Candidates Share Visions for Getting Toronto’s House in Order

The Mayoral Debate put on by the Ontario Home Builders’ Association (OHBA) was supposed to be the three primary candidates squaring off to talk about new development in the city of Toronto. At the 11th hour, though, incumbent Rob Ford quit the race for the Mayor’s throne (citing health issues), and so the debate became a head-to-head competition between front-runner John Tory and Olivia Chow, who currently sits third in the polls behind Doug Ford (who stepped into the race in his brother’s place).

Moderated by Toronto Star columnist Royson James, the debate asked candidates to look at the new development industry from four different perspectives — taxation, renovation, transit and vision. New development is a $17 billion industry in Toronto, accounting for over 320,000 jobs. And it’s growing, with investment rising to $8.6 billion in the past year and 72,000 new jobs created.

Although both candidates are against rolling back any of the current taxes (primarily, the Land Transfer Tax, Property Tax or Development Charges), they’re both in favour of inclusionary zoning and Tory says he’s willing to revisit the development charges and land-transfer tax debate, if the development industry can come up with feasible alternatives.

Both candidates stand in opposition of the current mandate for three-bedroom “family units” in new developments because they aren’t helping the low-income families they’re meant to help. Tory suggests looking at other areas, such as parks and schools, to attract more families. Chow believes that giving developers financial incentives to include family units in new developments is the way forward.

Chow believes that 20 percent of new residential developments should be set aside for affordable housing, proposing to put a more significant portion of collected development charges toward that. She also proposes raising the land transfer tax by one percent for homes over $2 million, with the revenues going toward student meal programs in the city.

Now, I’m all for ensuring more affordable housing in the city, and you can’t go wrong with helping all students to kick off their learning days with healthy breakfasts, but I’m sensing that implementing both these programs will mean more red tape, which wouldn’t bode well for aggressively and progressively growing the city.

More bureaucracy usually means fewer dollars going to the people who really need it — in this case, the families looking to get into affordable housing or the kids coming to school on empty stomachs — and I can’t help but fear a return to the Miller era.

More red tape would also likely impact home renovation and construction, an industry that employs nearly 200,000 and accounts for $2.3 billion in investments. Chow says on the one hand that the process for building permits needs to cut out some red tape, but adds the need for hiring more city staff is more important. This seems to me like the historical left-wing problem-solving tactic of throwing more money at the issue and shows me that perhaps Ms. Chow may be out of touch with the City’s fiscal responsibilities.

Tory says there is a need for smaller renovation projects to get approved faster so people aren’t waiting months and says the need is not for more City staff, but rather improved technology so that staff can work more efficiently. That seems a more sensible expenditure than just hiring more people to work on old systems.

And then there is the issue of transit, yet again. What should Toronto’s future public transportation system be? Who should pay for it?

With the Fords out of this debate, the solution of “new subways” didn’t come up, but Tory’s vision — a surface “subway” called SmartTrack — is predicated on new development taking place along the Regional Express Rail (RER) links — from Kipling and Eglinton to the Dundas West Subway Station; down to Union Station and then up to Main Subway Station and on to Unionville.

Tory claims his plan will take seven years to build and with developers kicking in their fees for growth (currently about $1 billion annually), there would be a good chunk of money going toward moving people around the GTA more efficiently. Tory suggests the City and developers work together to decide what types of development work best at the stops along the line.

Chow is sticking to the traditional transportation routes (buses and subways), including an extended Light Rail Transit (which is not unlike Tory’s SmartTrack proposal). She says that construction on the new infrastructure can begin within four years, with Tory adding that it would take close to 17 years to complete.

The problem is that a city this size — a really fantastic city by almost every other criteria — needs a fantastic subway system. It’s not popular to talk about it realistically, because it’s prohibitively expensive and takes longer than one or two terms in office, but we are never going to solve the city’s transit problems if we don’t stick to talking about underground transportation. City politicians, too, need to take a hardline with the province, even the Feds.

Mobility in Toronto is not just a problem for Toronto. Residents aren’t the only ones using the system (or lack of); we need to move commuter and tourists around efficiently too.

Both attendant candidates are just making noise and ignoring the reality: no relief line, no LRT, no surface transit is going to make up for what we lack in a viable subway solution. You can exercise all day long, but if you go home and eat peanut butter cookies all night, you’re never going to get buff.

I have my doubts about the long-term leadership about all Toronto’s mayoral candidates, and the subway is a real sticking point. The quicker someone bites the bullet, the quicker we can get down to helping people get to work and back, which will ease the burden of other social needs such as daycare, and go some distance toward genuinely relieving gridlock and parking issues. Nothing else is going to cut it.

I’m all for having the City and developers working together to speed up construction of new residences and the transit infrastructure in a sensible way, but I am entirely lacking in confidence that the current field will do it. Unfortunately, like you, I have to cast a vote for someone. Where will yours go?