Quote:
Originally Posted by niwell
The problem is, once employment lands are developed for residential use, they're essentially gone forever. Developers would *much* rather build highrise communities on former light industrial lands then in residential neighbourhoods if given the option. Barring severe contamination concerns it's much easier and cheaper.
And while office uses are allowed in employment lands they are also intended for industrial uses. Things that still do require a lot of space to do. I'm not opposed to keeping them, though some are already so compromised by retail uses it's probably not worth it. The tricky part is the fear of setting precedents.
|
industrial uses are important, but not immediately beside a new light rail line.
Precedent is a concern the city loves, but converting lands immediately beside an LRT is a *good* precedent. Every conversion request has to stand on it's own merit.
I'd be supportive of ensuring adequate employment spaces remaining on the lands - allowing conversion with significant mixed use elements remaining is fine. Let developers build residential as long as they provide so much office and commercial space still.
The heights proposed by developers here are generally pretty ridiculous and unnecessary, but in a way it has to make up for what is effectively 0 density on the south side of Eglinton.
A much better plan for the Golden Mile would have been to allow employment conversions on the south side of the street and to spread the density around a bit more in 20-something storey towers and mid-rises.
The city also views employment areas as key to supporting the City's employment growth, but the reality is that almost no employment growth has occurred in the City's employment lands over the last 10-15 years. Almost all of it has occurred in mixed-use areas, particularly downtown. Employment lands largely aren't declining, and there has been a new rush of value for industrial lands due to shortages of industrial space in the GTA, but that doesn't mean single-storey industrial buildings with surface parking and open storage areas is the best use beside a multi-billion dollar LRT line.
The harsh protection of employment areas also follows that historical pattern of segregating uses that flies in the face of most modern planning principles, which is partly why I'm so surprised the city remains so staunchly supportive of it. There are ways to protect employment space through conversions while allowing a wider range of uses.