception of luxury condominiums, in most cases developers are looking to minimize

building parking spaces as much as possible. Underground parking spaces cost on average

$60,000-$80,000 per space to build, and in most cases are unprofitable. As a result, on average

there is now 1 parking space per unit for only 60% of new condo units, and access to parking varies

on what type of unit you have. Studio and 1-bedroom condos are expected to not have parking,

and for 1-bedroom + dens there may be an option for parking, but for units with 2 bedrooms or

more, parking is nearly always an option, with the potential for 2 parking spaces in some cases.

This lack of parking has not substantially decreased the attractiveness of new condominiums. The

RCMI condos at 426 University Ave. sold out in 2 days with 0 parking, and anywhere on a subway

line, condominium buildings can sell at little to no discount if they have no parking at all.

Not only are the layouts and sizes of units changing, the presence and optics have amenities have

as well. In buildings with around 100 units, exercise rooms, party rooms, security services, and

passive areas such as libraries or video game rooms are the norm. Buildings with around 200 units

or more tend to have expanded amenities, for example exercise rooms more akin to health clubs

25

with saunas and/or spin rooms, larger and multiple common living areas such as outdoor rooftop

terraces and green roofs, and 24h security, along with expanded offerings such as guest suites,

internet lounges, dog washes and pet spas. What has changed has been that over time as overall

square footage and shared living space within condo units has declined the shared building

amenities have increased in visibility. These amenities have moved from the basements to main

level spaces and have increased substantially in quality.

Overall, this residential densification is leading to three key needs for residents: shared community

spaces and services, main street experiences, and affordable and accessible transit. With little room

for shared living spaces within their condominiums, residents rely on the amenities within their

buildings or spaces outside to socialize and live. In communities that are not designed to facility

community-building through shared spaces, the result becomes siloes of buildings. Without access

to parking, community residents need to be able to get to retail locations without using a car,

which means they either have to have access to affordable public transit or key services need to be

within walking distance. Main street experiences provide the opportunity to escape isolated tower

experiences and connect with the City.

26

8. Best Practices

8.1 Urban Design Guidelines and Master Plans

Streetscape master plans and design guidelines for BIA’s neighbourhoods has been the most

successful way for BIA’s to have create interesting and diverse retail mixes, attractive and inviting

streetscapes, and identifying and prioritizing community needs. These master plans set the rules

for quality and standards of future developments and renovations within the BIA. This allows BIAs

to address streetscape plans, including local connectivity, sidewalk quality and width, lighting and

landscaping, and the provision of park spaces through streetscape master plans and

neighbourhood urban design guidelines.

For example, the St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA published its Public Realm Master Plan

in 2015, which provides a vision for the neighbourhood’s roadway and streetscape improvements

and a sustainable public space network. Using ten guiding principles based on community surveys,

neighbourhood observations and BIA input, they created strategies for specific public space

considerations, developed demonstration plans for particular streets, and put in place an

implementation strategy to ensure that the plan’s priorities were implemented. As a result, projects

such as the Berczy Park revitalization were accomplished in a way that created a streetscape feel in

line with the rest of the neighbourhood in collaboration with developers. For more information on

the St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA Public Realm Master Plan However, there is still much

work to be done in developing these master across neighbourhoods and the implementation

phases.

27

8.2 Monitoring Development Activity and Building Relationships with City

Planning

The Toronto Entertainment District BIA has developed a comprehensive guide for their staff to

track development in the neighbourhood, and this strategy is being adopted by other BIAs across

the city as a standard practice. The staff at the Entertainment District BIA dedicate resources to

monitoring City Council agendas and meetings and tracking development. This includes cases that

are at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). Previously known as the Ontario Municipal Board,

the LPAT reviews appeals to development applications that have not passed through Toronto

Council. Through this process, the BIA regularly compiles a document on urban growth and

development within its boundaries, which it can use to inform its decision-making. It details the

current and projected population and planned real estate development for the neighbourhood.

The latest Toronto Entertainment District BIA Urban Growth and Development document from

November 2018 can be found here.

Using this information, BIA’s can be proactive about bringing their concerns to developers and city

staff including the size of retail spaces, type of retail, and in complement to this ensuring a mixture

of market-rate and affordable housing.

