PROVINCIAL PLATFORM
More Neighbours Toronto, 2025
Provincial Election Housing Position
Housing affordability remains a top issue in Canada. Ontario, in particular, has struggled to hit its housing targets and lower costs. While every level of government must play a role in fixing the problem, the provincial government has the greatest responsibility. It oversees municipalities and land use planning, infrastructure and services, and controls a significant portion of housing-related taxes.
More Neighbours Toronto is committed to advocating for reforms to end the housing crisis. Volunteers across the political spectrum have come together to advocate for market and non-market solutions. Though we have witnessed a shift in rhetoric, this has not always translated into action. In this 2025 election cycle several provincial parties seem poised to go beyond the last election, but there is still much to do. Despite the Progressive Conservatives stating last election that the Housing Affordability Task Force (HATF) recommendations would be their roadmap, they have not implemented or have watered down many recommendations.
Increasing construction costs and fluctuating interest rates have contributed to uncertainty and added costs. Still, Ontario has performed particularly poorly, with housing starts down 18% in 2024, according to CMHC. Further, building permit numbers have been declining since 2021. At the same time, apartments that began construction 6-8 years ago are now coming online, bringing more than 5,000 new housing units to Toronto and elsewhere in Ontario. This new housing stock, coupled with updated international student financial testing requirements, is relaxing pricing pressure on 1-bedroom units. Still, the housing market remains inaccessible overall.
With the announcement of the February 2025 provincial election, we have updated our provincial policy position with suggestions from recent provincial budget submissions and have included new ideas from our membership. Our position comprises five categories: Setting Ambitious Goals, Building More, Housing Justice, Changing Behaviour and Aligning Incentives, and Scaling Up and Building Faster. This provincial policy position reflects the required actions to address the housing crisis, the significant role that the province must play, and the various tools that are available to political parties.
1. Setting Ambitious Goals
Housing policies should reflect the scale and urgency of the crisis. Parties must acknowledge the severity of the housing shortage and how provincial growth planning has contributed to the crisis. Political parties must respond with a firm commitment to building more homes and ending chronic homelessness.
1.5 million homes is the target from the Housing Affordability Task Force report (HAFT); however, other estimates have suggested higher targets are required to meet demand. Since the release of the HATF report, Ontario has fallen behind on this target.
Current provincial growth targets based on the Hemson Report extrapolate from recent trends. This means that cities are in a cycle of declining provincial expectations because the province has failed to build in locations where many people have already been forced out. Growth targets should be based on the need for housing in each city and go beyond the minimum demand to allow for supply elasticity. Additionally, plans should account for students by requiring additional housing in municipalities with large or rapidly growing student populations.
This target will require a set of ambitious policies that prioritize housing and a commitment to significantly increasing transitional and non-market housing.
2. Building More
The province has taken steps toward increased housing permissions and transit-oriented development. Still, the changes have been incremental, and less than recommended in the HATF Report. Provincial parties must end exclusionary zoning by recognizing the critical function of zoning rules, including setbacks, height limits, minimum lot frontages, etc. Changes to the building code can make low- and mid-rise apartments more liveable and economically feasible. The province should also work to ensure that dense housing is permitted around its transit investments.
Provincial changes have allowed up to three units on a residential lot. This change is less than the four units recommended in the HATF report. In addition, no changes were made to height permissions or building envelopes, meaning that municipal rules may limit the floor space and make additional units impractical.
Minimum standards would limit mandatory stepbacks and excessive setback requirements. The province should also eliminate large minimum lot frontages that create “mansion zoning,” where only large lots with a minimum number of units are allowed. Further, urban design guidelines that limit usable floor space (e.g. angular plane policies), should be restricted, and minimum parking requirements should have a provincial standard.
Multi-tenant housing would legitimize a common form of housing that is often informal and quickly allow for greater density in single-detached homes without converting them to multi-unit buildings. The Parkdale Neighbourhood Land Trust has advocated for the positive affordability impacts of rooming houses in the past.
