Tools and Practices to Address Housing Issues - Background ... · Peel Housing Strategy (August 2009) Tools and Practices to Address Housing Issues Acknowledgements The Peel Housing

Final August 2009

Prepared by:

Peel Housing Strategy (August 2009) Tools and Practices to Address Housing Issues

Acknowledgements

The Peel Housing Strategy was undertaken on behalf of the Region of Peel. We would like to thank the study Project Team members for their input and assistance during the preparation of this report. These members include:

Arvin Prasad, Director of Planning, Policy and Research Division, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services

Ron Jaros, Planning Manager, Policy and Research Division, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services

John Yeh, Planner, Policy and Research Division, Environment, Transportation & Planning Services

Pat Chrisjohn, Policy Analyst, Housing Policy and Programs Division, Human Services Department

Geoff McIlroy, Acting Manager, Housing Policy, Housing Policy and Programs Division, Human Services Department

Cathy Zita, Supervisor, Community Programs Unit, Human Services Department

Michael Grodzinski, Inspector, Operational Planning Department, Peel Regional Police

Kennedy Self, Manager, Development Planning Services, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services

Joan Davison, Reproductive Health Manager, Health Services

Irene McCutcheon, Senior Public Affairs Associate

Jessica Wu, Planner, Policy and Research Division, Environment, Transportation & Planning Services

Archana Vyas, Planner, Policy and Research Division, Environment, Transportation & Planning Services

We also wish to thank representatives from various social service agencies, housing providers, municipal departments and the private sector for providing valuable input into key aspects of the study. In particular, we would like to thank individuals who completed a survey, participated in interviews and attended the consultation sessions.


Consulting Team

The Peel Housing Strategy was prepared by the consulting firm SHS Consulting. The consulting team for this document was comprised of:

Christine Pacini, Principal & Study Director

Cassandra Vink, Senior Research and Policy Analyst

Michel Molgat Sereacki, Research Analyst

Johanna Hashim, Research Analyst

70 East Beaver Creek Road, Unit 46,

Richmond Hill, ON L4B 3B2 905.763.7555

www.shs-inc.ca

http://www.shs-inc.ca/


Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................ i

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................ 1

1.1 Study Background ....................................................................... 1

1.2 Study Context ............................................................................ 1

1.3 Study Objectives ........................................................................ 4

1.4 Study Approach and Methodology ..................................................... 5

1.4.1 Study Format ....................................................................... 7

1.4.2 Study Area .......................................................................... 9

1.4.3 Sources of Information ............................................................ 9

1.5 Housing Priorities and Strategic Directions .........................................10

2.0 Federal/Provincial Legislation, Policies & Programs ............................. 14

2.1 Federal and Provincial Legislation ...................................................14

2.1.1 Federal Legislation ...............................................................14

2.1.1.1 National Housing Act ..........................................................14

2.1.2 Provincial Legislation .............................................................15

2.1.2.1 Municipal Act ...................................................................15

2.1.2.2 Planning Act.....................................................................16

2.1.2.3 Social Housing Reform Act ....................................................19

2.1.2.4 Environmental Assessment Act ...............................................19

2.1.2.5 Development Charges Act .....................................................19

2.1.2.6 Brownfields Act .................................................................20

2.1.2.7 Residential Tenancies Act.....................................................21

2.1.2.8 Greenbelt Act ...................................................................22

2.1.2.9 Oak Ridges Moraine Act .......................................................22

2.1.2.10 Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act ......................22

2.1.2.11 Ontarians with Disabilities Act ...............................................23

2.1.2.12 Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act ...................................23

2.1.2.13 Local Health System Integration Act ........................................24

2.1.2.14 Persons with Developmental Disabilities Act ...............................25

2.1.2.15 Provincial Policy Statement ..................................................25

2.1.2.16 Places to Grow Act .............................................................27

2.1.2.17 Ontario Building Code, 2006 ..................................................29

2.2 Federal and Provincial Policies and Programs .....................................30

2.2.1 Federal Policies and Programs ..................................................30

2.2.1.1 Affordable Housing Initiative .................................................31

2.2.1.2 Seed Funding Program .........................................................32

2.2.1.3 Proposal Development Funding ..............................................33

2.2.1.4 Affordability and Choice Today ..............................................33

2.2.1.5 CMHC Mortgage Insurance Practices .........................................34

2.2.1.6 Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program ............................36


2.2.1.7 Shelter Enhancement Program ...............................................38

2.2.1.8 Emergency Repair Program ...................................................39

2.2.1.9 Home Adaptation for Seniors‘ Independence ..............................39

2.2.1.10 Homelessness Partnering Strategy ...........................................40

2.2.1.11 Aboriginal Off-Reserve Housing ..............................................41

2.2.1.12 Youth Employment Strategy ..................................................41

2.2.1.13 Energy Efficiency and Sustainability ........................................42

2.2.1.13.1 ecoENERGY Programs .......................................................42

2.2.1.13.2 CMHC EQuilibrium Housing .................................................43

2.2.1.13.3 CMHC Energy Efficient Housing Mortgage Rebate .......................44

2.2.1.14 Federal Taxation Policies .....................................................44

2.2.1.14.1 Goods and Services Tax .....................................................45

2.2.1.14.2 Treatment of Capital Gains ................................................45

2.2.1.14.3 Capital Cost Allowance .....................................................46

2.2.1.14.4 Deductibility of Soft Costs .................................................46

2.2.1.14.5 Capital Taxes on Rental Properties .......................................47

2.2.1.14.6 Low Income Housing Tax Credit ...........................................47

2.2.1.14.7 Other Tax Changes ..........................................................47

2.3 Provincial Policies and Programs .....................................................48

2.3.1.1 Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program ..............................48

2.3.1.2 Affordable Housing Program – Brownfields Initiative .....................48

2.3.1.3 Ontario Trillium Foundation ..................................................49

2.3.1.4 Rental Opportunities for Ontario Families ..................................49

2.3.1.5 Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters ..............................49

2.3.1.6 Capital Funding for Repairs to Social Housing .............................50

2.3.1.7 Provincial Infrastructure Funding ............................................50

2.3.1.8 Homelessness Prevention Program ..........................................50

2.3.1.9 Provincial Rent Bank ...........................................................51

2.3.1.10 Shelter Allowances .............................................................51

2.3.1.11 Poverty Reduction Strategy ...................................................53

2.3.1.12 Supportive Housing Policies and Programs (MOH-LTC/LHIN) ............53

2.3.1.12.1 Local Health Integration Networks ........................................54

2.3.1.12.2 Community Care Access Centres ..........................................54

2.3.1.12.3 Aging at Home Strategy ....................................................55

2.3.1.12.4 Supportive Housing and Community Support Services .................55

2.3.1.12.5 Mental Health and Addiction ..............................................56

2.3.1.12.6 Residential Care Housing ...................................................56

2.3.1.13 Supportive Housing Policies and Programs (MCSS) ........................57

2.3.1.13.1 Persons with Developmental Disabilities .................................57

2.3.1.13.2 Aboriginal Healing and Wellness Strategy................................58

2.3.1.13.3 Victims of Domestic Violence ..............................................59

2.3.1.13.4 Persons who are Deaf, Hard of Hearing and/or Blind ..................59

2.3.1.13.5 In-Home and Out-of-Home Respite Care .................................59


2.3.1.13.6 Home and Vehicle Modification Program ................................59

2.3.1.13.7 Community Start-Up Benefit and Maintenance Benefit ................59

2.3.1.14 Infrastructure Ontario .........................................................60

2.3.1.15 Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program ..............................60

2.3.1.16 Community Improvement Plans ..............................................61

2.3.1.17 Development Permit System .................................................61

2.3.1.18 Energy Efficiency and Sustainability ........................................62

2.3.1.18.1 Green Light for a Better Environment ....................................62

2.3.1.18.2 Ontario Power Authority Low Income/Multifamily Programs: ........63

2.3.1.19 Provincial Sales Tax ............................................................63

3.0 Municipal Legislation, Policies and Programs ...................................... 65

3.1 Legislation ...............................................................................65

3.1.1 Official Plans ......................................................................65

3.1.1.1 Region of Peel Official Plan ..................................................65

3.1.1.2 Mississauga Plan ................................................................67

3.1.1.3 The City of Brampton Official Plan ..........................................69

3.1.1.4 The Town of Caledon Official Plan ..........................................71

3.1.2 Zoning By-laws ....................................................................73

3.1.2.1 City of Mississauga .............................................................73

3.1.2.2 City of Brampton ...............................................................75

3.1.2.3 Town of Caledon ...............................................................78

3.1.2.4 Zoning By-law Recommendations ............................................79

3.1.3 Municipal Housing Facilities By-Law............................................81

3.1.4 Development Charges, Fees and Levies .......................................81

3.1.5 Community Improvement Plans .................................................82

3.1.6 Area Municipalities Relevant Programs and Initiatives ......................83

3.1.6.1 City of Mississauga .............................................................84

3.1.6.2 City of Brampton ...............................................................84

3.1.6.3 Caledon ..........................................................................84

3.2 Policies and Programs .................................................................85

3.2.1 Liveable Peel Initiative ..........................................................85

3.2.2 Region of Peel Human Services Plan ...........................................87

3.2.3 Regional and Area Municipal Accessibility Committees .....................88

3.2.4 Affordable Housing Design Guidelines .........................................89

3.2.5 Universal Accessibility Standards for Affordable Housing Projects ........89

3.2.6 Regional Homelessness Initiatives ..............................................89

3.2.6.1 Preventing Homelessness in Peel Program .................................90

3.2.6.2 Outreach ........................................................................91

3.2.6.3 Advocacy and Collaboration with Other Levels of Government .........92

3.2.7 Emergency Shelters and Transitional Housing ................................92

3.2.8 Domiciliary Hostels ...............................................................92

3.2.9 Victims of Domestic Violence: ..................................................93

3.2.10 Social Housing .....................................................................93


3.2.10.1 Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters (Peel Allocation) .........94

3.2.10.2 Capital Funding for Repairs to Social Housing (Peel Allocation) ........94

3.2.10.3 Social Housing Administration and Federal Funding ......................94

3.2.11 Rent Supplement ..................................................................95

3.2.12 Peel‘s Affordable Rental and Supportive Housing ............................95

3.2.13 Long Term Care ...................................................................97

3.2.14 Peel‘s Affordable Homeownership Program ..................................98

3.2.15 Green$aver ........................................................................99

4.0 Tools and Practices ..................................................................... 99

4.1 Adequate Land Supply to Accommodate Growth ..................................99

4.1.1 Existing Policies ................................................................. 100

4.1.2 Residential Intensification as a Growth Strategy ........................... 100

4.1.3 Directing Growth to Urban Growth Centres ................................. 100

4.1.4 Achieving Density Targets in Designated Greenfield Areas ............... 101

4.1.5 Vacant Land Survey ............................................................. 101

4.2 Diversified Housing Stock: Densities, Forms, Type, Tenure & Price ......... 101

4.2.1 Housing Targets ................................................................. 101

4.2.2 Inclusionary Zoning ............................................................. 103

4.2.3 Density Bonusing and Transfer of Development Rights .................... 108

4.2.4 Prohibiting Downzoning ........................................................ 110

4.2.5 Rooming, Boarding and Lodging Houses ..................................... 110

4.2.6 Single Room Occupancy ........................................................ 113

4.2.7 Multi-Family Homes ............................................................ 114

4.2.8 Convertible House .............................................................. 115

4.2.9 Quattroplex ...................................................................... 116

4.2.10 Stacked Row/Town House ..................................................... 117

4.2.11 Grow Home ...................................................................... 118

4.3 Residential Intensification .......................................................... 119

4.3.1 Infill Development .............................................................. 119

4.3.2 Secondary Suites/Accessory Dwelling Units ................................. 120

The City of Edmonton ..................................................................... 121

4.3.3 Garden Suites .................................................................... 123

4.3.4 Redevelopment of Social Housing ............................................ 124

4.4 Efficient and Effective Use of Land and Resources ............................. 124

4.4.1 Directing New Housing Where Infrastructure is Available ................ 125

4.4.2 Promoting Densities the Efficiently Use Land .............................. 125

4.4.3 Housing Strategies in Support of Transit-Supportive Development ...... 125

4.5 Complete Communities .............................................................. 128

4.5.1 Benefits of Building Compact Complete Communities .................... 129

4.5.2 Strategies for Creating Compact Complete Communities ................. 129

4.5.3 Defining Complete Communities in the Official Plan ...................... 130

4.5.4 Examples of Complete Communities from other Jurisdictions ........... 130

4.5.5 Examples of Compact Communities .......................................... 133


4.5.6 Other Forms of Mixed Use Developments ................................... 133

4.5.7 Live-Work Arrangements ....................................................... 134

4.5.8 CMHC FlexHousing .............................................................. 135

4.5.9 Age-Friendly Communities ..................................................... 137

4.5.10 Safe Housing ..................................................................... 139

4.6 Retaining Existing Rental Housing Stock .......................................... 142

4.6.1 Funding Programs ............................................................... 143

4.6.2 Replacement Housing Policy .................................................. 143

4.6.3 Rental Housing Conversion and Demolition Policies ....................... 143

4.7 Energy Efficient Housing ............................................................ 145

4.7.1 New Provisions in Ontario Building Code .................................... 145

4.7.2 Region of Peel Energy Efficiency Initiatives ................................ 146

4.7.3 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ........................... 147

4.7.4 Green Building Initiative ....................................................... 147

4.7.5 Green Globes Certification .................................................... 148

4.7.6 Region of York Sustainable Development Through LEED .................. 149

4.7.7 High Performance New Construction Program .............................. 149

4.7.8 Energy Star Standards .......................................................... 150

4.7.9 Community-Based Energy Efficiency Programs ............................. 150

4.7.9.1 Home Energy $aver Program ............................................... 150

4.7.9.2 Residential Energy Efficiency Project ..................................... 151

4.8 Affordable Ownership Housing ..................................................... 151

4.8.1 Federal Home Ownership Initiatives ......................................... 151

4.8.2 Municipal Home Ownership Initiatives ....................................... 151

4.8.2.1 City of Hamilton‘s Home Ownership Affordability Partnership ........ 152

4.8.2.2 BHOME – Brantford Home Ownership Made Easier ....................... 152

4.8.2.3 Quint Development Corporation ........................................... 152

4.8.3 Other Home Ownership Models ............................................... 153

4.8.3.1 Options for Homes ........................................................... 153

4.8.3.2 Home Ownership Alternatives .............................................. 154

4.8.3.3 Self-Help Housing ............................................................ 154

4.8.3.4 Rent-To-Own Housing........................................................ 155

4.8.3.5 Home Ownership Co-operatives ............................................ 155

4.8.3.6 Co-housing .................................................................... 155

4.9 Barriers to Creation of Affordable Rental Housing .............................. 157

4.9.1 Hypothetical Rental Apartment Building .................................... 157

4.10 Affordable Housing: Availability of Land ......................................... 160

4.10.1 Impact of Places to Grow on Land Prices.................................... 161

4.10.2 Inventory of Land ............................................................... 163

4.10.3 ―Housing First‖ or Surplus Land Policy....................................... 164

4.10.4 Affordable Housing Property Reserve Fund ................................. 165

4.10.5 Leveraging Social Housing Sites ............................................... 165

4.10.6 Joint Ventures on Municipal Land ............................................ 166


4.10.7 Brownfields/Greyfields/Bluefields ........................................... 166

4.10.8 Land Banking .................................................................... 168

4.11 Affordable Housing: Streamlined Approval Process ............................ 169

4.11.1 Fast Tracking Approval of Applications ...................................... 169

4.11.2 Performance Based Planning .................................................. 170

4.12 Affordable Housing: Community Acceptance .................................... 171

4.12.1 Municipal Mitigation and Acceptance Strategies ........................... 172

4.12.2 Community Acceptance Tools ................................................. 173

4.12.2.1 Strategies of Gaining Community Acceptance Workshop ............... 173

4.12.2.2 Yes, In My Backyard .......................................................... 173

4.13 Affordable Rental Housing: Cost of Development and Financing ............. 174

4.13.1 Community Improvement Plans & Affordable Housing .................... 174

4.13.2 Alternate Development Standards............................................ 175

4.13.3 Development Charges, Fees and Levies ..................................... 177

4.13.4 Property Tax Incentives ........................................................ 178

4.13.5 Tax Increment Financing....................................................... 179

4.13.6 Land Value Taxation ............................................................ 180

4.13.7 Municipal Financing ............................................................. 181

4.13.8 Affordable Housing as a Municipal Service under DC Bylaw .............. 181

4.13.9 Capital Assistance Program .................................................... 182

4.13.10 Convert/Renovate to Residential Loan Programs ....................... 182

4.13.11 Housing Trust Funds and Community Land Trusts ....................... 183

4.13.12 Canadian Alternative Investment Cooperative ........................... 185

4.14 Partnerships ........................................................................... 185

4.14.1 Public Private Partnerships .................................................... 185

4.14.2 Corporate Sponsorship and Donations ....................................... 187

4.15 Housing Options and Supports for Persons with Special Needs ................ 188

4.15.1.1 Modified Units in Social Housing Portfolio ................................ 188

4.15.1.2 Inventory of Modified Units in Social Housing Stock .................... 188

4.15.1.3 Ontario Building Code and Visitability .................................... 189

4.15.1.4 Accessible Design ............................................................ 189

4.15.1.5 Supported and Supportive Housing ........................................ 192

4.16 Housing Options for Diverse Populations .......................................... 192

4.16.1 United Way of Peel Region‘s Role in Serving Diverse Populations ....... 192

4.16.2 Older Adults ..................................................................... 194

4.16.2.1 Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults‘ Housing ................ 194

4.16.2.2 City of Mississauga Older Adult Plan ....................................... 194

4.16.2.3 Types and Forms of Older Adult Housing ................................. 195

4.16.2.3.1 Life Lease Housing ........................................................ 195

4.16.2.3.2 Abbeyfield .................................................................. 197

4.16.2.3.3 Home Sharing .............................................................. 198

4.16.2.3.4 Care-Condominium ........................................................ 198

4.16.3 New Immigrants ................................................................. 198


4.16.4 Aboriginal People ............................................................... 199

4.16.5 Youth ............................................................................. 200

4.16.6 Low Income Families and Lone-Parents ..................................... 201

4.16.7 Women ........................................................................... 201

4.17 Approaches to Address Homelessness ............................................. 203

4.17.1 Social Enterprise ................................................................ 203

4.17.2 Housing Help Training .......................................................... 204

4.17.3 Primary Care to Homeless Men ............................................... 204

4.18 Barriers to Accessing Housing ...................................................... 204

4.18.1 Increasing Minimum Wage and Shelter Allowances ........................ 205

4.18.2 Municipally-Funded Rent Supplement Program............................. 206

4.18.3 Rent Deposits .................................................................... 207

4.18.4 Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) .................................... 207

4.18.5 Housing Location ................................................................ 209

4.18.6 Social Concerns in Social and Affordable Housing .......................... 209

4.18.7 Discrimination ................................................................... 210

4.19 Public Education and Awareness ................................................... 210

5.0 Potential Actions for Housing Strategy ............................................ 213

Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms and Acronyms ........................................... 214

Appendix 2 - Bibliography .................................................................... 230

Appendix 3 - Summary of Recommended Changes to Official Plan ................... 238

Appendix 4: Summary of Funding Programs ............................................. 246


List of Tables Table 1: Comparison of Shelter Allowances and Average Market Rents in Peel Region .......... 53 Table 2: Development Charges, Region of Peel and Area Municipalities, 2008 .................... 82 Table 3: Summary of Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Program Rental and Supportive Housing Units ................................................................................................... 96 Table 4: Summary of Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Program Units Funded As Pilot Projects ......................................................................................................... 97 Table 6: Estimated Development Costs, 120 Unit Apartment Development, Brampton ......... 158 Table 7: Impact of Incentives Related to Capital Costs ............................................... 159 Table 8: Incentives Related to Operating Costs......................................................... 160 Table 9: Property Tax Rates, Region of Peel and Area Municipalities, 2008 ...................... 179 Table 10: Minimum Wage Affordability Comparison, Brampton, 2007 .............................. 205

List of Figures Figure 1: Housing Continuum, Region of Peel .............................................................. 6

Figure 2: Map of Region of Peel and Surrounding Area ................................................... 9

Figure 3: Now House, Toronto .............................................................................. 43

Figure 4: Inclusionary Zoning Built Form Examples, DC Office of Planning ........................ 103

Figure 5: Inclusionary Zoning Four-Plex, Fairfax County, Virginia ................................... 104

Figure 6: Inclusionary Zoning Duplex, Montgomery County, Maryland .............................. 104

Figure 7: Floor Plan, Foyer des Cent Abris, Montreal .................................................. 111

Figure 8: Peel Youth Village ................................................................................ 114

Figure 9: Moldenhauer Developments, Townhouse Floor Plan ....................................... 115

Figure 10:Quattroplex Front Elevation ................................................................... 117

Figure 11: Stacked Row House Floor Plan & Elevation Drawings ..................................... 118

Figure 12: The Grow Home, Montreal .................................................................... 119

Figure 13: Transit-Oriented Development concept drawing, Midtown Commons, Austin, Texas................................................................................................................... 128

Figure 14: Built Form, Cornell, Markham ................................................................ 132

Figure 15: Richmond Flex House ........................................................................... 137

Figure 16: Quayside Village, North Vancouver .......................................................... 155

Figure 17: West Village, Mississauga ...................................................................... 167

i


Executive Summary The Region of Peel has witnessed many changes in the last fifteen years, such as rapid population growth, an increase in the number of immigrants settling in the Region, increased construction activity and a shift in socio-economic and demographic conditions. The Peel Housing Strategy provides a comprehensive review of the current housing continuum and recommends strategies to meet the housing needs of the Region of Peel‘s current and future residents, in the context of the recent changes that have taken place in the Region. The direction to develop the Housing Strategy comes from recent provincial initiatives including the Provincial Policy Statement on Housing (2005) and Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006), which directs the Region to develop a housing strategy that will set out a plan and Official Plan policies to provide a range of housing types to meet the needs of the current and future residents in the Region. The Regional Official Plan (Office Consolidation, November 2005) also directs the Region to develop a housing strategy that will address affordable, social, and special-needs housing components by working in collaboration with area municipalities. The development of the Housing Strategy is being undertaken as part of the Peel Regional Official Plan Review work program as well as the Liveable Peel Initiative. As the Housing Strategy is being prepared as part of the Liveable Peel Initiative, the short, medium and long-terms for the Strategy have been defined as 10, 25, and 50 years, similar to those of the Liveable Peel Initiative. The Housing Strategy is being prepared in two parts (see chart below). The first part involves the preparation of three discussion papers aimed at identifying key housing issues. Discussion Paper 1: Housing Availability Throughout the Life-Cycle, includes a review of the demographic and economic trends impacting the Region, and an overview of housing supply, with a focus on housing availability throughout the life-cycle. It identifies housing issues and gaps in providing safe, affordable and accessible housing to current and future residents at all stages of life. The second discussion paper, Diversity of Housing Needs, reviews the demographic profile of unique population groups including youth, older adults, immigrants, Aboriginal persons, visible minorities, persons with disabilities, and lone parents, and identifies the current and future housing needs of these groups. The paper also analyzes the demand and supply for social and special-needs housing, and identifies issues in meeting the housing needs of diverse population groups. The third discussion paper identifies the changing demographic and socio-economic conditions in Peel that influence housing affordability. The paper also identifies affordability issues in Peel.

ii


The second part will involve the preparation of the Housing Strategy paper. The paper will summarize the housing issues identified in the first phase, and recommend policies and strategies to meet the housing needs of all current and future Peel residents and address the identified priority areas and issues. It will also identify housing targets for the Region. In addition, the report will outline an implementation plan and monitoring plan for the recommended strategies. A background paper on Tools and Practices (the focus of this paper) will review relevant federal, provincial, and municipal policies, and will identify best practices and innovative tools available to address the identified issues. Summary of Background Paper: Tools and Practices to Address Housing Issues The background paper reviews relevant federal and provincial legislation, policies and programs; municipal legislation, policies and programs; and, tools and practices to address identified housing issues. Similar to the other background papers, Section 1 includes a description of the study background, context, objectives and format. This introductory section also includes a summary of the housing priorities and strategic directions identified in the housing issues paper. Section 2 of the paper includes a comprehensive review of relevant federal and provincial legislation, policies and programs which create the legislative framework guiding the creation and maintenance of housing within Canada and

Phase 1

Phase 2

iii


the Province of Ontario. This includes a review of the overarching National Housing Act and various provincial acts such as the Municipal Act and the Planning Act. Relevant federal and provincial policies and programs included in the review range from the many programs administered by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to Natural Resources Canada‘s energy efficiency grant programs and initiatives to current federal taxation policies. Provincial policies and programs such as the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program and provincial supportive housing policies and programs such as those administered by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ministry of Community and Social Services are also reviewed in this section of the paper. Section 3 identifies relevant municipal legislation, policies and programs which form another important component of the housing framework for the Region of Peel and area municipalities. The review includes an assessment of the Regional and area official plans to determine which policies facilitate the development of required housing or act as barriers to its creation. Zoning by-laws from the three area municipalities are also reviewed to identify potential barriers to housing creation. As with the previous section, a review of municipal policies and programs highlights relevant initiatives, such as the Liveable Peel Initiative which promotes a balanced long-term planning approach for the Region with the inclusion of social, economic, environmental and cultural needs of residents. Other programs such as the Regional Homelessness Initiative are also highlighted and reviewed in this section. The last section of this paper identifies a wide variety of tools and practices that are used to support the development and maintenance of housing throughout the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada and internationally. These tools and practices are sub-divided into sections that help address the issues identified in the discussion papers. Potential policies, programs and actions to address the identified housing issues in the Region of Peel are identified throughout the Tools and Practices paper for consideration in the development of the Housing Strategy report.

1


1.0 Introduction

1.1 Study Background

The Region of Peel has witnessed many changes in the last fifteen years, such as rapid population growth, an increase in the number of immigrants settling in the Region, increased construction activity and a shift in socio-economic and demographic characteristics. The purpose of developing the Housing Strategy for the Region of Peel was to assess the current housing situation and the future affordable, accessible and social housing needs in the context of the recent changes that have taken place in the Region. 1.2 Study Context

The direction to develop the Housing Strategy came from recent provincial initiatives including the Provincial Policy Statement (2005) and Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006), which both contain references to address a full range of housing needs within the Region. The introduction of Places to Grow required the Region, as well as area municipalities, to undertake a conformity exercise to meet the population and employment targets. It also directed the Region to develop a housing strategy that set out a plan and Official Plan policies to provide a range of housing types to meet the needs of the current and future residents in the Region. The Regional Official Plan (Office Consolidation, November 2005) also directed the Region to develop a housing strategy that addresses affordable, social, and special-needs housing components by working in collaboration with area municipalities (Section 6.2.2.18). The Regional Official Plan is a broad and strategic plan, which has general policies that encourage and support the Region and area municipalities with respect to redevelopment, affordability, and diversity of housing forms and suggests collaboration between the two-tiers of municipalities and other agencies to direct the housing growth in coordination with the availability of the necessary physical and human services. The Regional Official Plan is currently under review as part of the requirements of the Planning Act which requires Official Plans to be reviewed every five years, and in order to ensure that is it consistent with provincial plans, including Places to Grow. The development of the Housing Strategy has been undertaken as part of the Peel Regional Official Plan Review work program. The Housing Strategy suggests policies for the Regional Official Plan and also acts to supplement the Official Plan policies by suggesting other potential measures and action items for the Region and area municipalities for meeting housing needs and achieving provincial targets.

2


The Peel Regional Official Plan Review work program is scheduled to be complete by June 2009 in order to meet the legislative requirements of conformity of the Official Plan with Places to Grow by June 16, 2009. The Review involves several Regional Official Plan Amendments that are being brought to Council for adoption as work is completed. The Housing Strategy has commonalities with some of the fourteen other focus areas of the Regional Official Plan Review program including Managing Growth; Sustainability; Energy; Transportation; Employment Lands; Consultation, Communication and Engagement; and Monitoring. The Housing Strategy also contributes to the objectives of the Liveable Peel Initiative, and was undertaken as part of the Liveable Peel Initiative which concluded in December 2008. The linkages between the Housing Strategy and these other focus areas are as follows: Managing Growth

The Managing Growth component of the Official Plan Review will establish the amount and timing of population and employment growth and determine how the Region will meet the intensification target of 40% of all new residential development (within the built boundary) by 2015 and maintain this level to 2031. The Managing Growth component will also address the density requirement for Greenfield development. The results of the Managing Growth component will be used as inputs into the Housing Strategy. The Housing Strategy is compatible with the Managing Growth components and will recommend housing targets for a range of housing types and densities to support the intensification and density identified in the Managing Growth component. Sustainability

The Sustainability component of the Official Plan Review developed policies that address the four dimensions of sustainability –-- economic, social, environmental, and cultural. There are many linkages between the Housing Strategy and sustainability and an importance of integrating sustainability into the Housing Strategy. This is of particular importance because one of the fundamental aspects of sustainability is building in sustainability concepts at the design stages of housing developments and communities. The Sustainability component and Housing Strategy have a common objective of promoting more sustainable development patterns and ‗complete communities‘. Sustainability and the Housing Strategy also both face challenges of achieving social inclusion and social equity, finding solutions to homelessness, and managing rapid population growth. The Housing Strategy

3


has integrated wherever possible the four dimensions of sustainability into its policy recommendations and helps promote a vibrant economy and good quality of life for future generations. Energy

The Energy focus area has identified policies in support of alternative energy systems, district heating and cogeneration, energy conservation, energy efficiency and improved air quality through land use and development patterns. The Housing Strategy links with the Energy component by suggesting policies such as land use strategies and urban design standards that promote compact, energy efficient, complete communities that limit energy consumption and air pollution. Transportation

The Transportation component of the Official Plan Review reviewed and revised existing policies to develop an efficient, sustainable and integrated transportation system. The Housing Strategy‘s connection to the Transportation component was to recommend policies that promote compact, complete communities that optimize the use of transportation infrastructure and services. Employment Lands

The Employment Lands focus area has ensured that the Official Plan policies support the employment land density targets and ensured there is an adequate supply of employment land to meet employment forecasts to provide for employment opportunities and to support the vitality of the Region‘s economy. The Housing Strategy supports policies to protect employment land, recognizing that sufficient employment lands are needed to provide live/work opportunities, a vibrant economy, and quality of life of Peel‘s residents. Communication, Consultation and Engagement

The purpose of the Communication, Consultation, and Engagement component is to keep stakeholders and the general public informed about the Peel Official Plan Review Process, engaging them in the process and ensuring their input and feedback is received on an ongoing basis. This involved targeted consultation carried out as part of the Housing Strategy. The Housing Strategy involved surveys, interviews, and focus groups with key stakeholders as well as consultation sessions with key stakeholders and the general public. Monitoring Policies

The Monitoring Policies project reviewed and updated the existing monitoring policies of the Regional Official Plan to ensure they remain effective and

4


developed new monitoring policies to measure the progress on new initiatives from the Province. A framework for the monitoring plan for the Housing Strategy was developed as part of the process of preparing the Housing Strategy. Liveable Peel: A Community Sustainability Plan to 2051

Liveable Peel was a sustainability strategy to consider the long-term (to 2051) economic, environmental, social and cultural impacts of demographic and socio-economic changes, specifically the aging society, immigration and high levels of growth, on the programs and services delivered by the Region of Peel. One of the objectives of the Liveable Peel initiative was to research and analyze factors influencing growth and change, including housing, and to manage the impacts of growth by creating choice in all types and forms of housing and being an affordable place to live. The Liveable Peel initiative is no longer active, though the Housing Strategy and the other two projects that were recently undertaken as part of the Liveable Peel initiative continued. Peel Region staff continue to explore integration of long-term research and planning through the Corporate Planning Process. 1.3 Study Objectives

The Peel Housing Strategy was undertaken as a comprehensive and in-depth assessment of the full continuum of housing needs in the Region of Peel and the development of policies, programs and initiatives aimed at meeting the full range of identified needs. In preparing the Strategy, a number of specific objectives were identified, as follows:

1. Identify current housing needs, including the affordable (both ownership and rental) housing, as defined in the Provincial Policy Statement, special-needs, and social housing needs, issues, and supply-demand gaps related to affordable, special-needs and social housing needs in Peel.

2. Identify and recommend opportunities for a full range of safe,

affordable, accessible and appropriate housing for Peel‘s current and future residents, while recognizing that those opportunities can only be implemented in collaboration with key stakeholders, including the area municipalities.

3. Identify and recommend opportunities for a range of housing types and

densities to support intensification and density targets set by the Places to Grow Plan, while recognizing that those opportunities can only be

5


implemented in collaboration with key stakeholders, including the area municipalities.

4. Promote housing issues in the Region, including highlighting those

activities undertaken recently by the Region of Peel.

5. Propose policy directions related to housing, which will add to, or strengthen, what currently exists in the Regional Official Plan and the Area Municipal Official Plans.

6. Identify areas where changes to provincial legislation or programs could be proposed.

1.4 Study Approach and Methodology

The study provides a comprehensive review of the current and evolving trends across the housing continuum and recommends strategies to meet the housing needs of the Region of Peel‘s current and future residents. The Housing Strategy was a collaborative effort between the Region of Peel, SHS Consulting, and key stakeholders involved in the consultation process completed over the length of the study. The figure below illustrates the general spectrum of housing options offered within the typical housing continuum, spanning the range between absolute homelessness at the reader‘s left to owning one‘s own home at the reader‘s right. While not placing judgement upon one specific form of housing, the figure illustrates the gradual progression of types of housing that range from precarious or lack of housing (absolute homelessness), to gradually more permanent and longer-term housing options. Also included in the figure are the specific percentage totals of each housing type in the overall housing stock in the Region of Peel.

6


Figure 1: Housing Continuum, Region of Peel

SHS Consulting‘s role was to gather and analyze information on housing needs and suggest recommendations on suitable approaches for addressing identified issues to the Project Team. The Project Team was comprised of Regional staff from Environment, Transportation and Planning Services; Human Services, Ontario Works; Human Services, Housing and Property; Health Services; and Peel Regional Police. The role of the Project Team was to provide direction on relevant research opportunities, confirm timelines and outline the overall course for the study. In addition, the Project Team members provided insight into evolving trends in the housing market across the housing continuum. The study involved the participation of a number of key stakeholders from across the Region through the consultation process. Opportunities for consultation included the following:

Emergency, Transitional and Supportive Housing Survey- all emergency, transitional and supportive housing providers, as identified by the Region, were provided with an opportunity to complete a detailed housing survey.

Housing Issues Survey- surveys were sent out to agencies across the Region in order to provide insight into the housing needs within the Region.

Telephone Interviews- several key informants were identified in consultation with the Region to provide insight into broad housing issues throughout the Region.

Abso

lute

Hom

ele

ssness

O

wnersh

ip

Emergency Shelters (0.09%)

Transitional Housing (0.06%)

Subsidized and Supportive

Housing (4.45%)

Private Market Rental (17.4%)

Home Ownership (78%)

7


Focus Group Sessions- Four focused consultation sessions were held with key stakeholders involved in seniors/older adults housing, social housing providers, developers, and recent immigrants, to provide insight into the housing issues of various population groups and to suggest strategies for addressing the issues.

Public Consultation Session – A public consultation session was held to review preliminary findings of the issues and priority areas, and to review and provide feedback on the proposed recommended policies and strategies.

1.4.1 Study Format

The study was prepared in two parts. The first part involved the preparation of three discussion papers aimed and an issues paper. The second phase of work involved the preparation of the tools and practices background paper which feeds into the final paper, the Housing Strategy.

Discussion Paper 1: Housing Availability Throughout the Life-Cycle

The first discussion paper includes a review of the demographic and economic trends impacting the Region, and an overview of housing supply, with a focus on housing availability throughout the life-cycle. It identifies housing issues and gaps in providing safe, affordable and accessible housing to current and future residents at all stages of life.

Phase 1 Phase 2

8


Discussion Paper 2: Diversity of Housing Needs

The second discussion paper reviews the demographic profile of diverse population groups including youth, older adults, immigrants, Aboriginal persons, visible minorities, persons with disabilities, and lone parents, and identifies the current and future housing needs of these groups. The paper also analyzes the demand and supply for social and special-needs housing, and identifies issues in meeting the housing needs of diverse population groups. Discussion Paper 3: Housing Affordability

The third discussion paper identifies the changing demographic and socio-economic conditions in Peel that influence housing affordability. The paper also identifies affordability issues in Peel. The second phase will involve the preparation of the Tools and Practices paper and the Housing Strategy paper. This will be undertaken once the three discussion papers have been are finalized. Background Paper: Best Practices and Tools to Address Housing Issues

The background paper reviews relevant federal, provincial, and municipal policies, and identifies practices and innovative tools available to address the identified issues. This paper also identifies housing targets for the Region. Housing Strategy

The Housing Strategy will summarize the housing issues and needs identified in the three discussion papers, and recommend policies and strategies to meet the housing needs of all current and future Peel residents and address the identified priority areas and issues. The recommendations will focus on:

identifying policy directions related to housing which will strengthen what currently exists in the Regional Official Plan and the Area Municipal Official Plans

promoting housing issues in the Region

identifying areas where changes to provincial legislation or programs could be proposed

suggesting opportunities which can be implemented in collaboration with key stakeholders, including the area municipalities.

9


The Housing Strategy paper will also identify housing targets for the Region and outline an implementation plan and monitoring plan for the recommended strategies. 1.4.2 Study Area

The study area for this report is Peel Region, comprised of the City of Mississauga, the City of Brampton, and the Town of Caledon. For comparative purposes, where available, information is provided for the other Regions in the Greater Toronto Area-Hamilton (City of Toronto, Halton Region, York Region, Durham Region, and City of Hamilton) as well as the Province as a whole. The following figure illustrates the study area.

Figure 2: Map of Region of Peel and Surrounding Area

1.4.3 Sources of Information

In preparing the Housing Strategy information was gathered from a host of sources, these include:

Emergency, Transitional and Supportive Housing Survey

Housing Issues Survey

Telephone interviews

Focus groups with key stakeholders involved in seniors/older adults housing, social housing providers, developers, and representatives from the faith community

Public consultation sessions

Review of data and reports identified by the Region and key stakeholders

10


In depth analysis of Statistics Canada Census, Community Profile data from 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006

In depth analysis of additional Statistics Canada custom tabulated data for 1996, 2001, and 2006

Analysis of additional information and reports from various sources such as the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), and the local real estate board

Consultation with the Region of Peel Project Team for the study 1.5 Housing Priorities and Strategic Directions

The housing market can be seen as a continuum where supply responds to changing demands at different levels of income. The discussion papers have shown that housing needs along the continuum and throughout the life-cycle are not always met by the private market, especially for those with diverse housing needs and lower incomes. Public policies are needed to address these gaps in housing supply. The following table identifies the key priority areas that are the focus of this paper on tools and practices. The priority areas identified below address the housing requirements of the Provincial Policy Statement, Places to Grow and Liveable Peel, as well as the housing issues identified in the three discussion papers.

Key Housing Issues Key Priority Areas Source

Adequate and Diverse Housing Supply

An adequate and diverse housing supply is an important

component of meeting the needs of current residents and is required to accommodate future population growth.

Diversified Housing Stock

A more diverse housing supply is needed to ensure housing choice and affordability of residents with various economic and personal circumstances.

Retention of Existing Housing Stock

The supply of some forms of affordable accommodation, such as rental and rooming housing is shrinking, and the retention and preservation of these existing housing forms is needed to maintain an

PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1, 1.4.3.a)

Places to Grow (2.2.3.6.h, 2.2.3.6.i, 2.2.7.2)

Discussion Paper 1, 2 & 3

11



adequate supply of affordable housing.

Adequate Land Supply

A sufficient supply of land for residential development is needed to meet the projected population growth targets.

Affordable Housing Supply

Affordable housing, including both rental and ownership, is

a key component of the housing system.

Affordable Rental Housing

The supply of affordable rental housing does not meet current and future needs.

Affordable Ownership Housing

There is a lack of ownership housing affordable to low and moderate income households.

PPS (1.4.3.a)

Places to Grow (2.2.3.6.i, 3.2.6.5)

Liveable Peel

Discussion Papers 1, 2, 3

Housing Access and Housing Options for Diverse and Special Needs Groups

A well functioning housing continuum must provide

adequate housing options to meet the needs of distinct

groups, and remove barriers to enhance access for these

groups to housing. Likewise, housing and support services must be available for persons with health and other support

needs.

Housing Options and Supports for Persons with Special Needs

The supply of emergency shelter beds, transitional housing, and supportive housing, as well as homelessness services, are not sufficient to meet the needs.

Housing Options for Diverse Populations

Some distinct groups are facing particular difficulties finding and maintaining suitable, adequate and affordable housing, such as youth led households and lone-

PPS (1.1.1.f, 1.4.3.b.1)

Places to Grow (1.2.1, 2.2.3.6.i)

Liveable Peel

Discussion Paper 2 & 3

12



parent households.

Removing Barriers to Accessing Housing

In addition to affordability and health-related issues, some Peel residents are facing other barriers to accessing housing.

Sustainable Compact Complete Communities

Compact complete communities are important in ensuring that the communities

meet the daily and lifetime needs of all people. Meeting

the needs of all people includes the provision of

appropriate mix of employment, services, a full range of housing including

affordable housing, community and cultural infrastructure, schools,

recreation opportunities, open space, and access to public

transportation as well as other options for safe, non-

motorized travel.

Complete Communities

There is a need for the creation of more complete communities in Peel Region, which accommodate housing along the continuum, provides a mix of land uses and supports transit while maintaining appropriate levels of health and safety.

Residential Intensification

Residential intensification is an important contributor to the creation of complete communities in existing neighbourhoods and will also become an increasingly important method of meeting the growing population requirements in the Region.

Efficient and Effective Use of Land and Resources

Existing development and land use patterns have contributed to pressures on municipal infrastructure and human service delivery.

Energy Efficient Housing

PPS (1.1.1.b, 1.1.3.3, 1.4.3.b.2, 1.4.3.e, 1.7.1.h, 1.8.1.a, 1.8.1.d, 1.8.1.e)

Places to Grow (2.2.2.1.a, 2.2.2.1.b, 2.2.2.c, 2.2.2.d, 2.2.2.g, 2.2.2.h, 2.2.3.6, 2.2.3.7.b, 2.2.3.7.e, 2.2.4.5.b, 2.2.7.1.a, 2.2.7.1.c, 4.2.4.1.b)

Liveable Peel

13



Energy efficiency in housing is needed to limit the environmental impacts of development.

14


2.0 Federal/Provincial Legislation, Policies & Programs

Housing in Canada and in Ontario operates within a framework of legislation, and policies and programs. The following section outlines federal and provincial legislation, policies and programs related to the provision and retention of housing including safe, affordable, accessible, special needs, and Aboriginal housing, as well as energy efficiency. The information contained in this section and other sections of the Tools and Practices paper will provide a foundation for the specific actions that will be identified in the Housing Strategy to promote collaboration and partnerships among senior levels of government, the region, area municipalities, non-profit organizations, the private sector and residents to make effective use of all available and appropriate housing programs and funding sources and to achieve the vision for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as outlined in Places to Grow. 2.1 Federal and Provincial Legislation

2.1.1 Federal Legislation

The federal role in housing is guided primarily by the National Housing Act. 2.1.1.1 National Housing Act

The National Housing Act is the enabling legislation that sets out the Federal Government‘s roles, responsibilities and powers with respect to housing. It is defined in federal legislation as: “An Act to promote the construction of new houses, the repair and modernization of existing houses and the improvement of living conditions.”

The Act focuses primarily on enabling Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) to undertake a range of initiatives in support of various affordable housing programs. CMHC is the crown corporation responsible for delivering the federal housing role. The Act also sets out the provisions through which CMHC will provide mortgage insurance to approved lenders to help support the financing of all forms of housing. The Act is comprised of several parts that outline the roles and responsibilities of CMHC with respect to various aspects of housing. These include: Part I Housing Loan Insurance, Part II Housing for Rental Purposes, Part III Land Assembly, Part IV Land Acquisition and Leasing, Part VI Repair, Rehabilitation, Improvement and Conversion of Buildings, Part VII Facilitation of Home Ownership and Occupancy, Part IX Housing Research, Community Planning and International Support, Part X Public Housing, Part XI New Construction, Part XII

15


Loans for Student Housing Projects, Part XIII Community Services, and Part XIV Housing Development (directly by CMHC itself). These parts demonstrate the Federal government‘s involvement in maintaining an array of programs and supports which can help address local housing needs. They also show that there are opportunities to deal directly with the Federal government in pursuing support for specific projects. Many proponents and academics involved in housing and homelessness have called for the development of a long-term national housing strategy that outlines a range of effective, long-term solutions for addressing homelessness, housing affordability and other housing-related issues. Ideally, a national housing strategy would integrate a wide range of solutions, be flexible to respond to the diverse needs that exist in communities across the country and provide sufficient long-term funding so that private and community based housing providers can concentrate on building capacity and expertise to find solutions to create and maintain adequate, safe, affordable housing. 2.1.2 Provincial Legislation

There are a number of Provincial Acts that provide the framework for the provincial and municipal roles and related powers for the provision of the full range of housing and other related matters in Ontario. The relevant provincial legislation is outlined in the following. 2.1.2.1 Municipal Act

The Municipal Act sets out the responsibilities of municipalities in Ontario and the authorities through which these responsibilities can be carried out. Amendments to Section 210 of the Municipal Act allow designated municipalities (i.e. Service Managers) to add ―housing‖ as a class of municipal facilities and complement the new municipal authority for housing under the Social Housing Reform Act. The Region of Peel is the designated Service Manager for its territory. The amendments give Service Managers the authority to stimulate the production of new affordable housing by providing:

affordable housing producers grants affordable housing loans exemptions from or grants in lieu of development fees and charges reducing or waiving property taxes or a grant in lieu of the reduction

providing land at less than market value

As well, Section 110, of the Municipal Act, 2001 states that a municipality may enter into agreements for the provision of municipal capital facilities. Under

16


Section110 a municipality may provide financial or other assistance at less than fair market value or at no cost to any person who has entered into an agreement to provide facilities under this section and such assistance may include:

giving or lending money and charging interest

giving, lending, leasing or selling property

guaranteeing borrowing

providing the services of the employees of the municipality The Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act (Bill 130) received Royal Assent on December 20, 2006. The intent of the legislation is to provide municipalities with more flexibility and increased powers. Changes to Section 99.1 of the Municipal Act give Local Municipalities the authority to prohibit and regulate the conversion of residential rental properties with six or more dwelling units. This includes the power to pass a by-law to prohibit the demolition of residential rental properties without a permit; to prohibit the conversion of residential rental properties to a purpose other than the purpose of a residential rental property without a permit; and to impose conditions as a requirement of obtaining a permit. 2.1.2.2 Planning Act

The Planning Act sets out the formal planning process in Ontario and the roles and responsibilities of municipalities in Ontario with respect to this process. The tools and provisions included in the Planning Act may have a significant impact on the supply and production of housing as it allows for various exemptions and by-laws. These are described below. Planning and Conservation Land Statute Amendment Act (Bill 51) received Royal Assent on October 19, 2006, and came into effect on January 1, 2007. This new Act puts in place planning and Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) reforms that gives municipalities broader permissions to regulate development and more control over planning matters.

The changes introduced to the Planning Act included the following:

Provincial matters of interest are to be expanded to include the promotion of development that is designated to be sustainable, to support public transit, and to be oriented to pedestrians (Section 2).

The OMB is required to have regard to decisions made by municipal councils and approval authorities relating to the same planning matters (Section 2.1).

17


Municipal decisions are to be based on the policies in effect at the time of the decision, not those in place at the time of application.

Municipalities, upper and lower tier, that meet minimum requirements have the option to develop a local appeal body to deal with certain planning matters rather than the OMB. Decisions made by the local bodies cannot be appealed to the OMB (Section 8.1).

OMB appeals pertaining to amendments to official plans and zoning by-laws that would reduce the designation of employment lands are restricted to the 5-year municipal comprehensive official plan review (Sections 22(7.1) to (7.4), and 34(11.0.3)).

Public notice and consultation requirements are expanded. Open Houses are required in addition to public meetings for OPA‘s which are adopted under Section 26 and for a development permit system (Sections 17(15) to (19.6); 22(3.1) to (5); and 34(10.0.1), (10.2) to (10.9) and (12) to (14.6)).

Clarification of a municipalities‘ power to regulate the density of development including minimum and maximum density and height is provided (Sections 34(3), (16) and (16.2)).

Municipalities are able to establish second unit policies as of right (Sections 17(24.1) and (36.1); and 34(19.1)). Further, second unit policies put in place by municipalities cannot be appealed to the OMB.

The OMB‘s power to determine appeals of a Minister‘s Zoning Orders are restricted if the Minister has given written notice that he/she is of the opinion that all or any part of the requested changes adversely affect matters of provincial interest. Decisions, in this case are determined by the Lieutenant Governor in Council (Section 47(13.1) to (13.5)).

Through the site plan control process, municipalities can consider the accessibility of a development proposal in meeting the needs of persons with physical disabilities.

There are several other important sections of the Act that provide municipalities with various tools. Part IV of the Act allows a municipality, or upper-tier municipalities in some cases, to designate ―community improvement project areas‖ in their official plans (Section 28). Through the use of community improvement plans, the municipality is then able to enable a variety of tools, such as providing grants

18


or loans for eligible costs to owners or tenants of lands and buildings (subsection (7)), agreements for studies and development (Section 29.(1)). It also enables the use of grants in aid of community improvement (Section 30), or grants or loans to registered or assessed owners of land to help pay or offset the costs of any repairs required to be done (Section 32.(1)). Finally, through the community improvement areas, a municipality may enact a demolition control area by virtue of a by-law (Section 33). Part V of the Act provides several other interesting tools to municipalities. Section 36 allows for the use of holding designations in zoning that specifies the future use of land once the designation is removed. Such provisions can be used to ensure adequate land supplies for affordable housing uses for example. Section 37 of the Planning Act allows municipalities to approve density bonusing and transfers of development rights, which can be important tools in supporting affordable housing development. This can be done through a municipal by-law, but only if the respective official plan contains provisions relating to the authorization of the increases. Garden suites are authorized in Section 39 of the Act as temporary use ―portable‖ structures. A municipality with a garden suite by-law can require the owner of the unit to enter into an agreement which cover timelines for installation and removal, maintenance, the occupancy period, and any monetary security or costs that the units would incur on it. Section 40 of the Act authorizes municipalities to enter into agreements for the exemption of municipal parking requirements. It also authorizes the use of payment in-lieu of the parking requirements. Under Section 42 which covers the conveyance of land for park purposes, subsection (3) allows for the provision of alternative requirements. These alternative requirements, which include lowered standards or payment in-lieu, must be reflected in the policies of the official plan. The above two sections (40 and 42), can be helpful in the used to exempt or reduce requirements for affordable housing, items which can be especially helpful in infill or redevelopment situations. More detailed and specific uses for the tools outlined below, and their potential uses in the Region and its area municipalities are further covered in Section 3.0 and 4.0 of this paper.

19


2.1.2.3 Social Housing Reform Act

The Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 transferred to municipalities the responsibility for affordable housing. This includes responsibility for administering the existing stock of social housing, and also permits Service Managers to ―establish, fund and administer programs for the provision of residential accommodation‖ in their service areas. This Act, therefore, specifically gives Municipal Service Managers such as the Region of Peel the power to put in place programs aimed at supporting affordable housing development in their service areas. However, the Act does not specifically identify long-term provincial funds to assist Service Managers in the provision of residential accommodation in their service areas. In addition, there are a range of issues many Service Managers across Ontario are dealing with regarding their social housing portfolio. The most pressing issues include the physical condition of the social housing stock and maintaining service level standards for rent-geared-to-income units once operating agreements with social housing providers expire. 2.1.2.4 Environmental Assessment Act

The Environmental Assessment Act encourages the promotion of sustainable development to maintain a healthy environment. Its processes require municipalities and those conducting the Environmental Assessment (EA) to identify possible impacts and evaluate how they might affect the overall environment. The Environmental Assessment Act attempts to ensure the sustainable use of resources. An EA may have an impact on the supply of housing when, for example, higher densities are encouraged to minimize the impact of urban sprawl on natural resources in the surrounding areas. An EA also provides many opportunities for public involvement and input into important issues and concerns. In a community where an EA is being conducted, for example a highway extension, a community commitment agreement may be negotiated which can provide a community with certain funds or other items which the community may need (i.e. new park or arena). 2.1.2.5 Development Charges Act

The Development Charges Act gives municipalities the authority to levy development charges on new developments and/or redevelopments that result in an increased need for municipal services. Municipalities use the funds collected to assist in the financing of growth related to net capital costs incurred by the municipality such as education, fire protection, road maintenance or utilities. Given the often-significant cost of financing growth, development charges can add considerably to the cost of housing development and thereby can

20


discourage the development of affordable housing. Conversely, using the provisions of the Municipal Housing Facilities By-law, many municipalities have found that reducing or waiving such charges for specified forms of affordable housing can be an incentive to attract affordable housing investment. In addition, some municipalities have considered adding affordable/social housing as a municipal service that is funded by residential development charges. Halton Region‘s approach on this is described in section 4.0. 2.1.2.6 Brownfields Act

The Brownfields Statute Law Amendment Act, 2001 promotes brownfield development projects throughout municipalities in Ontario. The legislation provides municipalities with greater flexibility in community improvement projects. It also expands the definition of community improvement projects to include, as well as physical reasons, environmental, social and economic reasons as well. This new legislation will eliminate the need for ministerial approval of community improvement plans that do not involve financing incentive programs, therefore speeding up the planning process. The Act also allows municipalities to offer loans and grants to landlords and tenants of brownfield properties.

Some recent initiatives related to Brownfields include:

The Planning and Conservation Land Statute Amendment Act, discussed under the Planning Act, does have implications for brownfield development. The Act expands the scope of community improvement plans permitting municipalities to negotiate financial incentives on the title of land.

Recent changes (effective May 17, 2007), protect developers from provincial clean-up orders in cases where contaminants migrate from a property. Consultants doing clean-up work are also protected from clean-up orders. Additional changes include the protection of municipalities from civil lawsuits related to planning approval and permit decisions (related to brownfield development) where the lawsuit arises from inaccuracies in filed clean-up documentation. These changes were aimed at reducing the risks associated with brownfield development.

The Ministries of Environment, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Northern Development and Mines and the Attorney General held a consultation process with the public on potential legislative changes to address a number of issues relating to liability, financing and regulatory processes that act as barriers to brownfield redevelopment in Ontario. The session closed on May 22, 2007, and the compiled results and recommended changes are being reviewed.

21


It is suggested that the Region provide input into the potential legislative changes to the Brownfield Act to address a number of issues relating to liability, financing and regulatory processes that act as barriers to brownfield redevelopment in Ontario. 2.1.2.7 Residential Tenancies Act

The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 replaced the Tenant Protection Act. The Residential Tenancies Act changes the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal to the Landlord and Tenant Board (the Board). Other key changes of the Act are outlined in the following. If a building has serious maintenance issues, a tenant could apply to the Board to stop all rent increases until the maintenance issues are resolved or rent could be paid to the Board instead of to the landlord. Landlords can inspect for maintenance on 24 hours written notice. Several changes cover increases in rent. The annual rent increase guideline would be based on the Ontario Consumer Price Index (CPI). The guideline is announced each August, and the annual rent increase is the maximum percentage that landlords can raise rents without getting permission from the Board. A tenant‘s rent can be raised by ―an above guideline rent increase‖ for higher utility costs. If costs went down, a landlord would be required to reduce the rent accordingly otherwise he/she could face fines. A landlord must apply for an above guideline increase. Finally, a tenant‘s rent can also be raised by the above guideline rent increase for capital expenditures (i.e. new roof). For this, a landlord would have to apply for the increase and a tenant's rent would be reduced once the work is completed and paid for. If a tenant were to purposely cause excessive damage to a unit or building, the landlord would have more remedies to deal with this, such as cutting the eviction period in half. A landlord would also have more remedies available to deal with a tenant causing disturbances. Tenants who would be required to pay for their own electricity using smart metering would only pay electricity bills after the smart meter has been installed for one year. The tenant would also be able to apply to the Board if the landlord did not have appliances and buildings that promote electricity conservation. Interest paid to tenants on last month‘s rent deposit would be the same as the CPI. Landlords would also be able to give up to 3 months of free rent to tenants as a way to attract new tenants while still keeping original rent in place.

22


Rent-geared-to-income units in social housing projects are exempt from certain sections of the Residential Tenancies Act, in particular those related to rent increases. 2.1.2.8 Greenbelt Act

The Greenbelt Act of 2005 established the Greenbelt Plan under its Section 3 provisions, and is a cornerstone of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan. The Greenbelt Plan is designed in complement to provincial growth plan by identifying where urbanization should not occur, permanently protecting agricultural lands and natural and ecological features and functions. This includes the existing ecological protection area of the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The Plan prevails over official plans, zoning by-laws or policy statements issued under Section 3 of the Planning Act. Within the Region of Peel, the City of Brampton and the Town of Caledon have some lands that are affected by the Greenbelt Plan. 2.1.2.9 Oak Ridges Moraine Act

The Oak Ridges Moraine Act was passed in 2001 to protect this rich environmentally sensitive ecosystem that covers about 190,000 hectares in south central Ontario. It stretches from Peterborough into a section of the Town of Caledon in the Region of Peel. The Act established the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan in 2002 which sets out the provincial guidelines for protection and growth in and around the Moraine. As part of this Plan, residential uses are restricted to about 38% of the protected area through the Countryside Areas and Settlement Areas lands. The Plan takes precedence over local and regional official plan, and these must have been brought into conformity. In the Region of Peel, a section of the Town of Caledon is affected by the plan and this is reflected both in the Region of Peel and the Town of Caledon official plans. 2.1.2.10 Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act

The Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act of 1973 established the framework for the protection of this significant landform and component of the Greenbelt, and is a designated UNESCO World Biosphere Reserve. The escarpment area runs from Tobermory down to St. Catherines and Niagara Falls. The Act established the Niagara Escarpment Commission as the regulatory agency responsible for implementing the Niagara Escarpment Plan, developed in 1985. Overall administration of the program is done by the

23


Ministry of Natural Resources. The Plan takes precedence over local and regional official plan, and these must have been brought into conformity. The Plan defines and restricts residential uses, and several Minor Urban Areas are located in the Town of Caledon in the Region of Peel. These areas have defined boundaries and policies which direct the municipalities to ensure that growth is concentrated in these areas in such a way as to be environmentally sustainable over the long term. Minor Urban Centres affected in the Town of Caledon are Mono Mills, Cataract, Inglewood, Cheltenham, and Terra Cotta. 2.1.2.11 Ontarians with Disabilities Act

The Ontarians with Disabilities Act (ODA) was enacted in 2001, and sets out standards by which the Ontario government, public sector municipalities, public transport agencies, colleges and universities, hospitals, and school boards were required to develop annual accessibility plans. Requirements include the development of barrier-free design guidelines for government buildings, developed in consultation with persons with disabilities. Municipal accessibilities plans, developed with advice from the accessibility advisory committees and persons with disabilities, are required to include reports on measures taken to identify and remove barriers, and measures that assess by-laws, policies, programs, services, and practices to determine their effect on persons with disabilities. The plans are also required to list, for the coming year, by-laws, policies, services, programs and practices that will be reviewed to ensure barriers, if any, are identified and what measure are intended to be taken to address these. The Act also established Accessibility Advisory Committees (AAC) that includes representation of persons with disabilities. These committees were required for municipalities of over 10,000 residents, while municipalities with smaller populations could choose whether or not to establish one. 2.1.2.12 Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), passed in 2005, builds on the ODA with the creation of Standards Development Committees. The AODA sets as one of its goals to ―develop, implement, and enforcing accessibility standards in order to achieve accessibility for Ontarians with disabilities with respect to goods, services, facilities, accommodation, employment, buildings, structures and premises on or before January 1, 2025.‖ Provincially, the Act mandated the creation of Standards Development Committees which will develop mandatory standards on a regional basis. There are currently three Standards Development Committees in place;

24


transportation, customer service, and information and communications. The two additional Standards Development Committees, built environment and employment, are currently underway. The terms of reference for the Built Environment and Employment Committees indicate that proposed standards will be drafted by early 2009. These standards will define measures, policies, and steps needed to remove barriers for persons with disabilities. A barrier means anything that prevents a person with a disability from fully participating in all aspects of society because of his or her disability, including a physical barrier, an architectural barrier, an information or communication barrier, an attitudinal barrier, a technological barrier, a policy or a practice. Municipalities are required to prepare accessibility plans with the consultation of persons with disabilities, and make the plans public. Section 29 of the Act stipulates that ―every municipality having a population of not less than 10,000 shall establish an accessibility advisory committee‖ or that any such existing committees continue to exist. Small municipalities, of less than 10,000 ―may‖ establish or continue with any such existing committees. In Region of Peel, the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton each have their respective Accessibility Advisory Committees (AAC), and the Town of Caledon has established a joint AAC with the Region of Peel. The impending new standards will greatly improve accessibility in Ontario, however it is unclear as to what financial impact these standards will have on existing and future social/affordable housing buildings. The Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association (ONPHA) estimated that the costs for social housing providers could be as high as $10 million to $60 million annually just for the implementation of the Information and Communication Standards component. It is suggested that the Region participate in the work being carried out by the Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act‘s Standard Development Committee on Built Environment as it may have an impact on housing. 2.1.2.13 Local Health System Integration Act

In 2006, as part of the Provincial Government‘s new approach to health care in Ontario, the government enacted the Local Health System Integration Act (2006) which re-centres some of the power of decision of each local health system at the community level that is intended to better focus on the needs of each community. The Act created 14 Local Health Integration Networks (LHINS), which each manage their respective local health services. While LHINS will not directly provide services, they will have the mandate for planning, integrating and funding health care services. The LHINS will oversee nearly two-thirds ($21 billion) of the health care budget in Ontario.

25


LHINS operate as not-for-profit organizations governed by boards of directors who were appointed by the province after a rigorous skill and merit-based selection process. Each LHIN has nine board members, the board of directors being responsible for the management and control of the affairs of the LHIN and is the key point of interaction with the ministry. The responsibilities of the LHINS include:

Public and private hospitals

Community Care Access Centres

Community Support Service Organizations

Mental Health and Addiction Agencies

Community Health Centres

Long-Term Services Homes

The territory of the Region of Peel is covered under the operating areas of two LHINs, the Central West LHIN (CWLHIN), and the Mississauga-Halton LHIN (MHLHIN). Central West covers the territories composing the Town of Caledon, the City of Brampton as well as Milton, and Mississauga-Halton covers the remainder of the territory of the City of Mississauga. 2.1.2.14 Persons with Developmental Disabilities Act

The Services and Supports to Promote the Social Inclusion of Persons with Developmental Disabilities Act was passed in September of 2008 but has yet to be put into force. The Act will replace the older Developmental Services Act which mostly focused on providing services to people in government-run institutions, and further the government‘s policy of deinstitutionalization by supporting and providing for the inclusion of persons with developmental disabilities in their communities. The Act provides for flexibility in the choice of services and support for individuals and their families to better meet the needs of each person and situation. The Ministry of Community and Social Services is nearing the completion of the 1987 government plan to close its facilities for adults with developmental disabilities over 25 years and include them into communities across Ontario. The last three facilities to be closed by 2009 are located in Smiths Fall, Orillia, and Chatham-Kent, and will not affect services in the Region of Peel. 2.1.2.15 Provincial Policy Statement

On March 1, 2005, the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) was put in place which requires municipal policies to ―be consistent with‖ provincial requirements for

26


minimum targets for moderate and low income households based on a definition of affordability. The PPS further requires municipalities to maintain the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10 years and where new development is to occur, a three-year supply of serviced zoned, draft approved or registered plans sufficient to provide an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents. Residential intensification and redevelopment is to be the preferred means of meeting residential requirements, with designated growth areas to be used only when the former source is inadequate. Within Peel Region, residential growth targets for the Region will be based on the growth plan required by Places to Grow. Residential growth targets for the area municipalities will be based on the allocation of population and units established by the Region of Peel through the Managing Growth component of the Official Plan Review. The PPS requires municipalities to provide for an appropriate range of housing types and densities by:

• Establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of housing which is affordable to low and moderate income households

• Permitting and facilitating all forms of housing required to meet the social, health and well-being requirements of current and future residents (including special needs requirements) and all forms of residential intensification and redevelopment

• Directing the development of new housing towards locations where appropriate levels and infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to support current and projected needs

• Promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the use of alternative transportation modes and public transit in areas where it exists or is to be developed

• Establishing development standards for residential intensification, redevelopment and new residential development which minimize the costs of housing and facilitate compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of health and safety.

The Policy Statement defines ―affordable housing‖ as follows: In the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of:

Housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30% of gross household income for low and moderate income households; or,

27


Housing for which the purchase price is at least 10% below the average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area.

In the case of rental housing, the least expensive of:

A unit for which rent does not exceed 30% of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or,

A unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a unit in the regional market area.

Low and moderate income households mean:

In the case of ownership housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60% of the income distribution for the regional market area.

In the case of rental housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60% of the income distribution for renter households for the regional market area.

Sections 2.2 and 3.0 below identify a range of tools and practices for implementing the PPS requirements. 2.1.2.16 Places to Grow Act

Places to Grow is the initiative to manage population growth in Ontario in a way that supports economic prosperity and achieves a high quality of life. The foundation of the Places to Grow initiative is the Places to Grow Act, 2005. This Act helps the Province identify and designate growth plan areas and develop strategic growth plans for communities in these areas, in discussion with local officials, stakeholders, residents, and other public groups. A component of Places to Grow is the 2006 document, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan), which is the geographic area that generally extends from the County of Peterborough in the east, the Region of Niagara in the west, and the County of Simcoe to the North. Overall, the vision of Places to Grow is that ―the Greater Golden Horseshoe will be a great place to live in 2031. Its communities will be based on the pillars of a strong economy, a clean and healthy environment and social equity‖. The Growth Plan provides a framework for the implementation of the goals and vision of Places to Grow within the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Growth Plan further strongly emphasizes the need for creating complete communities. These are defined as communities which meet ―people‘s needs for daily living throughout an entire lifetime by providing convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs, local services, a full range of housing, and community infrastructure including affordable housing, schools, recreation and open space for their residents.‖ It further states that complete communities

http://www.placestogrow.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4&Itemid=9

http://www.placestogrow.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4&Itemid=9

28


will also have ―convenient access to public transportation and options for safe, non-motorized travel (…).‖ A key element of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is the identification of 25 Urban Growth Centres, two of which are located in the Region of Peel: Downtown Brampton and the Mississauga City Centre. These Urban Growth Centres will be ―characterized by compact settlement and development patterns and will provide a diversity of opportunities for living, working and enjoying culture‖. The Growth Plan projects that the population of the Region of Peel will reach 1,640,000 persons by 2031. The Growth Plan is grounded in the following principles:

Build compact, vibrant and complete communities

Plan and manage growth to support a strong and competitive economy

Protect, conserve, enhance and wisely use the valuable natural resources of land, air and water for current and future generations

Optimize the use of existing and new infrastructure to support growth in a compact, efficient form

Provide for different approaches to managing growth that recognizes the diversity of communities in the GGH

Promote collaboration among all sectors – government, private and non-profit sectors and citizens – to achieve the vision.

The following summarizes the key housing policies and directions contained in the Places to Grow initiative.

All upper and single-tier municipalities will plan for a phased increase in yearly percentage of intensification so that by 2015 a minimum of 40% of all residential development occurring annually will be within the defined built up area, specifically through official plan and other supporting documents. This 40% minimum must be maintained throughout the 2016 to 2031 period as well.

The targets provided within the document were developed with an emphasis on intensification of urban form, complete communities and recognition of the traditional role of rural settlement areas.

Downtown Brampton and the Mississauga City Centre are identified as Urban Growth Centres. These two growth centres are among those that will be planned to achieve, by 2031, a minimum gross density of 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare. Furthermore, designated greenfield areas must be planned to achieve a density target of no less

29


than 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare. This requirement is measured and monitored at the Regional level.

In general, although there are exceptions, the Growth Plan prohibits the establishment of new settlement areas.

The Growth Plan requires that municipalities establish and implement minimum affordable housing targets in accordance with the PPS 2005. Accordingly the Plan adopts the PPS definition of affordable housing.

The Growth Plan is intended to build upon other existing legislation such as the Greenbelt Plan, the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement. The Plan emphasizes that it works within the existing planning framework and does not replace existing Official Plans.

Sections 2.2 and 3.0 below identify a range of tools and practices for implementing the Places to Grow requirements. 2.1.2.17 Ontario Building Code, 2006

The new Ontario Building Code (OBC) was introduced in June of 2006, and uses an objectives-based format that provides room for alternative innovations, and flexibility in designs and construction through the use of ―acceptable solutions‖, which are prescriptive requirements that serve as benchmarks for evaluation. Other changes relevant to the housing strategy include increased requirements for energy efficiency, increased accessibility requirements, increasing flexibility for the design and construction of small care homes, and simplifying the requirements for small buildings. Accessibility is stated as an objective of the OBC, and it seeks to limit the probability of persons with disabilities being unacceptably impeded from accessing or using buildings. The OBC also includes objectives for barrier-free paths of travel design, and barrier-free facilities. Functionally, these objectives translate into updated requirements which include:

building of public corridors to accommodate wheelchairs

building main-floor bathrooms in new homes with reinforced stud walls to accommodate grab-bars bear toilets and bathtubs/showers in the future

use of tactile signs for the visually impaired

ten percent of units built in new apartment units to incorporate barrier-free features, including:

providing a barrier-free path of travel from the suite entrance door to the doorway to at least one bedroom on the same level and the

30


doorway to at least one bathroom having an area not less than 4.5 square metres at the same level

the doorway to such bathroom and to each bedroom at the same level as such bathroom must have, when the door is in the open position, a clear width of not less than 760 mm where the door is served by a corridor or space not less than 1 060 mm wide, and 810 mm where the door is served by a corridor or space less than 1 060 mm wide.

Changes for small care homes include the waiving of certain fire dampers and certain fire-resistant ratings, using residential sprinkler systems, and using lower structural floor loading requirements to make it easier to build and renovate such units and buildings. In addition, the changes to the OBC also increased the energy-efficiency requirements for new homes built as of 2007. For houses, these changes include the use of more energy-efficient windows, higher insulation levels, and the inclusion of more efficient gas or propane furnaces. There are further requirements that will be phased in incrementally, starting with requirements for near full-height insulation in basements as of 2009, and the substantial use of EnerGuide 80 standards in homes as of 2012. Larger residential buildings will also be required to meet increased efficiency standards, and as of 2012 it will be required that larger buildings exceed by 25% the standards of the Model National Energy Code for Buildings. The Region of Peel requires that any consultants building for it design according to the current OBC. It is suggested that the Region educate building industry about recent changes to the Ontario Building Code that are relevant to the housing strategy including increased requirements for energy efficiency, increased accessibility requirements, increasing flexibility for the design and construction of small care homes. 2.2 Federal and Provincial Policies and Programs

This section identifies the range of applicable policies and funding programs, including those to address homelessness, affordable housing, social housing, supportive housing, housing retention and energy efficiency. 2.2.1 Federal Policies and Programs

There are a range of federal policies and funding programs in place which address the creation of new affordable housing, repair and modernization of existing housing, adaptation of housing for seniors and persons with physical disabilities, homelessness and energy efficient housing.

31


2.2.1.1 Affordable Housing Initiative

The Affordable Housing Initiative (AHI) is the federal government‘s affordable housing funding initiative, implemented in 2001 it originally provided $1 billion in contributions. Agreements were signed with each province and territory that established the terms of the program, under which the provincial/ territorial governments matched the federal investment. In Ontario, the agreement between the Federal and Provincial Governments was signed on April 29, 2005 with the funding extending to March 31, 2010. Both levels of government committed a shared total of $734 million for the program, establishing the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program (AHP). The program also required extensive local contributions, but represents the greatest available source of senior government funding for affordable housing in Ontario. The current program is composed of several components:

Rent supplement/housing allowance which provides funds to create housing allowances for low-income households.

Rental and supportive housing provides funding to create new affordable rental units targeting persons or households on waiting lists or eligible to be on lists, as well as supportive housing units for persons with mental illnesses, victims of domestic violence, as well as other priority groups such persons with disabilities, Aboriginals, seniors, recent immigrants and the working poor. Funding of up to $70,000 of funding per unit is available under this component of the AHP.

Brownfields initiative which provides funding for a certain number of affordable units to be developed on brownfield sites.

Northern housing which targets $20 million for the renovation of affordable housing units in Northern Ontario.

Homeownership which funds allocations to help low and moderate-income renter households access the homeownership market.

The program is administered by the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MAH). The Ministry directs the allocation of units to the various Service Managers across the province. Service Managers are responsible for establishing the local council-approved program requirements for their areas. Region of Peel received $32.5 million in capital funding under the Rental and Supportive Housing component, and $2.8 million for Homeownership component. More detailed information on Peel Region‘s AHP initiate and projects is outlined in section 3.0.

