Old Mega-Projects Newly Packaged? Waterfront Redevelopment in Toronto UTE LEHRER and JENNEFER LAIDLEY Abstract The mega-project is experiencing revived interest as a tool for urban renewal. The current mode of large-scale urban development is, however, different from its predecessor in so far as its focus is flexible and diverse rather than singular and monolithic. However, the diversity that the new approach offers, we argue, forecloses upon a wide variety of social practices, reproducing rather than resolving urban inequality and disenfranchisement. Further, we suggest that the diversity of forms and land uses employed in these mega-projects inhibits the growth of oppositional and contestational practices. The new mega-project also demonstrates a shift from collective benefits to a more individualized form of public benefit. The article is based on Toronto’s recent waterfront development proposals, which we identify as an example of a new paradigm of mega-project development within the framework of the competitive city. Its stated but paradoxical goal is to specialize in everything, allowing for the pretence that all interests are being served while simultaneously re-inscribing and reinforcing socioeconomic divisions. Our findings are centred on four areas: institutional change; the importance of mega-projects to global interurban competition; the exclusive nature of public participation processes; and the increasing commodification and circumscription of urban public space. We have all agreed on the imperative of revitalizing Toronto’s waterfront (Robert Fung, Chairman, Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation 1 ). Introduction In November 1999, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, Ontario Premier Mike Harris and Toronto Mayor Mel Lastman gathered on the city’s waterfront to announce their tripartite support for a massive, long-term plan for redeveloping the city’s 46 km waterfront. The 30 year, $17 billion plan envisioned ‘a new waterfront for a new millennium’ that would be ‘the most exciting people place in North America’, acting as ‘a green gateway to the City, a destination for people across Canada, and a magnet to tourism and investment from across North America and around the world’ (City of Toronto, 1999: i–3). This waterfront vision was one of diversity of use, including not The authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers as well as Susan Fainstein and Fernando Diaz Orueta for their constructive comments that helped to improve the article. Various versions of this article were presented at the International Sociological Association, Durban (2006), Critical Geography Conference, Columbus, Ohio (2006), American Association of Geographers, San Francisco (2007), and ISA-Research Committee 21, Vancouver (2007). The support of the Social Science and Humanities Council, Canada, under grants #410-2005-2202 and #410-2005-2071, is acknowledged. 1 Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (2002: 3). International Journal of Urban and Regional Research DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00830.x © 2009 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2009 Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published by Blackwell Publishing. 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA