A multiplex home in Toronto.Eurodale Developments
Take away all the political noise and the situation is simple: Toronto council reneged on an agreement with the federal government to allow more housing and is now hoping for a pass. Ottawa should hold their feet to the fire.
The whole point of the federal Liberals’ approach to housing was that cities would be rewarded for doing certain things. Not promising, not attempting. Doing.
The amount of money that Ottawa could claw back is not big – $30-million is a rounding error in the federal budget – but the principle is important. If the federal government doesn’t hold Toronto to account, this could encourage other cities to backslide on housing at a time when they need to be much more ambitious instead.
Not pushing back against recalcitrant Toronto councillors will also give oxygen to the sort of NIMBY (not in my backyard) attitudes that have resulted in massive density in some neighbourhoods while other areas remain stuck in amber. The city cannot continue to develop on such a trajectory.
Toronto Mayor confident city’s compromise on sixplexes won’t risk federal housing funding
In 2023, Toronto city council voted in support of an agreement signed with Ottawa, pledging a variety of policy changes that included allowing buildings with six housing units on a single lot anywhere in the city. Federal money allocated from the Housing Accelerator Fund started to flow in return and then, during a debate last month, a lot of councillors got cold feet.
Instead of voting to allow the sixplexes they had pledged to permit everywhere, council watered down the proposal. In fact, they took a fire hose to it. These buildings will be allowed in only nine wards, which together make up less than one-quarter of the city’s area. Councillors for the other 16 wards can opt in later, as if they are mayors of their own area.
The amended plan was proposed by Councillor Gord Perks, chair of the city’s planning and housing committee, who said he was moving it “very reluctantly” after being unable to drum up council support for citywide reforms.
Mayor Olivia Chow told The Globe and Mail editorial board last week that the compromise was a way to prevent the sixplex item being deferred entirely by suburban councillors. She remains confident she can reach a revised agreement with Ottawa. She noted that Housing and Infrastructure Minister Gregor Robertson was once the mayor of Vancouver, and thereby understands how difficult change can be.
Her hopes for a second chance at a deal are understandable. But Mr. Robertson should stick to his guns.
Toronto wrangles with a simple question: What is a multiplex?
There is precedent for Ottawa expecting compliance.
Oakville, to the west of Toronto, was told to pay back federal money after breaking an agreement to allow fourplexes citywide. In Windsor, the city’s application for money was rejected after it refused to change its zoning rules.
Treating Toronto more leniently would be wrong. Toronto is one of the most expensive cities in the country. Its housing need is enormous. If councillors there get away with blocking much-needed change then politicians in communities with less dire housing affordability problems will feel justified in trying to do the same.
Toronto also needs to be jolted into recognizing how unfair it is that the older part of the city has for so long borne far more than its share of urban growth. This pattern was used cynically by surburban councillors to argue that that area was better suited for sixplexes even though, in fact, the smaller lots in the older neighbourhoods make it less appropriate for this kind of densification.
Opinion: On housing, Toronto fails a crucial test
So Toronto is left with an absurd dissonance in what development is allowed where. A 63-storey tower is proposed for what is now a residential street downtown while a pair of towers with a total of 706 units is proposed to replace a dozen houses on a residential block in midtown, dwarfing the adjacent buildings.
Developers hope these projects will be approved under a provincial policy of densifying in an 800-metre radius around subway stations. This concept is logical, though some of the changes it brings will be hard for nearby residents to swallow. Meanwhile, putting a sixplex amid single-family homes in the suburbs remains unacceptable.
This cannot be allowed to continue. The federal government enforcing its agreement with Toronto would be a statement that the old approach no longer flies. Mr. Robertson has the chance to light a $30-million fire under the city. He should strike the match.