Build the portlands for people, not for investment portfolios.

This article mentions co-ops often. A co-op is a building or set of buildings where there is no landlord in the traditional sense. The building is owned collectively by those renting it, and as such, there is no profit or financialization to the housing. This causes units often to be 1/2 to even 1/3rd of the market rate. The co-op is frequently lumped in community housing and 'the projects,' but this is a false notion that was used to prevent their continuation due to post-reganism interest in commodifying housing further by scaring the masses from them. Co-ops contain families, individuals, and couples living in quality dignified housing, simply with less rent, and are not 'halfway homes.' Some co-ops also contain market rate units as well.

The portlands—giant gravel lots by the dozens just minutes away from downtown, right beside the water, and one of Toronto's nicest parks—it is no wonder the development of these lands has been a subject of discussion for decades. With so much land for development and little to no height limits in the area, one thing is sure: a lot of units will be showing up fast. The question is, for whom?

Toronto can not afford to let its unparalleled chance to build the right type of housing in the Portlands be fumbled! We need co-ops, community housing, and affordable housing, not another district of luxury 650-square-foot '1 + dens'.

The first couple of development proposals have come rolling into the portlands as the final stages of drastic river re-routing have begun to wrap up. But before we get into what is happening now at the portlands, we need a history lesson.

Precedents in decades past:

There are three other examples of Toronto being presented with swaths of conveniently located land poised for development that is key to what must be done in the portlands.

St James Town South: Accidental Co-ops

Previously, I have written for Toronto Compass on the historical highs and lows of St james town. What I should have touched upon then was St. James Town South. Head south of Wellesley but north of Carelton, around Sherbourne, and something odd may be observed. A random pocket of several large co-ops. Some of these co-ops are among the largest and best (by quality of life) in the city. The story goes as follows: The town was vacant in the '60s in this area, and had planned to extend St James Town South into it; however, realizing St James Town did little to fix affordability in the city, it was decided the area should instead be developed with co-ops. The city had not set out to create a co-op district but did none less, and today a thriving community of working and middle-class families populate the area. Street hockey nets are found in alleyways, birthday banners hang in windows, and real people inhabit spaces created to house them.

Esplanade: A success story of putting people first in development

The esplanade is, as one might say online, my Roman empire. Daily, I think about its success. Thousands of residents live in what was once industrial land. The tale mirrors that of the portlands and gives me optimism I hope is not false. In the later-mid 20th century, Toronto had a housing crisis. Costs were up, and hope was fading, so the city did something. They set up a huge area of land that was going to be developed for co-ops. Quite simply, they made more affordable housing with one decision (yes, it really can be that simple.) After completion, affordable units were populated by families and those who would have been forced out of the city by cost otherwise. The parks in the area are still among the most used in the city, and to this day, a tight-knit community of average people holds as a sign of what a city could be like if it was built for all, not just for investment.

City Place: A mistake we can’t afford to make again and again.

In the 2000s, a former downtown golf course (yes, that was a thing) shut down just east of the CN Tower. The city prized this opportunity to create more housing and unveiled a developer-city made by Concord of many highrises. We were told this would create much-needed housing, and of course, supply and demand meant this would be a solution towards affordability. This was a lie, and the area was never made to house anyone. Instead, it served as a 3D stock market in a city. In a post-financial world, the units were investments, not housing. Awful floor plans and poor neighborhood design are clear signs that no one cared to have people living here, only to have units to buy, sell, and lease out in what looks like a nice sleek block in renderings. Now we have a neighborhood with $2,600 one-bedrooms, uber X's, and empty parks that long for children to play in, but no children come. What family could afford it?

(I keep mentioning families as a positive. Families are an indicator of a neighborhood's success when it comes to housing. In areas like City-Place, hyper-investment and the 'landlord class' have killed the idea of a family in the city. Yet, in the co-op areas mentioned above, families are alive and well and indicate that average folk can call the city home.)

The call to action for Toronto:

We can not afford another city place. The portlands are already in the perfect place to be a second esplanade or to continue where St James Town South left off. With modern building practices and progressive zoning ideas, the city could house 10,000's regular Torontonians in a new neighborhood and could be a global example of how to serve its people. Alternatively, each piece of land could fall to the same half-dozen developers and be flipped into luxury units to be bought and sold as stocks, with the only residents able to afford the area to be Patagonia-vest investors and marketing directors, paying inflated rent to increase profit for the same elite few who already have monetized the existence of Toronto.

These don't have to be exclusive. The areas mentioned in positive ways in this article feature both co-ops and market housing, and there's no reason the Portlands couldn't have both either.

So, here is my question to the city:

Do you want the Portlands as a district filled with families and the middle-class core of our city? Parks where the children of a nurse can play basketball against the children of their teacher. To have unit's where a couple comprised of a paramedic and an assembly line worker could call home. Where businesses can cater to middle-class needs and an area where a sense of community runs the streets, or do you want yet another series of towers inhabited by upper-level management, walking desginer toy poodle's past parking lots full of BMW's, just before calling an Uber to dinner at Terroni, while viewing the park across the street as little more than a point of advertising for resale value?

Toronto, Build the portlands for the people, not for investment portfolios.

.

Toronto Compass does not use artificial intelligence in any step of its writing or research for articles or graphic design/art.