32


The January 2009 federal budget announced new funding for social/affordable housing including $1 billion over two years for energy retrofits and renovations for up to 200,000 social housing units, $400 million over two years for new low-income seniors units, and $75 million over two years for new supportive housing units for people with disabilities. Additionally, $150 million of this funding will be allocated to renovations and retrofits of the CMHC administered portion of the social housing stock. To access the funds, provinces must match federal contributions on a 50/50 ratio. This funding is in addition to the announcement made by the government during the election campaign of $1.9 billion to extend the Affordable Housing Initiative (AHI), the Homelessness Partnership Initiative (HPI) and the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP). The recent funding announcement requires passage of the budget by the opposition parties, a commitment by the Ontario government to match federal funding and details on program guidelines related to the release of funds to the local level. 2.2.1.2 Seed Funding Program

CMHC‘s Seed funding offers financial assistance to housing proponents that are in the early stages of developing a housing project proposal that will either be affordable, innovative, community-based, or any combination of these characteristics. The funding is offered in conjunction with CMHC's capacity development initiative, with a maximum amount of $20,000 per housing project proposal. Of this amount, the first $10,000 is a grant and the second $10,000 is an interest-free loan. This second $10,000 is to be repaid when the affordable housing project commences construction. CMHC Seed funding may be used to pay for a variety of activities in the early stages of developing a housing project proposal, including preparation of housing market studies to evaluate need and demand for the proposed project, development of a business plan, evaluation of procurement options, inspection of existing properties, preliminary architectural drawings, and so on. In situations where the housing project proponent may not yet be an established organization, the CMHC Seed funding may also be used for group development activities. A number of not-for-profit and private sector organizations have received Seed funding in the last five years including Mississauga Ram Mandir (2008), Brampton Bramalea Christian Fellows (2008), Habitat for Humanity, Brampton (2005), Abbeyfield Houses Society of Caledon (2005), Supportive Housing in Peel, Brampton (2003), Paul Taylor, Mississauga (2003), Mississauga Italian

33


Canadian Benevolent Association (2003) and Shalimar International Housing Corporation Inc., Mississauga (2003) CMHC is currently accepting Seed funding requests on an on-going basis, which can be used in conjunction with funding through the Affordable Housing Program. 2.2.1.3 Proposal Development Funding

The CMHC Proposal Development Funding (PDF) program provides interest-free loans to non-profit and private sector groups with affordable housing developments. The loans are designed to help with up-front expenses of affordable housing project proposal development, and are of a maximum of $100,000. Certain expenses are not eligible to be paid out on the loans, such as expenses not related to the development of the project proposal, expenses incurred prior to the approval of the loan, ongoing operating expenses of the group or agency, and any retainer fees paid to consultants. A portion of the loan may be forgiven depending on whether or not the project meets CMHC level 1 or level 2 affordability criteria for the area in which the project is built, representing respectively a forgivable portion of 20% or 35%. If the project is built but no affordable housing created then the loan is repayable in its entirety. There are no groups in Peel Region that have received CMHC Proposal Development Funding. 2.2.1.4 Affordability and Choice Today

The Affordability and Choice Today program is sponsored by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and jointly run by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Canadian Home Builders‘ Association, and the Canadian Housing and Renewal Association. It was established in 1990 to help foster change in planning and building regulations, and residential development approval procedures with the goal of improving and increasing the affordability, choice and quality of housing in Canada. The program provides grants of up to $5,000 to facilitate the research and implementation of regulatory solutions that help the affordability and options for housing. Eligible recipients include municipalities, private and non-profit builders and developers, planners and architects. The grant funding has enabled the implementation and documentation of demonstration projects, case studies, and projects that streamlined the approval process throughout Canada.

34


It is suggested that the Region apply for an Affordability and Choices Today grant to facilitate the research and implementation of alternate development standards for affordable housing as proposed in the Housing Strategy as discussed further in section 4.13 below. 2.2.1.5 CMHC Mortgage Insurance Practices

Since the early 2000‘s, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) has made some significant changes to its mortgage insurance practices to help stimulated affordable housing development. General Practices In 2002, CMHC adopted a more flexible and market-oriented underwriting criteria which resulted in greater access to lower cost financing for rental development thus improving the business climate for rental investors at no cost to Canadian taxpayers. The changes meant that the level of insured financing available to borrowers would be based on current market trends rather than pre-determined minimums. The underwriting improvements permit higher advances during construction and, in some markets, higher loan amounts; a revised insurance premium that creates a system of surcharges based on risk factors; and, a new system of application fees that is more balanced and reflective of the costs of underwriting. In May 2005, CMHC made enhancements to its Mortgage Loan Insurance for owner occupied properties that would enable seniors to remain in their homes longer. The change includes the ability to purchase and occupy a two unit, new or existing residence with as little as five percent down. Up to 80% of the gross rental income for the second unit can be used for income qualification purposes, thereby making it easier for a homebuyer to qualify for mortgage loan insurance. In 2006, CMHC helped to make homeownership more affordable and accessible for Canadians by eliminating homeowner high ratio mortgage insurance application fees, extending amortizations and offering more flexible repayment options. In 2008, CMHC implemented guidelines to help self-employed individuals access mortgage insurance. It was also announced that as of October 15, 2008, the government would no longer back 40 year mortgage and would only insure mortgages up to a 35 year amortization period. As part of these changes, the loan-to-value ratio is reduced to 95%, buyers can still borrow the remaining 5%, but it will not be government-insured. These changes do affect affordable housing projects seeking mortgage insurance. Mortgage Insured Financing Options

35


CMHC offers a variety of mortgage insured financing options for individuals, self-employed individuals, newcomers and non-permanent residents as described below.

CMHC Flex Down: Allows purchasers who cannot or have decided not to provide the 5% down payment using traditional sources, to pay this using non-traditional sources such as gifts or borrowed funds.

CMHC Helping Newcomers to Canada Feel at Home: Newcomers to Canada, with permanent resident status, have access to all CMHC mortgage insurance products without additional eligibility requirements.

CMHC Non-Permanent Residents: Non-permanent residents that are legally entitled to work in Canada can purchase a home with CMHC mortgage insurance with minimum 10% down payment.

CMHC Energy Efficient Housing: Eligible purchasers can receive a 10% refund on their mortgage insurance premiums, and an extension to the amortization period with no surcharge if they are buying an energy-efficient home, or renovating a new or existing home to improve its energy efficiency.

CMHC Self-Employed Simplified: This option makes it easier for self-employed individuals to borrow for home ownership. Self-employed individuals, including commissioned sales persons, with proven records of debt management and having worked a minimum of two years in the same type of work are eligible to obtain CMHC mortgage insurance.

CMHC 1-4 Unit Rental Properties: Mortgage insurance for one to four unit non-owner occupied rental properties provides financing choices for investors looking at purchasing or refinancing small rental properties. Purchasers of one to four unit rental properties can do so with a minimum 5% down payment, and refinancing of properties can insure financing of up to 90% or 95% of the value of the properties. Affordable Housing Initiatives Mortgage loan insurance makes it easier for non-profit groups to obtain financial backing from lenders of affordable housing projects. In an effort to improve rental housing affordability, CMHC made key changes in 2003 to mortgage insurance for rental projects that achieve rents below new affordable target thresholds. The thresholds are set at 80% of the existing market rent distribution (Level 1), 65% of the existing market rent distribution (Level 2), or below 50% of the existing market rent distribution or projects with rents that meet the federal-

36


provincial affordable housing project agreements (Level 3). The main features for projects qualifying as affordable housing are:

Amortization periods of 25 years plus the ability to extend to up to 40 years

Maximum loan amounts up to 95% of lending value

Rental achievement holdbacks are reduced or may be waived

Flexibility on Debt Coverage Ratios (DCR) when rents are below the specified market benchmarks. At market rents and the base premiums, a minimum of 1.2 DCR is required. CMHC will reduce this to as low as 1.0 for affordable housing projects with rents below the qualifying rent benchmarks.

For projects meeting the Level 3 criteria: once funds under the federal-provincial/territorial affordable housing initiatives agreements are unconditionally committed to a project, lenders may commence insured loan advances. These funds no longer need to be injected up front. All other equity from the sponsor continues to be required prior to any advancing.

Waived premiums for federal affordable housing initiatives. CMHC has also introduced a mechanism to encourage public/private partnerships. If a developer makes a contribution to an affordable housing project, the developer can qualify for a credit on mortgage insurance premiums on a future project equal to 60% of the value of the contribution. This is also applicable to non-profit groups if they are not already registered charities.

2.2.1.6 Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program

CMHC oversees the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP), funding was extended in 2006 starting in April of 2007. The $256 million for two years covers all the CMHC renovation programs, which includes RRAP, as well as the Shelter Enhancement Program, Emergency Repair Program, and the Home Adaptation for Seniors‘ Independence, these latter three programs are further detailed following this sub-section. RRAP is designed to help low-income Canadians, people with disabilities and Aboriginals live in decent, affordable homes by providing funding for improvements, repairs, or renovations to the units to allow for this. The general goals of the programs are as follows, providing funding to:

fix up owner-occupied or private rental properties

modify homes for occupancy by people with disabilities

repair and rehabilitate community shelters

37


convert buildings from other uses to low-cost housing

facilitate neighbourhood revitalization projects

maximize the impact of funds from other sources. The RRAP program consists of eight distinct specialized ―chapters‖, each with specific target groups or goals: Rental RRAP: Designed to provide assistance to landlords of affordable housing in order to pay for mandatory repairs to self-contained rental units to be occupied by tenants with low incomes. Funding of up to $24,000 per unit is available. Rooming Housing RRAP: Designed to provide assistance to owners of rooming houses to pay for mandatory repairs to housing intended for permanent accommodation at rents which are affordable to low-income individuals. Funding of up to $16,000 per bed is available. RRAP for Non-Residential Conversion: Designed to provide assistance to owners of non-residential buildings to convert their structure for use as permanent rental accommodation at rents that will continue to be affordable. Funding of up to $16,000 per bed or $24,000 per unit is available. Homeowner RRAP: Designed to provide assistance to low-income homeowners to bring their properties up to minimum health and safety standards. Properties must be lacking basic facilities or require major repairs in one of five key areas: structural; electrical; plumbing; heating; or fire safety. Funding up to $16,000 per home is available. RRAP for Persons with Disabilities: Designed to provide assistance to households occupied by low-income persons with disabilities who require special modifications to their residence to improve access. Funding is in the form of a forgivable loan up to a maximum of $24,000. On-Reserve Non-Profit Housing Program: Designed to provide assistance to low-income homeowners on reserves in the construction, purchase and rehabilitation, and administration of suitable, adequate and affordable rental housing on-reserve. The loans can be up to 100% of the total eligible capital of a project. CMHC delivers the program in partnership with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) and First Nations to determine allocations of funding for eligible reserves. Home Adaptations for Seniors’ Independence (HASI): Designed to provide assistance to homeowners and landlords to pay for home adaptations which can

38


extend the time low-income seniors can live in their own homes independently. To be eligible occupants must be over the age of 65, have difficulty with daily activities brought on by ageing, have a total household income at or below a specified limit for the area, and have the dwelling unit in question as a permanent residence. Assistance is a forgivable loan of up to $3,500, applicable to installing elements that include handrails, easy-to-reach work and storage areas in kitchens, lever handles on doors, walk-in showers with grab bars, and bathtub grab bars and seats. RRAP for Secondary/Garden Suites: This component is designed to provide assistance to homeowners to assist in the creation of secondary rental and garden suites. A secondary suite involves the creation of a unit within an existing dwelling or an addition to the home. A Garden Suite is a separate self-contained living area created on the owner‘s property. Homeowners, private landlords, and First Nations owning a single-family residential property that can accommodate the creation of an affordable self-contained secondary suite or garden suite will now be eligible to apply for RRAP funds. Assistance is in the form of a forgivable loan up to $24,000. To date, between 2004 and 2008 fiscal years a total of 201 applications, covering 352 units, were made to the program from individuals or organizations in the Region of Peel, representing a total of $3.017 million in forgivable loans that was distributed for the various RRAP programs. It is suggested that the Region work with CMHC to discuss the benefits and possibility of the Region of Peel becoming a local delivery agent for CMHC‘s RRAP funding to ensure that RRAP funding for the Region is utilized. 2.2.1.7 Shelter Enhancement Program

The Shelter Enhancement Program (SEP) is a federal program funded and administered by CMHC. SEP offers financial assistance for the repair, rehabilitation and improvement of existing shelters for women, children and youth who are victims of family violence as well as the acquisition or construction of new shelters and second stage housing where needed. Assistance is in the form of a fully forgivable loan up to $24,000 per unit or bed. Funding for the SEP was renewed for two more years as part of the CMHC renovation program extension discussed above. For the period between 2004 and 2008, four applications were made that covered a total of 59 units in the Region of Peel, and represents a total of $271,000 in forgivable loans that were allocated in the Region during the four year timeframe.

39


It is suggested that the Region work with CMHC to ensure that eligible agencies and organizations are aware of the Shelter Enhancement Funding available, in order to utilize it. 2.2.1.8 Emergency Repair Program

The Emergency Repair Program (ERP) was designed to assist low-income homeowners or occupants in rural areas of populations less than 2,500 to make emergency repairs required for the continued safe occupancy of their houses. Repairs that are urgently required to make the homeowners‘ or occupants‘ houses safe are eligible for assistance. These include repairs to heating systems, chimneys, doors and windows, foundations, roofs, walls, floors, ceilings, vents, louvers, plumbing and electrical systems. The financial assistance from CMHC is in the form of non-repayable contributions with a limit of $6,000 per unit. Given the rural-specific nature of this program, no funding or applications were received for the Region of Peel. 2.2.1.9 Home Adaptation for Seniors’ Independence

The Home Adaptation for Seniors‘ Independence (HASI) program provides assistance to homeowners and landlords that will enable them to pay for home adaptations in order to extend the time low-income seniors can live in their own homes independently. Among the criteria for applicants is the requirement that the occupants must be over the age of 65, have difficulty with daily activities brought on by ageing, have a total household income at or below a specified limit for the area, and must live in the dwelling unit as a permanent residence. Assistance is provided through a forgivable loan of up to $3,500. Adaptations that could be implemented under this program include handrails, easy-to-reach work and storage areas in the kitchen, lever handles on doors, walk-in showers with grab bars, and bathtub grab bars and seats. A total of 162 applications were made to the HASI program from households in the Region of Peel, with a total of $537,000 being allocated for these applicants. It is suggested that the Region work with CMHC to ensure that eligible seniors and older adults in the Region are aware of the HASI program in order to utilize, given the greater preference, and emphasis for aging in place for older adults.

40


2.2.1.10 Homelessness Partnering Strategy

The Federal government announced a new homelessness program in 2006, the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS), which replaced the previous National Homelessness Initiative (NHI). The Strategy was originally announced with a two year, $270 million budget. The HPS is based on a housing-first approach, which emphasizes transitional and supportive housing followed by supports for the individuals. The Strategy is composed of three main components:

The Homelessness Partnership Initiative (HPI) is a community-based program in which Designated Communities are eligible for funding based on identified needs. The approach encourages community involvement through the use of a community planning process and Community Advisory Boards to include local stakeholders. Funding must be matched from other sources, but can be used to support community planning efforts as well as chosen projects. Peel Region is a designated community. Two other funding streams, for Outreach Communities and Aboriginal Communities are also available to respectively service the needs of smaller outlying communities and homeless Aboriginal people in cities and rural areas.

The Homelessness Accountability Network builds on research and data initiatives such as HIFIS (Homeless Individuals and Families Information System) with the goal of developing knowledge of homelessness and improving networking and sharing opportunities. The Region of Peel has benefited from the use of the HIFIS system.

The Surplus Federal Real Property for Homelessness Initiative (SFRPHI) compensates federal departments and agencies for the transfer of surplus properties to be made available for a variety of housing uses.

The Region has used their funding allocation from the Homelessness Partnering Strategy to contribute towards the purchase of a hotel which will be converted into a shelter for single women and families. The Region has also contributed approximately $6 million to the project. Additionally, the Region of Peel has undertaken extensive work to identify potential surplus Federal properties, and none have been identified within the Region at this time. In 2006, the government renewed HPS funding for $526 million over two years, starting as of April 2007.

41


2.2.1.11 Aboriginal Off-Reserve Housing

Bill C-48 was passed by the Parliament of Canada in 2005, and provided the $1.4 billion in funding for the Aboriginal Housing Trust Fund, for Provinces and Territories to increase the supply of affordable, supportive and transitional housing. The bill split the funding into three trusts, $800 million for urban centres, $300 million for northern and remote communities, and $300 million for non-reserve Aboriginal people. In addition, most of the programs described above from CMHC are available off-reserve, with the additional of two others, the Aboriginal Capacity Development and Direct Lending programs.

Aboriginal Capacity Development is designed to facilitate knowledge, skills and training tools and resources to encourage and further First Nation self-sufficiency in housing and community. It provides assistance through training sessions, First Nation inspector training, Healthy Housing projects and youth career supports regarding housing and management.

The Direct Lending Program provides low-interest financing and renewals for social and affordable housing projects to eligible Band Councils or project sponsors.

In 2006, $80 million was allocated to the Province of Ontario for the Off-Reserve Housing trust fund. In December 2008, the Province of Ontario allocated $20 million of this funding to be used for off-reserve Aboriginal housing in the GTA in partnership with the Miziwe Biik Development Corporation. It is suggested that the Region work with local Aboriginal groups to access these funds to develop Aboriginal housing in the Region. 2.2.1.12 Youth Employment Strategy

The Youth Employment Strategy, which is managed by Human Resources and Social Development Canada, was created by the Government of Canada to help young Canadians aged 15 to 30 years obtain career information, develop skills, find good jobs and stay employed. It was created in 1997 as a response to the ―no experience, no job – no job, no experience‖ dilemma faced by many young Canadians. It was designed to help young Canadians to find those first jobs that allowed them to get the experience that they needed. It was changed in 2003 to make it more responsive to the evolving needs of youth and employers (Service Canada, 2008).

42


Funds from the National Homelessness Initiative targeted to homeless youth were channelled through the Youth Employment Strategy. Between 2000 and 2003, $59 million was granted to projects to provide opportunities for homeless youth to gain work experience and develop life skills (CMHC, 2001).

In Peel Region, the Homelessness and Housing Initiatives is involved in a number of major projects including the Youth Employment Strategy. 2.2.1.13 Energy Efficiency and Sustainability

There are two federal funding initiatives to encourage energy efficient and sustainable housing design and rehabilitation: the ecoENERGY Programs and CMHC EQuilibrium Housing. The January 2009 federal budget allocated $1 billion in funding for clean energy research and development over five years, although no specific programs were named or created at that time. As previously mentioned, the budget also provided a one-time allocation of $1 billion towards renovations and energy retrofits for up to 200,000 social housing units, to be cost-shared with the provinces on a 50-50 basis. 2.2.1.13.1 ecoENERGY Programs

Natural Resources Canada‘s ecoENERGY Retrofit program is part of the Ministry‘s ecoACTION initiative. The ecoENERGY program provides financial incentives and support to homeowners, small and medium-sized businesses as well as public institutions and industrial facilities to help fund and implement measures and energy-saving projects that reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) and air pollution. The project will end on March 31, 2011 or when all funds have been committed; however the January 2009 federal budget announcement identified a two-year $300 million allocation that would provide additional retrofit grants to an estimated 200,000 homes in Canada. The ecoENERGY Retrofit for Homes program was developed to help property owners with retrofit choices designed to improve energy efficiency in their homes up to a maximum of $5,000 per home or multi-residential unit. Under the program, eligible homes must have undergone an energy efficiency assessment performed by a certified energy advisor. Natural Resources Canada ensures that only properly licensed and independent energy advisors perform an assessment of the properties to identify areas of energy loss through contracts with organizations across the country. The ecoENERGY Retrofit for Small and Medium-Sized Organizations covers businesses and public institutions. Eligible organizations must have performed and submitted a pre-project energy audit of the building or buildings in

43


question. Grants of up to $10 per gigajoule of estimated energy savings, 25% of eligible project costs, or up to $50,000 per project are available. It is suggested that the Region inform residents and local businesses about the federal government‘s ecoENERGY programs and explore the possibility of accessing these funding programs for the Region‘s projects in an effort to help achieve its energy efficiency and sustainability goals. 2.2.1.13.2 CMHC EQuilibrium Housing

The CMHC EQuilibrium housing initiative is designed to promote tools and methods that address the practical challenges of sustainable housing design, with the goal of fostering acceptance, capacity-building and use of energy-efficient technologies in home construction, reducing the environmental impacts of future homes. It is based on a collaborative effort of the public and private sectors, including all levels of government and the housing industry. Recently, a national demonstration initiative has led to the construction of

twelve pilot-project homes across Canada which showcase the ideas and technologies of the EQuilibrium initiative. The projects are to be built in both rural and urban/suburban settings and as of Summer 2008 four of these have been completed and open for public tours. The projects developed under the initiative will provide concrete experiences of sustainable technologies, and its implementation. One of the completed projects, the Now House (Figure 3), is located in a 1960s post-war suburban Toronto neighbourhood. Using a community

based approach, the home was retrofitted with various energy-efficiency upgrades, significantly improving efficiency and reducing its impact. It is estimated that the retrofits will reduce the home‘s greenhouse gas emissions by 5.4 tonnes, allow it to achieve a near zero energy cost and use minimal new resources and produce little waste throughout the renovations. The chosen retrofits included the installation of solar panels, high efficiency low-e windows, new exterior insulation, a grey water heat recovery system and high efficiency furnace.

Figure 3: Now House, Toronto

Source: Now House Project Inc.

44


Although not complete, the Urban Ecology project in one of Winnipeg‘s downtown neighbourhoods will develop affordable, energy-efficient infill housing aimed at first-time buyers. It is being developed as part of the Winnipeg Housing Rehabilitation Corporation‘s neighbourhood rehabilitation and renewal efforts. The houses will be adapted to Winnipeg‘s difficult climate conditions, and feature solar panels, geothermal strategies, high efficiency appliances and fixtures, and sustainable building materials. The technologies used by the demonstration projects include climate specific design, energy and resource-efficient construction, passive solar heating and cooling systems, natural daylighting, energy-efficient appliances and lighting, renewable energy systems, water conservation and re-use systems and methods, land and natural habitat conservation, and sustainable community design and green infrastructure practices. It is suggested that the Region report on the CMHC EQuilibrium Housing demonstration projects, as they may provide further lessons in the implementation of energy-efficient building methods and materials, helping to support the Region‘s sustainability goals. 2.2.1.13.3 CMHC Energy Efficient Housing Mortgage Rebate

As mentioned above, under CMHC‘s Energy Efficient Housing initiative, eligible purchasers can receive a 10% refund on their mortgage insurance premiums, and an extension to the amortization period with no surcharge if they are buying an energy-efficient home, or renovating a new or existing home to improve its energy efficiency. Similarly, Genworth Financial Canada, the only private sector mortgage insurer in Canada, has an Energy Efficient Housing Program that offers a 10% rebate on its premiums to buyers using Genworth insured mortgages to purchase an energy-efficient home, or are refinancing an existing home to make energy-efficient upgrades and renovations. Eligible loans are offered with an amortization period of up to 35 years at standard mortgage insurance rates. 2.2.1.14 Federal Taxation Policies

The Provincial Housing Supply Work Group, a government/industry/labour working group that included senior representatives of the rental/development industry, commissioned two in-depth studies of the impact of senior government taxation policies and regulations on the development of affordable rental housing supply. The first study, Affordable Rental Housing Supply: the Dynamics of the Market and Recommendations for Encouraging New Supply made recommendations relating to municipal, provincial and federal jurisdictions, many of which have now been implemented. The second study,

45


Creating a Positive Climate for Rental Housing Development Through Tax and Mortgage Insurance Reform focuses on financing and taxation of rental housing primarily at the federal level. The findings of these studies are summarized below. 2.2.1.14.1 Goods and Services Tax

GST is a federal taxation practice that drives up the cost of producing affordable housing. The Canada Revenue Agency, does however, provide partial rebates on the GST related to the purchase of a new owner-occupied home and new rental housing. For ownership housing, the rebate is applicable only on homes (new housing, major additions and conversions from non-residential uses) with purchase prices of less than $450,000. The rebates is 36% of the GST on a home with a purchase price of $350,000 or less to a maximum of $6,300, resulting in a current effective GST rate of 3.2%. The rebate decreases on a sliding scale on homes with purchase prices between $350,000 and $450,000. Similarly, for rental housing developed by the private sector, the rebate is 36% of the GST paid; no GST is paid on the sale of existing housing. Affordable rental housing projects can be eligible for a GST rebate of 50% and units with rents that are geared-to-income can qualify for a 100% GST rebate, depending on a range of circumstances including type of corporation (i.e. non-profit or charitable). For new rental housing, GST regulations require that the full amount of GST be paid on the construction of a new unit when the first unit is rented. This may cause cash flow problems for a new building and may present another barrier to creating rental housing. The Housing Supply Working Group concluded that fully rebating new rental housing for the purposes of GST would be one of the most effective, fair and practical ways to help reduce the cost of new rental housing. This recommendation has been enacted for municipal and related non-profit housing corporations and acts as a major incentive for affordable housing development by such organizations. The reduction of a larger portion of the GST payable of development costs may have a positive impact on housing affordability for those units developed by the private sector. 2.2.1.14.2 Treatment of Capital Gains

Prior to 1972, capital gains on rental properties were not taxable. At that time, changes were introduced making 50% of such capital gains taxable. This was further increased to 75% in 1990, but has been subsequently reduced back to 50%. In 1985 a lifetime capital gains exemption for individuals was introduced. This exemption was capped at $100,000 in 1987 and subsequently eliminated in 1994, thereby further discouraging investment in rental housing.

46


The Housing Supply Working Group recommended that the federal government should allow rental investors to defer capital gains tax and recaptured depreciation upon the sale of a rental project if the proceeds are reinvested in new rental housing. The Working Group concluded that this measure would help unlock the existing reluctance of investors to sell properties and invest in new rental housing.

2.2.1.14.3 Capital Cost Allowance

Both of the Housing Supply Working Group‘s reports found that a number of restrictions introduced in the 1970‘s and 1980‘s inhibited the ability of investors to benefit from Capital Cost Allowance (CCA) deductions. Two examples include restrictions on pooling of rental properties to avoid recapture of CCA at the sale of a building and prohibitions on individuals and non-real estate companies from using CCA losses to reduce taxable income. The report calls for the federal government to increase the rate (from 4% to 5%) for capital cost allowance on new rental housing. An increase in the CCA rate would increase after-tax returns and thus provide a potential stimulus to new rental investment. Recently, several groups including the Canadian Federation of Apartment Associations (CFAA), the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce have advocated a change to the current system of taxing recaptured CCA on nominal capital gains on the sale of rental properties. The proposed change would allow for this tax on a sale to be deferred over a period of years if the proceeds of the sale are reinvested in a replacement property within 12 months of the sale. This would help affordability by keeping rents lower and improving maintenance of properties, and would also assist small investors and landlords, as well as promoting the development of rental housing. 2.2.1.14.4 Deductibility of Soft Costs

Since 1992, all investors in rental properties have had to capitalize soft costs (e.g. legal fees, architect fees, engineering studies) incurred in the construction or renovation of rental housing. This increases the up-front financial burden on developers of rental housing and discourages investment. The Housing Supply Working Group report recommended that the federal government change the tax system to allow investors to deduct soft costs rather than capitalize them. Restoring soft cost deductibility would increase the negative income (i.e. tax losses) in the first year and allow investors to reduce their taxable income from other sources. Any measures that have a positive effect on the marginal returns usually experienced by the rental

47


developers in the early years of a project can have a significant impact on the decision to build or not to build.

2.2.1.14.5 Capital Taxes on Rental Properties

Both the federal and provincial governments should eliminate their respective taxes on rental properties according to the Housing Supply Working Group report. This controversial tax is felt by many in the real estate industry to discourage investment since it is applied without regard to the economic cycle, and it discriminates unfairly against capital-intensive industries.

2.2.1.14.6 Low Income Housing Tax Credit

In the United States, low and moderate income housing is developed through various programs and financing, one such method is the use of Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), which have been in use since the late 1980‘s. The program allocates the tax credits to each based on a per-citizen dollar amount. These tax credits help leverage private financing to build new units, rehabilitate or acquisition and renovation of units. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that between 1987 and 2005, 27,410 projects totalling over 1.5 million housing units were created throughout the country. Some in Canada have examined the adaptation of the LIHTC model for Canada as a method of furthering the development of affordable housing, arguing that it would promote competition and better projects, as well as spreading the funding over 10 year periods, allowing immediate construction but spreading the credit through the system. Finally, this method would continue to provide federal funding , but still allow provinces and municipalities to fine tune the housing to local needs (Steele, 2008). 2.2.1.14.7 Other Tax Changes

The Housing Supply Working Group has identified two other changes to the tax system which could encourage investment in residential development: allowing small landlords to qualify as small businesses for the purposes of obtaining the small business corporate rate, and allowing all investors in rental housing to use CCA losses in determining income for tax purposes – not just principal business corporations. While the Region of Peel cannot directly affect senior government taxation policy, it can lend its voice in advocating for changes that will have a positive impact on the development of new affordable housing. As such, it is suggested that the Region encourage the federal and provincial governments, in collaboration with area municipalities, Federation of Canadian Municipalities to

48


reform the tax treatment of rental housing in order to encourage rental housing investment by the private sector. 2.3 Provincial Policies and Programs

There are a range of provincial policies and funding programs in place which address the creation of new affordable housing, capital repairs to existing housing, provision of support services and/or supportive housing for persons with special needs, and homelessness. These policies and programs are described in the following sections. The provincial funding programs have been short term and ad hoc over the last decade. It is suggested that the Region advocate to the provincial government to ensure that its Affordable Housing Strategy complements and provides funding allocations and annual targets for new construction of affordable housing, as well as new supportive housing, renovations to existing social housing units and rent supplement. 2.3.1.1 Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program

As mentioned in section 2.2.2.1, the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program is administered by the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MAH) with Service Managers responsible for establishing the local council-approved program requirements for their areas. Detailed information on Peel Region‘s AHP initiate and projects is outlined in section 3.2. 2.3.1.2 Affordable Housing Program – Brownfields Initiative

In 2005, the federal and provincial governments allocated funding for a minimum of 300 units to be developed on brownfield sites under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program. These units were to be built specifically on cleaned up brownfield sites. The Affordable Housing Program – Brownfields Initiative included funding to pay for the clean-up of the sites and the construction of new affordable housing on the remediated land. Funding for this program has already been allocated, eight projects were selected, representing a total of 535 units. One of these, 424 Metcalfe Street in Ottawa, is being developed by the Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corporation in the City‘s downtown area on an underused site. The completed project will provide 195 units for low-income individuals and families, and is in close proximity to area amenities including schools and public transit. The project will also incorporate commercial space and an existing ambulance lay-by facility is to be re-built into the development.

49


In Cambridge, the Heartwood Place project will redevelop a former local newspaper building into a 66 unit affordable housing development. The project will incorporate accessible community space, and Coffee Shop that will provide training and employment opportunities for the tenants and residents of the downtown. 2.3.1.3 Ontario Trillium Foundation

The Ontario Trillium Foundation is a provincial government agency that supports charities and non-profit groups through two granting programs (either community or province-Wide) that allocate funding support for the following sectors: arts and culture, environment, sports and recreation, and human and social services. Community and Province-Wide program grants can cover operating or project expenses, as well as capital expenses such as building renovations and equipment purchases. Examples of grant recipients in the Region of Peel include Caledon Community Services, which received a two year $67,000 funding grant to help their work with alienated youth that includes helping them finding employment and housing. The Peel Children‘s Centre received a one year $100,000 grant to assist in renovating an older facility to deliver residential respite services for children, youth and their caregivers. St. Leonard‘s House Peel received an $80,700 grant to help it install an elevator to ensure full accessibility in their Rotary Resolve House building. 2.3.1.4 Rental Opportunities for Ontario Families

Ontario Works‘ Rental Opportunities for Ontario Families (ROOF), introduced in January 2008, provides funding for 27,000 low-income working families across the province. Eligible families receive $100 per month rental assistance payment for up to five years. The deadline for application was in June of 2008. Eligibility was based on several criteria, including recipients must be working and have a family income of at least $5,000 and a net income of less than $20,000 (not including child benefits); have one or more dependent children younger than 18 years of age; be paying more than 30% of their income towards rent; have less than $10,000 in liquid assets; not be receiving social assistance or any other rent subsidy; and be a resident of Ontario and meet Canadian residency status requirements. 2.3.1.5 Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters

The Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters (DOOR) program was a one-time grant allocation of $127.1 million for Service Managers in the 2006-2007 Ontario Budget to allow for the creation of new social housing, and help with the rehabilitation of existing housing for low-income households and

50


individuals. The Region of Peel was allocated a total of $6.4 million under this program. Details on how Peel utilized the DOOR funds can be found in section 3.2 below. 2.3.1.6 Capital Funding for Repairs to Social Housing

In March, 2008 the provincial government announced that $100 million would be invested to help offset the costs of capital repairs to social housing. This assistance would be to provide repairs to an estimated 4,000 units of social housing across Ontario. In July of 2008, $5.5 million in funding was announced to help fund capital repairs to social housing units in the Region of Peel. Details on how Peel utilized these funds can be found in section 3.2 below. 2.3.1.7 Provincial Infrastructure Funding

In the fall of 2008, the Province of Ontario allocated a one-time provincial infrastructure funding allotment of $67 million to the Region of Peel. The Region decided in October 2008 to earmark this funding to help fund infrastructure development of affordable housing and regional paramedic service structure. Details of how the Region of Peel used these funds can be found in section 3.2 below. 2.3.1.8 Homelessness Prevention Program

The Province of Ontario‘s Homelessness Prevention Program funds support services and programs for municipalities in order to help individuals who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. Municipalities administer and, in some cases, develop the programs with the help and partnership or associated community services agencies and other groups. Peel Region‘s Homelessness Initiatives are described in section 3.2 below. There are several programs covered under the Homelessness Prevention Program. Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program (CHPP) This program is designed to help individuals who are homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless. This includes supportive services for ―hard to house‖ populations, such as ex-offenders or individuals with mental illnesses, which can help establish and maintain living independence in their communities. The programs are developed by each municipality and community partners.

51


Emergency Energy Fund (EEF) The Emergency Energy Fund (EEF) program provides funding for municipalities to enable them to help low-income residents pay utility arrears, security deposits and reconnection costs. Maximum amounts allowable per household equal the amount that is needed to ensure the service is maintained or reconnected, and are only eligible to receive funding once. The program is delivered through the municipalities or third-party providers. Domiciliary and Emergency Hostels The program also provides funding for the 280 domiciliary hostels, and numerous emergency hostels throughout the province. The domiciliary facilities serve individuals with mental health and addiction issues, developmental disabilities, as well as frail and elderly individuals by providing accommodation and supportive services. Emergency hostels emphasize short-term accommodations, board, and personal needs items as well as various supports needed by individuals and families who are homeless and help provide transitional services by moving people off the street and connecting them with resources and community services that can help them. The per diem costs as shared between the province and municipalities. 2.3.1.9 Provincial Rent Bank

The province‘s Rent Bank program is administered and funded through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and was first launched in 2004 to provide funding to existing municipally-run rent banks, or help service managers set-up rent banks. Funding has been allocated on several occasions, and the most recent funding allocation was in 2008 with the government investing $5 million to help fund the Rent Bank program. The Rent Bank program in the Region of Peel is part of its Preventing Homelessness in Peel Program (PHIPP), and is administered by Ontario Works in Peel. 2.3.1.10 Shelter Allowances

There are two shelter allowance programs in Ontario which provide income and employment support for eligible households: Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program. Ontario Works (OW) provides financial and employment assistance to individuals who are in temporary financial need. Financial assistance helps cover the costs of basic needs such as food, housing, and clothing and some health benefits are also covered such as dental and drug coverage. Employment assistance provides job-skills training, and education programs. Ontario Works in Peel (OWIP) administers the program in the Region of Peel.

52


The Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) provides income and employment supports to individuals with disabilities and their families who are in financial need. The income supports helps pay for food, housing, as well as some health benefits such as dental and drug coverage. The employment supports provides a variety of help to individuals to train for a job, find employment, or keep a job. It also includes software or mobility devices that can help individuals with their job. The administration of ODSP in the Region of Peel is provided through the Ministry of Community and Social Services‘ Mississauga Office.

The 2006 Provincial Budget announced in March 2006 provides for a 2% increase to both Ontario Works (OW) and ODSP payments. This announcement resulted in an increase to the shelter allowance of an individual on OW by approximately $7 per month, and $9 per month for an individual on ODSP. This change was implemented as of November (ODSP) and December (OW) 2006. A further 2% increase to OW and ODSP rates was made as of November 2007. The 2008 Provincial Budget included a further increase of 2% to the OW and ODSP basic adult allowance and maximum shelter allowance rates, with a $123 million funding commitment for 2008 to 2010. An important component, and barrier to affordability, is how much people earn as it directly affects their capacity to access housing. This is especially true for lower income households. The table below shows that the current maximum shelter allowances available are not sufficient for households receiving financial assistance to afford the average market rents in Peel Region. This severely limits the housing choices of low-income families and households. Although the Province plans further increases in shelter allowances, it is suggested that the Region continue to advocate to the provincial government to enhance the shelter component of social assistance programs with the objective of reducing excessive rent burdens (for those paying more than 50 per cent of income for rent) of households in receipt of income assistance.

