San Francisco is in a crisis and Toronto should pay attention. Over the past few months the Bay Area has seen a kind of class war between well-paid tech workers who are being bussed from San Francisco to jobs at Google and other companies to nearby Silicon Valley, and those who find they’re being priced out of their city, with the tech workers serving as scapegoats for economic inequality.

A recent widely read article on TechCrunch explains the roots of San Francisco’s housing crisis, and though some details differ, what’s happening there should be a warning for us here as the similarities between the two cities are many. Toronto architect Larry Richards has referred to our city as “San Francisco turned upside down,” as Toronto’s ravines are the inverse of that city’s hills and both are defining features of each city’s topography. Consider also: both cities have many central neighbourhoods built around the turn of the last century that have become incredibly desirable places to live, where the cheapest houses can’t be had for much less than a million dollars.

RELATED:

Has the condo hurt or helped Toronto?

North Toronto ‘fixer upper’ gets 72 offers, goes for 195 per cent of asking

GTA’s new home sales defy Mother Nature

The sprawl of both the Bay Area’s seven million people and the GTA’s nearly five million has consumed some of best agricultural land on the continent, and both cities have large numbers of commuters who cycle and take transit, yet the car is still a big part of life here and there. Even the Prince Edward Viaduct — or Bloor St. viaduct as it is more commonly known — over the Don Valley is as beautiful as the Golden Gate Bridge; don’t let the Toronto naysayers tell you anything different.

A theme throughout the TechCrunch article is that NIMBYism is a big culprit in keeping San Francisco expensive, a Not In My Backyard sentiment that prevents much new development. Like Toronto, San Francisco has a strong tradition of citizen activism born in resistance to destructive freeway and urban renewal schemes in the 1950s through the 1970s. Yet that resistance has morphed into a profoundly conservative culture of “no” in both cities, regardless of political affiliations.

In Toronto, where we do have new construction, there are near-bloody battles on main streets over condo buildings six to eight storeys high that are opposed by nearby residents living in single family homes that cost, at the very least, double what the condos would. This means the barrier to neighbourhood entry is many hundreds of thousands of dollars rather than a few hundred thousand; not cheap still but open to more buyers. Some councillors take principled stands on the side of more people, like Mary-Margaret McMahon in the Beach during the fight over the six-storey condo building planned for the Lick’s hamburger site, a battle so relentless I’ve heard her say it gave her grey hair. If only other councillors mustered the same courage.

Most of the condos built in Toronto are not “luxury” but rather are the only place many people with standard issue, 9 to 5 jobs will ever afford to buy. Want more affordable housing? Make no mistake this kind of NIMBYism doesn’t much care if new residents are paying market price or if it’s geared to income — the message is that this neighbourhood is closed to anyone else.

What’s at stake if Toronto continues down this road to San Francisco is the very idea that this is a place for everyone, a “You Belong Here” kind of city. Do we change that welcoming idea of the city to match its demonstrated conservatism, or do we figure out a way to change the culture of no into one that is more concerned with figuring out how to fit more people into this city in buildings that are well designed and at various levels of affordability?

Condos aren’t a threat to Toronto’s diversity and liveability, but saying no to everything is.

Shawn Micallef writes every Friday about where and how we live in the GTA. Wander the streets with him on Twitter @shawnmicallef

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Read more about: