[boden]

Is Toronto at risk of becoming a suburb?

By Jason Buckland, Sympatico / MSN Finance, April 9, 2009

"We’ve all heard of the GTA, but how does GMA sound? What about GBA? GRHA? Maybe?

Those acronyms may not ring a bell now, but a new report detailing economic and societal growth shows Toronto is at risk of becoming an afterthought in Canada’s largest metropolis region – perhaps giving way to a Greater Mississauga Area, Greater Brampton Area or even, hey, a Greater Richmond Hill Area instead.

The Toronto Star suggests the overtaking may be well on its way, attributed in no small part by stagnant industry, a slowing economy and even slower population growth in Canada’s once-mighty economic engine.

According to the report, 1 in 4 people in Toronto are now classified as “low-income,” compared to just 1 in 8 in the city’s suburbs – or, the 905.

Toronto is home also to a lowly 1.1% average employment growth figure between 2002 and 2007 (the 905 hit a 2.8% mark), and grew in population by a mere 0.3% in that same time period. By contrast, the city’s suburbs grew by 3.5%, on average, during the same five-year sample.

Alarming figures, yeah, yet the argument seeking to put a nail in Toronto’s coffin is boosted by some other compelling points, too.

For one, long-term employment opportunities don’t seem promising in the city’s downtown core. Major companies like IBM and Honda are opening their doors in the 905 while businesses with long-standing roots in the city are looking to trim real estate expenses and head to the 905, where property taxes and operating costs are a fraction of what they have become in Toronto.

And, perhaps most importantly, it’s really not that hard to sell anti-Toronto sentiment. It’s easily the most polarizing city in the country, loved by many but hated by more. The traffic sucks and, despite what the numbers really say, the whole town may as well be inner-city Miami by how the majority of Canadians feel about its crime. It’s understandable to see why people aren’t clawing over each other move in.

The Star hinges its story on the “doughnut effect” that has hit the GTA in the last decade or so. It was once common for the masses to flock into the city each morning only to flee at night; a turnstile happenstance where the people working in Toronto didn’t actually live there. Now, though, that trend is in jeopardy of flipping altogether. New opportunities allow many of the 905’s residents to stay near home for work and it’s the downtown core who make the commute outside the city for employment.

But, while all damning points, will they really be enough to cause a shift so seismic that Toronto will no longer be the local powerhouse the GTA was named after in the first place?

Hasn’t the city’s core been expanding and outsourcing employment and residential opportunities since the 1800s, the very definition of healthy growth? Won’t this just simply mean stronger individual suburbs but, overall, a more prosperous and thriving GTA?

Toronto may have its short-comings, but it probably ain’t dead just yet. "

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought of miketoronto when I read this article, which in a number of key areas I disagree with. The picture painted very strongly in this article in no way reflects the Toronto that I see with my own eyes.
What do you think? Do you see Toronto like this?

[sammo]

No doubt toronto burbs are growing -wide and tall, but with all of the condo and office building projects still going up IN the city (-espesially downtown), vibrant, safe areas, busy theatres, restaurants, stores, sports events... -and the subsequent busy traffic!...
-I'm scratching my head over Jason Bucklands 'piece of journalism'.
Does Jason know or see something the developers and investors don't?

-but at least he hasn't declared toronto dead yet.

[caltrane74]

This is a wait and see article, there are things happening in the economy right now that are basically going to level huge portions of the 905. Then you will see a shift back to the 416-Core.

GM gone - Oshawa gone?
Ford gone - Oakville gone?
Chysler gone - Brampton gone?
Steel & Suppliers gone - Hamilton and York gone?


The loss of manufacturing industry in Ontario will force those in the 905 to come back to the higher skill set jobs and jobs those with the high skill set can provide for those that have limited skills back in Toronto to push paper and implement the creative power of the collective.

[sammo]

GM gone - Oshawa gone?
Ford gone - Oakville gone?
Chysler gone - Brampton gone?
Steel & Suppliers gone - Hamilton and York gone?


This is scary!

