This section addresses aspects of study areas that do not correspond directly to objectives contained in plans or associated in the literature with urban intensification. It describes the socioeconomic profiles of the study areas and thereby identifies the household types most likely to opt for downtown, node, or corridor living. By identifying markets that are attracted to the housing and urban forms of study areas, this section offers guidance for policies promoting the further development of downtowns, nodes, and corridors.
Income
As shown on Table 5, the highest incomes are recorded in downtown Oakville and the Yonge Street corridor. The Yonge Street corridor income levels surpass the inner-city norm by a large margin in all measures of income (average and median individual and household income), whereas in downtown Oakville only average individual income stands well above the already-elevated Town of Oakville income values.
Table 5: Average and median income of individuals and households living in the study areas and their urban zone and municipalities, and ratios of study area values relative to those of their urban zone and municipalities
|
|
Average Individual Income ($) |
Median Individual Income ($) |
Average Household Income ($) |
Median Household Income ($) |
|
Downtown Toronto |
52,377 |
35,263 |
80,740 |
54,696 |
|
Inner City |
42,496 |
25,315 |
77,727 |
49,259 |
|
Ratio: Downtown Toronto / Inner City |
1.23 |
1.39 |
1.04 |
1.11 |
|
Yonge-Eglinton |
54,485 |
39,040 |
85,229 |
51,800 |
|
Inner City |
42,497 |
25,315 |
77,727 |
49,259 |
|
Ratio: Yonge-Eglinton / Inner City |
1.28 |
1.54 |
1.10 |
1.05 |
|
North York Centre |
35,378 |
24,317 |
68,012 |
47,502 |
|
Former City of North York |
34,754 |
21,198 |
74,693 |
49,061 |
|
Ratio: North York Centre / North York |
1.02 |
1.15 |
0.91 |
0.97 |
|
Scarborough Town Centre |
26,279 |
21,950 |
57,754 |
49,050 |
|
Former City of Scarborough |
26,714 |
21,252 |
61,794 |
54,932 |
|
Ratio: Scarborough Town Centre / Scarborough |
0.98 |
1.03 |
0.93 |
0.89 |
|
Mississauga City Centre |
28,792 |
25,005 |
63,008 |
55,355 |
|
City of Mississauga |
35,314 |
27,279 |
82,860 |
71,108 |
|
Ratio: Mississauga City Centre / Mississauga |
0.82 |
0.92 |
0.76 |
0.78 |
|
Downtown Oakville |
64,915 |
34,917 |
106,930 |
59,157 |
|
Town of Oakville |
46,211 |
32,810 |
100,860 |
86,561 |
|
Ratio: Downtown Oakville / Oakville |
1.40 |
1.06 |
1.06 |
0.68 |
|
Downtown Kitchener |
26,771 |
22,571 |
45,862 |
39,485 |
|
Kitchener CMA |
31,127 |
25,156 |
64,431 |
51,990 |
|
Ratio: Downtown Kitchener / Kitchener CMA |
0.86 |
0.90 |
0.71 |
0.76 |
|
Yonge Street Corridor |
67,067 |
42,893 |
114,125 |
64,459 |
|
Inner City |
42,497 |
25,315 |
77,727 |
49,259 |
|
Ratio: Yonge Street Corridor / Inner City |
1.58 |
1.69 |
1.47 |
1.31 |
|
Mississauga East Corridor |
29,718 |
25,121 |
67,479 |
59,820 |
|
City of Mississauga |
35,314 |
27,279 |
82,860 |
71,108 |
|
Ratio: Mississauga East Corridor / Mississauga |
0.84 |
0.92 |
0.81 |
0.84 |
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001 Census.
High incomes mirror housing types present in these two areas (a high proportion of single-family homes relative to most other study areas) and a positive perception of these sectors, consistent with the type of retailing and services they offer. Note, however, that the two areas (downtown Oakville even more so than the Yonge Street corridor) exhibit the largest income spreads among investigated downtowns, nodes, and corridors, as suggested by median values that are much lower than average values. They therefore contain both rich and poor households.
