Housing & affordability

GO DEEPER · POLICY & PRIORITIES · What will you do?

P01 · question 1 of 10

What specific housing changes would you support in Ward 14, where would the housing go, and how would you ensure some of it remains genuinely affordable?

Quick version: S01 · What is the one housing change you would push for in Ward 14?

Approach & proposed action

Susan Chapelle

I would push for one coordinated application process, a clear fee schedule, published approval timelines and a single City contact responsible for moving each housing application through departments. Straightforward projects that meet the rules should receive straightforward approvals. Applicants should not have to become experts in navigating City Hall. I would also take on Urban Forestry’s role in housing approvals. Protecting our tree canopy matters, but requirements must be consistent, proportionate and explained early. I would seek coordinated reviews, clear tree protection standards and a timely escalation process when departments disagree. My own laneway housing experience showed me how fragmented approvals add substantial costs. For lasting affordability, I would retain City land for co-op and non-profit housing through long-term leases, support acquisition of existing affordable rentals and protect tenants from displacement. I would also defend employment lands. A growing ward needs places to work, childcare, parks and reliable transit, as well as places to live.

Jason Stevens

affordable housing should be a priority

Maria Voutsinas

There is no doubt that we need more housing of all types. People just keep wanting to move to Toronto and Toronto Danforth is a popular location. We need to work with developers to identify why they are not building more units. A greater supply of housing will reduce costs and lower house purchase and rental prices. The priority should be along major thoroughfares with good access to public transit and services. At the same time we should support more housing in communities such as laneway housing and multiplexes. While all this is being done we must keep in mind those who require housing that is below market rent and find ways to incentivize builders to invest in subsidized housing. Beginning July 1, 2027, new builds along major routes must set aside 5% of units for affordable housing. We must monitor this closely to ensure that these units are being built and assess whether 5% is sufficient.

Cost & funding

Susan Chapelle

Fund affordable housing through municipal land contributions, existing housing programs, and provincial and federal partnerships. Long-term ground leases would preserve public ownership while reducing upfront land costs for co-ops and non-profits. Support financing partnerships that secure lasting affordability, with transparent agreements and measurable results. For smaller projects, review application fees, remove duplicated reviews and pursue targeted fee relief for secondary suites. Developers should contribute to the infrastructure their projects require, within municipal authority, but we also have to include renewal costs in fee structures, not just immediate build. Proposals should identify its capital costs, ongoing operating costs and funding sources.

Trade-offs & affected groups

Susan Chapelle

Renters risk displacement when redevelopment removes cheaper homes. Homeowners face construction disruption, changing streetscapes and infrastructure pressures, while younger residents, families and newcomers need more housing choices. Seniors and people with disabilities need accessible homes near services. Small builders benefit from simpler approvals, fee relief reduces City revenue. Faster construction must be balanced with stormwater capacity and neighbourhood amenities. Using public land for affordable housing means foregoing sale revenue and competing uses such as parks. Converting employment lands adds homes, while displacing businesses and local jobs. These decisions require tenant protections, infrastructure funding and public accountability for economic development.

Authority & feasibility

Susan Chapelle

Council can change zoning, application fees and approval processes within provincial law, lease Toronto owned land and fund affordable housing initiatives, although I disagree with the municipality acting as developer. As councillor, I would bring motions, build support and work with community groups to implement changes. Coordinated reviews, clear timelines and proportionate fees are practical reforms, but require staffing and budget decisions. Affordable housing on public land takes longer, requiring suitable sites, servicing, financing and housing partners. Provincial rules, construction costs and funding availability limit what Council can deliver.

Deliverable & timeline

Susan Chapelle

I would bring a motion requesting a review of housing application fees, duplicated approval steps and delays. Within the first year, I would seek Council approval for proportionate fees, coordinated reviews and published service standards.

Supporting sources

Susan Chapelle

I would explore modular construction on suitable public sites to deliver housing faster. Vancouver offers useful precedents. Mukhtar Latif helped advance its modular housing initiative, and the City’s first project at 220 Terminal Avenue delivered 40 affordable homes on public land. Later supportive housing projects, including Larwill Place, combined modular homes with funded healthcare and round-the-clock support. The lesson for Toronto is to plan housing and care together. Public land and faster construction can help, but residents also need secure tenancy, sustainable operating funding and access to primary care, mental-health services and other supports appropriate to their needs. https://council.vancouver.ca/20160517/documents/rr2presentation.pdf

Responded, but not to this question

Denise Walcott

No response yet

Maqsood Ahmad · Sara Ehrhardt · George Fawcett · Mary Fragedakis · John Kladitis · Michael Mitchell · Caryma Sa'd · Dianne Saxe · Devyn Stackhouse · Christiane Tetreault