Environmentalists and housing experts advocate for sustainable mid-rise solutions as PCs’ sprawl strategy fails to tackle Ontario’s housing crisis

To tackle the challenges that come with a growing population in the fastest growing province in Canada, Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s solution is straightforward: build more. 

Whether it’s expanding infrastructure or constructing housing, the provincial government is committed to putting shovels in the ground—often at the expense of the environment and without adequate consultation with Indigenous communities about land use. 

In October 2022, the Ford government introduced Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, an omnibus and complex piece of legislation aimed at addressing Ontario’s housing crisis by streamlining numerous laws in order to facilitate the construction of 1.5 million homes over the next decade.

However, it quickly became clear that Bill 23 would have significant negative impacts on nine key environmental and development-related statutes, all under the guise of solving the housing shortage.

(Doug Ford/X)

On the same day the bill was passed in November 2022, Chiefs of Ontario and First Nations issued a statement strongly opposing the legislation.

“The Government of Ontario’s tabling of Bill 23 is a blatant violation of First Nations’ inherent, domestic, and international rights over their ancestral and traditional territories,” Ontario Regional Chief Glen Hare had said in the statement. “Bill 23 will inevitably harm Ontario’s environmental heritage and weaken land and water environmental protection.”

A recent report by Environmental Defence underscores the long-term risks of this approach. It highlights that Ontario’s existing low-density sprawl—fueled by decades of government-led highway projects and exclusionary zoning—presents a major obstacle to addressing climate change and maintaining fiscal responsibility at the municipal level. 

“The continuation of this outward, low-density expansion would jeopardize what remains of Ontario’s quality farmland and wipe out its most vulnerable species,” the report states.

Despite opposition to Bill 23 from environmentalists, advocates, and First Nations communities, the Ford government refuses to back down despite their housing projections falling significantly short of expectations, revealing that the ambitious plan may not be yielding the desired results.

On October 30, the provincial government released the Fall Economic statement which showed housing starts are expected to remain below target each year until 2027, signaling a significant slowdown in construction. 

In 2024, the government initially projected nearly 88,000 housing starts, but the latest update estimates only 81,000—well below the target of 125,000 for that year.

On November 18, recent data released by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) revealed housing starts dropped by 18 percent from 2023 in Ontario.

“Ontario and British Columbia have seen declines in all housing types. The increases in the monthly SAAR in Toronto and Vancouver are a promising sign for Ontario and British Columbia, as they drove the national SAAR increase in October. Despite these results, we remain well below what is required to restore affordability in Canada’s urban centres,” CMHC’s Chief Economist Bob Dugan warned in a statement.

To meet its goal of building 1.5 million homes by 2031, the government needed an average of 150,000 housing starts annually, a target that now appears increasingly unlikely. 

“It is a staggering number which we cannot meet without shifting most of our construction, which is currently going on low rise housing, to mid rise formats,” Phil Pothen, Ontario Environment Program Manager, Environmental Defence told The Pointer.

The housing crisis is not just an issue for Ontario—it’s a nationwide challenge driven in large part by the high cost of land. A recent study by researchers at the University of British Columbia points out that land costs can account for up to 30 percent of total housing development expenses in many communities, inflating the overall cost of construction.

One potential solution is to build homes on underutilized land owned by various levels of government. According to the study, the Toronto area, along with five other cities, has enough such land—held by federal, provincial, and municipal governments—to accommodate housing for up to one million people.

“By using public land for housing development, parcels already in the public trust could remove nearly one-third of housing construction costs from the equation entirely,” the study emphasizes.

Publicly owned lands present a valuable opportunity for housing development, offering a more efficient alternative to purchasing private land. For instance, the Federal Lands Initiative provides land at no cost for affordable housing projects. These lands are often in prime locations with easy access to transit and infrastructure, minimizing the need for expensive upgrades, and many of these sites are underutilized, with existing low-rise buildings that could be replaced with higher-density housing.

Yet the provincial government continues to prioritize the construction of “expensive, single detached homes, turbo-charging suburban and exurban sprawl.” 

This is the antithesis of building in the right places,” former Manager of Provincial Planning for Central Ontario and expert on provincial housing and planning policies, Victor Doyle, said in a press conference at Queen’s Park on November 18 during the release of a report card on the province’s housing actions by The Alliance for a Liveable Ontario (ALO), a group of farmers, neighborhood associations, housing activists, environmentalists, healthcare workers, academics, developers, and experts.

The report notes that, over the past two years, government ministers repeatedly made the disproven claim that there isn't enough land within existing towns and cities to meet housing needs. This claim was used to justify removing lands from the Greenbelt, a decision that was later reversed due to widespread public opposition by introducing Bill 136 Greenbelt Statute Law Amendment Act.

More recently, the PC government introduced Bill 185, the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act gives greenfield developers unchecked ability to build expensive single-family homes on farmland, natural areas, and waterways while removing requirements to focus growth in existing communities, and striping municipalities of the power to block expansion. 

It also removes the public’s right to challenge these developments at the Ontario Land Tribunal. 

The province amended laws and sent clear messages to municipalities and developers to focus on building costly single-family homes outside existing towns and cities, the report mentions. “Doing this raises the cost of housing since creating new suburbs from scratch requires extremely expensive new roads, sewers and other infrastructure.”

Meanwhile, a previous study by the same group had found that there is more than enough land within current towns and cities, or already designated by municipalities in 2021, to build over 2 million housing units. Therefore, the first key action to address Ontario’s housing needs is to build housing in the right places—within existing towns and cities, not on farmland or natural areas.

The other recommendation of the report is to prioritize a wide variety of housing types, including multi-residential, low-rise, and mid-rise buildings, often called the missing middle, rather than just small condos in tall towers or more single-family homes while investing significantly in non-market affordable housing.

Mid-rise buildings in Toronto are defined as those between 5-11 storeys in height, shown in comparison to other housing types.

(Environmental Defence)

Doyle said the province’s actions are focused on “development interests,” and are “completely at odds with the facts since 50 percent of Ontario households today are made up of one or two person households. 80 percent of housing starts last year were for multiresidential housing forms, not single-detached housing.”

Additionally, over 600,000 Ontarians are estimated to be unable to afford their homes, with many facing homelessness. Despite widespread calls from housing stakeholders and municipal governments, the provincial government has made no changes to increase funding or support for non-market, government-led affordable housing. 

Even with the imposition of density increases through Minister’s Zoning Orders and other decisions in areas like Transit-Oriented Communities, the government has removed municipal affordable housing targets and failed to set its own. And while it waived development charges for non-profit projects and eliminated the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) on purpose-built rental buildings, the PST waiver largely benefits luxury rentals, not affordable units, which should be the focus, as per the report.

ALO coordinator Franz Hartman says by ignoring these realities the “province’s policies have sent the wrong signals,” encouraging “the wrong type of housing in the wrong places at the wrong prices. And as a result, the housing crisis has only gotten worse.” 

“In short, the province has failed,” he added.

Pothen emphasizes that it’s crucial to recognize "we're in a grave situation," and the most effective way to quickly deliver more homes is also the best strategy for the environment - building mid-rise housing.

However, the challenge to bring costs down to build mid-rise housing remains.

Current laws and policies prevent builders from realizing the potential cost, environmental, and labor efficiency benefits of mid-rise infill housing. Restrictive regulations have artificially made what should be the cheapest, fastest, and most efficient way to build housing more expensive than conventional high-rise or suburban sprawl options.

In its report, Environmental Defence recommends lowering land costs by granting blanket permission for six-storey apartment buildings along major residential streets and avenues across Ontario’s existing suburbs, cities, and small towns. 

Next, to cut construction costs, the report recommends using simple wood-frame construction, eliminating parking minimums, removing "step-back" requirements, and legalizing single-staircase designs up to six storeys, as well as exposed mass timber construction up to eight storeys.

Third, to lower carrying and procedural costs, they advocate for "as-of-right" zoning and streamlined utility connections, making it easier and faster to approve mid-rise apartment buildings on existing residential streets, compared to greenfield development. It also calls for lowering or eliminating government fees, charges, and taxes for infill mid-rise housing to reflect the long-term fiscal benefits of adding homes to existing neighborhoods. 

Finally, they recommend reducing barriers for small builders and renovators, offering procedural support, guidance, and low-cost, long-term fixed-rate financing for mid-rise construction.

Bringing costs of mid-rise housing down will not only help them compete with high-rise development but also incentivize the creation of affordable housing, and provide a mix of unit sizes and attractive ground-related accommodations without expanding suburban sprawl while increasing Ontario’s housing supply efficiently. 

Pothen believes this is achievable in Peel, with areas like Brampton showing potential for such development. However, “the buck stops at Queen’s Park. Municipal governments must do all they can on their own initiative, and the federal government should be using its spending power to ensure both provinces and municipalities are empowered to do the right thing. Almost all of the changes we’ve identified as necessary are within the provincial government’s power to deliver.”

Email: [email protected]

At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you