Yonge-Eglinton and downtown Toronto come next on the income scale. In both cases, average and median individual incomes exceed the inner-city norm, but average and median household incomes are only slightly above this norm. This finding reflects household size; the two study areas have the smallest households among the areas under study.8 The downtown Toronto income spread is lower than that of the Yonge Street corridor.
Income levels place North York Centre between the four richest and the four poorest study areas. The lowest incomes are found in Scarborough Town Centre, Mississauga City Centre, the Mississauga East corridor, and downtown Kitchener. Nearly all income measures for these districts are inferior to those of their respective municipality. Low incomes can be explained by lower average housing costs in these nodes than in the rest of the municipality. In downtown Kitchener, there is also the negative perception of the downtown and affluent residents' preference for suburban living in a highly dispersed metropolitan region (Bunting and Filion, 1999; Filion, Bunting and Warriner, 1999). Small differences between average and median incomes within these four study areas suggest a narrow income spread, in contrast with the wealthy study areas.
Income distributions signal the existence of a strong link between income categories and types of study areas. The next tables identify similar relationships across other socioeconomic variables.
Education
Table 6 shows the proportion of people in each study area holding a university degree. This pattern closely resembles the income distribution pattern in the previous table, with one exception. Despite its high income, downtown Oakville posts a proportion of people with a university degree that is only at the middle of the range for the different study areas. One explanation for this observation is the wide income spread noted in this district. Another is the advanced age of its residents.
Table 6: Highest level of education of residents, study areas and their urban zone, and ratios of study area percentages relative to those of their urban zone*
|
|
Less than Grade 9 |
Grade 9-13 |
College |
University Degree |
|
Downtown Toronto |
3.5% |
12.0% |
16.7% |
51.1% |
|
Inner City |
10.2% |
20.6% |
18.2% |
36.1% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Toronto / Inner City |
0.35 |
0.58 |
0.92 |
1.14 |
|
Yonge-Eglinton |
1.8% |
12.4% |
17.9% |
51.6% |
|
Inner City |
10.1% |
20.5% |
18.2% |
36.1% |
|
Ratio: Yonge-Eglinton / Inner City |
0.18 |
0.60 |
0.99 |
1.43 |
|
North York Centre |
4.5% |
19.9% |
17.3% |
40.0% |
|
Former City of North York |
11.8% |
25.7% |
18.5% |
27.3% |
|
Ratio: North York Centre / North York |
0.38 |
0.77 |
0.93 |
1.46 |
|
Scarborough Town Centre |
9.2% |
32.9% |
19.4% |
21.2% |
|
Former City of Scarborough |
9.8% |
31.7% |
22.3% |
19.4% |
|
Ratio: Scarborough Town Centre / Scarborough |
0.94 |
1.04 |
0.87 |
1.09 |
|
Mississauga City Centre |
8.5% |
23.0% |
33.6% |
27.0% |
|
City of Mississauga |
7.4% |
26.8% |
23.8% |
24.1% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga City Centre / Mississauga |
1.14 |
0.86 |
0.99 |
1.12 |
|
Downtown Oakville |
1.3% |
18.1% |
27.9% |
33.4% |
|
Town of Oakville |
4.3% |
21.4% |
26.0% |
31.0% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Oakville / Oakville |
0.30 |
0.85 |
1.07 |
1.08 |
|
Downtown Kitchener |
10.1% |
33.4% |
22.3% |
17.2% |
|
Kitchener CMA |
8.5% |
32.9% |
24.0% |
17.0% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Kitchener / Kitchener CMA |
1.20 |
1.01 |
0.93 |
1.01 |
|
Yonge Street Corridor |
1.7% |
12.4% |
16.9% |
53.5% |
|
Inner City |
11.1% |
21.9% |
18.3% |
33.5% |
|
Ratio: Yonge Street Corridor / Inner City |
0.15 |
0.57 |
0.92 |
1.6 |
|
Mississauga East Corridor |
9.4% |
28.3% |
22.4% |
21.7% |
|
City of Mississauga |
7.4% |
26.8% |
23.8% |
24.1% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga East Corridor / Mississauga |
1.27 |
1.06 |
0.94 |
0.90 |
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001 Census.
