■ A look at the areas of Toronto that have the most potential to grow as homes change hands.
As boomers downsize, city could house another 207,000 people by 2051
On the edge of Toronto, to the west, there’s a neighbourhood that city planners are watching closely.
Markland Wood in Etobicoke is a twist of bungalows and other ’60s- and ’70s-era homes, tucked behind neatly groomed lawns and mature trees. It’s a neighbourhood that skews older than the rest of the city, with nearly twice as many seniors than the citywide rate. It skews wealthier, too, with a median household income nearly $20,000 higher than the city’s rate.
It’s here that sometime in the next three decades Toronto officials expect to house more than 1,000 extra residents, without building a single new unit — as existing homes turn over to younger, larger households.
Markland Wood is part of a larger trend. A new city report estimates that 207,240 more people could be housed in the city by the year 2051, based solely on the turnover of existing homes from baby boomers and the generations before them — stating that many are currently, or will soon be, “empty nesters.”
Where the report stops short, though, is measuring affordability — if these homes empty out, will larger, younger households be able to be scoop them up? Although the median value of homes in the area was $501,328 in 2016, a home currently up for sale in the neighbourhood — with five bedrooms and six bathrooms — was listed for $2.4 million.
Ryerson University urban planning expert David Amborski sees the report as useful to understand capacity, but says the impact will depend on future costs for those homes. “It looks at what becomes available to households, but doesn’t look at their ability to purchase it.”
The city estimates also don’t factor in repercussions of COVID-19. The pandemic may have affected generational turnover, as some young people moved back in with parents, and seniors may have deferred or changed plans to move into retirement homes or longterm-care facilities.
The conversation about home turnover relates to a discussion about city-dwellers living in too-large homes. Between 1996 and 2016, the number of households in Toronto considered “overhoused” — with too many bedrooms for their size — rose by 36.5 per cent, or 130,375 households, the city wrote. That’s faster than Toronto’s overall household growth, and took place while the number of households squeezed into too-few bedrooms dropped 18.3 per cent.
Overhousing encompasses anything from one person in a palatial home to someone using an extra bedroom as a home office. For some, living in more spacious homes may be a choice. But, the report noted, seniors looking to age in their own communities might hold on to too-large homes because there aren’t smaller, reasonably priced options in their neighbourhoods.
“While there will always be some who want to have more bedrooms than they require … the greater concern is for older households that would prefer to downsize but that are unable to do so due to a lack of available units that they can afford,” the report said, noting the city’s efforts to boost secondary suites to fill that gap.
In 2016, 24.3 per cent of Toronto households ranging from age 15 to 34 were overhoused, versus 66 per cent of households aged 70 or older.
There’s also a clear divide between renters and homeowners. Renters live in toosmall spaces three times as often as homeowners; roughly two-thirds of owners live in too-large homes.
Amborski believes the extra capacity in Toronto homes likely won’t provide right-sized housing to those currently in too-small homes. In Toronto, 36.9 per cent of underhoused households already spend more than is considered affordable on their shelter costs.
Still, he said, extra capacity could absorb some demand from a continually rising population.
Michael Wright, the city’s planning manager for research and analytics, said the analysis is a “key” piece of data, showing how much new housing might be needed for the Toronto of the future — and how supply needs to shift to fill demand that will otherwise go unmet.
Here are the areas where city planners believe Toronto has the potential to grow the most, as homes change hands between generations:
Markland Wood
If city predictions are accurate, a slice of Markland Wood could jump in population by nearly 20 per cent.
The population in 2016 sat around 6,300 — a figure that barely budged from 2011, increasing by just 0.2 per cent, compared to citywide growth of 4.5 per cent. The city report estimates the area is capable of housing between 1,000 and 1,200 more residents in existing homes.
á The average household size here, as of 2016, is fairly similar to the city average — just shy of 2 1⁄2 people per home.
á The area had 2,751 of Toronto’s more than 1.1 million private households in 2016.
á Most are homeowners, at 82.5 per cent of local households. Citywide, just half of Toronto’s residents own their homes.
á The most common home in Markland Wood was built between 1961 and 1980, with the next-most common being pre-1960s.
Neither Statistics Canada nor the city publicly report on over-housing, showing where in the city the issue is most prevalent. But the data shows that just 3.7 per cent of residents in the Markland Wood census tract have unsuitable housing, an indicator of overcrowding. Across Toronto, the most recent census shows the rate of unsuitable housing is much higher, at 12.1 per cent.
According to the city’s planning manager for the Markland Woods neighbourhood, there is “little development activity” taking place in that area.
Westminster-Branson
One census tract in the North York neighbourhood of Westminster-Branson — along Toronto’s northern border at Steeles Avenue West — is also thought to have the highest potential for generational turnover by 2051. Here, like in Markland Wood, planners believe that between 1,000 and 2,000 extra occupants could live in the housing stock that already exists.
In 3,408 homes from Steeles to Cedarcroft Boulevard, between Bathurst Street and Torresdale Avenue, there were about 7,300 people as of 2016 — a population jump of just 1.8 per cent in five years. á This piece of Westminster-Branson also has a higher share of senior residents, at 26 per cent of the local population, versus 15.6 per cent citywide. The number of residents over age 85 is 146-per-cent higher than the overall rate. á Unlike Markham Wood, single homes aren’t the prevailing structure here, as 93.3 per cent of private dwellings are in fiveplus-storey apartments. á Also different is income. The area isn’t wealthier than the city average — the median household income as of 2015 was $15,000 lower than the citywide median, at just $40,448. á More occupants of those households were receiving some form of government transfer payment. And 72.3 per cent of private households here are renters, not homeowners.
To more clearly estimate generational turnover, Amborski said the city could look at splitting its analysis into owned versus rented homes. For older generations, he said, the impetus to move from their existing home might be very different for a tenant.
While older homeowners may wish to downsize to access the equity from their home, renters may face a more expensive market, he noted. “The incentives to move aren’t as great in a rental accommodation for a boomer as they might be in an owner-occupied unit.”
Alexandra Park versus the downtown core
The city’s analysis found that, in most of downtown, generational turnover is expected to yield space for fewer than 200 extra residents by 2051 — a finding that didn’t surprise Amborski, since the core has younger residents and smaller dwelling units.
“Typically, what’s happening with our (downtown) condos is they’re shrinking,” he said.
There are a few exceptions — including Alexandra Park and the Distillery District. Existing homes there are thought to have space for an extra 400 to 600 residents when they turn over.
Farther north, one census tract in Rosedale and one in nearby St. James Town are predicted to turn over enough space for 600 to 800 new residents apiece. á The slice of Alexandra Park has slightly more seniors than the citywide rate, at 16.2 per cent. Most residents here are renters, and the most common form of housing is an apartment with five or more storeys.
Despite the area just north, between Dundas and College streets, having a higher showing of seniors, planners don’t believe the area has the same potential for turnover. That area is expected to yield up to 200 extra residents by 2051.