53


Table 1: Comparison of Shelter Allowances and Average Market Rents in Peel Region

Shelter Allowances (Maximum Amounts)

Average Market Rent - 2007

Ontario Works (OW)

Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP)

Caledon Brampton Mississauga

1-Bdrm

$356 $454 ** $895 $890

2-Bdrm

$560 $714 $829 $1,024 $1,020

3-Bdrm

$607 $775 ** $1,131 $1,162

** Data suppressed for reasons of confidentiality or statistical reliability Source: CMHC Greater Toronto Area Rental Market Report, 2007, Government of Ontario –

Ontario Works Act, Ontario Disability Support Program Act

2.3.1.11 Poverty Reduction Strategy

The Government of Ontario launched a new Poverty Reduction Strategy in December 2008. The focus of the Strategy is primarily to reduce childhood poverty, but it also strengthens the commitment to housing as an important element in poverty reduction. Among the funding commitments announced were additional funds for the Ontario Child Benefit of $230 million per year up to a total of $1.3 billion and $70 million annually for education and community initiatives up to a total of $350 million which includes increased funding for Aboriginal youth programs. Funding for housing was strengthened by an additional $5 million annually for the Provincial Rent Bank program. The Government has indicated a willingness to pursue the Strategy as a long-term plan against poverty, and would look at formalizing this through legislation in 2009. It is suggested that the Region advise the Province of the need for immediate action to meet its poverty reduction targets. In addition, it is suggested that the Region continue to advise the Federal government of the need to address the requests for funding identified by the Province in its Poverty Reduction Strategy. 2.3.1.12 Supportive Housing Policies and Programs (MOH-LTC/LHIN)

The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOH-LTC) has the provincial mandate to provide services to those aged 16 or older through such programs

54


as support services for persons with mental illness, persons with physical disabilities, persons with acquired brain injuries, and persons with HIV/AIDS, long-term care homes, and home care services. Through the Local Health Integration Networks, MOH-LTC provides a number of supportive housing funding and programs. The Local Health System Integration Act established the Local Health Integration Networks (LHIN) in 2006 and focused the provision of care at the local and regional level. Since then, the Ministry‘s role has shifted towards overall administration of the provincial health system, which includes the overall planning and strategic direction for health system priorities, the development of policies and legislation, monitoring of the health system, and planning and establishing funding models and funding levels for the system. The Ministry funds the various initiatives and programs through the LHINS. The Ministry has retained responsibilities for individual practitioners, Family Health Teams, ambulance services, laboratories, provincial drug programs, Independent Health Facilities and public health. 2.3.1.12.1 Local Health Integration Networks

As described in Section 2.1.2.12 above, the Local Health Integration Networks are responsible for the planning, integrating and funding of the health services of their territories. It is suggested that the Region liaise with the Central West LHIN (CWLHIN) and the Mississauga-Halton LHIN (MHLHIN) and the Province (Ministry of Community and Social Services) to share information on support service and accessibility needs of special needs residents in Peel Region, support funding applications by community based non-profit organizations seeking funds from the provincial government and make every effort to coordinate its services with those of the provincial government. 2.3.1.12.2 Community Care Access Centres

The LHINs work closely with the Community Care Access Centres (CCAC), established in 1996 by the MOH-LTC, on the delivery of support services in the community. In 2006, the CCACs boundaries were re-aligned to match those of the LHINS. The CCACs help people access publicly funded home care and long-term care homes in their territories and help to connect people with other community service and health agencies that offer supports and services. A variety of in-home and community based supportive services are offered through the LHINs and CCACs to help residents live independently in their homes. These services include physiotherapy, nursing services, speech language pathology, personal home support services, occupational therapy,

55


nutrition and dietetic services, social work, and medical equipment and supplies. 2.3.1.12.3 Aging at Home Strategy

The Aging at Home Strategy is aimed at providing seniors, their families and caregivers with a spectrum of care to help them stay healthy, and live independently in their homes. The Strategy is being implemented by the LHINs in their respective territories. Initiatives covered by the strategy are designed to support seniors that live at home and include funding for services such as community support services, home care, assistive devices, supportive living, long-term care beds, and end-of-life care. It also aims at promoting innovation in preventative and wellness services, as well encouraging partnerships with non-traditional providers. The Central West LHIN received $21.5 million under the strategy, and Mississauga-Halton LHIN received $60 million. Many initiatives are currently funded under the strategy. Examples in the Central West LHIN include the CANES Home Support Services program which provides home maintenance and safety inspections, as well as supportive services such as transportation and homemaking. The CWLHIN also provides funding to Supportive Housing in Peel for a joint program with the Punjabi Community Health Centre, the Sahara Seniors Program, designed to deliver culturally appropriate supportive services for seniors in the cultural community. Mississauga-Halton LHIN as also funded a number of initiatives including Peel Senior Link‘s expansion of their aging at home services to seniors. It also has provided funding for transitional beds in the area health centres, allowing for patients to better transition from acute care back to the communities. Funding has also been provided for the expansion of various day programs in the territory. 2.3.1.12.4 Supportive Housing and Community Support Services

Through the LHINs, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funds supportive housing and community support services for a variety of individuals and needs, including persons with mental illness, persons with physical disabilities, persons with development disabilities, persons with acquired brain injuries, and persons with HIV/AIDS. There are a variety of housing options for supportive housing in the Region of Peel that include options for persons with physical disabilities from groups like Cheshire House, while Kerry‘s Place provides supportive housing for individuals with developmental disabilities. Supportive housing for persons with acquired

56


brain injuries is available through the Peel Halton Acquired Brain Injury Services (PHABIS). A variety of community support services are funded through the LHINS, which includes neighbourhood drop-in centres, newcomer settlement services, services for persons with physical disabilities, and home support services such as meals-on-wheels. Examples of these include, or services for persons with physical disabilities as provided by Nucleus Independent Living‘s Peel Attendant Outreach services, services for individuals with developmental disabilities are provided through Brampton Caledon Community Living, and Community Living Mississauga. Another example is the India Rainbow Community Services of Peel which provides facilitation and services such as settlement services for newcomers, job search workshops, and housing and support services, in partnership with Supportive Housing in Peel (SHIP), for members of the South Asian community with mental illnesses. Funding is also provided to help the Peel HIV/AIDS Network (PHAN) which provides support for individuals and families of persons living with HIV/AIDS. 2.3.1.12.5 Mental Health and Addiction

The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, through the LHINS, funds a variety of services and supports for persons with mental health and addiction issues. In the Region of Peel, the Central West LHIN and the Mississauga-Halton LHIN fund groups and services that includes the Peel Addiction Assessment and Referral Centre, mental health services at the Credit Valley Hospital in Mississauga, and the William Osler Health Centre in the Etobicoke General Hospital and Brampton Civic Hospital, and the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) Peel Branch‘s Physical Activities and Rehabilitation (PAR) Clubhouse program. Supportive housing providers in the Region of Peel that receive funding from the MOHLTC include Supportive Housing in Peel (SHIP) and Peace Ranch. 2.3.1.12.6 Residential Care Housing

The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care also provides funding for residential care homes, Homes for Special Care and Domiciliary Hostels, which are forms of supportive housing that provide room and board, 24 hour supervision, basic assistance with daily activities, and medication supervision. Homes for Special Care Homes for Special Care (HSC) are private for profit and non-profit residential homes that are dedicated for individuals with mental illnesses for long-term permanent care. These are monitored by Provincial Psychiatric Hospitals or divested Provincial Psychiatric Hospitals by public hospitals. Provincially licensed homes qualify for Ministry of Long-Term Care funding for the

57


residents, while unlicensed homes do not. Referrals for residents can come from a variety of sources which includes the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, family doctors, and hospital mental health units. In the Region of Peel there are three Homes for Special Care: Oliver House in Caledon, Cholodny Residence in Brampton, and Drenkelly Court in Mississauga. Oliver House is a 50 unit non-profit residential home, with 47 beds dedicated to Homes for Special Care residents. Drenkelly Court is a smaller home with 8 beds, and the Cholodny Residence has 14 beds. Domiciliary Hostels Domiciliary hostels are private for profit and non-profit homes that serve individuals with mental health and addiction issues, developmental disabilities, brain injuries as well as frail and elderly individuals by providing accommodation and supportive services. They are administered through municipal agreements and the costs shared between the province and municipalities at a respective ratio of 80% and 20%. 2.3.1.13 Supportive Housing Policies and Programs (MCSS)

The Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS) administers the provincial income and disability support programs and provides funding and programs that support a wide variety of needs of individuals and families in Ontario including persons with developmental disabilities, Aboriginal peoples, victims of domestic violence and persons who are deaf, hard of hearing and/or blind. 2.3.1.13.1 Persons with Developmental Disabilities

MCSS funds a number of services and supports for adults with a developmental disability and their families to allow them to live, work and participate in a wide range of activities within their communities. These services and supports are provided locally by community agencies such as Brampton Caledon Community Living, Community Living Mississauga, and Kerry‘s Place. Services are that are provided by community agencies under contract with MCSC include the following: Residential Support and Familyhome: This initiative provides funding for supports to help individuals with developmental disabilities live independently or in group living arrangements. The Familyhome program provides funding for placements of adults and children with developmental disabilities in a family setting, by placing them in a home operated by a host family, the Familyhome provider who receives funding for the support provided from a community agency.

58


Special Services at Home: This program provides funding directly to families of individuals with adults or children with developmental disabilities to purchase personal development and relief support, specifically for services or supports they may otherwise not be able to provide, or are not available in the community. The program is open to families with individuals living at home, as well as not living at home but not in a provincially funded residential accommodation. This program also applies to children with physical disabilities. Community Supports: Various community supports are funded to provide individuals with meaningful daytime activities, develop their competence and increase their independence and participation in the community. These supports include day activities such as volunteering and life-skills, employment supports, vocational alternative supports for employment such as work placements, and protective services to coordinate the activities and advocate for those living independently in the community. The Passport Initiative: For individuals with developmental disabilities that have left school, this initiative provides funding for activities to help encourage personal development. Mentoring Initiative: This initiative provides mentoring for individuals with developmental disabilities that are still in school as a way of preparing them for leaving. Employment and Financial Supports: Employment and financial supports for individuals with developmental disabilities are provided and funded through the Ontario Disability Support Program. 2.3.1.13.2 Aboriginal Healing and Wellness Strategy

The Aboriginal Healing and Wellness Strategy combines traditional and mainstream health and healing practices to Aboriginal population on and off-reserve, and in urban areas. It is a partnership with 15 First Nations and Aboriginal groups across the province, as well as the Ministry of Community and Social Services, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, the Ontario Secretariat for Aboriginal Affairs, and the Ontario Women‘s Directorate. Provincial funding from these various ministries provides services that include shelters and crisis intervention for abused women and their children, mental health and addiction counselling, healing lodges for traditional healing approaches, and Aboriginal health planning authorities at the local and regional health services.

59


2.3.1.13.3 Victims of Domestic Violence

The Ministry of Community and Social Services funds several important initiatives that form a part of a 13 Ministry network of services for abused women and children that is coordinated by the Ontario Women‘s Directorate. MCSS directly funds services which include emergency shelters and crisis support services, counselling, transitional support services, and housing support services. 2.3.1.13.4 Persons who are Deaf, Hard of Hearing and/or Blind

The Ministry of Community and Social Services funds interpreter and intervenor services for individuals who are deaf, deafened, hard of hearing or deaf-blind. These services are accessed through the local MCSS regional offices. The Canadian Hearing Society also provides services through the CCAC‘S. Certain community support services for persons with sight disabilities are funded through the CCAC‘s, and in the Region of Peel are done in partnership with the Canadian Institute for the Blind, and the group Blind Adults Learning About Normal Community Environment (BALANCE). 2.3.1.13.5 In-Home and Out-of-Home Respite Care

In-home and out-of-home respite care is administered through the CCAC‘s to provide services for a variety of individuals and groups. In the Region of Peel, respite care is provided by agencies such as the Victorian Order of Nurses and Hospice of Peel. 2.3.1.13.6 Home and Vehicle Modification Program

The Ministry of Community and Social Services provides funding for home or vehicle modifications to individuals and families to enable children and adults with disabilities to live safely in their homes and maintain employment. The program is a partnership with the Ontario March of Dimes which administers the program. Participants must be Ontario residents, and have a substantial impairment that is expected to last one year or more and whose mobility impairment results in substantial restriction in activities of daily living. The maximum contribution is $15,000 each for home and vehicle modifications. Both can be combined for a maximum of $30,000. Applicants with incomes more than $35,000 may be required to contribute to the costs. Applicants in receipt of ODSP, Ontario Works, or Old Age Security/Guaranteed Income Supplement are not required to make contributions. 2.3.1.13.7 Community Start-Up Benefit and Maintenance Benefit

The Community Start-Up Benefit and Maintenance Benefit is additional funding available to Ontario Works or Ontario Disability Support Program recipients to

60


help them establish themselves in the community for necessary or unexpected moves. Eligible situations include victims of family violence or domestic abuse, homelessness, uninhabitable premises, overcrowded conditions, the death or incapacity of a caretaker, or recent release from a correctional institution, hostel or transitional home. The benefit provides a maximum of $799 for households, with the exception of households with dependent children which are eligible for a maximum benefit of up to $1,500. Eligible costs include clothing, fuel and hydro deposits, furnishings, deposits for last month‘s rent, and moving expenses and transportation to the home. Benefits can only be received once in a two-year period. 2.3.1.14 Infrastructure Ontario

Infrastructure Ontario provides an alternative financing solution for public sector agencies, with lower interest loans for up to 40 year terms. The total funding allocated so far has been of $2 billion. The program is open to eligible hospices, non-profit long-term care homes, municipal corporations, municipalities, universities and affiliated colleges. Among the eligible capital expenditures are facilities expansions, renovation and retrofits, land, systems and equipment, energy efficiency projects, alternative energy projects and municipal social housing. Municipal social housing was added as part of a recent program expansion to include social and affordable housing providers, local services boards and non-profit professional art institutes. As a part of this, eligible affordable housing projects are now able to receive these loans. It is suggested that the Region explore the financing possibilities that the Infrastructure Ontario loan program might provide in helping to finance affordable housing developments and furthering its needs. 2.3.1.15 Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program

The Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program is a provincial initiative designed to encourage the cleanup and redevelopment of brownfield sites. The program matches municipal property tax reductions for brownfield redevelopment by providing waivers for all, or a portion of provincial educational property taxes for a brownfield site for up to three years. Under the program, municipalities apply on behalf of property owners who must be qualified under the program, and the municipalities themselves must be offering municipal property tax assistance, located within a Community Improvement Plan project area.

61


2.3.1.16 Community Improvement Plans

Under Section 28 of the Planning Act, municipalities can enact community improvement project areas, in which it is possible to use grants and loans aimed at community improvement, grants and loans aimed at property owners for offsetting or paying for costs associated with community improvements, and demolition control legislation. The grants and loans permitted also allow municipalities to apply for funding under the provincial Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program. Community improvement areas are by-laws enacted at the municipal level and many municipalities in Ontario have enacted them in order to help redevelopment certain sectors of their cities or territories as defined in the community improvement area by-law. The changes to the Planning Act brought in by the Planning and Land Conservation Statute Amendment Act expanded the scope of the community improvement plans, and included expanding the definition of ―community improvement‖ covered under the plans to incorporate the provision of affordable housing. Prescribed upper-tier municipalities are permitted to establish community improvement plans for limited purposes: infrastructure that is within the upper-tier municipality‘s jurisdiction, lands and buildings adjacent to existing or planned transit corridors that have potential to provide higher density mixed-use development and redevelopment, and affordable housing. The Region of Peel is a prescribed upper-tier municipality under Ontario Regulation 221/07 (amendment 246/08) Community Improvement Plans – Prescribed Upper-Tier Municipalities. Municipalities at each level are able to participate financially in each other levels‘ community improvement plan as well. It is suggested that the Region consider using its powers as a prescribed upper-tier municipality to establish community improvement plans for the purpose of creating affordable housing by participating financially in local initiatives for the creation of affordable housing. 2.3.1.17 Development Permit System

The Development Permit System was enacted by Ontario Regulation 608/06 and came into effect in January of 2007. It enables municipalities in Ontario the option of using the Development Permit System (DPS), which combines the zoning, minor variance and site plan control systems into one, but does not include the lot creation or building permit process. The DPS was created to streamline the development process, requiring only one application as opposed to three, and faster turnaround and approval timelines reduced to 45 days for development permits as opposed to 120 days for applications to amend zoning by-laws. It also focuses the appeals process near the beginning of the process.

62


Other advantages of the DPS system includes the use of prescribed ―discretionary uses‖ within development permit by-laws, which helps to streamline the process as these uses would not need by-law amendments. In addition to the use of minimum and maximum development standards, development permit by-laws can also stipulate established ranges for acceptable variations to these standards. Environmental considerations are also enhanced through the ability to establish minimum criteria for vegetation preservation in development permits for example. Finally, community design considerations can be integrated through conditions related to exterior design of buildings or streetscape improvements. Municipalities can enact a development permit system in their territory through a by-law. The Ministry used five pilot municipalities to test the system before implementing it. These pilot cities were the Town of Oakville, the City of Toronto, the City of Hamilton, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, and the Township of the Lake of Bays. To date, the Township of the Lake of Bays is the only municipality in Ontario to have enacted a DPS by-law. It is suggested that the Region encourage area municipalities to implement the Development Permit System, which combines the zoning, minor variance and site plan control systems into one, to streamline the approvals process for affordable housing development and support the area municipalities‘ work in this regard, as appropriate. 2.3.1.18 Energy Efficiency and Sustainability

Although the Province does not directly fund initiatives aimed at encouraging energy efficient and sustainable housing construction and renovation, two provincial agencies administer relevant programs. 2.3.1.18.1 Green Light for a Better Environment

The Social Housing Services Corporation (SHSC) administers the Green Light for a Better Environment (GLOBE) initiative, which has replaced its predecessor pilot program, the Green Light Initiative. GLOBE is designed to help social and affordable housing providers meet the costs of undertaking energy-saving measures in their units. The initiative is currently composed of two incentives:

The Enbridge Gas MultiChoice Program which provides cost reductions on the gas rates on a sliding scale, depending on the number of saving measures implemented up to a maximum of $30,000 per building. It also provides incentives to switching to front-loading washers, and natural gas clothes dryers.

63


The Union Gas Energy Efficiency Program provides funding support for feasibility studies and energy audits of up to $4,000 per project, as well as rebates on gas rates for gas saving measures. It also offers rebates for programmable thermostats, and offers low flow shower heads and faucet aerators at no charge.

It is suggested that the Region explore the potential of applying for GLOBE grants administered by SHSC grants to improve energy efficiency within Peel Living units. 2.3.1.18.2 Ontario Power Authority Low Income/Multifamily Programs:

Based on previous energy-efficiency housing initiatives, including two pilot programs in 2007, the Ontario Power Authority will be launching new initiatives aimed at low-income households and social housing. Two programs, the Multi-Family Building and the Energy Efficiency Program for Houses (Single-Family homes) will provide grants to housing providers and households to help offset the cost of energy-efficient measures and retrofits, which help reduce household costs. The Multi-Family Building program will be administered by Green$aver in Ontario, and by the Energy Efficiency Office in Toronto, and will feature a component for private rental buildings, and another for assisted and social housing. In addition to grants to offset the costs of retrofits and efficiency measures, which will be based on building specific or per-fixture or per-unit measures, the program will also feature an education incentive to help fund energy-efficiency education and awareness initiatives for tenants. The program will also provide funding gap grants to offset energy costs for housing provided in defined energy constrained areas, or who are facing liquidity issues. Eligible new buildings can apply retroactively if they were completed as of January 1st, 2008. More information on the program guidelines and funding allocations will be available when it is launched in the near future. The Energy Efficiency Program for Houses will also provide grants for energy efficiency measures, and more information on its various funding and program guidelines will be available when it is launched in the near future. 2.3.1.19 Provincial Sales Tax

A full provincial sales tax (PST) rebate is available to organizations which are registered charitable organizations with the Canada Revenue Agency. Eligible costs for the PST rebate include certain construction costs, excluding building permit fees, charges for temporary facilities, cost of free-standing equipment, demolition costs, development charges or project consulting fees, equipment rental charges, land or land improvement costs , value of performance bonds or

64


costs for making, installing or repairing stained glass windows. This rebate has a positive effect on the financial viability of new rental housing developed by charitable organizations.

65


3.0 Municipal Legislation, Policies and Programs

This section will review relevant Regional and Area Municipal legislation, policies and programs aimed at ensuring there is an adequate supply of land, a diversified housing stock, opportunities for residential intensification, efficient and effective use of land and resources, creation of complete communities, encouragement of energy efficient housing, retention of existing stock, an adequate supply of affordable ownership and rental housing and a range of housing options and supports for persons with special needs and other diverse populations. 3.1 Legislation

This section reviews the Region‘s and Area municipalities‘ official plans, relevant zoning bylaws, development standards, and other relevant bylaws to identify opportunities and barriers to addressing Peel Region‘s housing priorities. 3.1.1 Official Plans

The current official plans of the Region of Peel, the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton, and the Town of Caledon guide growth and development for all the communities within the Region. The official plans reflect the views of Councils towards the provision of housing, providing important support for housing initiatives and policies. Similarly, official plans can also act as barriers, depending on their specific strategies and policies. The table in Appendix 2 reviews the effectiveness of the official plans of the Region of Peel, the City of Brampton, the City of Mississauga, and the Town of Caledon in addressing the identified housing priorities. The following sections provide a summary of the recommended changes to the Region of Peel, City of Mississauga, City of Brampton and Town of Caledon official plans.

3.1.1.1 Region of Peel Official Plan

A review of Region of Peel Official Plan demonstrates that the Official Plan incorporates a broad range of housing policies that are aimed at addressing the identified Housing Priorities. For example, policies are present that encourage an adequate land supply, diversified housing stock, efficient development and land use patterns, mixed land uses, as well as increases in the supply of affordable rental and ownership housing. However, there are areas that require changes in order to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Grow. These changes include:

66


Land supply policies need to be updated to address Places to Grow time horizon.

Land supply policies require tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1).

Densities prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 h require incorporation into the Plan.

Reference to range and mix of housing requires slight modification to incorporate affordable housing needs (Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 i).

Housing targets, including affordable housing targets need to be incorporated into the Plan (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to Grow 3.2.6.6.

Reference to residential intensification targets and preferred location of intensification needs to be added as per Places to Grow 2.2.3.1, 2.2.2.1 a, b, 2.2.3.7 e.

Policies related to efficient and effective use of land and resources requires reference to built-up area and designated greenfields and possible links to transit.

In addition, there are further opportunities for additions to the Official Plan that may be considered by the Region in order to help address a number of the housing priorities, these include:

include a definition of complete communities

add policies on rental demolition and conversion control

expand energy efficient housing policies to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly Regional standards or requirements

strengthen community acceptance strategy policy to identify a role for the Region in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies

identify various financial incentives the Region may consider in supporting the provision of affordable housing

encourage the area municipalities to also provide financial incentives to support provision of affordable housing

add a policy encouraging area municipalities to streamline the approval process for affordable housing

add a policy for encouraging area municipalities to provide alternative development performance standards for affordable housing

67


encourage area municipalities to add a density bonusing provision for affordable housing and develop a policy framework around this policy

encourage area municipalities to permit two-or-more-unit houses per lot, including secondary suites

encourage area municipalities to add policies to explicitly permit single room occupancy accommodation, rooming, boarding and lodging houses

encourage other measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or funding to include an affordable housing component

add provisions on accessible housing and support services

encourage area municipalities to add policies to explicitly permit special needs housing such as emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing

encourage the area municipalities to add measures to provide opportunities to meet the housing needs of diverse populations such as older adults, diverse ethnic populations, Aboriginal persons, and recent immigrants.

It is suggested that the Region consider incorporating the range of suggested changes to its official plan to better meet the requirements of Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement, as well as to help address the housing priorities identified in the Housing Strategy. 3.1.1.2 Mississauga Plan

As with the Region‘s Plan, the Mississauga official plan policies help address a number of the housing priorities, including ensuring an adequate land supply, encouraging a mix and range of housing, as well as recognizing the growing necessity of infill and redevelopment, and encouraging housing options for persons with special needs. Likewise, there are a number of required additions in order to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Grow, as follows:

Adequate land supply policies require reference to sufficient land availability through intensification and redevelopment and development as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1).

Densities prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 h and 2.2.7.2 need to be added.

Housing targets, including affordable housing targets need to be incorporated into the Plan (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to Grow 3.2.6.6.

68




The City should also consider the following to help address the identified housing priorities:



expand to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements

add a general policy statement supporting affordable housing development

add a policy to identify a role for the City in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies

include specific measures and incentives for affordable housing

add a policy for alternative development performance standards for affordable housing

add a policy to fast-track the approval process for affordable housing

add density bonusing provision for affordable housing

encourage and permit two-or-more-unit houses per lot, including secondary suites

add policies to explicitly permit single room occupancy accommodation, rooming, boarding and lodging houses

Consider identifying and maintaining an inventory of available public lands and buildings suitable for housing for moderate and lower income households.

add measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or funding to include an affordable housing component

add reference to supportive housing in description of special needs housing

69


add measures to provide opportunities to meet the housing needs of diverse populations such as older adults, diverse ethnic populations, Aboriginal persons, and recent immigrants

add a policy to identify a role for the City in removing barriers to accessing housing including participating in public education strategies.

It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Mississauga to consider incorporating the range of suggested changes to its official plan to better meet the requirements of Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement, as well as to help address the housing priorities identified in the Housing Strategy. 3.1.1.3 The City of Brampton Official Plan

A review of the City of Brampton Official Plan demonstrates that it incorporates a broad range of goals and objectives, as well as supporting policies that are consistent with a number of the objectives of the Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Grow. Additional policies that need to be incorporated to conform with the provincial policies include:

Adequate land supply policies requires tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1, 1.4.3.b.2).



Housing targets, including affordable housing targets need to be incorporated into the Plan (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to Grow 3.2.6.6).



The City should also consider the following to help address the identified Housing Priorities:

add reference to affordable housing when describing complete communities

alter the Upscale Executive Housing Special Policy Areas (4.1.2) to incorporate the principles of complete communities

70


add policies on rental demolition and conversion control.

expand to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements.

add a general policy statement supporting affordable housing development

add a policy to identifying a role for the City in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies


add special Policy Areas that facilitate the creation of affordable housing.

strengthen alternative development standards policy (4.1.6.5) by developing alternative detailed development performance standards and design features for the Policy Areas, and throughout the City, to facilitate the creation of affordable housing and streamline the review and approval process


add affordable housing to list of provisions that may be exchanged for increased density.

encourage and permit two-or-more-unit houses per lot, including secondary suites


identify and maintain an inventory of available public lands and buildings suitable for housing for moderate and lower income households


add policies to explicitly permit special needs housing such as emergency shelters and transitional housing

permit supportive housing facilities in areas designated Residential, Commercial and Public Uses in addition to Institutional


71


add a policy to identify a role for the City in removing barriers to accessing housing including participating in public education strategies.

It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Brampton to consider incorporating the range of suggested changes to its official plan to better meet the requirements of Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement, as well as to help address the housing priorities identified in the Housing Strategy. 3.1.1.4 The Town of Caledon Official Plan

The Town of Caledon‘s Official Plan incorporates a range of housing policies that are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Grow. However, the following policies need to be incorporated in order to conform with the provincial policies:

Adequate land supply policies requires tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1, 1.4.3.b.2).



Housing targets, including affordable housing targets need to be incorporated into the Plan (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to Grow 3.2.6.6).



The Town should also consider the following to help address the identified Housing Priorities:


permit certain multiple dwelling forms such as duplexes, and quads in low density residential areas to help encourage complete communities


add policy to encourage and support energy conservation and energy efficient housing

72


expand to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements

add a policy to identifying a role for the Town in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies


add a policy for alternative development performance standards for affordable housing


add density bonusing provision for affordable housing

remove the provision that requires that the names of the individuals who will be entitled to occupy the garden suite be included in the agreement registered on title


identify and maintain an inventory of available public lands and buildings suitable for housing for moderate and lower income households


add a general policy statement supporting special needs housing

review group home policies to provide permissions similar to (and not more onerous than) other forms of development

add policies to explicitly permit special needs housing such as emergency shelters and transitional housing (crisis care facilities and hostels for the homeless or transients) and supportive housing in are residential and possibly other designated areas


add a policy to identify a role for the Town in removing barriers to accessing housing including participating in public education strategies.

It is suggested that the Region encourage the Town of Caledon to consider incorporating the range of suggested changes to its official plan to better meet the requirements of Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement, as well as to help address the housing priorities identified in the Housing Strategy.

73


3.1.2 Zoning By-laws

Various aspects of zoning by-laws can have significant impact on the provision of affordable housing and other forms of accommodation required to meet the identified housing priorities. Further, the implementation of many of the policies outlined in the various official plans is through the use of municipal by-laws. Zoning by-laws contain a range of regulations and standards governing the development and use of land within a municipality. The regulations and standards that generally have the greatest impact on the provision of housing to meet the needs of a diverse population are:

Types of residential uses permitted

Minimum unit size and floor areas

Group home and rooming house policies

Supportive housing

Accessory units and garden suites and

Parking requirements

Cash-in-lieu provisions The following sections provide a review of the zoning by-laws of the area municipalities. Recommendations are discussed in the section following these reviews. 3.1.2.1 City of Mississauga

The City of Mississauga‘s zoning by-law contains the following regulations and standards regarding permitted residential uses, minimum unit size and floor areas, group home and rooming house policies, supportive housing, accessory units and garden suites, and parking requirements. Permitted Uses

The ―R‖ designated zones permit single detached dwellings. The ―RM‖ zones permit detached and semi-detached dwellings. The zones designated as ―RA‖ permit apartments, long-term care facilities and retirement dwellings.

A maximum of one dwelling unit is permitted on a lot in zones R1 to R16, RM1 to RM3, RM5 and RM6.

Dwelling units are permitted in the basement of duplexes, triplexes, horizontal multiples, apartments, long-term care and retirement dwellings provided that the finished floor is no more than 1.2 metres

74


below the highest grade level immediately adjacent to the dwelling unit.

Minimum Unit Sizes and Floor Areas

Dwelling units for zones Detached Dwelling Zones R1 to R16 and Semi-Detached Dwelling Zones One RM1 to Six RM6 should have a minimum gross floor area – residential of 60 m2.

A minimum floor space index of 0.4 to 1.9 applies to Apartment, Long-Term Care and Retirement Dwelling Zones One (RA1) to Five (RA5) residential zones.

Group Home and Rooming Houses

Group homes are permitted with detached dwellings in residential zones, subject to not being within a minimum radius of 800 metres of an existing group home.

Rooming houses are not mentioned in the City‘s zoning by-law.

Supportive Housing

Supportive housing is included in the additional permitted uses in R1 zones while long-term care and retirement homes are both permitted in R1 and R15 zones.

Accessory Units and Garden Suites

New basement apartments in single detached dwellings are not permitted in Mississauga, but applications can be made to legalize existing basement apartment units.

No provisions for garden suites could be found within the City‘s by-laws.

Parking Requirements

Parking requirements for condominium apartments range from 1 resident space per bachelor unit to 1.75 resident spaces per three-bedroom unit, plus 0.20 visitor spaces per unit.

Rental apartments require from 1.0 resident space per bachelor unit to 1.5 resident spaces per three-bedroom unit and an additional 0.20 visitor spaces per unit.

Apartment dwellings within CC1 and CC4 zones require 1 resident space per unit and 0.15 visitor space per unit.

Detached, semi-detached, and street townhouse dwellings require 2 spaces per unit. While condominium detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings require an additional 0.25 visitor spaces per unit.

75


Duplex, triplex, and dwelling units located above a commercial development with a maximum height of 3 storeys are required to have 1.25 spaces per unit.

A group home needs to have 2 spaces while a long-term care dwelling needs 0.33 spaces per bed and a retirement home requires 0.50 spaces per unit.

Cash-in-lieu Provisions

The City of Mississauga, recognizes in its Official Plan Section 3.17.7.7 provisions that encourage City Council to use cash payment in-lieu of parking, especially when constraints do not permit adequate parking, and/or existing supply is adequate, or site is not being ―over-developed‖.

The City Plan also states provisions for cash-in-lieu of the land required under parkland dedication guidelines.

Observations

Minimum floor areas which exceed OBC minimum requirements create barriers to the creation of small housing units which tend to be more affordable due to reduced construction costs.

Restrictions on the creation of garden suites and accessory units create a barrier to the creation of a diverse housing stock as these types of units are considered one strategy for meeting the affordable housing needs of low and moderate income households.

Group home minimum distancing by-law may act as a barrier to the creation of group homes in the City.

Rooming houses are not mentioned in the City‘s zoning by-law as a result the creation of this type of housing form may prove to be difficult.

Parking requirements do not allow for alternative parking provisions for affordable housing units which could help reduce the cost of developing affordable housing.

Cash-in-lieu provisions for parking and parkland may be a way of encouraging infill development and reduce the cost of affordable housing, depending on the specific cash-in-lieu requirements.

3.1.2.2 City of Brampton

The City of Brampton‘s zoning by-law contains the following regulations and standards regarding permitted residential uses, minimum unit size and floor areas, accessory units and garden suites, group homes, supportive lodging

76


houses and lodging/boarding houses, parking requirements and cash-in-lieu requirements. Permitted Uses

Generally, one dwelling unit per lot is authorized under the City of Brampton‘s zoning regulations, where a dwelling is a permitted purpose: this applies to single detached, semi-detached, duplex, triplex, double duplex, street townhouse or link house dwellings.


No minimum unit sizes could be found in the City‘s by-laws.


Accessory buildings are not to be used for human habitation.

A provision for two unit houses is permitted by specific zoning category, and must be in compliance with the applicable zoning by-laws and safety standards. This applies to ―grandfathered‖ units under provincial law, and those deemed ―legal non-conforming uses", however, this provision does not allow new two-unit uses to be built.

Group Homes, Supportive Lodging Houses, and Lodging/Boarding Houses

Group homes and supportive lodging houses are authorized in single detached dwellings, with a minimum separation of 120 metres between group homes and/or supportive lodging houses.

Supportive housing facilities must be a minimum of 610 metres between another facility or group home.

A group home type 2 is permitted within a single detached dwelling or a dwelling within a mixed use development.

A maximum number of group homes and supportive lodging houses combined are permitted in each area. This ranges from only 1 home from areas 2, 13, 14, 18, 25, and 26 to 6 homes in areas 11 and 26.

Lodging houses must also be located in single detached dwellings, with a minimum separation of 305 metres between it and another lodging house and any other lodging houses.


Unless otherwise specified, two parking spaces are required for single detached, semi-detached, duplex, triplex, double duplex and street townhouses.

Rental apartments must provide between 1.03 spaces per bachelor unit, to 1.53 spaces per three-bedroom unit, plus 0.20 spaces per unit for

77


visitor parking. Senior citizen rental units require 0.5 spaces per unit and 0.25 visitor spaces per unit.

Condominium apartments require from 1.25 resident spaces for each one-bedroom or bachelor unit to 1.75 resident spaces for each three- or more bedroom unit plus 0.25 visitor spaces per unit.

For each townhouse dwelling unit that does not have a private garage and driveway, between 1.30 to 2.05 resident spaces should be provided per unit in addition to 0.25 visitor spaces per unit.

For lodging/rooming houses, a minimum of 0.5 parking spaces for each lodging/rooming unit, plus 2 parking spaces for the proprietor is required.


The development and redevelopment of lands for residential purposes require a conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units. In lieu of requiring the conveyance of land, the City may require the payment of money to the value of the lands required to be conveyed.

The City Council may reduce the cash in lieu of parkland payment requirement by 50% for any high density residential development project with a net density of greater than or equal to 100 units per hectare (40 units per acre) and that is located within the area defined as the ―Central Area High Density Incentive Program‖; has a foundation or superstructure building permit issued between October 26,2004 and October 26,2006; conforms to the respective secondary plans and development design guidelines; and, will not receive funding from any other level of government.

Brampton has a cash-in-lieu of parking by-law, providing temporary exemptions for commercial development in Downtown Brampton.

Observations

The City‘s by-laws may act as a barrier to the development of group homes and rooming houses due to the minimum distance required between group homes and supportive lodging houses and due to the maximum number allowed in each area.

The lack of garden suite or accessory unit by-laws is a barrier to the development of a variety of housing types in the City of Brampton.

78


Cash-in-lieu, as well as relief from these requirements, are effective ways to help reduce the cost of creating affordable housing and could also help facilitate residential intensification.

3.1.2.3 Town of Caledon The Town of Caledon‘s zoning by-law contains the following regulations and standards regarding permitted residential uses, minimum unit size and floor areas, accessory units and garden suites, group homes, supportive lodging houses and lodging/boarding houses, parking requirements and cash-in-lieu requirements. Permitted Uses

Permitted residential uses for zones RE (estate residential), RR (rural residential), and R1 (residential one) are accessory apartments, apartment buildings, and detached dwelling units.

Permitted residential uses for R2 (residential two) zones are accessory apartments, duplex, linked, and semi-detached dwellings.

Permitted residential use for RT (residential townhouse) zones is a townhouse dwelling.

Permitted residential uses for RMD (mixed density residential) zones are detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings.

The RM (multiple residential) zone permits apartment buildings.

Permitted residential uses for I (institutional zones) are accessory dwelling units and long term care facilities.


Minimum unit sizes or floor areas are not stipulated in the Town of Caledon‘s by-laws.


Garden suites are permitted in the Town of Caledon in the RE, RR, R1, A1, A2, and A3 zones, but are subject to Temporary Use By-laws.1 Other provisions for Garden Suites are set out in Section 6.2.13.3 – Garden Suites of the Official Plan. There are currently two units in the Town of Caledon.

Accessory units, both dwelling units and apartments, are permitted in most residential zones as noted above and are subject to some provisions. Specifically, accessory apartments must not exceed 30% of

1 More complete and detailed information is available at the following website: http://www.caledon.ca/townhall/departments/planningdevelopment/apartment-in-house-criteria.asp

http://www.caledon.ca/townhall/departments/planningdevelopment/apartment-in-house-criteria.asp

http://www.caledon.ca/townhall/departments/planningdevelopment/apartment-in-house-criteria.asp

79


the dwelling unit floor area, accessory dwelling units must not exceed 30% of the gross floor area of a building, and only one accessory unit is permitted per lot. In addition, the accessory unit should have a minimum size of 32.5 m2.

Group Home and Rooming Houses

Group homes, supportive lodging houses, or rooming houses are not stipulated in the Town of Caledon‘s by-laws.


The Town of Caledon requires 2 parking spaces per detached, semi-detached, duplex and linked dwelling unit. Townhouses must have 2 spaces per units, plus 0.25 spaces per unit for visitor parking. Apartment buildings must have 1.5 spaces per unit, plus 0.25 visitor parking spaces per unit.