* Sums of percentages do not add to 100% because some educational categories are not included in the table.
Employment status
Equally consistent with income patterns is the distribution of types of employment held by people living in the study areas, shown in Table 7. As expected, there is a clear concentration of managerial occupations in the high-income study areas, and more sales-related occupations in lower-income areas. The correspondence between income and occupation is not perfect, however. Downtown Oakville, the highest-income study area, presents one of the larger proportions of sales-related occupations.
It is interesting to note the over-representation of occupations in social science, education, government, and religion as well as occupations in art, culture, recreation, and sport in the most central study areas: downtown Toronto, the Yonge-Eglinton node, and the Yonge Street corridor. Ley has identified a predilection on the part of the new middle class, which includes the categories of employment cited above, for central area living (Ley, 1996).
Table 7: Per cent residents of study areas and their urban zone and municipalities according to occupation, and ratios of study area percentages relative to those of their urban zone and municipalities
|
|
Management |
Business, Finance & Administration |
Natural & Applied Sciences |
Health |
Social Science, Education, Gov't & Religion |
Art, Culture, Recreation, Sport |
Sales |
Trades, Transport, Equipment |
Primary Industries |
Processing, Manufacturing, Utilities |
|
Downtown Toronto |
16.6% |
21.4% |
11.4% |
5.8% |
14.2% |
9.9% |
16.7% |
2.3% |
0.3% |
1.4% |
|
Inner City |
14.1% |
19.4% |
8.7% |
4.5% |
11.3% |
8.6% |
20.7% |
7.4% |
0.5% |
4.8% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Toronto / Inner City |
1.17 |
1.10 |
1.32 |
1.30 |
1.26 |
1.15 |
0.81 |
0.32 |
0.56 |
0.30 |
|
Yonge-Eglinton |
19.3% |
24.6% |
11.8% |
5.1% |
13.5% |
6.6% |
14.8% |
3.2% |
0.2% |
0.8% |
|
Inner City |
14.1% |
19.4% |
8.7% |
4.5% |
11.3% |
8.6% |
20.7% |
7.4% |
0.5% |
4.8% |
|
Ratio: Yonge-Eglinton / Inner City |
1.37 |
1.27 |
1.36 |
1.13 |
1.19 |
0.77 |
0.72 |
0.44 |
0.39 |
0.17 |
|
North York Centre |
19.2% |
22.5% |
14.1% |
5.3% |
8.1% |
4.3% |
17.9% |
5.0% |
0.5% |
3.0% |
|
Former City of North York |
11.7% |
21.5% |
9.8% |
4.9% |
7.4% |
3.1% |
21.1% |
10.4% |
0.4% |
9.6% |
|
Ratio: North York Centre / North York |
1.64 |
1.05 |
1.44 |
1.08 |
1.10 |
1.37 |
0.85 |
0.49 |
1.03 |
0.32 |
|
Scarborough Town Centre |
9.8% |
23.7% |
8.9% |
3.4% |
4.9% |
2.2% |
21.8% |
10.4% |
0.6% |
14.3% |
|
Former City of Scarborough |
9% |
24.6% |
8.6% |
4.3% |
5.6% |
2.5% |
22.6% |
11.5% |
0.4% |
11% |
|
Ratio: Scarborough Town Centre / Scarborough |
1.10 |
0.97 |
1.04 |
0.79 |
0.87 |
0.91 |
0.96 |
0.91 |
1.39 |
1.30 |
|
Mississauga City Centre |
12.0% |
23.1% |
10.8% |
4.2% |
5.2% |
1.9% |
22.7% |
10.8% |
0.2% |
9.1% |
|
City of Mississauga |
13.4% |
22.7% |
8.6% |
3.9% |
5.9% |
2.2% |
21.3% |
12.8% |
0.6% |
8.7% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga City Centre / Mississauga |
0.90 |
1.02 |
1.25 |
1.09 |
0.88 |
0.85 |
1.06 |
0.85 |
0.36 |
1.04 |
|
Downtown Oakville |
27.3% |
17% |
5.1% |
5.1% |
11.5% |
5.1% |
22.1% |
4.7% |
2.0% |
0% |
|
Town of Oakville |
19.2% |
21.5% |
8.7% |
4.2% |
8% |
3.4% |
21.8% |
8.2% |
0.8% |
4.3% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Oakville / Oakville |
1.42 |
0.79 |
0.59 |
1.24 |
1.43 |
