Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 210

Here's some positive news. This past week, the Government of Canada announced additional details around its $6 billion Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund (CHIF). The goal of the fund is to accelerate the construction of housing-supportive infrastructure (water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste), and the plan is to deliver it through two distinct funding streams.

The first is what they are calling a "direct delivery stream", and this is how the first $1 billion is going to be allocated. Municipalities and Indigenous communities will need to apply, and the funds are expected to be distributed over the next 8 years. But to be eligible -- and this is the positive news -- municipalities will need to have done the following:

• Adopt zoning permitting "four units as-of-right" per lot in all low-density residential areas that have municipal servicing

• Implement a three-year freeze on development charge increases beyond whatever rates were in place on April 2, 2024 (which is when the initial CHIF announcement was made)

Toronto has already done number one . But many/most other municipalities have not, so this should provide a further incentive. As for requirement number two, my understanding is that this is not (yet) in place pretty much anywhere. I haven't heard of any municipalities committing to this. So I'm taking this as incremental good news. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

There are, however, important caveats: item number two only applies to municipalities with populations greater than 300,000 people. This seems unnecessarily high. And I can speak from firsthand experience working in communities below this threshold.

Three-years also isn't very long when it comes to development timelines, especially in this market. A complicated rezoning process might take 3 years, or even 10 years. So this is very much for small-scale projects, which may be impactful or it may not be, depending on quickly the market responds to policy changes like requirement number one.

The last thing I will say, and this relates to yesterday's post , is that freezing is good, but lowering is obviously better.

I live in a condominium. I find it extremely desirable. I don't yearn to live anywhere else. And I think of it as my home . But there is of course truth to this Globe and Mail article :

Canadians, by and large, continue to think of condos and apartments as housing, not homes. That’s hardly surprising given the way Canada builds them: small units in tall towers clustered in downtown cores or near busy transit hubs. They’re the one- and two-bedrooms young people rent in their 20s (and, increasingly, their 30s). The starter homes. The initial landing spot for newcomers. But they are not desirable homes for two large swaths of the population. Young families need multiple bedrooms and  proximity to  parks and schools. Retirees looking to downsize  often say  they want to remain in the same neighbourhood. A dearth of higher-density homes for these two groups   has dire consequences for cities.

The problem is twofold.

Our land use policies are too restrictive, though that is slowing starting to change for the better . And it is simply not economically feasible to build larger, family-sized apartments at any sort of meaningful scale. This is not a developer unwillingness problem, it is a math problem.

Toronto, for instance, would be far better off if we had European-scaled apartment buildings all across the city and a lot more family-friendly housing. I believe this to be true at least. But in order to achieve this, we need to get serious. This is not serious .

We need to dramatically reduce development charges and other government fees . We need to get rid of the site plan control process for smaller buildings. We need to remove required amenity areas (the city is the amenity for small-scale neighborhood apartments). And the list goes on.

So if anyone in government is reading this and is truly serious about building more affordable housing in this country, please give me a call. I will gladly come into your office and run you through a development pro forma so that you can see what it's going to take. We can fix housing.

The Coalition Against New-Home Taxes (or CANT) is a group of home builders, led by Matt Young of Republic Developments , who are asking all levels of government in Canada to lower the taxes on new homes. In some cities, these taxes -- which include everything from development charges to HST -- can account for up to 30% of the cost of a new home. This is bad for housing affordability and runs counter to our publicly stated goals. So to drive this point home, the group created a cheeky game called Taxopoly: The Unwinnable Game of Canadian Homeownership . (Credit to Blackjet for the idea and design.) I don't think that the average buyer understands what kind of taxes are being levied on new homes, and so kudos to CANT for being a loud advocate for positive change. To learn more, sign their pledge, and/or email your representative, here's their website .