Accessory apartments and dwelling units must have 1 parking space per 70 m2 or portion thereof to a maximum of 2 spaces.

Long term care facilities are required to have 0.5 parking spaces per bed.


The Town of Caledon has a cash-in-lieu of parking provision for the Bolton Core Area.

The Town of Caledon Official Plan allows the Town to require a parkland dedication at a rate of 5% of the gross developable land in a residential development or at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units.

Observations

The lack of a group home, supportive housing or rooming house by-law does not necessarily represent a barrier, but discourage or make it difficult to create such units due to the absence of clear guidelines and legislation.

Parking requirements do not allow for alternative parking provisions for affordable housing units which could help reduce the cost of developing affordable housing.

Cash-in-lieu provisions for parking and parkland may be a way of encouraging infill development and reduce the cost of affordable housing, depending on the specific cash-in-lieu requirements.

3.1.2.4 Zoning By-law Recommendations

The current zoning by-law provisions do not significantly discourage the development of a diverse range of affordable housing. The combination of the

80


residential zone types permits a wide range of uses in most cases, and the absence of minimum floor areas in Brampton and Caledon supports the development of smaller, more affordable units. Overall, they generally support objectives of the Provincial Policy Statement, Places to Grow and Liveable Peel. However, certain recommendations can be made which would improve upon this. Residential Uses The lack of reference to specific forms of housing, for example, group homes, supportive housing, and rooming houses, may discourage or make it difficult to create such units due to the absence of clear guidelines and legislation. It is suggested that the Region encourage area municipalities to identify group homes, supportive housing and rooming, lodging and boarding houses as permitted uses in residential and other zones, in cases where they are not currently identified. Minimum Floor Areas Minimum floor areas that exceed OBC requirements create barriers to the construction of smaller, more affordable units. It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Mississauga to eliminate its minimum floor area requirements in an effort to remove potential barriers to the creation of small housing units which tend to be more affordable due to reduced construction costs. Distancing By-Laws and Maximum Number of Units Distancing by-laws and restrictions on the number of special needs units per area have been known to create barriers to meeting special needs housing requirements in some areas. It is recommended that the Region encourage the City of Mississauga to reduce or eliminate its distancing requirements for group homes. It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Brampton to reduce or eliminate its distancing requirements for group homes and supportive lodging homes, as well as its limit on the maximum number of group homes and supportive lodging houses allowed in each area. Accessory Apartments Accessory apartments or secondary suites have been found to be an effective form of affordable housing when provided in accordance with municipal building code, health and safety standards. Such accessory and secondary units are currently not permitted as-of-right in Brampton or Mississauga, while

81


Caledon has adopted policies and by-laws to regulate these forms of housing. It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Brampton and the City of Mississauga to identify opportunities where accessory apartments could be provided, subject to meeting relevant building, health and safety regulations. Garden Suites Garden suites have also been found to be an effective form of affordable housing when provided in accordance with municipal building code, health and safety standards. It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Mississauga and City of Brampton to identify opportunities where garden suites could be provided, subject to meeting relevant building, health and safety regulations. Alternate Parking Standards Given that low income residents and seniors tend to use cars less frequently than other households, reducing parking requirements for affordable housing and seniors housing, is an effective way to help reduce the cost of developing affordable housing. This tool is discussed further in section 4.13.2. 3.1.3 Municipal Housing Facilities By-Law

In order for Councils to provide incentives to the private sector (the authority to offer such incentives to the non-profit sector already exists), particularly in areas where community improvement plans are not in place, a "municipal housing facilities bylaw" must be enacted by the Municipal Service Manager. Such a bylaw allows municipalities to define public interests in ways which are not considered to be "bonusing" (i.e. would not give preferential treatment). This would allow, for example, a range of incentives to private developers in return for the provision of affordable housing such as exemptions or reductions to municipal taxes and development charges. As per the provisions of Regulation 603-06 under the Municipal Act, the Region of Peel passed a Municipal Housing Facility by-law (By-law 41-2003). 3.1.4 Development Charges, Fees and Levies

Municipalities and regions levy a variety of fees and charges for various aspects of development, such as building permit fees, parkland dedication, development charges, and so on. While these fees and charges generate important revenues to assist the municipality or region in providing important community infrastructure and facilities, they also contribute to increasing housing costs, especially for rental accommodations.

82


The table below details current development charges and fees for the Region and its area municipalities: Table 2: Development Charges, Region of Peel and Area Municipalities, 2008

Development Charge (Per Unit)

Region of Peel City of Mississauga City of Brampton Town of Caledon

(Town wide charges)

Single detached, semi, townhouse, multiple dwelling

$16,384 $11,437 $20,364 $17,189

Apartment, more than 750 ft2

$11,703 $8,169 $14,973 $11,444

Apartment, less than 750 ft2

$6,085 $4,247 $7,786 $6,614

School Board Levy (combined fees for Peel District S.B., and Duffering-Peel Catholic S.B.)

$2,141 $2,141 $2,141 $2,141

Source: Region of Peel, City of Mississauga, City of Brampton, Town of Caledon, 2008.

Depending on the unit type to be built and notwithstanding other fees, the charges can vary from $11,378 for a small apartment in Mississauga, to $38,889 for a single detached class unit in Brampton. Current Regional development charges include a line item for social housing funding. As of October 2007, the effective rate of this charge per dwelling unit was of $177.14 for ―other residential‖ developments, $126.53 for apartments over 750 square feet, and $65.80 for small units (less than 750 square feet). The Region of Peel should consider implementing a policy to reduce, waive, or defer development charges to encourage the development of affordable housing in the Region. This tool is discussed further in section 4.13.3. Additionally the Region should consider increasing the portion of the development charges for social housing. 3.1.5 Community Improvement Plans

Community Improvement Plans (CIP) are used to stimulate development and rehabilitation of areas, particularly areas that have been designated as ―growth centres‖ in the Places to Grow Growth Plan. The City of Brampton Central Area Community Improvement Plan is one example. This CIP allows for the City to offer financial assistance to encourage and support the development and redevelopment of lands in the area and covers a total land area of approximately 1,390 acres (561 hectares).

83


The following are incentives that are offered under the City of Brampton Central Area Community Improvement Plan:

Development Charges Incentive Grant Program;

Façade Improvement Program – this provides a loan or grant to offset façade maintenance, restoration and construction costs for non-residential and mixed-use buildings in specified locations in Downtown Brampton;

Feasibility Study Grant Program – this assists in determining the feasibility of a proposed non-residential or mixed-use development or rehabilitation project by assisting with the costs of undertaking studies or preparation of plans;

Development Application Fee Rebates / Equivalent Grant Program – this reduces or eliminates planning application fees for development proposals, particularly smaller developments;

Tax Increment Based Grant Program – the aim of this program is to promote the long-term redevelopment and rehabilitation of downtown properties by removing the financial disincentive of increased property taxes that are associated with this type of redevelopment. The property tax increase resulting from a redevelopment project is used to pay a grant that is equal to part or all of the property tax increase resulting from the project;

Building Improvement Loan / Grant Program – this aims to promote the maintenance and interior and exterior improvement of commercial and mixed-use buildings and properties and consists of a low interest loan that covers a certain percentage of the eligible costs;

Direct Investment / Development Partnerships – this would enable the City to participate in an active manner in downtown development through a number of ways such as public-private partnerships, land acquisition, and partner in private developments on key municipal properties;

Remediation Tax Increment Based Grant Program – this is meant to offset environmental remediation costs through the use of a grant for part or all of the municipal portion of property tax increment (Brampton, 2007).

It is suggested that the Region encourage area municipalities to establish Community Improvement Plans in urban growth areas to encourage and support the development and redevelopment of lands, as well as promote the inclusion of affordable housing units, in these growth areas. 3.1.6 Area Municipalities Relevant Programs and Initiatives

84


A review of existing programs and initiatives in the City of Mississauga, City of Brampton and Town of Caledon identified some other potential sources of funds to help stimulate the creation of affordable housing. These are described below. 3.1.6.1 City of Mississauga

Heritage Grants:

Designated Heritage Property Grant program applies to properties designated under the Ontario Heritage Act and provides matching grants from $500 to $5,000 for the conservation, repair and/or restoration of heritage attributes. In 2008, a total of $54,000 in grants were provided through this program. This grant may help preserve existing rental housing stock or older housing that is considered affordable.

Tax Assistance Programs:

Charities Rebate Program provides a rebate of a portion of the annual property taxes for registered charities occupying commercial/industrial property. There is no rebate for residential properties because the tax rate is lower. This rebate helps existing not-for-profit housing and service providers to reduce their operating costs, thereby helping these organizations remain financially viable.

Low income seniors and persons with disabilities who own and occupy their own home may be eligible for a $500 annual interest free loan to offset annual property taxes. This loan is secured by a lien to be repaid when the property is sold.

3.1.6.2 City of Brampton

Central Area Community Improvement Plan:

A range of incentives are provided as described in section 3.1.5 above.


The Elderly Assistance Program allows seniors to apply for a tax credit of $300 per year.

Charities Rebate Program provides a rebate for a portion of the annual property taxes for registered charities occupying commercial/industrial properties.

3.1.6.3 Caledon


The Elderly Residents‘ Tax Assistance Program provides financial assistance to elderly homeowners through a credit of $250 against the

85


current year‘s taxes imposed on residential property. This credit is a grant and does not entail repayment.

Tax Relief for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. This program is administered by the Region of Peel and is a deferral of annual tax increases greater than the deductible amount.

A registered charity may apply for a 40% rebate on the property it occupies in the commercial/industrial tax class.

Development Charges

New development that replaces previously existing development may be entitled to a credit against development charges that are otherwise payable in the form of a redevelopment allowance. These allowances are given in accordance with the Town of Caledon Bylaw 2004-118 (Caledon, 2008).

The discussion on the cost of development of affordable housing in section 4.13 identifies other area municipal grants, deferrals and waivers that could help encourage the creation of affordable and special needs housing. 3.2 Policies and Programs

There are a range of Peel Region policies, programs and initiatives that are relevant to addressing the identified housing priorities. In addition to the federal and provincial legislation, policies and programs and official plan policies described above, Liveable Peel and the Human Resources Plan are two other important initiatives that provide a framework for meeting identified housing needs. As part of its responsibility for social services, the Region of Peel oversees homelessness, social and affordable housing, and income assistance. The relevant Region of Peel policies and programs are described in this section. 3.2.1 Liveable Peel Initiative

Liveable Peel: A Sustainable Future for Our Community is an initiative that promotes long-term planning by balancing the social, economic, environmental and cultural needs of Peel‘s residents. The Region of Peel is working to ensure that future generations are able to live, work and travel in an inclusive and prosperous community. Specifically the Initiative set out five policy objectives:

1. To manage the impacts of growth and affect change

2. To achieve a sustainable land use and transportation system

86


3. To balance the demands of social, economic, environmental and cultural interests

4. To increase recognition and support of long-term planning

5. To capitalize on community capacity and stakeholder involvement. Peel Region is one of the fastest growing areas of the GTA, with a changing population. To ensure that Regional programs and services continue to meet the needs of the community, the Region conducted research and analyzed the factors which influence population growth and change as they relate to the demands for services. Some of the factors include an aging population, immigration, housing, health, infrastructure, labour, intensification and safety. The the Housing Strategy and its background papers is one of the research studies that will fed into the Liveable Peel process. Liveable Peel led to several important accomplishments as follows:

Liveable Peel Regional Council workshop including major community interests

Regional Official Plan Amendment Number 11 on Human Services

Long range transportation planning program including goods movement, transportation demand management, transportation for disabled persons

Largest new modest income housing development to be built in Ontario in 10 years (Millbrook)

Construction of Peel Youth Village - a housing, recreational, training and education facility with residences for up to 48 youth

Implementation of evening and extended hours of childcare

Implementation of a Homelessness Service Strategy Business Plan

Development of two new Long Term Care Facilities – Tall Pines and Malton Village

Regional smoke free by-law

Design and construction of the Peel Integrated Waste Management Facility

Regional Official Plan Amendment Number 7 to protect the Oak Ridges Moraine

Implementation of the High Scope Program for Children‘s Services

Brampton Rooming House pilot project

Emergency preparedness plan developed

Families First Program in Ontario Works

Made In Peel Smart Growth Workshop

Engagement of the Multi-Cultural Inter-Agency Group

Meadowvale Clinic – multi-use facility

87


First preventative dental clinic in the Region

Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adult Housing

Accredited Status of Long Term Care

Council Forum on Public Health

Funding has permitted the commencement of a series of five (5) research papers on the integration of immigrants in Peel, these will cover the following topics: human service needs of immigrants vs. service and community assets, initial health status of immigrants vs. services and assets, community cultural and social capital and openness to newcomers, life cycle assumptions for immigrant families, human capital (education) of newcomer parents and outcomes for future generations.

The joint elaboration of a Newcomer Strategy with the United Way of Peel and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

The Region of Peel launched a new immigration web portal, www.immigrationpeel.ca.

Potential actions to some of the issues core to the Region‘s Liveable Peel initiative such as housing, aging population, immigration, intensification, safety and energy-efficiency in homes are suggested throughout this paper.

3.2.2 Region of Peel Human Services Plan

The mandate of the Human Services Plan is ―to plan, manage and deliver quality, integrated human services and resources that invest in people and enable participation in the changing community and the economy.‖ There is a specific objective and a number of outcomes and actions identified in the plan which relate directly to housing as outlined below. Objective 3: relates to ―A continuum of housing options‖ Outcomes under Objective 3 are:

Adequate and appropriate housing for all Peel residents

Inclusive neighbourhoods

Peel residents accept and understand the need for social housing and housing support programs

Focus on the prevention of homelessness

Actions under Objective 3:

3.1 Explore creative solutions to maintain and expand affordable non profit and private housing options in the Region of Peel.

http://www.immigrationpeel.ca/

88


3.2 Establish an integrated approach to respond to the human services needs of residents in social housing.

3.3 Promote public acceptance and support for inclusive housing and neighbourhood models.

3.4. Implement enhancements to the Region‘s homelessness prevention strategy.

3.5 Promote strategies to enable suitable residents to move along the housing continuum towards independence.

These actions have been incorporated throughout this paper. 3.2.3 Regional and Area Municipal Accessibility Committees

The Cities of Mississauga and Brampton each have their own Accessibility Advisory Committees (AAC) as required by the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, while Caledon chose to establish a joint committee with the Region of Peel. Each committee has been submitting the yearly plans as required, and reporting and participating in furthering accessibility issues and standards for residents of the Region and its area municipalities. The Joint Peel-Caledon AAC activities have included promoting education and awareness of accessibility issues and sensitivity training. This included hosting a regional community forum on accessibility that coincided with the International Day of Disabled Persons. The 2008 Accessibility Plan for the Region of Peel furthers the previous work, and some of the actions detailed include building an effective training and development program for staff, integrating accessibility into the current procurement policy, and improving upon processes to identify and report accessibility barriers. The Committee also closely worked with Regional staff in recommending accessibility guidelines, and the creation of the Region‘s Universal Accessibility Standards for Affordable Housing Projects. The City of Mississauga‘s new 2008 Accessibility Plan focuses on education and awareness. Past initiatives include the development and implementation of disability awareness and a sensitivity training program including one for taxi drivers that included information on service animals and how to guide someone who is blind, the inclusion of accessibility planning into the City‘s Strategic Plan and Departmental Plans. Initiatives and examples of actions for 2008 include the continued implementation of a communication and awareness campaign by a City-wide review of printed materials for accessibility, continuing the implementation of Accessibility Design Guidelines by developing a 5 year accessibility retrofit plan for facilities, and developing a strategy to implement accessible route for Mississauga Transit.

89


The City of Brampton has adopted its new 2008 Accessibility Plan. Highlights and past initiatives of the 2007 document include the review of the Emergency Preparedness Plan and provisions for persons with disabilities, the AAC provided feedback on the City‘s Parks, Culture and Recreation Master Plan on needs and interest of persons with disabilities, and worked to develop a policy for accessibility of public meetings. The 2008 plan will focus on the review and education of how the needs of people with disabilities relate to the City‘s policies and services. The initiatives for 2008 include community outreach work to improve accessibility in residential, commercial, industrial and school board developments, reviewing sidewalk and trail design and implementation policies, and completing phases two and three of the Facility Accessibility Audit. 3.2.4 Affordable Housing Design Guidelines

The Region of Peel developed its own Affordable Housing Design Guidelines to help guide developers, builders and consultants build ―attractive, efficient and functional housing‖. The guidelines outlines all aspects of a project from site selection, design, development, and construction, and highlights required and recommended actions. Principles of the Ontario Smart Growth Vision are strongly encouraged to be implemented in any projects, and certain LEED certification elements are part of the required design guidelines. 3.2.5 Universal Accessibility Standards for Affordable Housing Projects

On April 2, 2009, Regional Council approved the Region of Peel‘s Universal Accessibility Standards (UAS) for Affordable Housing Projects, supporting the goals of aims of the AODA. These design guidelines were developed through the collaboration of the Region of Peel Accessibility Advisory Committee and staff from the Region‘s Development and Construction department. The UAS guideline are recommended to be incorporated into the Region‘s current Affordable Housing Design Guidelines, and help ensure universal accessibility for future affordable housing developments undertaken by the Region of Peel. The UAS guidelines exceed those proposed by the Province of Ontario, and were developed following a comprehensive review of current accessibility standard guidelines from other municipalities, and the Canadian Standards Association. 3.2.6 Regional Homelessness Initiatives

The reasons for the growing homelessness problem in the Region are wide-ranging and complex: poverty (inadequate income due to low wages, job loss, under-employment, a lack of jobs for unskilled workers, and low social assistance rates); a lack of affordable housing; family violence and break-up (spousal abuse, parent/child conflict or abuse); weak or lacking familial, friendship, or community support networks; illness including mental health and

90


addiction problems; eviction and the recent release from correctional facilities. The Region has undertaken a considerable amount of work to address the homelessness situation in Peel. Regional Council established the Peel Regional Task Force on Homelessness in 1998 to respond to the need for a comprehensive solution to homelessness in Peel. The Task Force made recommendations for both immediate and long term strategies and identified shortages and gaps in the range of resources and services that were then available to address homelessness in the region. In 2005, the Region implemented a cross-departmental Homelessness Service Strategy Business Plan with a mandate which includes the elimination of homelessness through a comprehensive and integrated approach to the planning and delivery of services that enhance individual, family and community capacity. The Peel Homelessness Partnership Strategy partners with community agencies and groups, participating in the shared programs and initiatives, under the direction of the Human Services and Health Services Departments. The Strategy is based on five key principles: prevention, outreach, social housing, advocacy and collaboration with other levels of government. 3.2.6.1 Preventing Homelessness in Peel Program

Prevention programs are offered through the Preventing Homelessness in Peel Program (PHIPP) which started in January of 2004 and are managed and administered by Ontario Works in Peel. The program offers various types of assistance with the aim of providing one-time emergency assistance to low-income families and individuals that are at-risk of becoming homeless. A number of funding programs are offered through PHIPP:

The Rent Bank program (RBP): This program provides funds to assist households with rental arrears to prevent eviction. RBP is administered by the Region of Peel and funded by the Province through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Funding for the Rent Bank totalled $226,413 in 2008.

The Energy Emergency Fund (EEF): This program provides funds to low-income residents to assist with energy arrears, security deposits and reconnection fees. The program was previously administered by Share the Warmth, a non-profit charitable group providing emergency energy assistance to low-income households that are at-risk of homelessness due to emergency situations. In August 2008 Ontario Works assumed responsibility for program management and administration of the EEF, which is now part of the portfolio of prevention programs. This program is funded by the

91


Province through the Ministry of Community and Social Services. Since 2004, these programs have assisted several hundred families: in 2008 alone, this number was of 570 households for the Rent Bank Program and of 293 households for the EEF. As of 2008, the budget for the Energy Emergency Fund is $169,600.

Eviction Prevention Program (EPP) in Peel Living Units: Within the units managed by Peel Living, an Eviction Prevention Program has been implemented to better prevent and help its tenants with rental arrears, and preserve their housing stability. It uses a mix of supports from caseworkers that work with the families to address the causes and issues that can create the arrears. Between 2005 and 2006 a total of 2,049 households living in Peel Living units were helped by the program. A cost-benefit analysis prepared in a 2007 report to Council assessed the monthly EPP cost as being $244.83 per household, while a monthly per client emergency shelter cost the Region $2,623.80.

Water Filter Fund: The 2008 budget for the Water Filter fund is $8,250.

The outcomes of the Prevention aspect of the Peel‘s Homelessness Strategy are concrete, and are clear indication of its success. It is recommended that the Region continue to use this supportive approach to prevention, and work to expand these services as the can effectively prevent more serious and costly problems early on. 3.2.6.2 Outreach

The Outreach component of the Region‘s Homelessness Strategy includes Peel‘s mobile Outreach Team which began in 1999. It is a collaborative effort between the Region and the Canadian Mental Health Association/Peel Branch (CMHA-Peel), the Peel Addiction Assessment and Referral Centre, the Catholic Cross Cultural Services, and St. Leonard‘s Place Peel. The Outreach Team service delivery model is innovative, client-centred and mobile, with a focus on health care, mental health and substance abuse support. Other Outreach services include basic needs, advocacy, assessment and community referrals, financial assistance with Ontario Works/Ontario Disability Support Program, housing supports and other supports identified by the individuals. A total of 1,281 individuals were served with 5,057 unique situations between 2006 and 2008. Most of those seeking support from the Outreach team in 2008 required assistance with obtaining housing or assistance with basic needs. A 2007 report to Council notes that many of those served had several other factors contributing to their being homeless or at risk of homelessness which added to the complexity of their situation.

92


As with the Prevention component, the Outreach component offers much needed help to individuals that are often coping with difficult and complex life situations. 3.2.6.3 Advocacy and Collaboration with Other Levels of Government

The Region of Peel is involved in advocacy activities with the provincial and federal governments through a variety of means, including both one-on-one advocacy with the area Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs), and through organized committees and associations. The Region also promotes public education and awareness of the issues whenever possible. Peel participates in the advocacy work of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), and sits on the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Housing Group. Staff from Peel Region sat on the Provincial-Municipal Fiscal Review Committee, and participate in the Provincial Technical Advisory Team of Service Managers which is in the process of advising the Province on program design and delivery of future affordable housing initiatives. Regional staff also sit on the Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association‘s (ONPHA) New Housing Delivery Committee. As mentioned in section 2.1.1 and 2.2.1, the Region should advocate to Provincial government to ensure that its Affordable Housing Strategy complements and provides funding allocations for communities to address homelessness and affordable housing issues. 3.2.7 Emergency Shelters and Transitional Housing

There are 9 emergency shelters/transitional housing facilities in the Region of Peel which serve women, children, youth and men. The Region owns and operates three emergency shelters run by the Salvation Army through a partnership, as well, 2 transitional housing facilities in partnership with the Salvation Army and YMCA of Greater Toronto. Caseworkers from OW in Peel Community Programs Unit provide financial assistance, as well, referral and support for the residents. The resources are part of the Region‘s homelessness strategy. As of August 2008, emergency hostels were funded at $2,281,536 which is $3,422,304 as an annualized amount. 3.2.8 Domiciliary Hostels

The Region of Peel partners with community agencies to provide domiciliary hostel services and support to individuals with special needs. Domiciliary hostels provide permanent housing, room and board, personal support and some assistance with activities of daily living to vulnerable adults in the community who, in the absence of such support, are likely to experience significant health and related difficulties and lose their housing. Funding for

93


domiciliary hostels is for permanent housing with limited supports for vulnerable adults with limited financial resources who require some supervision and support with activities of daily living but are not eligible for long-term care. Peel Region provides base funding by way of a daily per diem which is cost shared 80% by the Ministry of Community and Social Services and 20% by the Region of Peel. There is no commitment from MCSS to ongoing funding for these beds. The Region is continuing to advocate for increased base funding and/or annual fiscal funding for additional beds. 3.2.9 Victims of Domestic Violence:

Domestic violence can take many forms, and although it is primarily committed by men towards women, it also occurs by women against men and in same sex relationships. Individuals and their dependents that are victims of domestic violence face several challenges once a decision is made to leave the home or the abuser. Advocacy groups highlight that in many cases, the lack of a place to stay and financial resources are often reasons, among many others, why individuals stay in abusive relationships. The decision to leave puts the victims in a precarious situation that can lead to temporary or longer periods of homelessness if they do not know where to go. Victims of domestic violence have an immediate need for safe housing from which decisions can be made, and from which they can access the supports and services to help them rebuild. The immediate housing needs are typically met through the emergency shelter system which provides basic needs and access to supports and services. Transitional housing and access to safe, affordable housing is also an important component for victims to start rebuilding their lives and establishing independence. In the Region of Peel there are a variety of services offered that includes supports through groups such as Victim Services of Peel, Ontario Works in Peel and referrals from the Region‘s Human Services Department and the Peel Regional Police. Interim Place 1 and 2 and the Family Life Resource Centre offer emergency and transitional housing to women and their children who are victims of violence or abuse. 3.2.10 Social Housing

There are over 15,000 units of social housing from a variety of housing providers in Peel Region. These include 32 private community sector non-profit providers representing over 3,500 units, 15 co-operative non-profit providers representing 1,976 units, Peel Region‘s Peel Living representing more than 7,200 units, and over 2,400 rent supplement units located in private sector and social sector buildings.

94


These units are accessed through the central waiting list, Peel Access to Housing (PATH), which administers all applications for social housing in the Region of Peel. Currently, the centralized waiting list for social housing is operating with a wait time of about 21 years for new applicants, with new senior applicants waiting about 3 to 7 years. Current applicants already on the list are estimated to have a wait time of about 10 to 15 years, while certain special priority applicants can wait about one to 7 years. The Region‘s wait times are currently the highest in the Province. Also of concern is the state of capital reserves for housing providers in Peel. Prior to the 2009 federal budget announcement, housing providers in the Region of Peel were forecasting gross capital expenditures of $208 million over the next ten years, while capital reserves were estimated at $48 million, leaving a $160 million shortfall. It is suggested that the Region work with housing providers to fully utilize available federal funding for capital repairs, as recently announced by the federal government. 3.2.10.1 Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters (Peel Allocation)

As mentioned above, the Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters (DOOR) program was a one-time grant allocation to allow for the creation of new social housing, and help with the rehabilitation of existing housing for low-income households and individuals. The Region has invested the $6.4 million in funding they received through the DOOR program into their Affordable Housing Development Reserve. This funding is likely to be utilized for a number of potential projects which are currently in predevelopment stages. 3.2.10.2 Capital Funding for Repairs to Social Housing (Peel Allocation)

In July of 2008, $5.5 million in funding was announced to help fund capital repairs to social housing units in the Region of Peel. This allocation was transferred to the Region‘s Social Housing Contingency Liability Reserve for the repair and renovation of social housing in the Region. The funding was approved for capital repairs to three properties in the Region of Peel: the Fletcher‘s Creek Co-operative Homes, Northwood Park Co-operative Homes, and the Lom Nava Housing Co-operative. The funding will allow important repairs to be accomplished including roofing, repairs and renovations to the units, and structural work such as foundation and brick repair. 3.2.10.3 Social Housing Administration and Federal Funding

The Region of Peel currently receives $23.2 million in federal funding through the province to operate its social housing program. Peel Region staff have

95


identified concerns regarding the uncertainty surrounding the maintenance of service levels after the expiry of the operating agreements. The Social Housing Reform Act requires that Peel Region maintain a certain ‗standard‘ or number of rent-geared-to-income units in its service area. Peel Region, as well as other service managers across Ontario, will not be able to maintain the identified service level standards if federal funds are withdrawn from the system. Significant increases in municipal funding would be required to maintain service level standards at the current number. It is suggested that the Region advocate to the Provincial government to continue to provide funding for social housing once the operating agreements expire to allow the Region to continue to achieve its Service Level Standards. 3.2.11 Rent Supplement

The Region administers a range of rent supplement programs as follows:

Strong Communities Rent Supplement Program: A total of 496 rent-geared-to-income units are funding under this program to 2023. Of these, 294 units are in Peel Living buildings; 187 units are with private landlords; and 15 units are targeted for an OW/ODSP Rent Supplement pilot program.

Commercial Rent Supplement: There are a total of 1,107 rent-geared-to-income units under this program. Of these, 90 units are allocated to Millbrook Place. The terms of the rent supplement agreements under this program vary, but they have a maximum lifespan of 35 years, some of which are due to expire in 2011.

Stack Rent Supplement: This program combines the former provincial Community Sponsored Housing Program and the Ontario Community Housing Assistance Program. A total of 302 rent-geared-to-income units are funded under this program.

Affordable Housing Initiative - Supportive Housing Rent Supplement: A total of 214 units are funded under this initiative.

AHP Housing Allowance: A total of 270 units or $4.1 million was allocated under the AHP program for housing allowance. This is a five year program which expires.

3.2.12 Peel’s Affordable Rental and Supportive Housing

Through Peel Builds initiative, using a variety of funding sources that includes federal and provincial funds, as well as private contributions and the Region‘s own financing, the initiative has added or is in the process of adding eight new buildings to the Region‘s affordable housing stock. These buildings provide

96


units for a variety of population groups that includes seniors, youth, and homeless individuals. As noted above, under the Rental and Supportive Housing component of the Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Program (AHP), the Region of Peel was allocated 465 units or $32.55 million. Five projects are being developed using this funding, as described below.

Table 3: Summary of Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Program Rental and Supportive Housing Units

Project Owner / Operator

Mandate Development

Status

Number and Type of Units

Special Needs Units

Estimated Total Capital

Cost

Total AHP Funding

Walker Road (Caledon)

Owned and operated by

Peel Housing Corporation

Seniors

Under construction, to be completed

later in Fall 2008

25 units, 1 & 2

bedrooms N/A $6,050,000

$1,250,000 ($50,000 per

unit)

Peel Manor Apartments (Brampton)

Owned by Region of

Peel, operator TBD

Mental health and

dual diagnosis

Construction to begin in Fall

2008

30 units, 1

bedrooms

26 mental health, 4 dual diagnosis

$6,500,000 $4,200,000 ($140,000 per unit)

1133 Queen Street E., Brampton, Canadian Legion Site

Owned by Region of

Peel, operated by


50 units for

Canadian Legion

members, 125 family

units

Predevelopment stage,

estimated completion in Summer 2010

175 unis, 1-3

bedrooms

11 mental health, 3 dual diagnosis,

15 victims of domestic violence

$35,770,000 $11,389,200 ($65,081 per

unit)

12041-12061 Hurontario Street, Brampton, Coptic Orthodox Church Site

Owned by Region of

Peel, operated by


Seniors and

supportive housing

Predevelopment stage,

estimated completion in Summer 2010

94 units, 1-3

bedrooms

7 mental health, 8 victims of domestic violence

$17,210,000 $6,060,900

($64,478 per unit)

21 Division (Brampton)

Owned by Region of

Peel, operated by


families, seniors

and supportive housing

Council approval later in

Fall 2008, estimated

completion in Summer 2011

141 units, unit type

TBD



$39,900,000 $9,649,900

($68,439 per unit)

Total 465 125 $105,430,000 $32,550,000

In addition to the above projects, three additional projects have been developed as or are under development pilot projects using Affordable Housing Program funding. These projects are summarized on the next page.

97


Table 4: Summary of Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Program Units Funded As Pilot Projects

Project Owner / Operator

Mandate Development

Status Number and Type of Units

Special Needs Units

Total AHP Funding

Chapelview

Owned by Region of Peel and

operated by Peel Housing Corporation

Singles and

Seniors

Under Construction, anticipated

completion in Fall 2009

200 units, 1-2 bedrooms



To be confirmed

Summerville Pines

Owned and operated by


Seniors Complete 136 units,

1 & 2 bedrooms N/A $1,000,000

Using the Region‘s own resources, as well as Supporting Community Partnerships Initiative (SCPI) funding and the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) funding, the Region has recently developed six affordable and supportive housing projects:

Millbrook Place – a 163 unit project in Mississauga for seniors and singles, which was completed in 2003 and funded by Peel‘s social housing reserve funds

Angela’s Place – an innovative 20-unit housing initiative in Mississauga for families in transition, which was completed in 2005 and funded by SCPI and Peel‘s social housing reserve funds

Peel Youth Village – completed in 2005, Peel Youth Village provides 48 rooms for youth with a majority of these configured as four bedroom pods for long term stays. It also offers units for special needs, specifically mental health and dual diagnosis.

St. Leonard’s House – an addition to an existing long-term shelter to accommodate 20 units of transitional housing. This project was funded by the Region and through SCPI.

Supportive Housing in Peel- an 8 unit supportive housing project for persons with mental illness. This project was funded through SCPI.

Peel Family Shelter – the acquisition of a hotel in Mississauga which is being renovated to provide both emergency shelter for families, seniors and single females and transitional housing for single females.

3.2.13 Long Term Care

98


The Region of Peel also owns and operates five long-term care centres for older adults. These are the Davis Centre, Malton Village, Peel Manor, Sheridan Villa, and Tall Pines. Applications for the long-term care centres are administered through the respective Community Care Access Centres in the Region of Peel. 3.2.14 Peel’s Affordable Homeownership Program

Home in Peel is the Region‘s affordable homeownership program is aimed at low and moderate-income residents, and provides an opportunity for these households to access the ownership market. The Region of Peel received $2.85 million under the AHP affordable homeownership program to fund a total of 282 units. Home in Peel is aimed at low and moderate income households that are currently renting, and recipients cannot earn more than $75,800 per year, with the purchase price of the home not exceeding $247,000. The program provides an interest-free loan for the down payment of a maximum of $10,000. The loan is forgiven after a 20 year period, but must be repaid if the home is sold before this 20 year period has expired and the recipient must also pay 5% of the capital gain on the sale. The program was administered to the public from May 2008 until March 31, 2009 the program end date as per the Provincial Guidelines. Within this 11 month period, the Region of Peel assisted 119 families and singles with down payment assistance. The following applicant types were able to successfully purchase a home: • 75 families • 15 singles • 1 senior • 0 disabled (although two families noted that they have disabled children) • 0 aboriginal • 18 recent immigrants (within 2 years) • 10 other (non-specific clientele) During the 11 month program delivery period, over 1100 applications have been received from interested applicants. As of May 2009 there were 297 applicants remaining on the program waiting list. The average household income for the 119 successful purchasers was $46,057. The average house price purchased by the 119 successful purchasers was $204,502. Of these homes, 8 were detached, 13 were semi-detached, 59 were townhouse condominiums, 12 were freehold townhouses, and 27 were high-rise condo units. Geographically, 63 homes were purchased in Brampton and 56 were purchased in Mississauga.

99


3.2.15 Green$aver

In the Region of Peel, Green$aver is an accredited Energy Advisor for the ecoENERGY programs. Costs vary, but the province offers rebates to offset the cost by 50% up to a maximum of $150. Green$aver also implements the Enbridge Home Weatherization Retrofit Program within the GTA, which includes the Region of Peel. The program is designed to help low-income households living in older, privately owned homes, to upgrade and retrofit insulation and draft proofing measures to increase the energy efficiency of the homes. Eligible households also include those receiving Ontario Works, ODSP, Guaranteed Income Supplement for Seniors, allowances for seniors or survivors, or child benefit tax supplement. Funding allocated per home is based on the upgrades needed that cost-effectiveness in terms of energy savings that can be achieved.