1.53 |
1.01 |
0.58 |
2.63 |
0 |
|
Downtown Kitchener |
9.9% |
15.6% |
6.1% |
2.9% |
9.0% |
3.7% |
22.2% |
16.2% |
0.8% |
13.5% |
|
Kitchener CMA |
10.6% |
17.3% |
6.8% |
3.7% |
7.4% |
2.4% |
21.4% |
16.4% |
1.5% |
12.5% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Kitchener / Kitchener CMA |
0.93 |
0.90 |
0.91 |
0.79 |
1.23 |
1.57 |
1.04 |
0.98 |
0.52 |
1.07 |
|
Yonge St. Corridor |
20.9% |
23.1% |
9.7% |
5.4% |
14.6% |
8.1% |
14.5% |
2.6% |
0.2% |
0.8% |
|
Inner City |
14.1% |
19.4% |
8.7% |
4.5% |
11.3% |
8.6% |
20.7% |
7.4% |
0.5% |
4.8% |
|
Ratio: Yonge St. Corridor / Inner City |
1.48 |
1.19 |
1.12 |
1.20 |
1.29 |
0.95 |
0.70 |
0.35 |
0.53 |
0.17 |
|
Mississauga East Corridor |
10.6% |
22.9% |
8.7% |
3.2% |
5.5% |
2.1% |
22.3% |
13.5% |
0.4% |
10.8% |
|
City of Mississauga |
13.4% |
22.7% |
8.6% |
3.9% |
5.9% |
2.2% |
21.3% |
12.8% |
0.6% |
8.7% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga East Corridor / Mississauga |
079 |
1.01 |
1.02 |
0.83 |
0.93 |
0.96 |
1.05 |
1.06 |
0.69 |
1.24 |
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001 Census.
Downtown Toronto residents include a proportion of immigrants (defined broadly as people born outside Canada) that approximates that of the inner city (see Table 8). Still, non-immigrants outnumber immigrants in this district. In the metropolitan region that posts the highest presence of immigrants in Canada, it is important to gauge the attraction of different types of study areas on this category of residents.
Proportions of immigrants in downtown Oakville and downtown Kitchener correspond to those of their respective municipality, which are much lower than those in the urban zones and municipalities to which the other study areas belong.
Table 8: Per cent of residents of study areas and their urban zone and municipalities who are non-immigrants and immigrants, and ratios of study area percentages relative to those of their urban zone and municipalities
|
|
Non-immigrants |
Immigrants |
|
Downtown Toronto |
57.3% |
42.7% |
|
Inner City |
56.1% |
43.9% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Toronto / Inner City |
1.02 |
0.97 |
|
Yonge-Eglinton |
68.0% |
32.0% |
|
Inner City |
56.1% |
43.9% |
|
Ratio: Yonge-Eglinton / Inner City |
1.21 |
0.77 |
|
North York Centre |
42.3% |
57.7% |
|
Former City of North York |
42.8% |
57.2% |
|
Ratio: North York Centre / North York |
1.01 |
1.01 |
|
Scarborough Town Centre |
39.5% |
60.5% |
|
Former City of Scarborough |
44.3% |
55.7% |
|
Ratio: Scarborough Town Centre / Scarborough |
0.89 |
1.09 |
|
Mississauga City Centre |
38.7% |
61.3% |
|
City of Mississauga |
52.2% |
47.8% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga City Centre / Mississauga |
0.74 |
1.28 |
|
Downtown Oakville |
72.5% |
27.5% |
|
Town of Oakville |
72.1% |
27.9% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Oakville / Oakville |
1.01 |
0.99 |
|
Downtown Kitchener |
78.1% |
21.9% |
|
Kitchener CMA |
77.8% |
22.2% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Kitchener / Kitchener CMA |
1.00 |
0.99 |
|
Yonge Street Corridor |
70.6% |
29.4% |
|
Inner City |
56.1% |
43.9% |
|
Ratio: Yonge Street Corridor / Inner City |
1.26 |
0.67 |
|
Mississauga East Corridor |
45.7% |
54.3% |
|
City of Mississauga |
52.2% |
47.8% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga East Corridor / Mississauga |
0.88 |
1.14 |
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001 Census.
Household size and composition
The sub-section examines the attraction of study areas on the different genders and types of households defined in terms of size and life cycle. This information is important to the understanding of present and future residential growth levels in the categories of study areas under investigation. Table 9 indicates an over-representation of females, at or above 3 per cent, in four study areas: Yonge-Eglinton, North York Centre, the Yonge Street corridor, and downtown Oakville. We will see that in the latter case, a high proportion of elderly residents contributes to the gender imbalance. Interestingly, none of the study areas exhibit a comparable imbalance in favour of males. Only downtown Toronto registers a very slight (0.9 per cent) over-representation of males.
This same table reveals an under-representation of the 0-19 age group in each study area relative to its urban zone or municipality. The proportion of this age group is at its lowest in downtown Toronto, the Yonge-Eglinton node, and downtown Oakville. On the other hand, it approximates the municipal average in Scarborough Town Centre, Mississauga City Centre, the Mississauga East corridor, the Yonge Street corridor, and downtown Kitchener. These findings do not support a relationship between lower residential density and the presence of children, although it is generally assumed that families with children prefer low-density forms of housing. This assumption is at odds with findings from Scarborough Town Centre and Mississauga City Centre, two study areas where high-rise apartment units account for over 90 per cent of all housing (see Table 14). More likely is an association between a lower socioeconomic status and the presence of children in high-density housing.
Downtown Toronto and the four nodes have higher proportions of the 20-34 age group relative to their urban zone or municipality (less so in Scarborough Town Centre). In the other study areas, the presence of this age category is closer to the urban zone or municipal norm. Downtown Oakville is the only study area where people aged 20-34 are under-represented relative to the municipal average. The presence in the study areas of residents belonging to the next age group (35-49) approximates the average of their urban zone or municipalities. With the exception of a substantial over-representation of people aged 50-64 in downtown Oakville, the ratios of people aged 50-64 relative to urban zone and municipal norms range from 0.91 to 1.11.
The proportion of downtown Oakville residents who are 65 years old and over is well above that of the other study areas (30.5 per cent versus 16.7 per cent in North York Centre, which records the second highest level) and 2.79 times higher than the Town of Oakville level. Despite its presence at the lower end of study area percentages, Mississauga City Centre still posts a higher proportion of elderly people than the City of Mississauga as a whole.
