[Admiral Beez]

I originally posted this on that Dutch Worfren thread, but I think it needs its own topic.

If we don't like the sprawl and car culture, then you need to promote employers to stay in the city, and you need sufficient housing to give the employees somewhere to live, but we have some of the highest corporate property taxes in the GTA (my employer in Markham intentionally moved their office and plant from Markham and Sheppard to save significanty on property taxes). Furthermore, the city seems intent on building condos on top of all its commercial land, promoting the de-industrialization of Toronto instead of providing incentives for those lands to be used for employment growth. The factories that used to reside on those lands are still in the GTA, they haven't all moved production to China, but instead they're in Markham, Mississauga, Vaughan, etc.

Meanwhile the city seems intent on erasing their competitive advantage in residential property taxes, and in turn erasing the incentive to keep your employees in the city, by increasing taxes, and enacting more fees such as vehicle taxes and property transfer taxes. Also, the city does nothing to promote the building of market value rental housing stock for families (as opposed to one bedroom condos), thus pushing the city's potential employee pool further away.

If you want an urban city, you need to keep your workers and their employers in the city, and you do that by providing financial incentives. Vaughan, Markham, Mississauga, etc are all working hard to attract Toronto's employers away. In turn these outlining cities will take the employees away too. What is Toronto's plan to stop them?

 

[kettal]

There's nothing explicitly wrong with industrial and factory style businesses being in the outskirts of a city. These kinds of businesses depend more on truck and highway access than transit access, and they have low employment density, so they are not an efficient destination for higher order transit.

I'm sure you agree that living downtown and working in the suburbs is a pretty sweet deal, there's not much traffic. You're using car lanes which would otherwise be empty. You're not really contributing to gridlock by making this commute, are you?

Toronto needs to re-adjust it's tax levels for sure, but why try to compete with these suburbs when they have a natural advantage in industrial? Downtown has a natural advantage for finance/creative/salaryman businesses.

 

[Glen]

Admiral Beez,

I am glad that you are bringing up this issue instead of me this time. Your experience demonstrates the number one problem facing Toronto.

kettal,

You are missing the point completely. First off, the re-locations have been to areas outside the city. This has major financial repercussions for Toronto. It amounts to a conversion of taxable assessment from a type that produces a surplus of revenue to one that consumes more than it generates (residential). The Urban Development of Vancouver, which has a similar tax ratio imbalance as Toronto, looked at the implications of such conversions........

Property Tax Imbalance
• Impact of converting 1-storey commercial
building to Residential Tower
• Business
Deemed Services Consumed: $71,695
Taxes Paid: $152,350
Excess Taxation: $80,655
• Residential
Municipal Services Consumed: $234,670
Taxes Paid: $129,750
Shortfall: $104,920

Property
Upon Redevelopment:
Assessed value increases 500%
Consumption of services increases by 227%
Actual tax revenue falls 15%

* based on a 33 unit tower
http://www.udi.bc.ca/Publications/UDI/UDI_Pres_WestSideGVREB_March012007.pdf

You should also let go of your outdated notion that the 905 regions is nothing more than factories and warehouses.

The balance of office space between Toronto and the rest of the region has clearly
shifted since the 1960s. One study found that in 2004, 1.8 million square feet of office
space was under construction in the suburban parts of the Toronto CMA, compared to
less than 500,000 in downtown Toronto. Another study noted that between 1986 and
2003, the number of head offices of companies in the Financial Post 500 in Toronto fell
from 171 to 136, while the number in the rest of the Greater Toronto Area rose from 32 to
62

http://www.canurb.com/media/pdf/TO-OfficeCoalition-report.pdf

Lastly your contention most traffic flows are into the city in the AM are not supported by the stats. By 2002, IIRC Vaughan was a net importer of labour from Toronto. Mississauga reports..."Mississauga is beginning to break away from its label as a "bedroom community" to Toronto as 25,000 more workers commute to jobs in Mississauga than leave". Have a look at the A.M. traffic flow map here, and compare inbound and outbound flows.

 

[taal]

What plan does Vancouver have help combat the problem?

Any lessons Toronto can learn from?

 

[GraphicMatt]

I do the reverse commute thing and while you still face less traffic going out of the city than coming into the city at rush, it's by no means a traffic picnic. Outflow continues to get busier.

Is this really a phenomenon limited to Toronto, though? And what could we realistically do to address it? We've built infrastructure to facilitate people commuting long distances and allowed them to access it for (essentially) free. In addition, suburban areas generally have lower expenses due to newer infrastructure and limited responsibility ("Need social services and live in Whitby? Move to Toronto!") leading to low low tax rates for businesses.

Toronto's move toward balancing their commercial tax rates is a good thing and, yes, I know the argument is that they should do it faster, but until the labour market is such that people refuse to commute from their nice condo downtown to an office park on a highway service road, how much is going to change?