4.0 Tools and Practices

Legislative and regulatory provision can be important tools to support an active housing policy, and can make significant contributions to the Housing Strategy. Below are described a range of legislative and regulatory provisions, as well as tools and practices from other jurisdictions, that can be considered by the Region, and the area municipalities to help encourage the production of affordable housing. The Region and its municipalities may want to explore the potential to work with local groups that may be interested in using these approaches. 4.1 Adequate Land Supply to Accommodate Growth

As a part of the requirements outlined in the Provincial Policy Statement, municipalities are required to ―maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10 years through residential intensification and redevelopment, and if necessary, lands which are designated and available for residential development‖. A second requirement is that municipalities must ―maintain at all times where new development is to occur, land with servicing capacity sufficient to provide at least a 3 year supply of residential units available through lands suitably zoned to facilitate residential intensification and redevelopment, and land in draft approved and registered plans‖. The area municipalities are currently undertaking conformity exercises to allocate growth according to the requirements of Places to Grow. Specifically, area municipalities are identifying intensification areas to support the 40%

100


minimum growth target through intensification within the built up areas and confirming that density targets for urban growth centres and greenfields will accommodate the balance of the projected growth. Dwelling targets by municipality will be finalized in early 2009. There are a number of actions that the Region and area municipalities can put in place to ensure that there is an adequate supply of land to accommodate growth, as well as maintaining at all times the ability to accommodate growth for a minimum of 10 years and a three year supply of serviced residential units. 4.1.1 Existing Policies

Current projections in the Region of Peel Official Plan and the City of Brampton‘s Official Plan recognize that most of the growth that will occur in the Region will take place in Brampton. As a part of its preparations, an amendment to the Regional Official Plan was adopted in 2005 which extended Brampton‘s urban boundary to include the then excluded Northwest Brampton. Dwelling or housing targets will need to be updated in the Region‘s and area municipalities‘ official plans to ensure agreed upon growth targets are incorporated into policy. Housing targets are discussed further in section 4.2 below. 4.1.2 Residential Intensification as a Growth Strategy

Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement identify minimum intensification targets for all residential development. Specifically, by the year 2015 and onwards, a minimum of 40 percent of all residential development must occur in the built up area. At the same time, Places to Grow prohibits the establishment of new settlement areas. Given the strong focus on intensification as the approach for meeting population growth and that a significant portion of the land required to accommodate growth is to take place through residential intensification, section 4.3 below identifies specific actions to ensure this takes place. 4.1.3 Directing Growth to Urban Growth Centres

Urban growth centres, as defined in Places to Grow, are to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth. In particular, urban growth centres will be planned to achieve, by 2031 or earlier, a minimum density target of 200 residents and jobs per hectare for downtown Brampton, and Mississauga City Centre. Given the strong focus on directing growth to urban growth centres, it is recommended that the Region strongly encourage the Cities of Brampton and Mississauga to put in place measures to facilitate growth in the urban growth

101


centres, in particular, include policies in their official plans which require adherence to the minimum density target of 200 residents and jobs per hectare. 4.1.4 Achieving Density Targets in Designated Greenfield Areas

Places to Grow also identifies density targets for greenfields. The minimum density target for greenfield areas is a combination of 50 people and jobs per hectare across the Region‘s designated greenfield area, excluding environmentally protected areas. It is suggested that the Region strongly encourage the area municipalities to include policies in their official plans which require adherence to the minimum density target for designated greenfield areas of 50 residents and jobs per hectare. 4.1.5 Vacant Land Survey

The City of Ottawa has used a vacant land survey to inventory the amount of vacant land available, as well as monitor the approximate supply in terms of years. This includes vacant land, greenfields, urban land, and serviced lands. It is suggested that the Region work with the area municipalities to undertake vacant land surveys if this has not already been done as part of their Places to Grow conformity studies. 4.2 Diversified Housing Stock: Densities, Forms, Type, Tenure & Price

The Region of Peel is projected to grow by 19.6% by 2031, increasing its diverse population and its housing needs. A full range of housing that is affordable and suitable for all Peel residents is required to ensure that people employed in the Region are able to live and work within the Region. As well, Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement identify the requirement for diversified housing stock, housing targets and provisions for affordable housing. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to encourage the development of a diversified housing stock throughout the Region, including providing a range of housing densities, forms, types, tenure and price/rent. 4.2.1 Housing Targets

Housing targets are specifically mentioned in the Provincial Policy Statement and are directed at the establishment and implementation of minimum targets for the provision of affordable housing for low and moderate income households. This is somewhat echoed in Places to Grow which asks that

102


municipalities plan for a range and mix of housing which includes affordable housing needs. Establishing Housing Targets for the Region and area municipalities, which would be incorporated into official plan policies, is one way to ensure that a diverse supply of housing stock is created to meet the needs of residents along the housing continuum. The intent is to develop housing targets for each area municipality based on their growth strategies, Places to Grow requirements, and affordability requirements of households at various income levels. The Region of Peel and its area municipalities do have Official Plan policies that deal with affordable housing, but currently none that specify explicit housing targets. Housing targets will be developed for the Region and the area municipalities as part of the Housing Strategy. Regulatory Framework for Enforcing Housing Targets As mentioned above, Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement require that upper-tier municipalities (such as the Region of Peel), in consultation with the area municipalities, establish and implement minimum affordable housing targets for each of the local municipalities as well as the Region (Places to Growth 3.2.6.5, Provincial Policy Statement 2005 1.4.3). Places to Grow also states that targets in its growth plan represent minimum standards (Places to Grow 5.4.1.5). However, both Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement do not provide for any regulatory authorities for the upper-tier municipalities to force lower-tier municipalities to achieve the affordable housing targets. Currently, lower-tier municipalities can encourage the creation of affordable housing, but it is unclear whether they have the ability to make the provision of affordable housing a condition of zoning (see discussion on Inclusionary Zoning below). Without such authorities it will be difficult for area municipalities to ensure that the affordable housing targets are met, and for the Region to enforce the achievement of the affordable housing targets by the area municipalities. It is suggested that the Region advocate to the Province for stronger regulatory authority to enforce the achievement of the affordable housing targets by the area municipalities. It is further suggested that the Region and area municipalities consider putting in place a system to monitor housing targets on an annual basis, including the requirement that planning applications include information on housing type, form, density, tenure, and price.

103


4.2.2 Inclusionary Zoning

Inclusionary zoning is the most prevalent of the regulatory initiatives used by US municipalities to stimulate the creation of affordable housing. Also referred to as inclusionary planning, inclusionary zoning typically requires or encourages private developers to construct some proportion of new residential

development for affordable housing. Fees-in-lieu, land and other contributions of an equivalent value are also sometimes accepted by area municipalities. The initial price or rent of the affordable units is typically set by terms of the regulation and first occupancy is limited to income-eligible households. Restrictions are also placed on subsequent occupants, and on rent

increases and resale prices, but these vary widely by municipality. Inclusionary zoning can be either mandatory or incentive-based. In mandatory programs, developers are required to contribute a certain proportion of affordable housing as a condition of development approval. In exchange, the municipality usually gives cost offsets, such as density bonusing, fee waivers,

Figure 4: Inclusionary Zoning Built Form Examples, DC Office of Planning

Source: DC Office of Planning, 2006

104


fast-tracked approvals and/or reduced development standards. In incentive-based programs, the developers are offered density bonuses and other incentives as inducements to contribute affordable housing on a voluntary basis. Research shows, however, that incentive-based programs produce significantly less affordable housing than mandatory ones.

Inclusionary zoning initiatives depend on a buoyant housing market to create new affordable housing units. Figure 4 illustrates examples of some creative ways in which inclusionary has been suggested in Washington D.C. Inclusionary zoning receives both criticism and praise as an effective tool for affordable housing development. The key goal is to balance public objectives of inclusion and affordability with the rights and incentives for land owners and developers to realize a fair profit, and not impose a ―tax‖ on development or cause development to be unattractive or financially unviable. Recent experiences from the United States has shown that inclusionary zoning can be an effective tool to help increase the amount of affordable ownership

and rental housing if properly designed and implemented. However, experts warn against seeing it as a ―quick-fix‖ method of creating housing for lower income individuals and families. Rather, inclusionary zoning is an option that must be carefully used, and it is typically not able to reach the affordability needs of the lowest income groups, but provides needed housing to households in the lower middle portion of the housing continuum. It is also often noted

Figure 5: Inclusionary Zoning Four-Plex, Fairfax County, Virginia

Source: BPI, 2008

Figure 6: Inclusionary Zoning Duplex, Montgomery County, Maryland

Source: BPI, 2008

105


as being most effective in high-growth areas and markets of high density districts. US Experience Experience with inclusionary zoning is more extensive in the United States. Montgomery County in Maryland and Fairfax County in Virginia have had success with such practices, with developers usually including smaller affordable units into the designs. In some cases, the architectural styles are maintained to make it appear as though the units in question are a single detached, or a large townhouse when they are actually subdivided into smaller units, or two smaller more modest units combined to resemble a larger single family home (see Figure 5). Most of these are ―workforce‖ housing, meaning they are directed at middle income groups in high demand markets. British Columbia Experience The City of Vancouver has had inclusionary requirements in place since 1988, and more recently other cities in British-Columbia have been implementing forms of inclusionary zoning. District of Ucluelet The District of Ucluelet on Vancouver Island has recently implemented its Perpetual Affordable Housing program, created through a policy added to its Official Plan that zones land as inclusionary and requires between 15% and 20% of units in new multi-unit residential developments to be deemed affordable. These units are sold to low-income, long-term residents of the District, and remain ―permanently affordable‖ through restrictive re-sale conditions placed on the titles, including a capped price increase of 2.4% per year. Eligible owner households cannot earn more than $52,000 a year, and must use the unit as their primary residence, as well as having had to live in the District for a minimum of 12 months. The District has completed two such units which sold between $150,000 and $160,000, and it is anticipated that a total of 120 to be built through the program in the next 5 to 10 years. City of Langford Another Vancouver Island community, the City of Langford, has also implemented a similar program, active since 2003. The City‘s Affordable Housing Policy requires that 10% (1 unit for every 10 units built) of homes built in new residential subdivision developments be designated as ―affordable‖ and sold for $160,000. Developers are granted density bonusing as a cost-offset to their building of the units. Provision within the Policy allows for certain corrections to be made in the case of sharply increasing costs and house prices, allowing the developers to ask for additional concessions from the City.

106


The Policy also sets out minimum constructions standards, stating a minimum lot size of 270 m2, a minimum unit size of 83 m2. Long-term resale restrictions include the inability to sell the home within 5 years of its purchase, and a maximum resale profit of $2,000 per year after this initial 5 year period. The City will find a buyer for any home sold within 25 years of its original purchase. Eligible households must have either lived in the City or been employed within its limits for at least 2 years, must not have any affiliations with current City of Langford staff, or members of the Housing Committee or Council, be at least a two-person household (or which one person can be a dependent under 18 years or age, or a person with a disability), not currently own real estate, have assets of less than $50,000, not have a household income of more than $60,000. As of January 2008, a total of 51 homes were completed or under development. A case study report of the Langford experience noted that the policy would have been more effective had it indexed the prices of the homes to inflation, rather than use a fixed price (Mitchell, 2008). Ontario Experience In the late 1980‘s, many municipalities across Ontario required that 25% of all housing in a new subdivision be affordable to households in the 60th income percentile. These inclusionary zoning requirements were removed in Ontario when the Provincial Land Use Policy Statement was repealed in the mid-1990s. In January 2007, the Province amended Section 34 of the Planning Act to permit municipalities to zone with ―Conditions‖ (Section 34(16)). However, it is unclear whether a condition of zoning can include the condition of provision of affordable housing. The relevant section is as follows:

S.34, ss.16: (16) If the official plan in effect in a municipality contains policies relating to zoning with conditions, the council of the municipality may, in a by-law passed under this section, permit a use of land or the erection, location or use of buildings or structures and impose one or more prescribed conditions on the use, erection or location. 2006, c. 23, s. 15 (7).

Same (16.1) The prescribed conditions referred to in subsection (16) may be made subject to such limitations as may be prescribed. 2006, c. 23, s. 15 (7).

Same (16.2) When a prescribed condition is imposed under subsection (16),

(a) the municipality may require an owner of land to which the by-law applies to enter into an agreement with the municipality relating to the condition;

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/french/elaws_statutes_90p13_f.htm#s34s16

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/french/elaws_statutes_90p13_f.htm#s34s16p1


107


(b) the agreement may be registered against the land to which it applies; and

(c) the municipality may enforce the agreement against the owner and, subject to the Registry Act and the Land Titles Act, any and all subsequent owners of the land. 2006, c. 23, s. 15 (7).

City of Toronto (16.3) Subsections (16), (16.1) and (16.2) do not apply with respect to the City of Toronto. 2006, c. 23, s. 15 (8).

City of Toronto Large Sites Policy The City of Toronto‘s Official Plan under Section 3.2.1 – Housing, includes a policy with elements of inclusionary zoning that also encourages a mix of housing types and affordability. The policy states that for sites larger than 5 hectares a minimum of 30% of the new units will be of built form other than single and semi-detached units, and includes row houses, triplexes, and multi-unit residential buildings. Another provision of the policy states that if a density increase is sought, the community benefit that will be prioritized will be affordable housing, in which case at least 20% of the additional units granted must be affordable. These affordable units can be built, either near the development or elsewhere in the City, provided through the conveyance of land, or through a cash in-lieu payment for the construction of affordable housing. The policy has not yet been used. Potential Barrier to Implementing Inclusionary Zoning Bylaw One of the potential legal barriers to introducing inclusionary zoning in Ontario is that there is legal precedence (from the Bell vs. the Queen case) that the then current Planning Act (1979) are not intended to grant authority to municipalities to impose restrictions on the users of buildings (as compared to the use of the building), and a number of legal experts are of the opinion that these restrictions would extend to zoning that requires affordable housing to be provided, as affordability relates to the user (i.e. affordable housing is intended for households in a certain income group). Though, this opinion has not been tested in the courts. As a counter argument to this opinion, the Ontario Human Rights Code provisions related to discrimination state that ―a right under Section 1 is not infringed by the implementation of a special program designed to relieve hardship and economic disadvantage or to assist disadvantaged persons or groups to achieve equal opportunity…‖ It is unclear whether a municipality could successfully argue that this provision could extend to an inclusionary zoning bylaw addressing affordable housing.


108


Even if it is accepted that the current Planning Act does permit inclusionary zoning for affordable housing, the Province could amend the Act to explicitly spell out this authority. One of the actions in the City of Ottawa‘s Housing Strategy is to pursue authority from the provincial government to allow municipalities to use inclusionary zoning. The City of Ottawa, and the City of Toronto, are both currently advocating for changes to the Planning Act to allow for inclusionary zoning. The City of Ottawa is also in the process of exploring how inclusionary zoning could be used in the Ottawa context, including conducting an analysis of how aspects of its use in other jurisdictions can be applied to Ottawa, and consultations with the development industry on the impact of inclusionary zoning. Given the significant potential for inclusionary zoning to help meet affordability targets and create complete communities, it is suggested that the Region of Peel explore the potential for introduction of inclusionary zoning for affordable housing, including obtaining a legal opinion as to whether current legislation permits inclusionary zoning for affordable housing. It is also suggested that the Region advocate to the Province to amend the Planning Act to explicitly provide municipalities with the authority for inclusionary zoning for affordable housing.

4.2.3 Density Bonusing and Transfer of Development Rights

Density bonusing encourages developers of new residential projects to provide various public amenities on a voluntary basis in exchange for increased developable floor space. This initiative is usually associated with downtown and other intensively developed areas where additional revenue-generating space can be offered and also where increased building size will not impose on the surrounding environment or infrastructure. Municipalities in the U.S. use density bonusing either on a negotiated, ad hoc basis on individual sites or as-of-right according to some established and standard rules across broad classes of sites. Research has shown that negotiated bonusing has been very successful in providing affordable housing, whereas programmed bonusing has not proven to provide affordable housing to any notable extent (Drdla, 1999). In Ontario, Section 37 of the Planning Act authorizes municipalities to provide for increases in height and/or density in exchange for ―public benefits‖, such as heritage preservation, day care facilities and affordable housing. It is a valuable mechanism for municipalities as it is a recognized planning tool to ensure that certain public benefits are provided at the development stage. Municipalities have used the practice of transferring development rights as a

109


means of generating funds for the preservation and/or rehabilitation of low and moderate income housing in downtown areas. Section 37 and its four subsections deal with the density bonusing, called density increases, through bylaws:

―The council of a local municipality may, in a bylaw passed under section 34, authorize increases in the height and density of development otherwise permitted by the bylaw that will be permitted in return for the provision of such facilities, services or matters as are set out in the bylaw.‖

However, any bylaws providing for additional height and density can only be allowed once a municipality has directly outlined these provision for authorizing additional height and density in their Official Plan, noted in subsection 2. Subsection 3 of section 37 deals with agreements:

―Where an owner of land elects to provide facilities, services or matters in return for an increase in the height or density of development, the municipality may require the owner to enter into one or more agreements with the municipality dealing with the facilities, services or matters.‖

Any such agreements must be registered against the land or lands in question, and are subject to enforcement by the municipality. City of Toronto The City of Toronto has used density increases, starting in 2000 when it implemented a framework which provides a ―facilities-first‖ approach whereby units can be provided as affordable housing or the developer has the option of providing cash-in-lieu of affordable housing. More recently, the City of Toronto has developed its own set of guidelines for the implementation of Section 37, as well as a protocol for negotiating the community benefits under the Section. Transfer of development rights programs are based on the idea that ownership of real property is comprised of a ―bundle of rights‖, including a property‘s development rights, which can be separated, sold and transferred to another property. The City of Toronto, for example, is one municipality that generated funds to create affordable housing by transferring development rights. Overall, these legislative opportunities tend to incur lower direct costs to the municipalities, but have the highest benefits in urban centres, and areas undergoing urban growth. Peel Region Context Within the Region of Peel, the City of Brampton, the City of Mississauga, and the Town of Caledon have included policies in their respective official plans to

110


allow for density bonusing. In light of the growing importance of intensification for the Region and its municipalities, it is suggested that the Region encourage and work with the cities of Brampton and Mississauga and the Town of Caledon to develop more detailed implementation guidelines and protocols for the use of the density bonusing provisions. 4.2.4 Prohibiting Downzoning

Down zoning is the reduction of density allowed for a certain property under zoning bylaws, such as from high density to medium density. Down zoning may have the effect of reducing the affordable housing stock as sites that are currently zoned to allow multi-residential developments, which are generally more affordable, would only allow low density residential developments after the down zoning process (Daly, 1996).

The City of Ottawa‘s Official Plan has a policy that specifically prohibits down zoning of residential land to curb the loss of affordable housing. The goal of this policy is to ensure that redevelopment of land does not result in low density infill housing and the loss of apartment potential for multi-housing types of development.

Mississauga is the only municipality that discourages or prohibits down zoning. The specific policies are as follows:

3.2.3.4 Reduction of residential densities will be discouraged. 3.13.2.4 Reduction in densities of lands within the City Centre should not be permitted. 3.13.3.4 down-zoning of lands within a Node and in the transition area adjacent to the Node should not be permitted.

It is suggested that the Region encourage the City of Brampton and Town of Caledon to adopt policies in their official plans to discourage or prohibit down zoning to help ensure that there are sufficient lands designated to accommodate medium and high density residential development in Peel Region. 4.2.5 Rooming, Boarding and Lodging Houses

Rooming, boarding and lodging houses (rooming houses) represent one of the most affordable forms of transitional and permanent housing available to low income single persons. Most rooming houses provide shelter at monthly rents of lower than market rates. Some provide not only inexpensive accommodation but also meals, housekeeping, and other services. Rooming houses provide an opportunity for social interaction and a shared-living

111


environment which many individuals find an important element of day-to-day living. Many operate with no government funding or subsidies, adding further to their value as a sustainable solution for those of lower income (SHS, 2004). Zoning regulations represent one of the primary barriers to rooming houses. Typically, rooming houses are only allowed in areas zoned for apartments and not in single-family and newer residential areas(CMHC, 2001). However, studies have found that the characteristics of the neighbourhood where they are living, such as access to grocery stores, services, transit and food banks, are important to rooming house tenants. Tenants also value living in a residential area as opposed to large housing projects as they associate this with feelings of safety. This suggests the benefit of permitting rooming houses in residential areas within close proximity to community services and amenities (Oriole Research, 2008). Foyer des Cent Abris, Montreal One example of a rooming house project is the one built in the Centre-Sud neighbourhood in Montreal by Foyer des Cent Abris, a non-profit organization with the mandate to assist single persons looking for housing in the neighbourhood. Two rooming houses were built with a total of 24 units. One building contains 13 studio apartments in a two-storey U-shaped structure surrounding a courtyard. The U-shaped design was important as it removes the necessity and cost of an interior hallway, it provides increased exterior exposure resulting in an increase of natural light for each unit, it allows for a staircase configuration that permits exterior access to each unit, and the building does not give the impression of being of high density, making it easier for it to blend in the existing neighbourhood.

The second building has three storeys, is rectangular in shape, and has 11 studio apartments. This rectangular design increased density as it allowed for a central circulation block in the building into which all the units can open. The shape also allowed the building the blend with the existing neighbourhood. The units in both buildings are smaller than conventional apartments but larger

Figure 7: Floor Plan, Foyer des Cent Abris, Montreal

Source: CMHC

112


than units found in most rooming houses, with a floor area of 35 square metres (377 square feet). Each unit has its own kitchen and bathroom.

The construction of these buildings was possible due to flexibility in zoning regulations in the City of Montreal so replicating this project in other communities would require the same flexibility. For example, the smaller unit sizes and increased density on each site, which makes the units more affordable, were possible due to special permission received from the City. In addition, parking requirements were waived, which reduced the overall construction costs and land requirements (CMHC, 2008). Peel Region Context In Mississauga, group homes/rooming houses are permitted in residential zones but are subject to a minimum radius of 800 metres of an existing group home. This may partly explain why, according to the assessment role data from Peel, there are currently no rooming houses in Mississauga. The City of Brampton has a similar bylaw with a minimum separation distance of 305 metres between two rooming/lodging houses. The Town of Caledon does not have rooming/lodging houses in its by-laws. This may or may not present a barrier to the development of rooming houses in the Town. The assessment role data from Peel Region shows that there are 20 rooming/ lodging houses in the region. There are 18 in Brampton and two in Caledon. However, the supply of rooming houses in Peel is decreasing. Brampton City records show that at least seven lodging houses, housing almost 50 residents, have closed since 2004 and one, which houses 9 residents, is slated to close in the near future. The shrinking supply of rooming houses generates fewer housing options for Peel residents at the lower end of the housing market. This trend is similar to that occurring in other areas of the province. Retaining and Expanding Supply Strong landlord-tenant relationships and tenant-tenant relationships have been identified as enhancing retention and expansion of rooming house stock and good building maintenance. There are a number of good practices that a rooming house landlord can put into place that would result in a better living environment for tenants and an easier management experience for the landlord, including limiting number of residents to five or fewer and having a lease in place (Oriole Research, 2008). Public education and information is also essential to the successful retention and development of rooming house stock. A proactive approach involving all stakeholders can avoid NIMBY attitudes (CMHC, 2002). In 2001, the Region of Peel helped the owner of a licensed rooming housing in downtown Brampton secure funding through RRAP to rehabilitate the property.

113


The exterior work that the funding helped to address included replacing windows, stabilizing the foundation. Work in the building‘s interior included the installation of new plumbing and electrical systems. The forgivable loan granted was of $108,000, and is forgivable over a 15 year period provided the rents charged to tenants are maintained at an affordable level for this period of time. Rooming, boarding and lodging homes are a form of housing that could help meet the demand for affordable housing for low income individuals. Thus, efforts are required to retain the current stock and encourage the creation of new rooming houses. To help ensure that Peel Region‘s rooming house stock does not continue to decrease and to encourage the development of new stock, the Region should direct area municipalities to expand the areas where rooming, boarding and lodging housing are permitted, particularly in areas that are close to amenities and existing services. Minimum separation distances may be decreased or completely eliminated. This is discussed further in section 3.1.2. In addition, it is suggested that the Region consider developing an education program for current and potential rooming house landlords that focuses on raising and maintaining higher standards of care, fire and safety, and/or maintenance. 4.2.6 Single Room Occupancy

Single Room Occupancy Units (SROs) are located in buildings that often combine private and shared public space. These units are generally geared to low income single persons. Some SROs incorporate support services such as health facilities or assistance in finding employment. The purpose of sharing facilities is to reduce development and /or operation costs. Additional benefits of sharing facilities include the creation of a supportive living environment and improved amenities. With the exception of social housing, rooming houses and SROs are the least expensive form of permanent housing and are essential for low-income single people (CMHC, 2008). City of Vancouver In an attempt to retain affordable housing units, the City of Vancouver has implemented a replacement housing program in the Downtown Core. Developers who convert, demolish or close single room occupancy hotels (SROs) are responsible for the one-to-one replacement of those units. The replacement ensures that, in addition to other strategies the City employs to create more SRO units, the number of existing units is not reduced. For each unit a developer demolishes in an existing multi-unit building, they must pay $1,000 to the City. This money goes into the City‘s general revenues, and has been used mainly to buy land for future social housing projects. General

114


revenues from the City have also been used to renovate and re-open several SRO hotels without senior government funding. This example may be replicated in an urban area where development is decreasing the amount of SRO‘s, non-market, or special needs housing. It has been stated that for the replacement program to be effective, all elements should be enforced: a one-to-one replacement, a $1,000 fee for each low-income unit demolished, and, a percentage of development cost levies for the purpose of replacement housing. Peel Youth Village One example of a SRO project in Peel Region is the Peel Youth Village. This is a mixed-use development that incorporates housing with a community centre. The residential component provides safe, stable, transitional housing and support services for homeless youth aged 16 to 30 years. There are 48 single rooms with 32 rooms that are clustered into groups of four and these clusters are called ―houses.‖ Each ―house‖ shares a kitchen, washrooms, and a common lounge. The remaining 16 rooms will have either one or two beds and is intended for short term stay. The residential areas are designed to take advantage of social supports and community building interaction. The community centre serves residents as well as the surrounding neighborhood. There are recreation opportunities and social services, such as employment and life-skills counseling (Peel Region). 4.2.7 Multi-Family Homes

A number of developers in Peel Region are starting to meet the demands for multi-family homes with innovative designs. In addition to the examples described below, the section on stacked row/townhouses also describes housing types and forms that may be suitable to multi-families.

Figure 8: Peel Youth Village

Source: Region of Peel

115


The Springdale development in Brampton, includes 20 FlexHomes by Townwood Homes, which are designed to look like single family homes from exterior, but have two separate entrances for the two units, one on each floor. Each unit functions separately, and offers the ability to be reconverted back into a single family home. In a 2005 article for the Toronto Star, the developers explained that they no longer offer the design, partly due to zoning challenges, as the homes are a form of duplex, but can also be single-family dwellings. The actual design of the homes is also more challenging due to separate furnace and air conditioning capabilities, as well as the ability to reconvert must be taken into consideration. However, the article did highlight that there was a demand for such units. Similarly, Moldenhauer Developments has included a stacked townhouse design which accommodates two separate units in some of its new subdivisions. Other unit plans in its developments feature ground floor master bedrooms which can help with better accessibility for older adults, or allow a household member with mobility issues live comfortably in a two floor home. 4.2.8 Convertible House

Figure 9: Moldenhauer Developments, Townhouse Floor Plan

Source : Moldenhauer Developments, 2008

116


The Convertible House is an innovative alternative to installing a secondary suite as a permanent feature. It is designed to look like a single-family dwelling on the outside and can be built with or without a secondary suite in place. It can later be converted to the alternate form as the homeowners‘ income and space requirements change. This built form helps maintain the character of single-family neighbourhoods (Affordability and Choice Today).

The Convertible House has a total area of 197 square metres (2,118 square feet). Inside the foyer, there are separate entrances to the main dwelling and the secondary suite. The main dwelling is on the ground floor and is a one-bedroom unit with a floor area of 86 square metres (925 square feet). It has a den, bathroom, kitchen eating area, laundry facilities, and living room. The secondary suite has a floor area of 71 square metres (763 square feet) and has its own kitchen/eating area, bathroom, laundry facilities, and can contain one or two bedrooms depending on the occupant‘s needs (CMHC, 2008).

The Convertible House adds to the rental housing stock by having a secondary suite without having any impact on the character of a neighbourhood. In addition, it allows for flexibility in a homeowner‘s income or lifestyle and makes homeownership possible for first time homebuyers or empty nesters. For the Convertible House to be replicated there is a need for flexible municipal regulations that would allow for a house to be converted from one unit to two units and vice versa (CMHC, 2008). 4.2.9 Quattroplex

A quattroplex is a housing built form that contains four units. It typically has two units located in the front of the structure and two units in the rear. The exterior of a corner lot quattroplex would look like a large single-detached house while quattroplexes on mid-block lots would look like a semi-detached house. This characteristic makes quattroplexes ideal for neighbourhoods where residents have concerns about higher density house forms (CMHC, 2008). Each unit in a quattroplex is generally 1,100 to 1,400 square feet and has two or three bedrooms. All the units have combined living/dining rooms, a kitchen/dinette, a full bathroom and a half bathroom. Usually, the basement comes unfinished and this reduces the purchase price of each unit. Quattroplexes normally have on-site parking so this built form does not result in the streetscape being dominated with garages (CMHC, 2008). City of Brampton One example of a residential development with quattroplexes is the KingKnoll subdivision in Brampton, Ontario. This contains 12 quattroplexes representing 48 three-bedroom units. Each unit has a floor area of 1,350 square feet and contains a master bedroom, two other bedrooms, a kitchen/dinette area,

117


living/dining area, and an unfinished basement. There are also two parking spaces per unit (CMHC, 2008). A number of elements make the quattroplex more affordable. First, the shared walls, roof, and lot are more cost effective when compared to conventional single detached homes that each need walls, roof, and lots. In addition, the quattroplex design results in a 50% saving in lot area, curb length, and roof and foundation areas. There is also a 35% saving in exterior wall perimeter.

The quattroplex is an affordable built form that achieves densities comparable to townhouses but still retains the character of conventional neighbourhoods with single detached homes.

4.2.10 Stacked Row/Town House

Another form of housing that fits in well into low density neighbourhood is the stacked row house. This form of house is usually designed with three full storeys and a basement. Individual living units are layered vertically over each other while maintaining a street-related entrance for each unit (Design Centre for Sustainability at UBC, 2008).

This built form results in a 50% savings in foundation and roof areas, a 33% saving in lot area and curb length, and a 70% saving in exterior wall perimeter. It also offers a range of unit types and sizes. For example, bachelor units in the basement may be 500 square feet while units in the upper floors may have two storeys with two or three bedrooms and 1,200 square feet. This allows for flexibility in household types and incomes within one structure (CMHC, 2008).

Figure 10:Quattroplex Front Elevation

Source: Metrus Management

118


Stacked condominium townhouses, or ―garden homes,‖ are an alternative to condominium suites for households who are looking for a more affordable alternative to conventional single-detached homes but who do not want to live in a high rise structure. This built form provides an alternative for infill projects where mid or high-rises are inappropriate (Raymaker, 2007).

4.2.11 Grow Home

The concept of the Grow Home was developed by Avi Freedman in 1990 with the purpose of creating a home that would be affordable to low-income households. The typical grow home is a narrow three-storey townhouse with approximately 1,000 square feet. When purchased, the home has a finished first floor that contains a kitchen, bathroom, and living space. The other floors are open concept and are unfinished when purchased, allowing the homeowners to finish them based on their space requirements and financial circumstances. There are 33 different options available to homeowners to customize the Grow Home to allow them to make trade-offs between amenities and their budget (CMHC, 2008).

Grow Homes are built on small lots resulting in higher densities and reduced land costs and per unit hard infrastructure costs. It has one-third the area of exterior walls and one-half the roof area of a conventional detached house so energy costs are reduced by an average of 40% annually. Excluding land costs, a Grow Home can be constructed for about $40,000 making it very affordable to low-income households (CMHC, 2008).

Figure 11: Stacked Row House Floor Plan & Elevation Drawings

Source: CMHC

119


It is suggested that the Region encourage area municipalities to consider permitting diverse forms of housing such as rooming, boarding and lodging homes, single room occupancy, convertible house, stacked row/townhouses and the Grow Home in residential areas throughout the Region as a way to meet the needs of low and moderate income households. 4.3 Residential Intensification

Residential intensification, either through infill or redevelopment, will become an increasingly important method of meeting the growing population requirements in the Region. Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement also require that municipalities facilitate and use intensification for meeting the growth and density targets set out by the Province. The Region and area municipalities are required to include a strategy and policies in the official plans and other supporting documents to achieve their intensification targets. The area municipalities are currently examining intensification potential as part of their growth strategy conformity exercise. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to increase and encourage residential intensification in the Region of Peel. 4.3.1 Infill Development

Infill development is a form of intensification that refers to development that takes place on land within built-up urban areas that has remained vacant or under-utilized. Infill sites are usually already served by utilities and other services that can reduce a developer‘s upfront costs, and in turn, may help in reducing the costs of completed housing units. Infill development is strongly encouraged in the Provincial Policy Statement and in Places to Grow.

Figure 12: The Grow Home, Montreal

Source: World Habitat Awards, Accessed from http://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?lang=00&theProjectID=36

http://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?lang=00&theProjectID=36

http://www.worldhabitatawards.org/winners-and-finalists/project-details.cfm?lang=00&theProjectID=36

120


There are a number of ways that municipalities can encourage infill development, including:

preparing an inventory of potential infill sites, including surplus municipal lands, and making it available to developers

adopting flexible zoning and building regulations to allow development of irregular or substandard infill lots

allowing mixed uses for infill developments which may enhance economic feasibility of projects

allowing sufficient density to induce housing development. The official plans of the Region of Peel, the City of Brampton, City of Mississauga, and the Town of Caledon include objectives and policies regarding infill and redevelopment for housing. 4.3.2 Secondary Suites/Accessory Dwelling Units

Secondary suites or accessory apartments have been found to offer some of the most affordable forms of accommodation within a community, as well as providing improved housing choices for its residents. They also offer homeowners the opportunity to earn additional income to help meet the costs of homeownership. Places to Grow specifically requires that municipalities ―encourage the creation of secondary suite throughout the built-up area” (Policy 2.2.3.6 j). Recent changes to the Planning Act have enabled municipalities to establish second unit policies as of right. Further, second unit policies put in place by municipalities cannot be appealed to the OMB. Numerous municipalities throughout Ontario, notably the Cities of Toronto, Ottawa and Guelph, have passed bylaws to permit accessory dwellings as-of-right in designated areas. In most cases, the bylaws tend to restrict the location of accessory dwellings to specific areas and ensure that such units meet local planning, building, health and safety standards. However, the City of Ottawa allows such units as-of-right in all areas of the City, save for one planning district. In the Region of Peel, the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton currently only permit grandfathered accessory apartments. The Town of Caledon has

Town of Markham: Secondary Suites Policy Review

The Town of Markham has recently held a review process for secondary suites within its territory, and after several public meetings is currently reviewing a draft bylaw to implement a new secondary suites policy. The draft proposal would establish secondary units as-of-right in singled detached and semi-detached dwelling units only, require a registration process for houses with secondary suites every three years, as well as an education campaign to inform the public about the registration process and the how to comply with building and fire codes, as well as property standards.

121


developed provisions for accessory apartments, called apartments-in-house. Specifically, the Town of Caledon Official Plan states:

3.4.3.6.1 Criteria for Apartments-in-Houses

a) An Apartment-in-House shall be permitted within a detached, semi-detached, duplex or link house and is located on residentially designated lands within the Rural Service Centres of Bolton, Mayfield West and Caledon East, on lands within the Villages and Hamlets where primary use is residential, or located on lands identified as Agricultural Area, Rural Area, Rural Estate Residential Area, Policy Area 1, 2 or 3 within the Palgrave Estate Residential Community, or Environmental Policy Area lands within the Town of Caledon in accordance with the policies of this Plan, the provision of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law, and where required, the approval of the Building Department and/or the appropriate conservation authority.

b) In accordance with the requirements of the Niagara Escarpment Plan, except for lands lying within a Minor Urban Centre, Apartments-in-Houses shall not be permitted within the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area.

c) Apartments-in-Houses should generally have a minimum size of 32.5 m2

d) Apartments-in-Houses should generally be restricted to a maximum size of 30% of the detached, semi-detached, duplex or link house excluding the cellar and private garage.

e) An Apartment-in-House will be registered in the Town’s Apartment-in-House Register.

Secondary Suite Facilitation: Municipalities in British-Columbia The practice of facilitating secondary suites is also being implemented elsewhere in Canada. In Coquitlam, B.C., the local municipality offers utility rebates to secondary suite owners that register their units with the City. Coquitlam also developed a set of alternative life safety standards to address the issue of units in existing homes. The City of New Westminster has established a set of municipal design guidelines for secondary suites in order to help address concerns about their effect on the built form. New Westminster also developed a guideline through which it will only close older ―grandfathered‖ units if there are serious safety issues. The City of Edmonton The City of Edmonton implemented a two-phase transition towards a comprehensive plan to develop secondary suites to help augment the supply of affordable housing. The by-laws were developed with the aid of open houses, public consultations, stakeholder meetings and a web survey. The two-phase plan was designed to enable the legislation, and allow for a trial period after which modifications could be done.

122


The first phase by-law was passed in December 2007 with the aim of making it easier for individuals to create secondary suites within their homes. The first phase allowed units in targeted smaller-lot suburban areas with units to be contained within single-detached dwellings, large-lot mature areas, and also permitted garage suites above detached garages in both of these zones. The second phase by-law passed in February 2009 included several modifications based on the consultation process and experience. Some location restrictions were removed for large-lot residential areas. Garage suites were permitted to be located in most of the City‘s low-density residential areas, and at-grade garage suites and garden suites were also permitted to be included with these being authorized on a discretionary basis by the development authority. Promoting Secondary Suites As a part of secondary suite by-laws and policies, many municipalities have jointly implemented education and awareness campaigns in order better inform the public and potential landlords, as well as facilitating the transition towards the use of the legislations and policies. As a part of its implementation, and ongoing information, the City of Toronto published an information guide for secondary suites which details the process involved in setting one up. These guides are available for free at any of the City‘s Civic Centres or City Hall. Toronto also published two information brochures aimed at secondary suite landlords and tenants respectively, which quickly outlines the issues of becomes a landlord, and what rights tenants have in second suites. The City of Toronto also directs prospective landlords to the Landlord‘s Self Help Centre, a community clinic that provides services to small-scale landlords in Ontario. Similarly, the City of Ottawa published an educational brochure titled A Home Within a Home on secondary suites as a part of its zoning by-law revision. The publication outlines the regulation, building and approval process, discusses certain positive aspects of secondary suites, answers questions regarding them, and highlights funding and grant opportunities. As well, the City has several resources available on its website to help prospective landlords with their decision. The City of Hamilton has also recently started examining the potential for expanding the areas of the City in which secondary suites and garden suites would be permitted. This review will be a part of their new official plan drafting process. The Region should encourage the legalization of secondary suites in the cities of Mississauga and Brampton as suggested in section 3.1.2. In addition, it is suggested that the Region assist in the promotion of secondary suites, as well

123


shelters and rooming and boarding houses, through the development of an education and awareness program to dispel myths and negativity. 4.3.3 Garden Suites

A Garden Suite is a form of accessory dwelling unit, defined as being a ―portable, self-contained dwelling without a basement [that is] installed temporarily in the rear or side yard of a lot with an existing, permanent, single-family house‖ (CMHC, 2008c). Garden suites are authorized in Section 39 of the Act as temporary use ―portable‖ structures. A municipality with a garden suite by-law can require the owner of the unit to enter into an agreement which cover timelines for installation and removal, maintenance, the occupancy period, and any monetary security or costs that the units would incur on it. Garden Suites are designed to allow older singles or couples, usually over 65 years of age, or people with disabilities the ability to live independently, with the benefit of having care and support in close proximity. The ―host family‖, the owners of the single-family home on whose property the garden suite is located, are usually related to the garden suite occupants. Currently, the Town of Caledon permits garden suites in several zones, subject to temporary use by-laws. The permitted zones are the Estate Residential (RE), Rural Residential (RR), Residential One (R1), Agricultural (A1), Rural (A2), and Small Agricultural Holdings (A3). Furthermore, the suites are subject to a legal agreement, registered on the title, between the Town and the owners of the land that states the name of the tenant, provisions for removal and restoration of the property once the unit is removed, and the length of time for which the agreement is in effect up to a maximum of ten years. The Town also stipulates guidelines for the units, which include a minimum size of 32.5 square metres up to a maximum of not more than 93 square metres, that its design be compatible with the surrounding community, and that it be situated in the rear or side yard of the main dwelling not more than 15 metres from the main dwelling (Town of Caledon Garden Suite Criteria). Several municipalities in New Brunswick have also implemented garden suite policies, including Tantramar Planning District which covers the municipalities of Sackville, Dorcherster and Port Elgin, as well as the Miramichi Planning District. Garden suites are a form of intensification that can also be an effective form of semi-supportive housing in that they can provide independent living for older family members while maintaining proximity to the care and support of extended family.

124


It is suggested that the Region of Peel encourage the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton to identify opportunities where garden suites could be provided, subject to meeting relevant building, health and safety regulations, as suggested in section 3.1.2. 4.3.4 Redevelopment of Social Housing

Redevelopment of social housing can lead to interesting new opportunities to provide denser, improved communities and housing. In some cases, the rationalization of housing stock, although a fiscal exercise, has allowed for the redevelopment or development of a number of social housing projects across the province. The most ambitious and current example is the redevelopment initiative of Regent Park by Toronto Community Housing, which will see the area completely redeveloped by 2012. Currently there are about 2,000 units on the site, the final plan will see this number increased to about 4,500 units which will include a mix of apartments and townhouses and include important components of commercial, community and education space. Rent-geared-to income units will be mixed with market units, and allow for a mix of commercial and institutional uses. The Kingston & Frontenac Housing Corporation recently redeveloped an underused section of one its sites and built a 49 unit seniors‘ affordable apartment building. As a part of the redevelopment, office space was also added for their headquarters, and adjacent affordable housing buildings were also improved, including landscaping of the site. Peel Region‘s Human Services Plan includes an objective to explore creative solutions to maintain and expand affordable non-profit and private housing options in the Region of Peel. Redeveloping and intensifying existing social housing sites may be one way to meet this objective. In fact, the Peel Youth Village project is one example where this approach was implemented. It is suggested that the Region continue to explore the potential of redeveloping some of its existing social housing projects in an effort to intensify and rejuvenate some of these communities. 4.4 Efficient and Effective Use of Land and Resources

A number of actions can be implemented to ensure efficient and effective use of land and resources. These actions include directing new housing where infrastructure and public service facilities will be available to support needs; promoting densities that efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and

125


public services; and supporting use of alternative transportation modes and public transit where it exists or is to be developed.

4.4.1 Directing New Housing Where Infrastructure is Available

The Area Municipalities are in the process of assessing their ability to meet intensification targets identified in Places to Grow. Identifying ways to meet the intensification targets will be critical to the municipalities‘ strategy for directing new housing where infrastructure and public service facilities are available to support needs. 4.4.2 Promoting Densities the Efficiently Use Land

Sections 4.1 and 4.2 identify a number of strategies for promoting increased densities to efficiently use land. 4.4.3 Housing Strategies in Support of Transit-Supportive Development

The pursuit of sustainable transportation cannot be separated from the need for more supportive forms of development. The nature of urban land use—that is, its form, structure and design—can have a strong influence on both transportation demand and supply. Building compact, transit-supportive communities in designated greenfields and developing mixed-use transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly urban environments are requirements of Places to Grow.

Region of Peel The Region of Peel, through its Long Range Transportation Plan (2005), has identified among the goals and policies, the need to work with area municipalities to encourage the intensification of residential and non-residential development along nodes and corridors in support of transit (Long Range Transportation Plan, Section 4.3.2). Other policies state supporting mixed-use development guidelines that will encourage the use of active transportation, such as walking or cycling, for short trips. As part of the Region‘s Official Plan review, a paper on the background and challenges regarding transportation in the Region was published (Transportation Background and Challenges) which identified several ways to encourage more transit-supportive and pedestrian friendly design. These included the development of complete communities which increase density around transit stops and transit corridors, and promoting street-side retail development. The Region has undertaken significant work in support of transit supportive development. The following examples provide some potential strategies for

126


the Region to consider to further promote residential development that is transit supportive. City of Toronto In January 2007, the City of Toronto set new minimum thresholds for the environmental performance of site and building designs through the publication of The Toronto Green Development Standard. The standard recognizes the role of individual buildings and sites in improving environmental quality through their influence on air quality and climate change, energy use, economic and social health, ecosystems, water quality and the production of solid waste. Within each category, charts identify key development features. A new standard is identified for each feature, as well as any existing guidelines or standards, similar standards used by other rating systems, and possible implementation strategies. Requirements directly related to multi-residential developments include the following transportation-related development features:

Automobile infrastructure—minimum parking space provision, shared parking strategies, and preferential parking for carpools and ultra-low emission vehicles

Cycling infrastructure—short-term bicycle parking, long-term bicycle storage, and shower and change facilities

Pedestrian infrastructure—sun and weather protection, integration with walking routes, grading and surface treatment, signage, lighting, and separation from vehicular routes and air intake or exhaust systems

Transit accessibility—integration of transit facilities, proximity to transit service

Transit-oriented development (TOD) includes mixed land uses set in a pedestrian-friendly environment within walking distance of high-quality transit service.

City of Calgary After high-level planning policies failed to generate transit oriented development around key light rail stations, the City of Calgary set out to develop guidelines for such development, leading to the City‘s 2004 document, Transit Oriented Development – Best Practices Handbook. The report examined best practices in transit oriented development from across North America and suggested 11 key implementation tools like eliminating procedural roadblocks, creating community support, developing customized station area plans, leveraging public lands around stations, and providing financing and incentives. Under the City‘s plan, six planning objectives are to be achieved by development projects in designated areas, these are:

127


Ensure transit-supportive land uses

Increase density

Create pedestrian-oriented design

Make each station area a "place"

Manage parking, bus and vehicular traffic

Plan in context with local communities

For each of these planning objectives, a handful of design guidelines identify transit oriented development options around different station types. The objectives and guidelines are intended to help developers, staff and residents improve planning processes and applications—from area plans to subdivision applications and individual development permits. Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers The Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers (CITE) published Promoting Sustainable Transportation Through Site Design in 2004, based on an international review of best practices and an understanding of the Canadian context. The publication recommends site design practices and supporting initiatives to enhance sustainable travel modes like walking, cycling, transit and carpooling. The guidelines themselves are organized into four themes:

Site organization—proximity of and connections between buildings and key features like parking areas

Site layout—location and configuration of internal roads, parking areas, and facilities for transit and cycling

Site infrastructure—dimensions, materials and signage for roads, sidewalks, pathways and parking areas

128


Site amenities—bicycle parking, changing facilities, transit waiting areas, landscaping

Austin, Texas Figure 13 depicts a concept drawing from a proposed development in Austin, Texas, that illustrates the ideas of the transit-supported development, in conjunction with mixed-uses. It is suggested that the Region consider policies to further continue and strengthen its work in support of transit supportive development and encourage the area municipalities to incorporate similar strategies. 4.5 Complete Communities

Complete communities refer to a well designed and properly scaled community which meets the daily, and lifetime needs of all people through an appropriate mix of employment, services, a full range of housing including affordable housing, community and cultural infrastructure, schools, recreation

opportunities, open space, and access to public transportation as well as other options for safe, non-motorized travel. The concept is referred to in Places to Grow, but its elements are also detailed in the Provincial Policy Statement. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help or facilitate the creation of more compact complete communities in the Region of Peel.

Figure 13: Transit-Oriented Development concept drawing, Midtown Commons, Austin, Texas

Source: Trammell Crow Co., 2008

129


One of Places to Grow‘s guiding principle is to ―build compact, vibrant and complete communities‖. A key component in creating compact complete communities is providing density in appropriate locations. Densities that are more than 25 units per hectare (10 units per acre) provide enough residents and activity to support neighbourhood retail and transit services. Neighbourhood hubs near transit stations, town centres, civic centres, where two neighbourhoods meet, and at major retail and employment locations are ideal locations for more density and diversity of land use (Smart Growth BC). Creating compact complete communities is closely tied into other key elements of the housing strategy, including residential intensification, effective use of land, energy efficiency and housing affordability. The following summarizes key findings of a number of discussion papers on creating compact, complete communities and also provides examples of opportunities for encouraging mixed uses, alternative housing forms and planned complete communities. 4.5.1 Benefits of Building Compact Complete Communities

The objective of developing compact complete communities is to use less land and reduce the separation of land uses in order to achieve a diversity of values that include open space protection, community vitality, affordable housing, air quality, transit use, and more walkable places (Pivo, 2005). The benefits of building compact complete communities include:

Improvements to health by providing safe and attractive ways to get around without having to use an automobile, such as by bike or on foot

Mitigation of climate change by providing shopping, schools, and other services within easy walking distance

Protection of farmland and open space

Reduction of infrastructure costs due to greater densities

Diversification of the local economy by allowing people to work from vibrant, mixed-use neighbourhoods that attract and keep residents

Strengthening of social networks (Smart Growth BC).

4.5.2 Strategies for Creating Compact Complete Communities

There are a number of strategies for the creation of compact complete communities. These include:

Establish urban and rural containment boundaries and adhere to these boundaries;

130


Offer housing diversity through affordable housing options for all stages of life;

Limit service provision, such as having no service for developments with low densities or outside designated areas;

Protecting the natural environment from urbanization (Smart Growth BC);

Make communities attractive to new households and businesses to increase population density and jobs for local residents;

Invest in access and amenities, such as public transit and parks, to make an area more attractive to development;

Regulate growth to balance conservation and development by changing zoning by-laws to allow for higher densities;

Protect ―sacred spaces‖ and compensate for change with amenities, by protecting the character of existing neighbourhoods (Pivo, 2005).

4.5.3 Defining Complete Communities in the Official Plan

A review of the Region‘s and area municipalities‘ official plans found that the City of Brampton‘s official plan includes the best description of complete communities:

Complete communities will be well designed, offer a variety of transportation choices, contain a mix of housing for people in all stages of life, offer a range of employment opportunities, and provide shopping and community services that meets the needs of residents and businesses (4.14).

Complete communities are compact, transit-oriented and pedestrian friendly with a mix of uses, and a variety of housing choices, jobs and supporting, services and facilities (4.15.5).

The other Official Plans discuss characteristics of the desired communities, but not necessarily all the features of complete communities. 4.5.4 Examples of Complete Communities from other Jurisdictions

The following are two examples of planned compact complete communities --- one from Ontario and the other from the United States.

131


Town of Markham One example of a planned compact complete community is Downtown Markham. The site is near Kennedy Road and between Highway 7 and Highway 407. Once complete, it will have 9,500 residents and 16,000 employees. This is a 243 acre mixed-use development with residences, restaurants, retail, office buildings, parks, and public squares all within walking distance of one another (Remington Group of Companies, 2006). This development takes into account already announced transit improvements in the area, including increased bus service and additional GO Transit service (Carniol, 2006).

Kirkland Washington Kirkland, Washington is an example of an automobile-dependent suburban city that was transformed into a compact complete community. It is located on the eastern shore of Lake Washington and was founded in 1886. Kirkland places in the highest decile among Washington‘s cities and census designated places for housing density, jobs density, jobs-housing balance, and retail-housing balance (Pivo, 2005). An examination of Kirkland found a series of strategies and events that seem to have been critical to its transformation. These are:

Visualize and value places where people want to be Kirkland City leaders realized that to increase population density and jobs for local residents, they had to make their community a more desirable destination to attract new households and businesses. As early as 1975, the city manager recognized that the city should get denser but not bigger, to be able to retain its small-town charms.

Hire and support strong professional managers Once the city had a vision, they recognized that it would take strong management capacity to make this vision reality.

Have a collaborative city council that will defend the vision Kirkland City Council worked as a unit and learned to compromise to implement its vision.

Invest in access and amenities Investments make an area more attractive to development and they enhance residents‘ satisfaction with their community, which is important for maintaining tolerance and support for change.

Regulate growth to balance conservation and development Higher densities and a mix of land uses in Kirkland were made possible through zoning by-laws. For example, single-family subdivisions in Kirkland in the 1980s had an average density of five lots per acre compared to less than two lots per acre for all the other cities in the county during the same period. Multi-family housing was allowed in

132


both residential and non-residential zones which resulted in having 55% of the city‘s housing stock in 2000 as multi-family housing. In addition to zoning, development regulations were configured to promote development. For example, smaller lots and narrower access easements were allowed and minimum single-family lot widths were removed.

Protect “sacred spaces” and compensate for change with amenities The development regulations protected existing neighbourhoods by directing growth to vacant lands and appropriate locations within neighbourhoods. Additionally, neighbourhoods that received a large amount of multi-family housing development also received additional parks and open space.

Provide developers the resources they need For development to occur, there needs to be buildable land with adequate infrastructure and development capital. Kirkland zoned land for development that was either vacant or used at lower densities than the zoning permitted, thus providing an economically feasible land supply for development (Pivo, 2005).

These strategies could be replicated in the Region of Peel and area municipalities to transform conventional suburban neighbourhoods into more compact complete communities. It is suggested that the Region identify in its official plan policies strategies that are appropriate for the Region and area municipalities to consider in creating complete communities. It is also suggested that the Region consider developing a ―made in Peel‖ definition of what a ―complete community‖ means to the Region and area municipalities. This definition could be a one of the guiding

Figure 14: Built Form, Cornell, Markham

Source: FreeLS, 2008

Source: Flickr, 2008

133


principles for future development in the Region. 4.5.5 Examples of Compact Communities

Several ―new urbanist‖ style developments have been created throughout Ontario, which encourage the creation of compact communities. One example is Cornell in Markham (Figure 14). These type of developments typically have houses much closer together, with short street setbacks, and an overall plan which can sometimes include garages in the rear of the houses along with alleyways. Such developments are of great interest, but have also been criticized within the context of current planning and building methods. One consistent criticism is the lack of supporting infrastructure for these developments, such as transport and the proximity to employment and commercial nodes, which can essentially lessen the impact and positive elements of creating such communities. 4.5.6 Other Forms of Mixed Use Developments

Mixed-use developments need not be restricted to the typical residential-commercial uses that are often seen. An interesting example of other mixed-use developments is illustrated by the Region of Peel‘s Chapelview affordable housing development located in downtown Brampton. The 16 storey building will contain 200 units for mixed-incomes with 130 dedicated to seniors, and the remaining 70 units will be open to singles. Once completed in the fall of 2009, the building will have a five level underground parking garage, of which three levels will be used by the City of Brampton. Through the Winnipeg Housing and Homelessness Initiative, The Edge – Artist Village development in Winnipeg‘s downtown Exchange District combined the creation of affordable residential rental units, and commercial space for an art gallery, studios, workshop, and classrooms along with space for rent to the local downtown art community in the City. New development can be designed in a way to encourage such mix uses and liveability within the area, neighborhood or district by not segregating uses as much as they might normally be. Older developed areas can be encouraged through the development of the elements which are missing or of which there is less of in order to better balance the needs of the community. On a micro-scale this may prove effective for the daily needs and uses of those who live in an area, and would certainly encourage more sustainable habits such as walking and cycling. This would certainly support the aims of Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement regarding the creation of compact, complete communities, sustainable development and intensification.

134


On a macro-scale it is unclear what the impact of mixed use strategies might prove to be useful due to the larger economic context of the Greater Toronto Area, and the very fluid nature of the current employment market. Many people do not necessarily live in the same community they work in. Given this situation, it is important for the Region and area municipalities to also encourage the development of broader and more effective modes of transit linking major employment areas to smaller community nodes which would include commercial, employment and living opportunities. 4.5.7 Live-Work Arrangements

Live-work units, which typically include a ground floor dedicated to office or retail space and upper floors for living quarters, are increasingly of interest, especially among proponents of New Urbanism and the creation of complete communities. The City of Vancouver developed a series of guidelines for live-work housing to be used in conjunction with zoning and development by-laws in order to encourage ―functional, liveable, and safe live-work units and developments‖ (City of Vancouver, 2006). The guidelines include provisions for certain types of uses, such as artist studios, as well as loading bays and parking. It also outlines provisions for adequate light and ventilation. The Live-Work concept goes beyond the suitability of a dwelling to living and working within it. It also encompasses the larger overall layout of a neighborhood or district by providing for a nearby mix of employment opportunities, commercial needs, cultural and recreational amenities as well as residential space. Thus, it is also an arrangement that provides the framework to connect that business with a larger community of others who live and work in the same place. The residences and small businesses are then linked to nearby commercial and institutional areas. In an ideal setting, residents can work and live in the same building and walk to the post office, bank, grocery store, dry cleaners and any other service. Relevant Official Plan Policies The regulatory framework is in place for live-work arrangements as each of the area municipalities have policies in their Official Plans related to live-work units. These policies are described below. Mississauga permits home occupations in detached dwellings (3.2.1.4). Brampton‘s policies are as follows:

4.2.14 Live-Work Units

135


The City recognizes the opportunity for Live-Work Units that provide for limited home-based office, personal service and convenience commercial uses that are compatible with the primary residential use and the surrounding community. 4.2.14.1 Live-Work Units shall be identified, as appropriate, as part of the preparation of Block Plans with respect to the emerging Secondary Plan areas of the City.

4.2.14.2 Regulations relating to the location of Live-Work Units shall be included in the City’s Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

Caledon promotes live-work accommodation as follows:

5.14.2 Home occupation uses shall be permitted as accessory uses in conjunction with permanent residential development, and shall be limited strictly controlled… in order to ensure that they are compatible with surrounding uses. Home occupation uses shall be permitted within a designated residential area, provided that:

The principal uses of the dwelling shall be as a residence;

No operation shall upset the character of the area by way of noise, odour, storage, traffic or parking problems;

Stringent restrictions on signs shall prevail

Restrictions on engaging outside help shall prevail; and

The scale of operations must remain small and subordinate to residential uses and that if operations are to expand, the use of the residence for the commercial purpose must be abandoned and the operation transferred to a more appropriate use area.

4.5.8 CMHC FlexHousing

136


The CMHC FlexHousing concept is an example of what can be done to better adapt for live-work uses within a dwelling, as well as for longer term adaptability of the dwelling to future life changes such as a growing family of aging. It incorporates, at the design and construction stage, the ability to make future changes easily and with minimum expense, to meet the evolving needs of the occupants which can allow them to occupy a dwelling for longer periods of time, perhaps over their entire lifetimes. Similar concepts are referred to as Universal Housing in the United States and Lifetime Homes in the United Kingdom.

The advantage of this type of housing is that it allows homeowners to adapt their dwellings, instead of moving, as their circumstances change. Examples of this include:

A large bedroom can be renovated into two smaller ones

An existing bedroom can be converted into a home office

An attic can be converted to a large family room or master bedroom

The basement can be adapted to become a rental suite.

The advantages of the FlexHousing concept are not limited to individual homeowners: by making it possible for people to remain in their homes despite changes in their lives and personal needs, the concept can contribute to neighbourhood stability, helping to foster a sense of community among residents.

The four principles of FlexHousing are accessibility, affordability, adaptability and healthy housing. However, affordability is a fundamental principle of the FlexHousing concept. The cost of a FlexHouse is slightly higher than the price of a similar conventional home but the FlexHouse has a number of short and long-term paybacks. Specifically, the flexibility of the units lend themselves to potentially interesting uses in a changing housing environment, society, and a culturally diverse community like the Region of Peel. CMHC gives several examples of this:

Reducing Child-Care Costs: Creating a liveable space for an aging parent to join the family and perhaps take care of a pre-school child is less expensive than traditional day care costs.

Reducing the Frequency of Moves: The costs of real estate agent fees, legal fees, building inspector fees, moving costs and redecorating costs can run an average of $20,000.00 per move.

Reducing the Cost of Office Space: A home based office saves on office rent, travel costs back and forth to the office and parking expenses.

137


When you add in the value of the time consumed in the daily commute, a home based office has a variety of advantages.

Reducing Renovation Costs: By incorporating a number of features in advance, the costs of future renovations are reduced. For example, the provision of suitable doors and windows makes the creation of two bedrooms from one significantly less expensive.

Within the program, CMHC has been building and evaluating test dwellings, of which is the Richmond Flex House (Figure 15). Located in Richmond British Columbia, the house is a two-story, 2,178 square foot, wood frame home designed to accommodate a future elevator, wheelchair ramps, strategically place light and electrical switches in easy to reach places. It is also designed with the ability to provide separate accommodation for adult children or elderly parents should it be needed. The floor plan allows the house to convert from a four-bedroom family home, to a duplex or a rental suite at relatively affordable renovation costs. Modular housing like the Flex Housing concept also holds promise as a design method for future social housing construction to help ease issues of overhousing or underhousing. As the size of households change modular housing may enable housing providers to modify their existing housing stock to meet these changing needs in a cost-effective way, while allowing social housing households to remain in their community. It is suggested that the Region encourage the development of guidelines that may further develop live-work housing as part of new developments and intensification. These guidelines should further existing policies for mixed-use development and examine more explicit guidelines for live-work uses of dwellings. 4.5.9 Age-Friendly Communities

Figure 15: Richmond Flex House

Source: Pacific Western Developments Limited

138


The concept of ―age-friendly‖ communities is based around the World Health Organization‘s (WHO) Active Aging initiatives, and the partnership initiative of the Global Age-Friendly Cities Project, partially funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada, which places value on older adults and acknowledges the need to ensure guidelines are in place to make cities more age-friendly for older adults and seniors. As a participant in the Global Age-Friendly Cities Project, the City of Saanich in British-Columbia developed a community plan to make their urban-environment more age-friendly. The plan identified barriers along with recommendations to removing or resolving them. WHO has developed a series of essential features for age-friendly cities that includes providing sufficient outdoor seating, well-maintained and non-slip pavement, wheelchair curb cuts, providing sufficient affordable housing near services and close to the community, and having all city services and areas be accessible by public transport, and ensuring that events are held at times that are convenient for older people. City of Mississauga The City of Mississauga commissioned its Older Adult Plan (OAP) in 2008 as a response to the demographic projections that show an aging population in the City, with an expectation that the population of those over 55 years of age will double within 30 years. The OAP establishes demographics and needs of the older adult population, in order to establish policies and principles for Mississauga to further its age friendly vision. The Plan establishes 10 principles from which the City‘s initiatives will be guided, these are:

support individual needs and interests of older adults

celebrate life‘s older years

travelling within Mississauga is possible for all

complete neighbourhoods benefit older adults

active living and lifelong learning enhance older adults‘ quality of life

older adults are ―in the know‖

public spaces, places and programs are age-friendly

age will not be the sole determinant in establishing fees for older adult services

older adult volunteers contribute immensely to the community

Partnerships strengthen the community. Suggested actions for the implementation of the Plan are numerous and include accessibility programs and policies which recommend the full implementation of the Mississauga Accessibility Plan, assisting the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority in implementing the GTA fare card by 2010, and the

139


installation of countdown walk signals at intersections to improve pedestrian safety. The plan also prioritizes facilities within the City of Mississauga which will be geared towards older adults for a variety of items that include physical improvements, and services areas for increased older adult programs. The actions and monitoring goals are established over several time-periods that run from the short term, 2008 to 2009, to the long term, 2014 to 2022. Reference in Region and Area Municipalities Official Plans The official plan policies related to age friendly communities are limited with only the City of Brampton and Town of Caledon mentioning this concept. Brampton:

Objectives of the Official Plan It is the objective of this Official Plan to: b) Promote a barrier free municipality that provides increased opportunities, inclusion and dignity for people of all ages and abilities in all aspects of design, planning and policy development; 3.1 SUSTAINABLE PLANNING FRAMEWORK The City’s sustainable planning framework is built on: • Fostering vibrant residential neighbourhoods that provide a variety of housing options for people at various stages of their life cycle;

Caledon: Caledon does permit adult lifestyle and retirement projects only in Rural Service Centres and Villages (5.10.3.21) The Region of Peel has been working with the Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults‘ Housing (PAWGOAH) to ensure the needs of current and future older adults in the Region are met. It is suggested that the Region continue its productive work with the PAWGOAH and also encourage the City of Brampton and Town of Caledon to prepare an Older Adult Plan, similar to the one commissioned by the City of Mississauga, to establish policies and principles for an age friendly community vision. This age-friendly community vision should be incorporated into work undertaken by the Region and area municipalities in their efforts to create complete communities.

4.5.10 Safe Housing

A safe place to live is one that promotes physical and personal safety and includes residents‘ positive feelings of safety in their community. Measures of safety include number of calls to police or safety services; number of major

140


security incidents/disturbances; controlled access to building; breaches of building security measures; fire safety/evacuation plan; safety audit; confidence in personal safety; satisfaction with building security; satisfaction with safety services; and, response of safety services (SHS, 2007).

One example of a program that aims to reduce illegal activity in multi-unit housing developments is the Ottawa Crime Free Multi-Housing Program (CFMHP), which was adopted by the Ottawa Police Service in 1996 and is based on the CFMHP developed by the Mesa, Arizona Police Department in 1992. This program is a comprehensive approach to crime prevention which includes a partnership between police, landlords and residents; a three-phase certification process; and, a comprehensive screening process for new residents and renewed leases. The three-phase certification process is composed of a one-time landlord management training, a yearly CPTED inspection, and a yearly resident safety social where residents are given a chance to get to know their neighbours and the police and to learn more about the program, general safety principles, and crime prevention (Ottawa Police Service, 2008).

The Ottawa Crime Free Multi-Housing Program uses CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) strategies to ensure a safe environment. These strategies include: natural surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement, and maintenance. In multi-unit housing, these strategies are applied in the following ways:

Natural Surveillance:

Buildings are designed so that exterior doors are visible to the street

or neighbours

Good lighting is used at all doors that open to the outside

Assign parking spaces to residents but do not mark with the unit

number

Designate visitor parking

Make parking areas visible from windows and doors

Provide good lighting for parking areas and pedestrian walkways

Position recreation areas to be visible from many of the units‘

windows and doors

Avoid creating blind spots and hiding places

Build elevators and stairwells in locations that are clearly visible

from doors and windows and construct these to be open and well-

lighted

Locate playgrounds centrally where they are visible from units but

not directly next to parking lots or streets

141


Natural Access Control:

Keep balcony railings and patio enclosures less than 42 inches high

and avoid using opaque materials

Define entrances to the site and parking lots with landscaping,

architectural design or symbolic gateways

Block off dead-end spaces

Discourage loitering by non-residents and enforce occupancy

provisions

Use devices that automatically lock upon closing on common building

entrances

Provide good lighting in hallways

Limit access to the building to only one or two points

Territorial Reinforcement:

Define property lines with low landscaping or decorative fencing

Accentuate building entrances with architectural elements, lighting

and landscaping

Clearly identify all buildings and residential units using street

numbers that are well-lighted at night

Maintenance:

Maintain all common areas to very high standards

Prune trees and shrubs back from windows, doors, and walkways

Use and maintain exterior lighting

Strictly enforce rules regarding inappropriate outdoor storage

(Prince William County, n.d.).

In addition to its Crime Free Multi-Housing Program, Ottawa Community Housing has a Safer Communities Program which aims to respond to tenant concerns about safety and security. The key elements of this program include: in-house security services; a call centre that receives and coordinates maintenance requests and can dispatch staff in response to security and maintenance-related calls; community development wherein staff will work with tenant associations to foster the active participation of tenants in creating healthy communities and help develop partnerships with community agencies; and, safety planning, which will help identify and resolve problems that may cause safety concerns (Ottawa Community Housing, 2008). It is suggested that the Region consider implementing a Safer Communities Program in communities across Peel Living‘s housing portfolio.

142


The Region‘s and area municipalities‘ official plans include references to safety through design. Specifically,

Creating an environment that contributes to the reduction of the fear and incidence of crime and improvement in the quality of life based on the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.

The link between healthy communities and crime prevention is important. For example, the McMurty report, The Review of the Roots of Youth Violence (2008), highlighted the importance of providing adequate support to youth as a way of preventing youth violence. Such supports would also contribute to the health and safety of communities in general, especially those in which there are issues with concentration of poverty, or where youth violence is a bigger issue than in other areas. Peel Region has its own Crime Free Multi-Housing Program that follows the original program developed in Arizona, directly supporting the importance of community safety as a key component of complete communities. The program is run in Partnership with Peel Regional Police, and includes training for Peel Living staff, full-time Officer on secondment to the program, and a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design assessment of Peel Living buildings. The program was implemented in ten Peel Living sites. It is suggested that the Peel Regional Police and Peel Living resume working together on the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program. 4.6 Retaining Existing Rental Housing Stock Although the development of new rental housing stock is an important component of ensuring adequate housing for residents of a community, the retention and preservation of the existing rental housing stock is also as important in maintaining an adequate supply of housing. Older housing stock plays an important role in providing low-cost accommodation for local residents because these units tend to be more affordable than new housing supply. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help retain the existing rental housing stock in the Region of Peel.

143


4.6.1 Funding Programs

The importance of preserving older rental stock has been recognized by the federal and provincial governments through programs, previously described, to provide assistance to homeowners and landlords in this regard. These include RRAP, Shelter Enhancement Program, Emergency Repair Program, Home Adaptation for Seniors‘ Independence, as well as the Aging at Home Strategy, and social housing capital funding repair grants. 4.6.2 Replacement Housing Policy

As described above, the City of Vancouver has a replacement housing program in the Downtown Core to help ensure that the number of units affordable to low- and moderate-income households is not reduced. This strategy may be replicated in an urban area where development is decreasing the amount of SRO‘s, affordable market or special needs housing. It has been stated that for the replacement program to be effective, all elements should be enforced: a one-to-one replacement, a $1,000 fee for each low-income unit demolished and a percentage of development cost levies for the purpose of replacement housing. 4.6.3 Rental Housing Conversion and Demolition Policies

The number of rental housing units in Peel Region decreased in all three local municipalities between 1996 and 2001, and again in most instances between 2001 and 2006, with the exception of Brampton. Some of these units may have part of the secondary rental housing stock which reverted back to ownership, a limited number were demolished and some may have been converted to ownership units. Due to the importance of the rental housing stock in providing housing for low and moderate households, some municipalities have passed demolition and conversion policies. City of Ottawa The City of Ottawa has policies preserving the existing older rental stock from conversion as part of its Official Plan. Policy 4.5.1 limits the number of rental units that can be converted to ownership formats when vacancy rates are low. The policy also protects housing that is rented at below market rents:

4.5.1 The conversion of rental housing with five or more rental units to condominium ownership or to free hold ownership as a result of applications such as, but not limited to, applications for severance of properties, is premature and not in the public interest unless the following two criteria are satisfied:

a)The rental vacancy rate by dwelling/structure type for the City of Ottawa as defined and reported yearly through the Canada Mortgage and Housing

144


Corporation (CMHC) Rental Housing Market Survey has been at or above 3 per cent for the preceding two-year reporting period;

b)The existing market rents of the units proposed for conversion are at or above the average market rent levels for the corresponding CMHC survey zone in the City of Ottawa, as reported yearly by the CMHC Survey for rental units of a similar dwelling/structure and bedroom type.

4.5.4 The maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing stock will be ensured through enforcement of the property standards by-law and support for residential rehabilitation assistance programs.

4.5.5 The City will study the use of demolition control throughout the urban area as a means of maintaining the supply of affordable rental housing.

City of Toronto The City of Toronto, through By-law 885-2007 has increased power to protect rental housing from conversion and demolition as well. Policies to this effect are also present in the City‘s Official Plan which states that ―the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing housing stock will be ensured through enforcement of the property standards by-law and support for residential rehabilitation assistance programs.‖ City of Guelph The City of Guelph has also enacted a by-law which designates the City as an area subject to demolition controls, in order to retain existing residential stock and former residential buildings. City of Burlington The City of Burlington passed an Official Plan amendment2 which sets out a series of policies restricting the demolition and conversion of residential rental properties. This amendment states that demolition or conversion of rental units, properties containing six or more units, is not permitted unless a series of conditions are satisfied. These conditions are: that the rental vacancy rate set out in CMHC‘s residential rental market survey must have been at 3% or more for the preceding two years, that the building in question meet the property standards by-law, that negative economic and other impacts on tenants be minimized, that requirements of any applicable provincial legislation be met, and that in the case of demolition, replacement units are provided for.

2 The amendment modified Part III, Section 2.0, Residential Subsection 2.3, subsections 2.3.2 clauses f) and g).

145


Region of Peel and Area Municipalities’ Official Plan Policies None of the official plans have strong demolition and conversion controls, although most, with the exception of Caledon, have policies encouraging the preservation of rental housing. The policies are as follows: Region of Peel:

5.5.2.5 Support the initiatives of the area municipalities in the construction and retention of rental housing.

Mississauga:

3.2.3.6 Mississauga will directly assist all levels of government in the provision of rental housing by: c. supporting the preservation of the rental housing stock.

Brampton:

4.1.1.10 The City shall encourage the maintenance of a minimum rental vacancy rate of two percent (2%). To this end, the City shall encourage the rehabilitation and provision of rental housing in appropriate forms and locations by practical and realistic means.

It is suggested that the Region consider establishing conversion and demolition policies in its official plan and encourage its area municipalities to enact conversion and demolition control by-laws in order to help preserve existing residential stock. 4.7 Energy Efficient Housing

With increasing concern for the environmental impact of development, energy efficiency has become increasingly a more prevalent practice. Other benefits of energy efficient design and retrofits include costs-savings, which for lower income households can help with affordability issues. These cost savings can also benefit the owner groups or agencies through lower operating costs. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help energy efficiency and design for housing in the Region of Peel. Further, Places to Grow requires municipalities to develop official plan policies and other strategies in support of energy conservation. 4.7.1 New Provisions in Ontario Building Code

As noted above, recent amendments to the Ontario Building Code set ―green‖ standards that make homes 21% more energy efficient. These amendments

146


include a 50% increase in basement wall insulation, 29% increase in ceiling insulation, and 67% increase in the energy efficiency of windows. Some municipalities require higher green standards for buildings constructed within their own jurisdiction. While improving energy efficiency in the community is a laudable goal, it must be recognized that increased green standards impact on housing affordability (Finnigan, 2007). 4.7.2 Region of Peel Energy Efficiency Initiatives

In March 2008, the Region of Peel‘s Real Property Asset Management division completed the Design Guidelines – Energy Performance of Buildings and Equipment document which sets guidelines for incorporating energy efficient design into new Regional buildings and residential buildings. The document also covers retrofits for existing buildings and is designed to set minimum efficiency levels for construction with the goal of reducing overall energy consumption using per square foot benchmarking targets. Life cycle costing of equipment and buildings is also considered within the document and the division has conducted developmental work on green procurement with the goal or introducing the methodology into future procurement guidelines for capital projects as of 2009. The guidelines have been used in the design of several Regional buildings, including the Clarkson and Heart Lake Community Recycling Centres for the Waste Planning division, the Lakeview Administrative Building of the Lakeview Water Treatment Plant, and the Regional paramedic Tomken Reporting Station. Based on positive feedback from clients and consultants, the guidelines are being incorporated into a broader set of guidelines that would eventually evolve into a set of Regional standards. The Region has also been conducting comprehensive energy audits. In the 2007-2008 year, 54 buildings of the South Peel water and wastewater system were audited. The initiative included the development of a template for contractors conducting the audits. Other Regionally owned buildings are planned to be evaluated in the coming years. The Region of Peel‘s new Integrated Waste Management Background Paper explores various issues and tools surround this issue in the Region, and recommended that the Official Plan integrate a Waste Collection Design Standards Manual in order to help ensure that future buildings in the Region are designed to promote and ensure efficient and sustainable waste management practices. This recommendation is important, but adequate thought should be given to mitigating any potentially negative impacts on housing affordability these standards could entail.