Reform would permit low-rise and mid-rise apartments to align more with international standards. Recent changes in British Columbia, which now permit a single stair for buildings up to six storeys, provides a proof of concept for Ontario.
The current provincial approach sets an average density target and allows municipalities to define the region where it applies. This approach lets municipalities continue existing patterns that concentrate growth into small areas while preserving low-rise permissions near major transit stations. While Protected Major Transit Stations Areas require minimum densities on each lot, municipalities like Toronto have applied to lower these targets to reflect existing zoning. A more efficient approach than requiring bespoke definitions and approvals for every transit station would follow British Columbia’s recent changes, where height permissions are based on distance from transit; this is a more straightforward, fairer system that is less likely to reinforce existing exclusionary practices.
Transition zones developed near streetcar and bus lines create walkable, transit-connected communities that are more accessible and denser. Transition zones would permit apartments and denser housing forms on quieter, safer residential streets within a few blocks of arterials rather than confining apartment developments to noisy and polluted areas. Transition zones should include as-of-right height permissions of 6-11 storeys and eliminate minimum parking requirements.
3. Housing Justice
Government policy and subsidy must support mixed-use housing to achieve a range of housing options, including social, affordable, co-op and rental housing. After several decades with almost no purpose-built rental starts, Ontario has begun to see an increase in purpose-built rentals due to policy changes, such as rolling back rent control for new construction and eliminating HST. Additionally, interest rates have further shifted demand to rental tenure.
The provincial government plays a vital role in setting the policy that shapes what gets built. By making better use of provincial lands and providing tax incentives and direct subsidies, the provincial government can create options for people who cannot access market-rate housing on their own. In addition, the provincial government plays an important role in protecting existing tenants while ensuring an adequate supply of rental housing for future tenants.
A list of provincially-owned properties should be made available to municipalities for usage in programs like Toronto’s Housing Now (or the province can initiate a similar program). However, due consideration must be given to addressing the issues that have delayed Toronto's Housing Now program.
A public builder would be empowered to deliver mixed-income housing with a sustainable funding model.
ODSP rates have not kept pace with inflation, let alone housing costs. Today, inflation-adjusted ODSP rates are $200 less than in 2002 and $400 less than in 1995. Increasing this payment would increase housing security for recipients and those in public housing. Moreover, the rent portion of this payment would go toward building maintenance and repairs, helping to keep existing public housing in good repair.
Direct subsidy or tax reductions for social, affordable, public and supportive housing plans. Toronto’s Generational Transformation plan estimates that about $21 billion in subsidy, plus additional low-cost loans, would be needed to cover capital costs for 65,000 units (6,500 rent-geared-to-income, 41,000 below-market rental and 17,500 rent-controlled market units) in current market conditions in Toronto, or about $320,000 per unit, in addition to using City-owned land, as well as tax and fee deferrals and waivers.
Rent controls affect project viability and decisions about rental versus condo tenure. Offsets allow rent controls to be implemented for tenant security without disincentivizing new purpose-built rentals. For example, Toronto’s Rental Housing Supply Program proposed waiving building permit and planning application fees, as well as property tax exemptions to offset rent controls for market rate units capped at 2% above the provincial guideline.
Extended and/or long-term financing options offered to non-profit and co-op builders would increase their access to construction loans at lower interest rates.
Replacement policies are intended for apartments undergoing demolition or redevelopment and support municipalities while they adjust their land use patterns to expand apartment permissions to new areas.
Improvements to the landlord-tenant board process and utilized technologies coupled with enhanced access to legal aid would better support tenants' rights to housing.
The creation of new tax rates tied to the number of units a beneficiary owns can combat decreasing housing stock due to the financialization of housing.
4. Changing Behaviour and Aligning Incentives
The current provincial strategy of assuming that municipalities know best has not succeeded. While some municipalities have stepped up to allow more density in neighbourhoods and address approval times, others have stated an unwillingness to change and even resorted to requesting the province suspend the rights of those who cannot find adequate shelter and who are out of options.
However, municipal barriers to housing are partly a result of misaligned incentives as cities have taken on more responsibility with limited revenue tools. Parties should seek to provide better incentives while also recognizing that not every municipal objection is legitimate. Leadership will require a willingness to enforce provincial growth targets. The public can help hold governments accountable with better access to information.
This could involve provincial transfers based on housing starts or the municipal services corporation utility model described in the HATF report. It could also involve new municipal revenue tools, including split taxation that relies more on land value than total property value. In addition, the province should undertake studies to calculate development-related charges or conduct routine audits to ensure reasonable costs rather than allowing each municipality to conduct their own analysis.
This includes Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data (which should be updated regularly), and rental data by building/unit so that researchers can better understand our housing market. In addition, municipalities should be required to prepare current and planned transit maps and maps showing where there is available water, sewer and school capacity.
An independent auditor would evaluate municipal plans for compliance with provincial planning. The auditor should also evaluate local zoning by-laws and approval practices that comply with current provincial legislation but that may present as-yet-unidentified barriers to housing.
Penalties could take the form of provincial zoning rules that become the standard for municipalities that miss targets, expedited applications to the Ontario Land Tribunal under special provincial zoning standards, or an approach similar to California’s Builders’ Remedy. The province could also make transit or other funding transfers conditional on zoning changes or housing targets.
For example, additional funding could depend on exceeding housing starts or achieving a target vacancy rate during growth periods.
Taxes add costs to housing, raising its price floor. This limits the ability of builders, including non-profits, to produce low-cost housing. The province should build on recent moves to remove HST on purpose-built rentals and look at reducing or removing HST on other types of housing as an incentive to build. Similarly, land transfer taxes should be reduced or removed.
5. Scaling Up and Building Faster
In Ontario, the average time for a housing application is 20 months, although there is significant variation between municipalities. Approval times have improved in the last year, possibly due to provincial mandates and penalties introduced in Bill 109 (partly rolled back in Bill 185). However, approval still takes longer than in most other provinces and countries, even as the number of applications has declined during the recent period of high interest rates. Many site-specific applications fail to use technologies or processes that allow delivery to scale, producing housing more cheaply and efficiently.
The recent legalization of mass timber up to 18 storeys is a significant move towards enabling modular and panelized construction. The province should include pre-approved modular and panelized designs in a design catalogue, support regulatory changes needed for off-site construction and work with municipalities to expedite modular housing builds for supportive housing.
Strata ownership is a time-tested, affordable ownership solution in British Columbia, and expanding permissions also enables housing choice, better reflecting the diversity of household composition and housing arrangements in the province.
A catalogue of approved accessory dwellings, multiplexes, small apartments and mid-rise buildings would hasten the time from approval to completion, thus efficiently increasing the housing supply according to demand.
Detached homes are regularly expanded and constructed without consultation. Small multiplexes and apartments are regularly subject to separate conditions and processes despite being of similar size, giving veto points and opening up indirect opportunities for people zoning. Delays and extra requirements add costs and uncertainty to denser projects, disincentivizing more homes.
Ensure an adequate supply of construction labour by coordinating with the federal government on immigration. Also, consider a public builder or other government incentives to retain labour during economic downturns.
Update the building code to allow small elevators in buildings of up to six storeys. This code change would increase interior floor space and promote units with more cross-ventilation. Harmonizing elevator requirements with a broader international standard would also increase access to new and replacement parts, reducing the cost and wait time for elevator repairs. Reconsidering Canadian standards that are harmonized with the U.S. is particularly important given the uncertainty in the U.S. and the ways in which Canadian markets could be expanded.
Projects categorized as urgent and essential to meet basic housing necessity, including shelters and supportive housing, should have expedited approvals at the provincial level.