[flar]

The old Hamilton is already gone, the loss of jobs in the city itself over the past 30 years is staggering. If Stelco closes permanently, just over 1000 will be out of work. That pales in comparison to the 26,000 that worked for Stelcoin 1980 or the many thousands that worked at places like Westinghouse or International Harvestor. The greatest damage is already done, Hamilton is no longer a blue collar city. Now Hamiltonians look to the QEW employment corridor through Burlington, Oakville and Mississauga for work. In 1980, 75% of Hamiltonians worked in blue collar occupations. That number is now only 25% and there is a net outflow of commuters.

On the flip side, health, education and research are now the largest employers in Hamilton and growing rapidly. Hamilton is well ahead of Ontario's other industrial cities (eg Windsor, Oshawa) in the transition to a post industrial economy.

Places like Mississauga are employment powerhouses, and for the region as a whole, employment is increasingly decentralized. But the real story is that the Golden Horsechoe is functioning as one large interrelated region. Toronto and Hamilton continue to have very strong identities within and function as cultural centres and focal points for the region. There is no danger of Richmond Hill or Mississauga upstaging Toronto, or of Burlington replacing Hamilton. There is too much too much of a cultural and historical legacy in Hamilton and Toronto that is lacking in newer cities.

[MonkeyRonin]

Sigh, copy & paste of my post from the other thread, which is basically a copy & paste from the thread at SSC:

Note this:

Employment growth in Toronto, 2002-2007: 1.1%
Population growth in Toronto, 2002-2007: 0.3%

Employment growth in suburbs, 2002-2007: 2.8%
Population growth in suburbs, 2002-2007: 3.5%

So, employment growth in Toronto is even higher than its population growth, while the opposite is true of the suburbs. Much of that suburban employment growth is simply due to the increasing need of services for the increasing population. Toronto is in a more preferable position than the 905 for economic growth, even if it isn't as high.

[1ajs]

it will allways be the gta the burbs feed of toronto and toronto feeds off them its one big happy family if anything the mas of highrises will just get larger and will make for a even sweeter urban forest of towers

[LeftCoaster]

Also important is the type of employment. Toronto is still the home to the majority of corporate HQs and white collar jobs, especially the higher status professions such as finance and law. Branch offices such as Honda and IBM may move to the burbs, but many firms still need the status of a downtown office for their headquarters.

We've been having this discussion in the Vancouver local as a few of the fourmers there seem to think surrey will be the centre of Vancouver in the future.

[miketoronto]

You guys think that I am over the top I know. And that is because you only go by my posts and have not talked to me in person.

However you can not sit down and say there is nothing wrong and that Toronto is doing just great.

There are economic issues that the city of Toronto has to address or it will lose out to the outter suburbs.

For example. Toronto's downtown has just now in 2008 passed the 1989 employment levels. The fact that it took so long to recover employment levels is an indication, when the 905 added hundreds of thousands of jobs at this time.
While office buildings in the 905 are full, and office buildings in suburban Toronto(416) are sitting half empty or empty all together is another issue.

It may not be full doomsday, but we have to address these issues. This is not just about where jobs are located. This has other issues attached such as tax base for the city, transit or the car for commuting, sustainable development, etc.

Toronto was a model metropolitan area at one time, thanks to the Metro Gov. What did Metro do? It had a balance of jobs in the downtown core, and also select suburban centres. But overall the central city was still the centre of the region. That is what led to high transit use, less sprawl, and a tax base that could afford to build things(downtown Toronto taxes paid for alot of the needs of the inner suburbs, because of the large tax base in one small area).


So we can sit and say everything is o.k., but it is not. And if you drive around Toronto you will see areas that are indeed in poverty that were not so a couple years ago. There is a major income gap between the city and the suburbs now, etc.
We never had this before in the old Metro area.
I do not want a divided city like we have now, rich such a gap of rich and poor, and where economic growth is only on the fringe. I want a metro region like we had when I was growing up. That was a region that was more balanced, and where more people lived the middle class lifestyle and everything was tidy and well run.

[samne]

just posted this on the city discussions board.

I work in the burbs and live in the city. There's quite a few people in my office that do the same. Im also starting to see this trend among my circle of friends.

I cant blame these companies for starting or moving outside the city. Its just a lower cost of doing business. An inner city location is just an unnecessary cost when you can pool the same talent and operate just the same

[MolsonExport]

A MikeToronto thread already exists (naturalich!) on this topic in city discussions.

[Cambridgite]

However you can not sit down and say there is nothing wrong and that Toronto is doing just great.

There are economic issues that the city of Toronto has to address or it will lose out to the outter suburbs.

Toronto still has positive absolute growth in both population and employment. That is better than most central cities on this continent.

I would worry about the crime and ghettoization in the city more than anything. That is the kind of thing that will deter investment, just like it did in so many American cities. It can't all be chalked up to freeways as the cause of decline.

So we can sit and say everything is o.k., but it is not. And if you drive around Toronto you will see areas that are indeed in poverty that were not so a couple years ago. There is a major income gap between the city and the suburbs now, etc.
We never had this before in the old Metro area.

Back then, wasn't the divide between the inner city and suburbs? What I see happening is a movement from donut to bulls eye.

I do not want a divided city like we have now, rich such a gap of rich and poor, and where economic growth is only on the fringe. I want a metro region like we had when I was growing up. That was a region that was more balanced, and where more people lived the middle class lifestyle and everything was tidy and well run.

1) Economic growth isn't just happening on the fringe. The is absolute job growth in the City of Toronto.

2) Rich and poor gap: This is happening everywhere. Nothing about it is exclusive to Toronto. The middle-class is disappearing all over the Western world.

[CANAUS]

We never had this before in the old Metro area.
I do not want a divided city like we have now, rich such a gap of rich and poor, and where economic growth is only on the fringe. I want a metro region like we had when I was growing up. That was a region that was more balanced, and where more people lived the middle class lifestyle and everything was tidy and well run.

Yes, because the old metro was sooo perfect!!!! Nothing went wrong, everyone was one big happy family, crime was nonexistent, ya da, ya da.

Get a grip, Mike, Toronto in my opinion, is a much better city today, it is a more engaging and creative city. Has the transition to a more diverse economy been smooth? Of course, not; but like always there are winners and losers. Do not delude yourself into thiking it was any different back then.

Also, do not forget as someone else pointed, when relative population growth is taken into account, job growth has been faster in the CITY OF TORONTO! At the moment there is also more commercial growth in downtown alone than the whole of the 905.

[jmt18325]

Ford gone - Oakville gone?




Ford isn't going anywhere.

[ue]

This is a little crazy. Did the suburbs of Detroit take over? No...this is absurd. Sure the suburbs are growing ... fast, you could say the same about LA or Miami. Of course there are more poor people in the city, it's easier to get around there, and the city actually has diversity. Suburbs have new homes and what not which attract the rich. That has no real reason to say Richmond Hill, Mississauga, Vaughan, or Newmarket will take over Toronto as the main city in the GTA.

[Urban_Genius]

^ Exactly

Even if Surrey surpasses Vancouver in population, Vancouver will still be the anchor to that metro area and people will still refer to it as Greater Vancouver, not Greater Surrey.

Same goes with Toronto. Toronto will never be a suburb of Mississauga or Brampton.

[ue]

^To add Toronto and Vancouver have the history (although New Westminster does too) and what not for that region whereas Mississauga and Brampton are modern cities, with very little history compared to Toronto. Toronto has much more of a story, so I think that is another reason that helps keep it and other cities the top city. Plus that main city whether Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Halifax, or Kingston, has always been the main city and probably will remain.

[MolsonExport]

where the heck is tornto?

[vid]

It's northeast of Misissoga, in Southern Onteario.

[MolsonExport]

not near Tunder Ba?

[vid]

No, it isn't near Tunder Ba. It is between Widsor and Montrela.

[Calgarian]

TO is just going through what most major US metropolitan areas have gone through. It will always be the GTA, unless all the banks moved to Calgary or something (unlikely), and Mississauga became the employment hub..

[SpongeG]

Vancouver has one of the largest reverse commutes apparently - people who live in the city and commute to the burbs for work

[NetMapel]

Vancouver has one of the largest reverse commutes apparently - people who live in the city and commute to the burbs for work

Because the city of Vancouver don't know how to build office towers :yuck:

[ue]

^But most other cities don't know how to build residential and end up with a dead downtown.

[SpongeG]

it's been said that is the future of cities - multiple town centres is the future
not one central downtown but many smaller ones

[NetMapel]

^ That would make a lot of sense for local businesses, but I dunno if high-end retailers would like that. They generally prefer downtown spots because it is THE busiest part of a region. I think there are lots of advantages and disadvantages with muti-centres or one single mega centre.

Also, I would say there are enough residential buildings in downtown for now for it to be vibrant. Now we should enter a phase where we need to attract more businesses downtown until we need more residents again to go back to a residential-boom phase in downtown.

[SpongeG]

well most high end retailers are in the burbs in large cities

bellevue - its getting hermes, louis vuitton, jimmy choo etc

new york has manhasset - which is home to loads of high end labels and its in the burbs

anyway cities are evolving and becoming less what they used to be or how we thought of them

its an interesting time

[dennis1]

The old Hamilton is already gone, the loss of jobs in the city itself over the past 30 years is staggering. If Stelco closes permanently, just over 1000 will be out of work. That pales in comparison to the 26,000 that worked for Stelcoin 1980 or the many thousands that worked at places like Westinghouse or International Harvestor. The greatest damage is already done, Hamilton is no longer a blue collar city. Now Hamiltonians look to the QEW employment corridor through Burlington, Oakville and Mississauga for work. In 1980, 75% of Hamiltonians worked in blue collar occupations. That number is now only 25% and there is a net outflow of commuters.

On the flip side, health, education and research are now the largest employers in Hamilton and growing rapidly. Hamilton is well ahead of Ontario's other industrial cities (eg Windsor, Oshawa) in the transition to a post industrial economy.

Places like Mississauga are employment powerhouses, and for the region as a whole, employment is increasingly decentralized. But the real story is that the Golden Horsechoe is functioning as one large interrelated region. Toronto and Hamilton continue to have very strong identities within and function as cultural centres and focal points for the region. There is no danger of Richmond Hill or Mississauga upstaging Toronto, or of Burlington replacing Hamilton. There is too much too much of a cultural and historical legacy in Hamilton and Toronto that is lacking in newer cities.

Amen.:yes:

[jimj_wpg]

Is Toronto at risk of becoming a suburb?

By Jason Buckland, Sympatico / MSN Finance, April 9, 2009

"We’ve all heard of the GTA, but how does GMA sound? What about GBA? GRHA? Maybe?

Those acronyms may not ring a bell now, but a new report detailing economic and societal growth shows Toronto is at risk of becoming an afterthought in Canada’s largest metropolis region – perhaps giving way to a Greater Mississauga Area, Greater Brampton Area or even, hey, a Greater Richmond Hill Area instead.

What are these, New World Order talking points?

[vid]

"Toronto is at risk of becoming an afterthought in Canada’s largest metropolis region"

Yes, overnight the 33,500,000 people of Canada will refer to our largest city as "Mississauga". :rolleyes:

[Cambridgite]

What are these, New World Order talking points?

What does this have anything to do with the New World Order?

"Toronto is at risk of becoming an afterthought in Canada’s largest metropolis region"

Yes, overnight the 33,500,000 people of Canada will refer to our largest city as "Mississauga". :rolleyes:

Thank you for bringing some good old sense to this thread. :yes:

[boden]

Well, my feelings have been validated! Jason Buckland has not only written a lot of crap, but he has written a lot of crap badly. I honestly do not know what his point is. Basically he has written an editorial, which is fine; everyone has an opinion; however his "alarming figures" would hold true for just about any major city in North America. The middle class is a dying breed, and the wealthy move to the suburbs. Cities constantly evolve and change. We have just witnessed the end of capitalism as we know it, (whether we know it or not) and I suspect there will be even more profound changes in the near future. My suspicions are that every major city will be littered with unfinished/abandoned high-rises for many years to come. God knows what he will write about Toronto then.:speech: :speech: :speech: Diatribe over!