Table 9: Household size and per cent of residents in study areas and their urban zone and municipalities in different gender and age groups, and ratios of study area values relative to those of their urban zone and municipalities
|
|
House- |
Males |
Females |
Age |
Age |
Age |
Age |
Age |
|
Downtown Toronto |
1.7 |
50.9% |
49.1% |
9.1% |
39.4% |
24.6% |
15.1% |
11.9% |
|
Inner City |
2.3 |
48.8% |
51.2% |
19.6% |
27.6% |
25.9% |
14.8% |
12.0% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Toronto / Inner City |
0.75 |
1.04 |
0.96 |
0.46 |
1.43 |
0.94 |
1.02 |
1.00 |
|
Yonge-Eglinton |
1.7 |
45.4% |
54.7% |
12.6% |
35.1% |
25.8% |
14.8% |
11.6% |
|
Inner City |
2.3 |
48.8% |
51.2% |
19.6% |
27.6% |
25.9% |
14.8% |
12.0% |
|
Ratio: Yonge-Eglinton / Inner City |
0.74 |
0.93 |
1.07 |
0.64 |
1.27 |
0.99 |
1.00 |
0.97 |
|
North York Centre |
2.4 |
47.1% |
52.9% |
18.5% |
25.9% |
23.1% |
15.8% |
16.7% |
|
Former City of North York |
2.8 |
47.7% |
52.3% |
24.5% |
21.7% |
23.0% |
15.4% |
15.5% |
|
Ratio: North York Centre / North York |
0.85 |
0.99 |
1.01 |
0.75 |
1.20 |
1.01 |
1.02 |
1.08 |
|
Scarborough Town Centre |
2.9 |
48.8% |
51.2% |
25.0% |
22.7% |
22.8% |
14.5% |
15.1% |
|
Former City of Scarborough |
3.1 |
48.2% |
51.8% |
26.0% |
21.0% |
24.2% |
16.0% |
12.8% |
|
Ratio: Scarborough Town Centre / Scarborough |
0.95 |
1.01 |
0.99 |
0.96 |
1.08 |
0.94 |
0.91 |
1.18 |
|
Mississauga City Centre |
2.9 |
48.9% |
51.1% |
24.8% |
26.2% |
25.1% |
15.1% |
9.0% |
|
City of Mississauga |
3.2 |
49.3% |
50.7% |
28.5% |
21.5% |
26.2% |
15.4% |
8.5% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga City Centre / Mississauga |
0.91 |
0.99 |
1.01 |
0.87 |
1.22 |
0.96 |
0.98 |
1.06 |
|
Downtown Oakville |
1.9 |
43.8% |
56.3% |
13.1% |
15.6% |
18.3% |
22.8% |
30.5% |
|
Town of Oakville |
2.9 |
48.7% |
51.3% |
28.6% |
17.7% |
26.7% |
16.1% |
10.9% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Oakville / Oakville |
0.65 |
0.9 |
1.1 |
0.46 |
0.88 |
0.68 |
1.42 |
2.79 |
|
Downtown Kitchener |
2.1 |
49.2% |
50.8% |
21.6% |
25.4% |
24.2% |
13.6% |
15.2% |
|
Kitchener CMA |
2.6 |
49.2% |
50.8% |
27.5% |
22.0% |
24.5% |
14.8% |
11.2% |
|
Ratio: Downtown Kitchener / Kitchener CMA |
0.81 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
0.79 |
1.15 |
0.99 |
0.92 |
1.35 |
|
Yonge Street Corridor |
2 |
45.6% |
54.4% |
16.2% |
28.6% |
25.3% |
16.4% |
13.4% |
|
Inner City |
2.3 |
48.8% |
51.2% |
19.6% |
27.6% |
26.1% |
14.8% |
12.0% |
|
Ratio: Yonge St. Corridor / Inner City |
0.87 |
0.94 |
1.06 |
0.83 |
1.04 |
0.97 |
1.11 |
1.11 |
|
Mississauga East Corridor |
3 |
49% |
51% |
24.8% |
22.1% |
24.4% |
17.0% |
11.6% |
|
City of Mississauga |
3.2 |
49.3% |
50.7% |
28.5% |
21.5% |
26.2% |
15.4% |
8.5% |
|
Ratio: Mississauga East Corridor / Mississauga |
0.94 |
0.99 |
1.01 |
0.87 |
1.03 |
0.93 |
1.11 |
1.37 |
Source: Statistics Canada, 2001 Census.
Socioeconomic summary
Table 10 summarizes the socioeconomic findings. Each study area is ranked relative to the other areas on a three-point scale (low, medium, high) for each socioeconomic variable introduced in this subsection. The number of low, medium, and high rankings allocated to each variable varies to reflect how the different study areas score on this variable. For example, if many study areas rank high for a given variable and a few are found somewhat and much lower on the scale, Table 9 would present many highs and a small number of mediums and lows for this variable.
