On the heels of a recent survey that found more than 50% of young professionals would like to purchase a home in Toronto, the Toronto Region Board of Trade (TRBOT) convened a panel discussion on housing affordability in the region. The Star’s Tess Kalinowski provided an overview of the event’s discussion.
I was asked to provide opening remarks and it gave me an opportunity to reflect on the issues challenging affordability in the region, and the implications for our planning policy.
On March 13th, hundreds of residents and business owners attended our first public meeting on the King Street Pilot. King Street is Toronto’s busiest surface transit route, moving over 65,000 riders a day. Although vehicle drivers only make up 16% of King Street’s users, they currently use 64% of the right-of-way space. As Toronto continues to grow rapidly, it behoves us to plan more strategically to maximise the public benefit of our existing assets.
Last September, City Planning sent out 12,000 letters to random households across Toronto. Each letter contained a personal invitation to participate in an exciting experiment aimed at diversifying the voices that contribute to Toronto’s planning process, so that it is more reflective of the most multicultural city in the world. The experiment, now approaching its first anniversary, is called the Toronto Planning Review Panel, and it is an engagement success story that I’m proud to say is a first, not just for Toronto, but for the whole world.
Earlier today this article appeared in Metro News about the impact of projects like Rail Deck Park on housing affordability. I think this is a really important topic, so here I provide a bit more detail about my position.
According to a new report by CBRE, less than 5% of commercial space in downtown Toronto is vacant – a rate that is tied with booming San Francisco as the lowest in North America. Incredibly, this has occurred at the same time that Toronto has added an additional 4,400,000 ft2 (408,800 m2) of new office space over the past three years, enough room to accommodate 20,000+ employees. The City Planning Division’s 2015 Toronto Employment Survey counted half a million downtown workers, by far the highest level in Toronto’s history.
The following is the text of an op-ed I wrote with Paul Smetanin, the president of the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis. It appeared in the Globe and Mail on Friday, June 10th, 2016. You can access the original article here. continue reading →
From the retreat of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, to the earliest beginnings of Yonge Street, to the 20th century’s concentration of commerce and manufacturing – Toronto’s history has been more than 12,000 years in the making. The city’s unique geography, natural features, and ecological character have always positioned Toronto as a meeting place, where different people have exchanged goods, cultures, and ideas. Our views of history are fluid and always changing, reflecting the past in new and dynamic ways.
As Toronto faces some of the greatest growth and development pressures in North America, protecting and preserving the history and character of our neighbourhoods becomes increasingly difficult. Across the city, planners are grappling with how to balance the protection of established heritage buildings and districts with the need for infill development and intensification.
On December 1st, I had the great honour of sitting on stage with Janette Sadik-Khan for a fireside chat about how we can reimagine and redesign our cities around people.
Janette served as the Transportation Commissioner of New York City from 2007 to 2013, as part of Mayor Bloomberg’s administration. She oversaw the addition of hundreds of kilometers of new bike lanes, hectares of public pedestrian plazas, and brought forward focused efforts to calm traffic. Janette shared with the audience her accomplishments at NYC DOT, some of the challenges and opposition she faced along the way, and explained how they overcame a century of car-centric planning in New York City. Fundamentally, Janette’s efforts have reshaped how North America thinks about transportation planning.
A couple of weeks ago I spoke at the Ontario Professional Planners Institute annual conference. I spoke about the relationships between planners and elected officials, and the importance of being true to our role as experts within the planning process. Below is the text of an article that appeared in NRU on October 9, summarizing my address. It is posted with permission of the publisher of NRU Publishing Inc. The original article first appeared in Novae Res Urbis – Toronto Edition, Vol. 19 No. 40, Friday, October 9, 2015. continue reading →
The City of Toronto’s Official Plan articulates a vision in which housing choices are available for all people in their communities, and at all stages of their lives. Toronto’s quality of life, economic competitiveness, and social cohesion depend upon affordable and appropriate housing options. And yet, like so many desirable, rapidly growing cities, housing affordability is increasingly out of reach for many Torontonians. The reality is, there is no “quick fix” to address this challenge. Cities around the world struggle to provide affordable housing. I am increasingly convinced that a myriad of solutions are needed, using a variety of planning tools. I blogged about inclusionary zoning a few weeks ago, and before that I blogged about the Federal and Provincial role. The best examples of providing affordable housing in Toronto, such as the revitalized Regent Park and the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood, have involved all three levels of government playing a clear role.
Section 37 of the Planning Act also has a role to play, and is a tool specific to Ontario municipalities. It can be used by planners to negotiate the integration of affordable housing into a new development. While the affordable housing units secured using Section 37 may seem small, this is reflection of the value of a typical Section 37 agreement. It’s important to note that this is different from a Development Charge, which is a fee collected from developers at the time a building permit is issued to pay for the cost of infrastructure required to provide municipal services (such as roads, transit, water and sewer infrastructure, community centres and fire and police facilities).
Following are some examples wherein Section 37 was used to secure affordable housing units – an approach being applied more and more in instances where it is deemed desirable to do so.