 

[lead82]

This is all a natural process caused by the lack of infrastructure spending in the city. If we want more office development, we need more transportation infrastructure into the city. The highway infrastructure remains the same in the city, while the 905 got the 407. Toronto hasn't built a new subway line into downtown since the 1960's. GO transit expansion is very slow and produces a minimal added capacity until GO actually becomes a true regional rail operator with frequent bi-directional service. Until then, the economy activity is being balanced out by making full use of the existing infrastructure. Currently the outflow of people living in the city and working in 905 is less then the traditional living in 905 and working in the city...for now. This is growing until both directions become just as jammed.

The main problem is that the reverse commute cannot be easily serviced by transit, vs the downtown commute. If we want Toronto to attract more jobs downtown, then we need new subway line built, and new regional rail service (not only along Lakeshore but along all the lines). Union can only handle so much traffic. Toronto needs to build another train station (Summerhill or Dupont) would be a good area to attract more development in mid-town area and relieve Union station's pressure.

 

[Glen]

What plan does Vancouver have help combat the problem?

Any lessons Toronto can learn from?

They have adopted the same do as little as possible approach as Toronto.

 

[GraphicMatt]

They have adopted the same do as little as possible approach as Toronto.

Are any large North American cities doing it right?

 

[Glen]

lead82,

Toronto is more than downtown and this is a result of much more than a natural process. Large portions of Toronto's industrial areas are now nothing more than used car dealers. Take a drive up the DVP and look at what happens once you go north of Steeles. NYCC was shaping up to be a satellite downtown. After the move to CVA, most office construction stopped, as it was and remains much more profitable to develop condominiums. And unlike traditional development patterns that are driven by cheaper land costs as you move away from the core city, the opposite is true in the GTA. The high tax rates have collapsed the value of ICI properties.

 

[Glen]

Are any large North American cities doing it right?

Comparisons with many US cities are difficult because they have other sources of revenue, like income and sales taxes. So while they might have large disparities in rates between residential and non residential, in absolute amounts the differences are smaller.

 

[T.O.Fanatic]

Of course its natural for employment to spread from the traditional downtown or CBD, but I think the issue is the general hollowing out of employment in Toronto. All the TTC improvements in the world wont get you to work if your company moves to Markham. Are lower taxes the answer? Or will less gridlock entice companies back? My personal favourite would be for the province to strengthen the greenbelt legislation, curbing sprawl and basically setting a limit on suburbia. This would mean that densification would occur.

 

[taal]

Improving transit will not help Toronto in the slightest ...

It'll help the region as a whole and that will likely help everyone.

I work in Markham in a very large company and the majority of employees don't live within Markham ... and while it is at times slightly easier to get to Markham by car verse say downtown this will change if the shift in employment occurs.

Shift might be the best word either ... Toronto has been growing employment in the last *little* while ... but most of the growth occurs in the 905 ... this is particularly true if you look at the outer 416.

When looking at these comparisons net rent (excluding property tax) is irrelevant as it is largely market driven ... actually, you'd probably expects rent to be higher in parts of the 416 but it's likely the higher property tax that stops this from occuring.

I think the education tax / property tax are really all the city can do (also development charges).
There are other incentives but there mainly one time / one sector ... so they don't help across the board.

Anyway at the end of the day (excluding the province) it comes down to the property tax differential ...
I think hope rests in whomever out next Mayor in.

But so many of the candidates probably know nothing / care nothing about the issue and are instead focused on eliminating user fees / lowering property taxes / political things.......

 

[GraphicMatt]

The landscape will change over time, as well - the 905 municipalities have drawn businesses through incentives financed on the back of development fees and low infrastructure costs. As these suburbs grow they start to have to deal with Big City problems all their own, and things get more difficult.

Mississauga is going to be the first to tackle these challenges in the coming decade, and I think their ability to do so will give us an indication of what employment will look like across the GTA in the long-term.

 

[junctionist]

Are any large North American cities doing it right?

That's what I'm wondering as well. It seems like the stereotypical American city approach works according to Glen's points. The central city has low businesses taxes and high employment growth, with correspondingly high residential taxes. That and the fact that urban investment will favour the growing employment areas will then encourage people to move further out into new suburbs.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Of course its natural for employment to spread from the traditional downtown or CBD, but I think the issue is the general hollowing out of employment in Toronto. All the TTC improvements in the world wont get you to work if your company moves to Markham. Are lower taxes the answer? Or will less gridlock entice companies back? My personal favourite would be for the province to strengthen the greenbelt legislation, curbing sprawl and basically setting a limit on suburbia. This would mean that densification would occur.

First step, stop re-zoning Toronto's industrial and commercial land to residential - those are employment lands, we can't all work on Bay Street, and need factory/industrial jobs. Second, set corporate property taxes to match or lower than in GTA cities bordering Toronto. Third, do not allow employment lands to remain abandoned or vacant, instead city should promote and push to keep these industrial lands running. Toronto has rail spur-lines all over the city, many of which roll by abandoned sites - the infrastructure is still there, let's use it.

It saddens me when I drive up Warden or Laird and along the waterfront and Eastern Ave and see all the industrial and commercial space being torn apart and replaced by condos and townhouses. There were jobs there, and now there's nothing but a house with an employee who must drive for ages to get to work.