8.3 Capturing Local Cultural Narratives

Some developers have made an effort to create retail spaces that are affordable to small and

independent operators by creating ground floor retail with smaller footprints that are more

affordable to mom-and-pop businesses, and by relocating businesses within their current

neighbourhood when development occurs. In Mirvish Village, a local developer, Westbank,

relocated “A Different Booklist” because of its cultural important to the area rather than simply

displacing the store. Once the Mirvish Village development is completed, “A Different Booklist” will

be able to open their store again in the new development, thereby preserving the ‘feel’ of the

neighbourhood will still allowing development.

BIA’s can leverage their local history and culture by documenting stories of businesses, local

heritage, and culture. The St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA, for example, has prioritized

the story of their neighbourhood in their interactions with developers to promote the

incorporation of the neighbourhood history into the design, layout, and retail mixes of new and

existing developments. They have also used the neighbourhood’s history as a unifying theme in

their community festival planning such as the Feast of St. Lawrence and Bards in Berczy during the

summer months, as they shift away from generic festivals that do not highlight the unique history

of the neighbourhood.

28

8.4 Shared Spaces

Given the increasing cost of rent, some local businesses have now begun to experiment with

shared commercial space as a way to access larger floor plans, and either gain access to or stay in

communities. For example, restaurants at the Assembly Chef’s Hall at Richmond and York Streets,

and the Annex Food Hall at Bloor St. and Dalton Road, share their upscale common spaces and

seating areas. This trend goes beyond food halls to incorporate many other business types through

coworking spaces, such as the WeWork in the Entertainment District, the Centre for Social

Innovation in the Annex, the Shecosystem in Koreatown, the East Room in Riverside, and

Workplace One in Queen West, which transformed an older industrial building into a vibrant

shared working space. Beyond formal commercial space sharing arrangements, some businesses

have opened their space to additional uses that enrich the community such as bookstores that

opens their space to social and political gatherings after hours.

BIA’s can promote the creation of shared commercial spaces to developers as a way to foster a

more diverse retail mix and a greater concentration of independent businesses in their

communities.

8.5 Creative Public Spaces

In light of the shortage of public park spaces, creative solutions such as Privately Owned Public

Spaces (POPS) and laneway experiences such as public art and seating can create spaces where

residents and visitors to an area can relax, enjoy, and socialize. There are many of these POPS

around Toronto, including the parkettes at 77 Adelaide Street West and 123 Front Street West, the

corner plaza at 2 Queen Street East, and the pedestrian walkway connecting Elizabeth Street and

Bay Street at 532 Bay Street. Some of the more well-known spaces such as the TD Centre Pasture

and Commerce Court predate Toronto’s use of POPS agreements, but follow similar veins and are

frequently used by the public to enliven the community. BIA’s can promote the use of POPS by

engaging with developers through the development process. Explore this map of POPS in Toronto.

29

8.6 Community Agency Partnerships Through Public Private Partnerships

All of the best practices are nuanced and complex matters that require creativity, collaboration, and

unique partnerships to address. The public and private sector can no longer work when necessary

or required but rather must constantly communicate with each other and work collaboratively in

order to achieve real outcomes that will improve any of these issues for the City of Toronto. The

East Harbour development proposal from First Gulf Development Corp is a good example of a

strong community agency partnership. This development will see a massive office node built on 62

acres of formerly industrial land on the eastern edge of downtown Toronto. The East Harbour

consultation process from First Gulf was an extensive, multi-year process with the City, community

stakeholders, and residents that exceeded expectations; this has allowed the surrounding vibrant

communities of the West Donlands, Distillery District, and Portlands, among others, to contribute

and be a part of this extensive new development.

30

9. Next Steps

The best practices outlined are intended to be a general overview for further research and

advocacy for interested organizations including TABIA and the BIA community across the City.

Further study into the state of Main Street in the City of Toronto that comprehensively addresses

the changes in business mixtures in the past, present, and future across neighbourhoods; and

surveys of residents living in high growth areas to measure their perspective with respect to these

issues are recommended. These areas were outside the scope of this study but would add further

value and validation to the results provided here.

