The City of Toronto has been suffering a predictable outcry when a federal crown corporation decided to sell off a parcel of Toronto waterfront land without requiring an affordable housing component to the deal.
The city wishes at least to be seen promoting affordable housing in an an overheated housing market. The federal government says its hands are tied because the land has been transferred to the arms-length corporation over whom it has no relevant control. Read more at the CBC: City Fuming As Queens Quay Land Up For Sale Without Affordable Housing Plans
In this squabble between two governments, who is doing the best for housing in Toronto? A Toronto newspaper suggests that there’s a far more effective alternative than building a handful of affordable apartments in an otherwise luxury development. Better to allow the private sector to develop the site, paying through the nose for the land.
The proceeds could then be used (if the federal government was willing) to build much more affordable housing in some cheaper corner of the city. Read more at The Toronto Sun: Editorial: Smart Ways To Build Affordable Housing.
A more considered view comes from a United Kingdom article, which looks at why cities should be opposed to selling off public land at all. The viewpoint is specific to UK circumstances, but there’s lots of overlap with the social needs in other countries.
Why should cities hang on desperately to public land? To create community land trusts, for one. It’s a method proven to create affordable housing that can remain so for decades, even centuries.
For all the other reasons why a United Kingdom needs to cling to as much public land as possible, read more in The Guardian: If This Public Land Sell-Off Continues, There Could Be None Left By 2050
