OUR RIGHT TO QUAYSIDE

If the Quayside project unfolds as planned, this neighborhood will see a reduction of government power compared to all other neighborhoods in the city, and an increase of governance by a single private entity. This can already be recognized by Sidewalk Labs’ attempt to gain control of the money that is predicted to be generated by the site once development is complete. In the leaked document by Sidewalk Lab’s on the secretly planned expansion into the Portlands post-Quayside development, the company outlines their plan to create a ‘value capture zone,’ where generated capital from taxation in the neighborhood will go directly to Sidewalk Lab’s, instead of the local government, who would use that money to funnel into other city services for the entire city. By establishing a value capture zone for Quayside, and subsequently the Portlands if the expansion does occur, Sidewalk Lab’s will be claiming ownership of the success of these properties, disregarding the citizens that are the catalysts for the increased value generated. With that money, Sidewalk will be able to rework and develop new technologies, only now they will be more informed because of the collection of aggregate data from the technologies that have already been implemented. This ties into the theory of both techno-solutionism and determinism. Sidewalk Lab’s will be able to use the money generated from value capture zones, along with the data obtained from sensors on the land, to prescribe new tech that will further force our dependency on their interventions in the neighborhood; ‘to use this, you must download that or input your information here’. Further, it could provide a “friction-less” space in which Sidewalk’s algorithm centered work would eliminate any possibility for expansion in any other direction.

Heightened levels of governance continues to be highlighted through the leaked document, as Sidewalk Lab’s outlines how they plan to move forward with the expansion into the Portlands. First, they hope to create a new district called the IDEA District (as seen in the image on the left), and as this piece of land is parceled off to be sold for development, Sidewalk Labs wants to receive a portion of the money from each sale split it between the government, whichever level it my be depending on the specific lot, and themselves. This means, they want to eliminate Waterfront Toronto’s role as stewards of the waterfront and owner of waterfront land, stripping them of the right to receive money from the sale of land in which they have the rights to currently. Sidewalk Labs is planning on reducing Waterfront Toronto’s power toward the land, claiming that power for themselves. This would put one private entity with monetary goals above all else, as the new steward for this region of the Portlands removing that title from a tripartite government agency. If this Sidewalk Labs goal is fulfilled, Toronto’s waterfront will have competing entities battling for control of the future of this massive piece of land; one entity with the goal of providing for the public’s interest, and the other with the goal of extracting profit from the public.

*image from the Sidewalk Labs document on the Portlands expansion

Furthermore, the future of the development patterns on Toronto’s waterfront, as well as other cities waterfronts around the world, will be greatly impacted if this project is completed. For Toronto, I predict that there will be a race to develop the other existing brownfield sites along the waterfront, where other large private entities will want their own stake of the available land. If this race to gain the rights to develop other lots does occur, these newly introduced companies of similar size to Sidewalk Labs and Google will fight for the same allowances that Sidewalk is forging for themselves, including the rights to the money generated through additional value capture zones, and data excavation on the same scale as Sidewalk as well. Government power on the waterfront will dim, and corporate ownership of public spaces and homes will rise - diminishing any level of affordability in its wake as private capital interests prevail.

Another strong force is determining the layout of Toronto is the Ontario premier Doug Ford and his conservative government. On June 7, 2018, the province of Ontario held an election to vote on a new premier. The winner, Ford, is a known politician in his hometown of Toronto; however, this was his first time on the provincial stage. His brother was once a mayor of Toronto, and Doug had run for Mayor in the last election, being defeated by the current mayor John Tory. Ford has a long-standing relationship with local Toronto politics, but after losing the mayoral election his political views on the city became increasingly vocal and negative. After winning the provincial election off of his populist-conservative views, one of his first orders of business for the province targeted solely Toronto - he announced he would slash Toronto city council by nearly half, changing the number of wards from 44 to 25, and doing so by gerrymandering the wards to be the same as the federal and provincial electoral boundaries in Toronto which he recently won the provincial election off of. This gerrymandering legislation was officially put forward on the same month as the upcoming mayoral election at the end of October, 2018, and therefore, residents were forced to vote on council nominees based on this new ward structure and who they were unfamiliar with. Previously existing wards were not merged with others; instead, old wards were split off into multiple new ones. This caused immense confusion, not only for the residents but for the nominees as well. Many people were unable to vote on their previous councilors, and were forced to vote on individuals who had never represented their areas before. As well, councilors had no experience representing certain areas of the new wards they were running for. Well liked councilors had to run against each other, and the result of the local election made way for a more conservative city hall. This has diminished the previously strong liberal voice in local politics and provided more space for politicians who are strong advocates for a more capitalist Toronto, Ontario and Canada.

However, Doug Ford has always had his gaze facing the waterfront of Toronto and the control of its development. On December 6, 2018, Doug Ford’s party released an audit report that antagonized the provincial representatives at Waterfront Toronto, and caused the firing of three board members. These board members are people who have been integral to the Sidewalk Labs partnership for the city, and who are vocal against Doug Ford’s antics toward the city. Historically, Ford has made apparent that the best thing to do with the Port Lands is build a large-scale attraction as a new economic driver for the city - such as a large mall, Ferris Wheel or a casino. These three newly fired board members have always been opposed. They are also representatives that were hired by the past Premier, Kathleen Wynne - a member of the Liberal Party. While Ford may believe that relieving these three board members will help him get closer to his goals for the Port Lands, he must recognize that Google is his one true competition for its takeover.

So - Torontonians are being faced with two dramatic new forces influencing the function and direction of the city, each with their own personal goals that are disconnected from the changes residents want to see for the community. This is a major concern as the development of planning for Quayside continues. This then begs the question: who is this project being catering to? Higher income and tech-industry workers seem to be at the center of who the project is for, and who it has already began to attract. Not surprisingly, these populations do not accurately represent who the majority of the long-term residents are that live downtown. Because Quayside is located in an area that is surrounded by historically lower-income communities, it can be theorized through ongoing trends in gentrification and examples of various development strategies affecting local communities, that the creation of the captive neighborhood by Google will harm the livelihood of these adjacent areas.