After my last article, a few friends in the industry nudged me with a simple challenge:

“Okay, we understand the problems. But what are we actually going to do about housing in Toronto and the GTA?”

It’s a fair question.

So in order to answer it, we’ve started a living list of practical ideas to fix Toronto’s housing crisis. Some of the ideas are mine, many are borrowed. All of them have the potential to move the needle on housing. We want this to become a document that planners, architects, developers, policy nerds, and curious citizens can use as an avenue to throw real solutions on the table.

So without further ado, here it is:

1. Make zoning rules smarter with flexible conditional logic.

Right now, built form regulations are mostly rigid numbers: fixed heights, fixed densities, fixed everything.

Instead, those rules should work more like “if/then” logic:

For Example: If you’re building a multiplex, then allow up to 75% lot coverage for a primary apartment building of 4 storeys (2.5 m/storey).
- This way, apartment sizes respond to lot configuration, naturally reflecting the existing neighbourhood’s “character” instead of being arbitrarily limited.
If a lot can’t support both a laneway/garden suite and a multiplex (because of code or lot size constraints), then bump max lot coverage to 85% to make the project viable.

Dynamic rules are superior to static boxes they are flexible.

2. Scrap unit caps for multiplexes.

Let site size, market conditions, and building code dictate how spaces are divided. If the building can safely and reasonably support more homes, why cap them?

(See my last article)

3. Remove elevator requirements for buildings less than 6 storeys.

Update accessibility code so elevators are only required at 6+ storeys.

Five-storey walk-ups with accessible units at grade are:

Common in other cities.
Reasonable to live in.
Cheaper and easier to build.

This idea opens the door to more small apartment buildings without expensive vertical circulation killing the pro forma.

4. Don’t wait for the fire code to formally approve single-stair apartment buildings.

We already know single-stair buildings can work safely at the scale of small apartments.

The City of Toronto’s Building department should hire local architects and engineers to design pre-approved, engineered single-stair cores as alternative solutions. These standard details would stay in place until single-stair buildings are permitted as-of-right up to 6 storeys.

This would accelerate multiplex adoption and support family-sized units.
Applicants could simply reference the pre-approved details in their documentation, speeding everyone up.

5. Right-size servicing + transformer requirements for multiplexes.

Current servicing and transformer requirements are often oversized for small buildings. This requirement adds unnecessary cost and complexity.

Instead, we should:

Standardize and reduce these requirements for multiplexes.
Adjust transformer size expectations to reflect actual loads for these building types.

(Credit: LGA / Re-Housing)

6. Use development charges to proactively upgrade infrastructure.

We’ve been collecting development charges’s for 20+ years, and have a massive surplus.

Let’s strategically deploy those funds and use them to upgrade power, water, and sewage infrastructure. These upgrades would be rolled out in specific target areas where density is expected to increase via multiplex construction.

With proper foresight, the city can prime itself for the growth it needs with city-initiated, city–funded infrastructure.

7. Publish a standard power guide tied to unit count.

Developers and designers shouldn’t have to guess (or overbuild) electrical capacity.

Create a clear, easy-to-reference power guide that links:

Unit count → Expected power needs → Servicing expectations.

Make it predictable. Predictability lowers risk. Lower risk = more projects completed.

8. Allow more density for developers that add public parking.

Create a density bonus system where:

If a developer includes public parking on the P1 level (where feasible),
Then they get additional density as-of-right, up to a negotiated maximum.

As new buildings come online:

On-street parking can be reduced.
Road congestion can ease.
Density provided increases.
But overall parking supply remains the same or even increases.

(Credit: Chris Spoke)

9. Stop forcing the cost of “complete streets” upgrades onto individual projects.

We all like complete streets, and the idea of leveraging development to implement them is a neat idea. But they are public infrastructure and should be paid for by public dollars.

We can’t offload the cost of complete streets improvements onto individual developers. They should be funded through development charges and other tax revenues. ,

10. Raise property taxes (selectively) on low-density homes near transit hubs.

In highly transit-accessible locations, low-density (1–3 unit) buildings represent a massive opportunity cost.

Solution:

Increase property taxes specifically on low-density properties in the best transit areas.
Make it more expensive to “sit” on highly valuable, underused land next to expensive transit investments.

This would compensate the city for the lost opportunity of inefficient land use next to expensive transit assets.

11. Stop releasing “standard” designs that don’t pencil.

Governments love releasing standardized designs and catalogs. But if they haven’t been assessed for basic financial viability, then they aren’t solutions, they’re PR. Financial feasibility should be a primary pre-requisite when delivering standards, not an afterthought.

12. Standardize site plan requirements for mid-size buildings on major streets.

For buildings that qualify under major streets zoning (e.g., 6 storeys, ~60 units as-of-right):

Create standardized site plan requirements and details that have already gone through technical review.
Let the site plan agreement handle the contextual tweaks.

This can shave months off timelines for exactly the scale of housing we say we want.

13. Eliminate development charges for projects with 60 units or less.

We need more small and mid-sized projects. So:

Eliminate (or heavily reduce) development charges for all projects 60 units and under regardless of tenure.
Let larger projects (60+ units), where the real strain on infrastructure occurs, carry the development charge burden.

This makes it easier for small, incremental projects to get built—multiplexes, small apartments, and infill.

14. Remove HST from all new housing.

All orders of government have mandates to increase housing supply. Yet, supply provision is being actively slowed down by taxation regimes. HST on new housing is a tax on supply. If you want people to do less of something, then you tax it. If we want to do more of something, we remove taxes.

Eliminate HST from all new housing. If we’re serious about affordability, taxing production is counterproductive.

(Credit: Most Developers)

15. Treat key housing types as critical infrastructure

The City should create a “preferred typology” list for housing that is:

Fast-tracked
Subsidized
Treated as critical infrastructure to broaden funding sources

For example:

Multiplexes
Small apartments (≤ 60 units)
Laneway and garden suites

These building types should:

Receive city support to fast-track approvals
Access subsidies for necessary municipal upgrades.

The city can frame these as critical in terms of:

Future tax revenue they gain by adding homes
Increasing the economic productivity of currently underused infrastructure

Any and all of these ideas should be seriously considered by government. This list is just a starting point though, and will continue to evolve.

We want to keep adding, refining, and discussing these ideas with you.

Have an idea you want promoted, tested, or challenged?Email: future@proofhousing.comLet’s build a shared playbook for fixing housing in Toronto and the GTA.

accordingto.ca

A Living List of Practical Solutions for…