Our recommendation, in light of the results, for TABIA and the BIA’s is continued and emphasized

advocacy at the municipal level for the City of Toronto to put additional efforts and resources into

addressing each these issues. The best practices are a means of interim interventions for BIA’s

experiencing high-density development to preserve and manage the incoming residential density

and retail changes. However, the issues will only increase in scale and cost over time at the

detriment of quality of life for Toronto residents and businesses while they remain unaddressed.

31

10. Addendums

Addendum A: The Development Journey in Toronto and where to get involved in relations to the

best practice

Addendum B: Issues Tree

32

11. Reference List

Bascarmurty, D (2015, June 5). Toronto’s Shrinking Condos: Built for Families, Perfect for

Roommates or Couples Without Kids. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/condos-for-families-without-the-

space/article22602785/

Coates, K. (2000). Cyber-Canada: electronic commerce and Canadian life. Gazette (Leiden,

Netherlands), 62(3-4), 301-317.

City of Toronto (2014). Downtown Toronto: Trends, Issues, Intensification. Retrieved from

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-69192.pdf

City of Toronto. (2018). How Does the City Grow? Retrieved from https://www.toronto.ca/wp-

content/uploads/2018/07/9108-City-Planning-How-Does-The-City-Grow-July-2018.pdf

City of Toronto (2017). Living in the City Survey. Retrieved from

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-110520.pdf

City of Toronto (2019b). TO Core: Planning Downtown. Retrieved from https://www.toronto.ca/city-

government/planning-development/planning-studies-initiatives/tocore-planning-torontos-

downtown/

Cohen, M. (2019, January 7). Personal interview.

De Lange, B. (2019, February 12). Personal interview.

Digital Main Street (2018). Retail isn’t dead, it’s just changing: Shopify’s Shimona Mehta on the

future of e-commerce. Retrieved from https://digitalmainstreet.ca/retail-isnt-dead-its-just-

changing-shopifys-shimona-mehta-on-the-future-of-e-commerce/

Garner, M. (2019, February 13). Personal interview.

Garner, M. (2019, April 4). Personal interview.

Gomez, R., Isakov, A., & Semansky, M. (Eds.). (2015). Small Business and the City: The

Transformative Potential of Small Scale Entrepreneurship. University of Toronto Press.

Hauch, V. (2015, December 17). Once Upon A City: St. Lawrence Market at centre of Toronto's

history since 1831. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/12/17/once-upon-

a-city-st-lawrence-market-at-centre-of-torontos-history-since-1831.html

Kocur, T. (2019, February 10). Email interview.

33

Layton, M. (2019, February 21). Personal interview.

Marr, G (2017, June 26). Why the Incredible Shrinking Condo is about to become Even More

Popular. The Financial Post. Retrieved from https://business.financialpost.com/business/the-

incredible-shrinking-condo-and-why-its-about-to-become-even-more-popular

McMillan, S. (2019, March 8). Phone interview.

Mirabelli, J (2018, February 27). Growth to Watch for 2018: Beaches, Leslieville, & The Danforth.

Retrieved from http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2018/02/growth-watch-2018-beaches-leslieville-

danforth

Palmer, M (2018, January 18). Managing Crowding on Line 1 Yonge-University. Report for Action.

Toronto Transit Commission.

http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetin

gs/2018/January_18/Reports/6_Managing_Crowding_on_Line_1_Yonge.pdf

Pieters, G. (2019, January 16). Personal interview.

Rankin, S. K. N., Kamizaki, K., & McLean, H. (2015). Toronto’s Changing Neighborhoods:

Gentrification of Shopping Two shopping streets in low-income, ethnically super-diverse

neighborhoods of Toronto. Art galleries, boutiques, and cafés on one street, social control by

the state on the other. In Global Cities, Local Streets (pp. 152-181). Routledge.

Robertson, J. R. (n.d.). 83: York House. Retrieved from

https://landmarksoftoronto.com/chapters/83-york-house/

Robertson, J. R. (n.d.). 78: Mackenzie as an Exile. Retrieved from

https://landmarksoftoronto.com/chapters/78-mackenzie-as-an-exile

Smith, A. (2019, January 22). Personal interview.

Solomon, J. (2018, December 20). Personal interview.