Two geographical categories stand out: the inner-city study areas (which include downtown Toronto, the Yonge-Eglinton node, and the Yonge Street Corridor) and the inner and outer suburban nodes and corridor (North York Centre, Scarborough Town Centre, Mississauga City Centre and the Mississauga East corridor).
As shown at the bottom of Table 10, the population in this first group of study areas is characterized by medium/high individual and household income, high education, and a medium/low presence of immigrants. In addition, these areas are characterized by small households and a high/medium proportion of people aged 20-49. The second grouping is characterized by lower income and education levels than the first. It includes higher proportions of immigrants and larger households. There are more children and youth, but fewer people aged 20-49 in these suburban study areas. The socioeconomic profiles of downtown Oakville and downtown Kitchener differ from each other and from the above categories. Oakville is characterized by high incomes and an elderly population and Kitchener by low incomes and a larger number of families.
The cleavage between social status in inner-city and suburban study areas may be related to the attraction of downtown Toronto and other inner-city locales for certain types of households, characterized by high income, education, and occupational status. We can infer from the predominance of small households and from prior associations established between, on the one hand, high education and certain occupations and, on the other, a taste for inner-city living, that for a certain sector of the population, high-density living in an inner-city environment with good-quality public transit and a walkable environment is a matter of lifestyle choice. This finding suggests a lifestyle-driven residential-sorting process at work in inner-city nodes (see Bagley, 2002, Mokhtarian and Kitamura, 2002; Krizek, 2003).
The situation is different in the suburbs. Lower incomes, lower levels of education, and lower occupational status, and the presence of larger households with more children and youth suggest that many households have opted for these locations for reasons of housing cost rather than lifestyle.
Differences in the reasons for choosing the inner city vs. the suburbs are reflected in the relation between individual incomes within these two types of areas and their respective urban zone or municipality. Individual incomes are lower in suburban nodes and the Mississauga East corridor than their respective municipal average (with the exception of North York Centre), while the opposite holds true for inner-city study areas.
Neither the suburban nodes (with the possible exception of North York Centre) nor the Mississauga East corridor provide an environment conducive to walking or that generates strong synergistic effects between different functions, including housing. Poor pedestrian conditions prevent the residents of Scarborough Town Centre and Mississauga City Centre from connecting easily with the numerous activities these nodes contain, and thereby from fully benefiting from living within a node.
The study areas are further differentiated by the occupations of their residents. Downtown Toronto, the Yonge-Eglinton node, North York Centre, the Yonge Street corridor, and, to a lesser extent, Scarborough Town Centre, contain higher proportions of people in managerial occupations than their respective urban zone or municipality. When downtown Kitchener is added and Scarborough Town Centre is removed from the analysis, the distribution of people in occupations related to the social sciences, education, government, and religion is similar.
On the other hand, sales-related occupations equal or exceed the urban zone or municipal norm in Mississauga City Centre, downtown Oakville, downtown Kitchener, and the Mississauga East corridor. The proportion of people in occupations related to processing, manufacturing, and utilities, which is well below urban zone and municipal norms in downtown Toronto, the Yonge-Eglinton node, North York Centre, downtown Oakville, and the Yonge Street corridor, is above these norms in Scarborough Town Centre, Mississauga City Centre, downtown Kitchener, and the Mississauga East corridor. These findings also point to differences between inner-city and suburban study areas.
The inner-city/suburban contrast should not conceal the existence of common socioeconomic features that distinguish most of these areas from their respective surroundings:
* In every study area, household size is smaller than that of the overall urban zone or municipality.
* In every case, with the exception of downtown Toronto, there is an over-representation of women in the population of study areas.
* Downtown Toronto, the nodes, and the Yonge Street corridor all register education levels considerably above those of the urban zone or municipality to which they belong. Even the two nodes with relatively low incomes -- Mississauga City Centre and Scarborough Town Centre -- contain relatively high proportions of university graduates among their residents.
Table 10: Study area scores on different socioeconomic variables relative to each other
Notes
8. Other things being equal, the bigger a household, the larger is its number of income earners.