147


Finally, the Region‘s Development and Construction department has been proactive in obtaining loans and grant funding to help alleviate project costs. This includes recent approval of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) grants and loans for three projects in the Region. 4.7.3 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System, while originally developed in the U.S. by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has been adapted to the Canadian climates as well as our construction practices and regulations. The program rates and tracks the environmental performance of the buildings and their construction, and is quickly gaining popularity. Specifically, it rates five principle categories:

Sustainable sites

Water efficiency

Energy and atmosphere

Materials and resources

Indoor environmental quality

There are also ratings for the innovation and design process. It has been noted that a LEED certified building does incur higher costs due to the certification process which requires certification by a qualified third party. The LEED rating system allocates more of its points to materials section than the Green Globes (described below), and allocates points based on having achieved a certain level of performance, rather than for having implemented certain strategies. 4.7.4 Green Building Initiative

The Green Building Initiative (GBI) is a not for profit organization whose mission is to accelerate the adoption of building practices that result in energy-efficient, healthier and environmentally sustainable buildings by promoting credible and practical green building approaches for residential and commercial construction. The Green Building Initiative™ was originally conceived as a way to bring green building into the mainstream by helping local Home Builder Associations (HBAs) develop green building programs modeled after the National Association of Home Builders' (NAHB) Model Green Home Building Guidelines. While developing a strategic partnership with the NAHB, an opportunity emerged to bring a revolutionary learning tool developed in Canada to commercial builders in the United States. Near the end of 2004, the GBI finalized an agreement to

148


bring the Green Globes™ environmental assessment and rating tool into the U.S. market. The GBI has benefited from the early support of a core group of industries that are committed to advancing the green building movement by creating a variety of credible options for their mainstream builder customers. Organizations like the Wood Promotion Network, as well as interests from such sectors as financial services, retailers, wholesalers, appliance manufacturers and other building material providers have all stepped forward to offer early support for our efforts. The GBI plans to increasingly diversify its financial base with similarly committed companies and organizations. The GBI is governed by a multi-stakeholder board of 15 directors featuring representatives from industry, NGOs, construction companies, architectural firms and academic institutions. Each board member has one vote, so no single entity or individual has more control than any other. Ultimately, the GBI aims to expand the board to 30 participants, consisting of 10 producers, 10 users (builders, architects, engineers, etc.) and 10 interested parties. The mission of the Green Building Initiative is to accelerate the adoption of building practices that result in energy-efficient, healthier and environmentally sustainable buildings by promoting credible and practical green building approaches for residential and commercial construction. 4.7.5 Green Globes Certification

The Green Globes certification was developed in Canada with support of federal and provincial ministries and public utilities and in the UK, by the RICS foundation and Faber Maunsell. It is an online building audit for assessing and rating new and existing buildings against best practices, standards and principles of green architecture. It is being used by BOMA Canada as a national environmental recognition and certification program for existing commercial buildings called the BOMA Go Green program. The federal government has adopted the Green Globes system. It has been explored as a lower cost alternative to LEED certification, which in the context of affordable housing may offer an excellent alternative to the LEED process. Studies have shown both systems to be comparable. A University of Minnesota study from 2006 established that, even though a direct comparison is difficult, the Green Globes on-line system was deemed to be quicker, simpler, and more cost effective as it provided quicker feedback which could influence any design changes. It also better integrated life-cycle thinking into the rating system.

149


4.7.6 Region of York Sustainable Development Through LEED

The Region of York‘s Sustainable Development Through LEED Program is a voluntary program aimed at creating incentives for developers to build more sustainable high density developments that will lower the amount of resources required. The program grants servicing allocation bonuses of between 20 and 40 percent to create high density residential developments located in the Regional corridors and centres. Developments must meet a LEED Silver certification to qualify, be at least of five storeys, conform to the York Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines, achieve significant water conservation, and incorporate the three-stream waste management system. In partnership with the Region of York, the Town of Markham has joined in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Through LEED initiative. It requires that all new municipal buildings achieve a LEED Silver minimum certification. The Town is also in the process of preparing a Sustainable Development Standards and Guidelines document. In order to ensure that the sustainability concerns of future development be fully considered throughout the development process, it is recommended that the Region of Peel establish minimum green building guidelines or encourage the use of a system similar to Green Globes or LEED in new residential development. These guidelines should be balanced by policies which will help mitigate the effects of any added financial costs brought upon by such green and sustainable building guidelines. 4.7.7 High Performance New Construction Program

The Ontario Power Authority‘s (OPA) High Performance New Construction (HPNC) program is a part of the OPA‘s initiative to promote energy conservation in Ontario. The program is designed to encourage builders and architects to incorporate energy efficient measures in the construction of new buildings, additions, or major renovations that exceed the current Code. Eligible projects include commercial, industrial and office buildings, multi-unit residential developments, affordable housing complexes, institutional buildings, agricultural buildings, and hotels and motels but single-family homes are not eligible. The project is open to developments across Ontario, with the exception of those in the City of Toronto, which has its own program in conjunction with the OPA, the Better Building Partnership. The Better Building Partnership is very similar to HPNC with the exception that it funds incentives for retrofits to existing buildings, as well as new construction like the HPNC. Take-up of the BBP has been very good, and as of 2007, 636 buildings had registered in Toronto, totalling a retrofit area of 47

150


million square feet and a CO2 reduction of 200,500 tonnes per year. The retrofits have resulted in about $19 million in savings per year with an economic impact, including energy savings and job creation, of about $176 million so far. Funding allocations are based on kilowatts per hour saved, as opposed to being based on specific types of technologies. Projects are eligible for a minimum of $1,000 in incentives, and incentives vary depending on the project types, building owners can received between $250 to $400 for every verified kilowatt that is saved during peak or mid-peak weekdays in summer, using approved modeling software. Architects can receive between $50 and $100 per kilowatt saved above Code. Also eligible in certain cases is the cost of modelling. It appears the program is tailored towards larger buildings, especially commercial developments, as projects above 75,000 square feet will benefit most from the larger incentives. Currently, stacked townhouses or structures with separate entrances do not appear to be eligible under the program. The HPNC program is accepting application for approval until October 2010, and projects must be completed, evaluated, and deliver energy savings by December 2012. 4.7.8 Energy Star Standards

The Energy Star certification is a joint program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy which started as voluntary labelling of energy efficient products in 1992. The certification has since grown to be a recognized label that provides energy efficiency information to consumers on a wide variety of items. The certification has also been expanded to include the energy efficiency of new residential, commercial and industrial constructions using the USEPA guidelines. The Town of East Gwillimbury passed a municipal policy to encourage energy efficiency in 2006 which requires all new residential developments to be built to Energy Star certification. Energy Star certified inspectors ensure that compliance with the codes is met. 4.7.9 Community-Based Energy Efficiency Programs

Two community based energy efficiency programs provide grants for households interested in improving energy efficiencies in their home. 4.7.9.1 Home Energy $aver Program

The Home Energy $aver Program is run by the non-profit group World Wide Opportunities for Women, based in the Kitchener-Waterloo area and active in the Region of Waterloo. The program offers low-cost home energy assessments

151


that will offer the owners advice on improving energy and water efficiency, as well as waste reduction in exchange for a $25 fee or a donation. 4.7.9.2 Residential Energy Efficiency Project

The Residential Energy Efficiency Project (REEP) is run by the non-profit group Waterloo Region Green Solutions that is funded by a variety of stakeholders that includes the Region of Waterloo, the cities of Kitchener and Cambridge, as well as area utility corporations. The group offers a variety of programs, and are accredited Energy Advisors for the federal ecoENERGY programs for the Region. Funding for the energy audits offsets the cost of these evaluations, meaning the initial costs for an audit will range from $100 to $150, and $130 to $150 for follow-up visits. These visits allow home owners eligibility, among other criteria, for accessing the federal and provincial retrofit grants. 4.8 Affordable Ownership Housing

Affordable ownership housing is another important component of the housing continuum. The cost of ownership has been rising in the Region of Peel with the average cost of single detached homes rising to about $450,000. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help develop and facilitate affordable ownership housing in the Region of Peel. 4.8.1 Federal Home Ownership Initiatives

The January 2009 federal budget included funding and provisions for home owners through several initiatives. For first-time home buyers, the budget allocated a $750 tax credit to further assist the purchase of a first home. The federal government also announced a change to the Homes Buyers Plan that allows first-time home buyers to use more of their RRSP savings they can use towards the purchase of a home, increasing the amount to $25,000 from the previous $20,000. For existing home owners, the budget included a $1,350 tax credit on the first $10,000 of renovation work through the Home Renovation Tax Credit, to reduce the cost of home renovation. 4.8.2 Municipal Home Ownership Initiatives

Affordable homeownership is a component of the housing continuum that can help the supply of affordable rental units in a community. There are several initiatives that can help low and moderate income families access the ownership market. As described above, the Region of Peel received $2.8 million from the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program for its Home in Peel affordable homeownership program. The following are some examples of other municipal home ownership initiatives.

152


4.8.2.1 City of Hamilton’s Home Ownership Affordability Partnership

The City of Hamilton has partnered with the REALTORS Association of Hamilton-Burlington, Scotiabank, and the Threshold School of Building to create the Home Ownership Affordability Partnership initiative which helps tenants in social housing access the ownership market. Through the program, neglected homes are purchased, thus being more affordable, and revitalized by students of Threshold, providing on the job training. The initiative works on the basis of helping one family at a time, and three families have been housed in the Hamilton-Burlington. Also in Hamilton is the Hamilton HomeStart program in which the City of Hamilton provides a matched down payment assistance amount of $4,500. It is also in conjunction with Scotiabank. In this case, Scotiabank provides financing, $1,000 grant per family and financial counselling to ensure that the recipient households are given sufficient financial knowledge as new homeowners. Threshold School of Building assists by providing maintenance workshops for the new home owners. 4.8.2.2 BHOME – Brantford Home Ownership Made Easier

The City of Brantford‘s Brantford Home Ownership Made Easier (B HOME) initiative provides interest-free loans for 5% of the down payment of a home, up to $9,250, for low and moderate income families. Eligible household cannot earn more than $56,000 per year and not have assets exceeding $30,000, and must also be eligible to obtain a mortgage. Purchase price of the homes cannot exceed $185,000, and must be of modest size but includes the purchase of semis, townhouses or condos. The loan is forgiven if the house is sold after 20 years, but must be repaid if it is sold before this 20 year period expires. To be eligible, the household must also attend a series of training sessions called the Home Ownership Training Sessions that cover budgeting, the mortgage financing process, working with real estate agents, and pros and cons of home ownership. 4.8.2.3 Quint Development Corporation

In Saskatoon, the Province of Saskatchewan and the City of Saskatoon are important funders of the Quint Development Corporation‘s Neighbourhood Home Ownership Program. The initiative enables low income families to access homeownership through helping to finance the construction of home ownership cooperatives. Since 1997, eight co-ops have been built that house over 100 families. Eligible households cannot earn more than $30,000 per year and must have at least one child of 18 years of age or under.

153


4.8.3 Other Home Ownership Models

4.8.3.1 Options for Homes

Options for Homes is a private non-profit organization that has created a unique concept to approach the development of affordable ownership housing without the need for government assistance. The concept provides an innovative example of a homeownership program initiated by a not-for-profit organization with limited direct municipal involvement. The Options for Homes concept develops its affordable housing through several elements. First, it passes on the cost savings gained through its ―no frills‖ approach to construction and marketing to the buyers. Second, future purchasers become responsible for raising the construction financing and managing the project's construction. Third, the ―profit‖ or difference between the appraised market value and the production cost of each unit, is deferred until the unit is resold. This deferral has a significant impact on the affordability of the unit, and since it is not recovered until resale, the owner can carry the unit at a lower monthly cost than a conventional market unit. Other cost savings that are secured are passed on where possible, such as through reduced development charges and fee waivers. A second mortgage is retained on each unit for the difference between the production cost and the appraised market value for each unit. Typically, the initial appraised value is about 10-15% above the at-cost selling price. The second mortgage is repayable when the unit is resold. The owners can also buy-out the mortgage earlier if they wish. No interest is paid on the mortgage, but its value on resale (or when bought out) will be increased in relation to the market appreciation of the unit at that time. When the unit is sold and the second mortgage is paid, Options for Homes has no further legal interest in the unit. However, the cost savings achieved in the first sale are not passed on to subsequent owners. The second mortgage serves to discourage speculative buying of the units and is a way of recovering the cost savings plus their enhanced value, so that they can be re-invested in subsequent affordable housing projects. The group has completed eight projects in the Greater Toronto Area since 1993 representing over 1,200 units. There are currently two projects selling units which are located in Markham and in Toronto. Although Options for Homes is active in the Greater Toronto Area, it also provides training and monitoring for non-profit groups that want to implement the concept in other areas. The concept is being implemented in several cities by groups in Waterloo, Sudbury, and Vancouver. The concept is also being used by the City of Montréal‘s housing management and development corporation,

154


the Société d‘habitation et de développement de Montréal‘s (SHDM) Accès Condo initiative. 4.8.3.2 Home Ownership Alternatives

Home Ownership Alternatives (HOA) is a non-profit corporation that aims at helping low income families access home ownership through financing support for developers and home buyers. Affordable home developers can receive funding to help them with early stage studies as well as financial guarantees for construction financing. The group provides second mortgages for these low-income families that allow them a large enough down payment to obtain a conventional mortgage. The mortgage is the difference between the cost of the unit and its market value, and can be bolstered by additional government or HOA funds depending on the need of the family. While there is no principal or interest payment required on the second mortgage until the home is sold, buyers can pay it out anytime they so choose or are able to. At the point of repayment, a share of the increase in value is also paid. The funds are reinvested by HOA towards new buyers and developments. Although similar to the Options for Homes concept, HOA‘s help is focused on the buyers and not associated with development or purchase of a specific housing or unit type. Since its creation in 1998 the group has funded over 2,000 homes for low-income families in Toronto, Guelph, Waterloo, Pickering, Markham and Kitchener. 4.8.3.3 Self-Help Housing

Growing interest has been expressed in the ―Self-Help Housing‖ model. This model involves the extensive use of volunteer labour (including the future occupant) and donated supplies and materials to produce affordable housing. A growing number of non-profit agencies, such as Habitat for Humanity and the Frontiers Foundation, are active across Canada in co-ordinating the production of both ownership and rental housing using the Self-Help model. There are Habitat chapters active in the Region of Peel, the Mississauga chapter was formed in 2005, and will be starting a project in the Streetsville area. The Brampton chapter is working with the City of Brampton and a private developer, Metrus Developments Inc., in an extensive relocation-renovation of a 19th century heritage home. The George Elliot House is being converted into two semi-detached units that will provide housing for two families.

155


4.8.3.4 Rent-To-Own Housing

Rent-to-own housing means housing where families pay monthly rental payments to a not-for-profit organization which owns their home, with the intent that the families would eventually purchase the home from the organization. Each month, the not-for-profit organization keeps a portion of the rental payments to cover its costs and the balance goes towards a down payment for the future purchase of the home. Much like the Self-Help model there is growing interest in this approach to affordable home ownership, however, it remains rare in Ontario and Canada presumably due to the current mortgage market. It is not clear whether or not rent-to-own housing is more affordable than other options. 4.8.3.5 Home Ownership Co-operatives

This is housing where a homeowner must make a five year minimum commitment to be part of a co-operative in exchange for an equity loan from a community based co-operative. During the five year period, the co-op is the ―owner‖ of the homes which make up the co-operative, but individual families pay mortgages on their homes, and they are the owners. The co-op provides group resources and security to help families make the transition to home ownership. At the end of the five year period, the equity loan is forgiven, and families have the option of assuming their mortgage and taking title of their home. In the equity co-op model, the residents buy shares in the co-operative which entitle them to a unit in the development. However, one challenge with this model is that financing can be difficult to obtain for the shares as they are not recognized as collateral for a mortgage. According to the Ontario Co-operative Association, there have been changes to the legislation in other provinces that better define the units with an individual title, helping in financing the mortgages but this is not yet the case in Ontario. 4.8.3.6 Co-housing

Cohousing is also referred to as collaborative housing and is an opportunity for residents to participate in the planning and design of their housing. Through the design of their community, participants identify communal needs and interests and therefore tailor their housing to meet these

Figure 16: Quayside Village, North Vancouver

Source: Quayside Village Cohousing, 1999

156


needs. Contrary to housing sharing, residents determine community requirements ahead of time in the development phase. Groups will then enter into cost-saving agreements with architects, developers and City officials at early stages and can therefore reduce the cost of the housing. This form of housing while meeting specific needs of residents and providing an affordable housing option does have challenges. The key challenge is that it is unfamiliar to many planning departments as well as builders and can be an overwhelming process for a cohousing group. Cohousing communities typically range from 8 to 30 households, all are self-sufficient with self contained kitchens, and dining facilities. All households are clustered around community open space, share amenities such as workshops, office spaces, childcare facilities and gardens. Quayside Village (Figure 16) is a cohousing community in North Vancouver, comprised of 19 residential units: one bachelor, six one-bedroom apartments, two one-bedroom apartments with dens, five two-bedroom units, one two-bedroom plus a den, and four three-bedroom units. The project also contains retail space on the ground floor (currently contains a convenient store). Every unit contains a kitchen, bathroom, living room and a yard, deck or balcony. The project contains 2,500 square feet of common area. The common areas include outdoor pathways, a common deck, reading room, common playroom, washroom, laundry room, craft area and guest suite. Overall the project incorporates several significant energy efficiency designs, recycled material and accessibility guidelines. All residents (including children) are eligible to participate in the consensus decision making regarding all aspects of community living. Residents manage the building and grounds. Cost to develop this project was reduced in a number of ways including smaller unit sizes (ranging from 730 to 780 square feet for the two-bedroom units), residents acted as the project‘s developer by incorporating their own development company, and the group received an in-kind donation of $50,000, and CMHC funded the development’s multi-family grey water recycling system. In addition, the group received a density bonus of 10% by the municipality (as a result of meeting several of the City of North Vancouver’s social policy objectives such as affordable housing, mixed use development, adaptable design and community development) to enable the development to construct two additional units which reduced residents’ construction cost per square foot. The City also reduced the tax rate charged on common floor space. Four of the units were sold at prices 20% below market rates. The remaining 14 units were sold at market value ranging from $164,000 to $260,000.

157


It is suggested that the Region continue its work with community based organizations in identifying a range of affordable ownership housing models which may help to meet the Region‘s needs for an increased supply of affordable ownership housing. 4.9 Barriers to Creation of Affordable Rental Housing

A major cause of the lack of development of private market, affordable housing over the past 20 years is the high cost of development itself, which leads to a lack of profitability. It simply has not been profitable for developers to build private modest housing, given the high costs of development versus the level of rents or selling prices achievable in the market. Discussions with local builders/developers have identified the four major barriers to the creation of affordable rental housing, namely:

Availability of land, including scarcity and cost

Costs related to delays in planning and building approvals and timelines

Costs associated with zoning challenges, including NIMBY

High cost of development, including rising construction costs, limited construction and mortgage financing options, increasing energy costs, increased awareness for energy efficient features and technologies, and consumer demand for improvements to accessibility.

The sections below identify a number of strategies for addressing these barriers. 4.9.1 Hypothetical Rental Apartment Building

The above issues and impact of strategies discussed in the sections below can be illustrated through outlining the typical costs of a hypothetical rental apartment project, in this case a 120 unit high-rise building in Brampton. The costs used are hypothetical, and for illustration purposes only, as precise development costs vary from project to project depending on a wide range of variables such as land costs, servicing, unit sizes, unit finishes, etc. However, the chosen costs have been carefully considered based on recent experiences, information provided from local developers and regional staff, and reasonable assumptions. The Baseline scenario building is a 120 unit high-rise in Brampton, with 84 one-bedroom units of 550 ft2, and 36 two-bedroom units of 750 ft2, representing a total floor area of 95,160 ft2 which includes common areas. The unit mix was

158


chosen based on the highest demand for Peel Living units from the social housing waiting lists. The per-square foot hard construction costs of $160/ft2 are considered representative of typical projects of this nature. The scenario also assumes 176 parking spaces as per the Brampton parking requirements, 88 of which would be above ground and included in the hard construction cost, the remaining 88 spaces are assumed to be below ground at a cost of $35,000 each. Finally, the land costs were estimated at $15,000 per unit based on discussion with developers. The capital costs of this hypothetical project as shown below.

Revenue assumptions for the hypothetical apartment building call for rents at about 1.8 times higher than CMHC average market rents in order for the project to be financially viable. Specifically, one bedroom rents of $1,629 per month and two bedroom rents of $1,864 were assumed. In addition, parking

Table 5: Estimated Development Costs, 120 Unit Apartment Development, Brampton

Capital CostsTotal Cost Per-Unit Cost % Sq.Ft Cost

Soft Costs

Building Soft Costs (e.g. architect, project

manager, planning, quantity surveyor, site

soft costs, legal fees, etc.) $1,300,036 $10,834 4.6% $13.66

Building Permit Fees $114,928 $958 0.4% $1.21

Site Plan and Minor Variance Fees $28,011 $233 0.1% $0.29

Parkland Dedication Fees $396,000 $3,300 1.4% $4.16

Development Charges (Brampton & Region

of Peel) $1,684,076 $14,034 6.0% $17.70

School Board Levies $256,920 $2,141 0.9% $2.70

Financing Costs (Interest during

Construction, Bank Application fees, CMHC

premiums) $1,194,650 $9,955 4.3% $12.55

Property Taxes During Construction $34,830 $290 0.1% $0.37

Contingency on Soft Costs $195,990 $1,633 0.7% $2.06

Total Soft Costs $5,205,442 $43,379 18.6% $54.70

Hard Costs

Construction Costs ($160/sq.ft, underground

parking, hydro connection, impost fees) $18,385,600 $153,213 65.6% $193.21

Appliance/Furniture $137,200 $1,143 0.5% $1.44

Contingency & Escalation (7% of

construction costs) $1,290,996 $10,758 4.6% $13.57

Land Costs (land value, transfer tax, legal

fees) $1,837,475 $15,312 6.6% $19.31

Total Hard Costs $21,651,271 $180,427 77.3% $227.52

Total GST $1,151,741 $9,598 4.1% $12.10

Total Project Cost $28,008,454 $233,404 $294.33

159


revenue of $50 month for 132 spaces and laundry revenue of $100/year/unit were assumed. Expense assumptions are as follows: annual maintenance costs of $1,000/unit, property taxes of $1,200 per unit, management fee of 4% of project revenue, capital reserve of 4% of project revenue and vacancies and bad debt expenses at 3% of rental revenue. Totalling the above costs, as well as the CMHC requirement of ensuring a debt-coverage ratio (DCR) of 1.20 as required by the loan insurance guidelines for multi-unit properties, the Baseline project would not be viable without significantly higher than market rents.

From the above analysis, it is clear that developers attempting to provide more modest forms of accommodation are unable to bring units to the market at rents affordable to those of modest income. In particular, rent levels required in order for developers to achieve returns sufficient to build are beyond the levels that most households in this income range can afford. As a result, strategies are required to enable local private and non-profit providers of rental housing to develop affordable rental housing projects. These strategies

Table 6: Impact of Incentives Related to Capital Costs

Municpal Charges

Impact to Capital

Cost Per Unit Cost

Impact on

Rent (per

unit/month)Waiver of Local Development

Charges $934,346 $7,786 $60Waiver of Regional Development

Charges $749,730 $6,248 $48

Waiver of Building Permit Fees $114,928 $958 $7

Waiver of Site Plan Approval Fees $25,987 $217 $2Waiver of Parkland Dedication

Fees $396,000 $3,300 $25Total Impact of All Municpal

Charges $2,220,992 $18,508 $142

Land Value Donated $1,927,725 $16,064 $124

Alternative Parking Standards

(reduction from 1.47 to 0.97 spaces

per unit) $2,100,000 $17,500 $135

Decrease in applicable CMHC

mortgage insurance premiums (for

AMR or less) $486,969 $4,058 $31

Total Impact of All Capital Cost

Reductions $6,735,685 $56,131 $432

Impact of Incentives Related to Capital Costs

160


can be designed to address the various cost elements contained in the proposed project in order to reduce costs and, ultimately, reduce rents. They are described in the following sections. The impact of applying municipal charge incentives, donating the land and reducing parking standards is illustrated in Table 6, above. The mortgage insurance premium would be reduced due to the fact that the rents for this hypothetical project would be reduced to the average market rents for the area. In total, these incentives would reduce rents by $432 per unit per month. Combining both the capital and operating expense incentives results in a total rent reduction of $979 per month. This would bring down the rents for the one bedroom unit to $650 per month and the two bedroom unit to $885 per month, both below the average market rent for the area.

4.10 Affordable Housing: Availability of Land

The availability of land for housing development, and its cost in certain markets, can be an issue in the cost and feasibility of new developments. With current growth, increasing pressures are put on land in the Region of Peel, pressures and challenges which will increase as the availability of land decreases through development. In addition, studies have found that growth

Table 7: Incentives Related to Operating Costs

Impact to Capital

Cost

Per unit impact to

Capital Cost

Impact to

Annual

Operating

Per Unit

Operating

Cost

Impact on

Rent (per

unit/month)

Reductions in Property Taxes from

Multi-Residential Rate to Single

Residential Rate $557,037 $4,642 $51,419 $428 $36

Waiver of Property Taxes

(Incremental Impact from Single

Residential Rate) $1,002,963 $8,358 $92,581 $772 $64

Low Interest Mortgage Financing

(reduction in interest rate by 2%) $3,834,740 $31,956 $353,976 $2,950 $246

Impact of reducing DCR from 1.2 to

1.06 because of AMR $3,144,473 $26,204 $290,259 $2,419 $202

Total Impact of All Operating

Costs Reductions $8,539,213 $71,160 $788,235 $6,569 $547

Total Impact of All Capital and

Operating Cost Reductions $15,274,898 $127,291 $979

Incentives Related to Operating Costs

161


management policies such as Places to Grow can cause the price of housing to increase. This section will examine the impact of Places to Grow on land prices, as well as potential tools and practices that can be used to assist in providing more land or helping with its cost for residential development in the Region of Peel. These tools and practices alone will not guarantee that a sufficient supply of land will be available at all times to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10 years and at least a three year supply of residential units available on lands with sufficient servicing capacity that are zoned or in draft approved and registered plans, as required by the PPS. However, they can complement clear provisions in the Region‘s and area municipalities‘ official plans which do call for these minimum requirements to be met. They may also provide opportunities for lands suitable for affordable housing development. 4.10.1 Impact of Places to Grow on Land Prices

While the major driver of house prices is the demand for housing, studies have found that growth management policies such as Places to Grow can cause the price of housing to increase. The reasons for this include:

Reductions in the supply of developable land outside the built-up area may reduce the number of new housing units being built, causing the price of new housing to rise relative to existing housing (Dawkins, Knaap and Nelson, 2002).

Reductions in the supply of developable land outside the built-up area for housing construction can also cause the construction of housing for the most affordable segments of the housing market to become unprofitable, which increases the tendency for developers to target higher priced markets, thus causing housing to be less affordable due to the greater number of higher priced housing units.

Growth management policies reduce the number of land parcels along with the number of land owners, which can decrease competition amongst land owners, and can allow them to charge higher prices and increase the minimum price for new housing. However, if housing producers are flexible and are able to economize on the costly price of land by increasing housing densities, they may continue to produce affordable housing. Unfortunately, housing producers do not always respond to higher land prices by increasing densities, as zoning regulations may prohibit the kind of densities that would be required to serve the most affordable segments of the housing market or housing producers are unable to assess the demand for multi-family housing.

162


Fewer home builders may be able to survive because there is less land available and the price of what is available for development is higher than it would otherwise be. As a result, smaller firms may be driven out of the market, reducing competition and raising prices.

If sufficient demand exists for higher priced multi-family units, housing producers may produce sufficient quantities of new high density housing, but sill fail to produce a sufficient quantity of new affordable units (Danielsen, Lang, and Fulton 1999).

Growth management policies favour infill development, and because infill development is inherently more expensive than greenfield development due to the inability to achieve the economies of scale and standardization that occurs in larger development, prices can rise as a result (Steinacker, 2003 and Cox, 2004).

Growth management policies promote the creation of ―complete communities‖ where individuals and households can live, work, and play in the community, and one of the potential by-products of creating desirable communities is higher demand for housing in those communities (if there is an unequal distribution of amenities among different communities), therefore resulting in higher house prices in these communities (Nelson and Duncan, 1995).

Finally, growth management policies can cause an increase in housing prices even if they alter nothing more than expectations that future land or house values will rise because of the growth management policies (Dawkins, Knaap, and Nelson, 2002).

Most of the literature on growth management policies argues that if growth management policies are not accompanied by other policies that promote the creation of affordable housing, the growth management policies can have negative implications for low and moderate income households. The increase in home prices resulting from the growth management policies can force households of modest means into smaller units or in the worst case scenario can force these households out of the community altogether. In either case, it is argued that entry-level home-buyers and other households with low to moderate incomes bear most of the burden of the policies. Higher house prices can also reduce the rate of homeownership, and more moderate-income households would either have to delay their entry into the home ownership market or be forced to remain in the rental market. In contrast, growth management policies such as Places to Grow help counter the tendency for exclusion by incorporating policies that increase housing densities, mandate a mix of housing types, and promote affordable housing in all areas.

163


Some studies have found that where growth management policies have been implemented along with the provision of adequate public facilities, there has often been a shift toward multi-family housing. Growth management policies can also make housing more affordable by lowering public infrastructure costs and minimizing regulatory delays. Where growth management policies are able to create ―complete communities‖, which includes housing to meet all needs, more open space, access to public transportation, and walkable neighbourhoods, residents are not necessarily worse off if housing prices increase. Instead, it is possible that the higher housing prices may be offset by lower transportation and energy costs and better access to jobs, services, and amenities. Because of the potential for house prices to rise as a result of implementing the Places to Grow polices, the need for policies and programs aimed at creating and maintaining affordable housing will be all the more essential in the future. It is suggested that the Region and area municipalities monitor house prices and housing affordability annually throughout the implementation timeframe of Places to Grow and adjust policies and programs as required to respond to any erosion of housing affordability among low and moderate-income households. It is also suggested that the Region advocate to the Province for stronger authorities to enforce the achievement of the affordable housing targets by the area municipalities. Finally, it is also suggested that the Region advocate to the Province for additional funding to assist in dealing with the affordability pressures that may be caused by Places to Grow. 4.10.2 Inventory of Land

Creating an inventory of public lands and buildings suitable for housing moderate and low income households is one strategy for ensuring there is an adequate supply of land for affordable housing development. Several municipalities have implemented policies on land inventories. City of Toronto The City of Toronto‘s Real Estate Services section keeps an inventory of the City‘s lands that have been declared as surplus, and manages the disposition of these lands. The listing includes the documentation that outlines which action has been taken, or approved regarding each property and ranges from the authorization of sale to non-profits at below market rate, such as Habitat for Humanity in one case, to the authorization for listing and sale on the open market. The list is accessible through the City of Toronto‘s website.

164


Notices for expressions of interest are circulated to an extensive list of stakeholders to notify them of a property being declared surplus before it is openly posted for sale or offer on the City‘s website. This list of stakeholders includes City divisions and agencies such as the Toronto Transit Commission, Toronto Community Housing, or Transportation Services, as well as utilities, school boards, and community groups or agencies. If interest is expressed, the land is simply transferred or sold according to the City‘s protocols. City of Ottawa As part of its Ottawa 20/20 Official Plan, the City of Ottawa reviewed its Historical Land Use Inventory to better identify potential contaminants from the previous uses of brownfields sites as they become available for redevelopment or intensification. This was part of its Brownfields Redevelopment Program, and helped to define areas that would be covered under a community improvement plan. In addition to the Region, area municipalities, the federal government and provincial government may have surplus or underutilized sites within Peel Region. Creating an inventory of public lands and buildings suitable for housing of moderate and low income households is an important first step in implementing a ―housing first‖ policy (described below). It is suggested that the Region of Peel work with area municipalities, the federal government (i.e. Canada Lands) and the provincial government (i.e. Ontario Realty Corporation) to create a comprehensive inventory of surplus government lands and identify which sites may be suitable for affordable housing development. 4.10.3 “Housing First” or Surplus Land Policy

One possible source of affordable housing sites comes from surplus lands owned by all levels of government as noted above. Some municipalities have adopted ―housing first‖ policies calling for surplus lands to be used for housing purposes first. These municipalities have made such sites available on a lease basis for $1 in return for the provision of various forms of affordable housing.3 Surplus school properties have also been converted into affordable housing projects in a number of municipalities across Ontario. For example, a surplus school in Niagara Falls was converted into a seniors project. Surplus homes for the aged in Brantford and Newmarket have also been considered for affordable seniors housing. The federal and provincial governments have declared a ―Housing First‖ policy for surplus federal and provincial lands. Elsewhere, the City of Montreal implemented a surplus land policy which prioritized affordable

3 It is important here to note that there may be some confusion, as the term ―housing first‖ carries a different definition in the homelessness housing field, where it generally means a policy which prioritizes adequately housing homeless individuals or families first, and then providing them with adequate supportive services to help them.

165


housing for its surplus lands. Such programs or policies may be tied into other initiatives such as greyfields and brownfield redevelopment. It is suggested that the Region of Peel, in collaboration with the area municipalities, consider establishing a ―housing first‖ policy on surplus municipal lands. Specifically, this policy should state that the first priority in the decision making process respecting surplus or potentially surplus municipal real property be for affordable housing development. It is also suggested that the Region consider having such surplus property made available for affordable housing purposes at a reduced cost or no cost. 4.10.4 Affordable Housing Property Reserve Fund

The City of Peterborough established an Affordable Housing Property Reserve Fund to stimulate the production of affordable housing. Since 2002, the City has contributed $75,000 per annum to the fund, as well as direct revenues from municipal land sales for five years commencing in 2002. The Reserve Fund is dedicated to the acquisition of property for affordable housing initiatives. It is envisioned that the Fund may be utilized directly by the municipality to land bank for future initiatives or as a direct municipal contribution to affordable housing projects developed under the Peterborough Affordable Housing Foundation. 4.10.5 Leveraging Social Housing Sites

There are a number of ways that existing housing projects can be leveraged to create additional affordable rental housing. These include: Intensification of existing housing sites Typically this occurs by developing a new building or adding a horizontal addition on a vacant portion of a property with an existing housing project. An innovative solution that has been utilized by St. Clare‘s Multifaith Housing in Toronto was to add a roof-top addition in a case where land was not available. Refinancing the existing project by extending the amortization or adding an additional mortgage to free up equity for use in a new project Depending on the funding program, some existing social housing projects can be refinanced by extending amortization or adding an additional mortgage to free up equity for use in the new affordable housing project. Often, funders and financers prefer that such funding be used on the same site as the existing project. One of the important considerations in utilizing this type of contribution in a new development is that the new project has to be able to pay off the loan.

166


Transfer existing rent-geared to income or rent supplement units from an existing project to a new project If there is sufficient demand at market rates for units in an existing housing project that currently has rent-geared-to-income or rent supplement units, with the permission of the Service Manager, some of these units could be transferred to a new housing project to help with the financial viability of the new project. It is suggested that the Region of Peel explore some of these approaches to leveraging social housing sites with Peel Living and other social housing providers within the Region. 4.10.6 Joint Ventures on Municipal Land

Joint ventures on municipal land can take many forms, such as the long-term leasing of the land in question to groups which will develop it for affordable housing. The surplus land policies discussed above are examples of such ventures, in which land can be made available in exchange for the construction of affordable housing. Another example, the Horizon Housing development in Calgary, can be found in the Public-Private Partnerships section further on in this paper. 4.10.7 Brownfields/Greyfields/Bluefields

Greyfields and brownfields typically refer to lands which have been previously developed and used and brownfields usually refer to abandoned or under-used industrial and commercial land in which there may be environmental remediation issues, such as contaminants, related to the previous or current use. Greyfield is a newer term, usually referring to older commercial lands such as shopping malls or parking lots or other such real estate or lands. Bluefield is a term sometimes used to refer to older, unused institutional lands or buildings. The redevelopment of such sites has long been recognized as an important way of intensifying and redeveloping land. In some cases, this included revitalizing neighbourhoods or areas, or even creating new residential areas such as the redevelopment of the old Angus rail yards in Montreal. Given the sometimes unknown nature of the contamination, as well as other complications such as rezoning and neighbourhood acceptance, many municipalities have adopted strategies to facilitate and guide brownfield redevelopment. As part of its Growth Strategy, the Niagara Region included provision to further examine the development of strategies to guide such development in the future.

167


The municipality of Chatham-Kent adopted a Brownfield and Bluefield Strategy, the first in Ontario to address bluefield sites. The study reviewed challenges associated with redeveloping such lands in Ontario and in Chatham-Kent. As a part of its findings, financial issues were highlighted and a financial support program was implemented which provides grants to help offset the cost of feasibility and environmental studies, as well as providing tax assistance and rehabilitation grants to eligible applicants. City of Mississauga The City of Mississauga has seen the successful redevelopment of a number of brownfield sites including two quarry sites in Streetsville and Cooksville, a former postal sorting facility and an auto wrecking yard in the Lakeview District, a former industrial site in Streetsville for residential use, the former Mercury Marine site in the Dixie District, the former St. Lawrence Starch lands in Port Credit, and, the former Imperial Oil tank farm property in Clarkson-Lorne Park (Mississauga Planning & Building Department, 2001).

An examination of the successful brownfields redevelopments in Mississauga shows a number of common themes. These themes include:

The need for public-private cooperation since often, brownfield sites are privately owned, requiring cooperation between the private interests and the regulatory bodies represented by all levels of government.

The need for this type of redevelopment to be seen as an opportunity for economic and environmental revitalization. Redeveloped sites are more compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and larger sites often allow the City to include community amenities, such as schools and parks, within mature neighbourhoods, something that may not be possible otherwise.

The need for community support for the redevelopment since transitions to a new use can cause concern

Figure 17: West Village, Mississauga

Source: City of Mississauga

168


for the neighbourhood (Mississauga Planning & Building Department, 2001).

One example of a successful brownfield redevelopment in Mississauga is the West Village. This is a phased mixed-use development located on the site of a former postal sorting facility within an older established community along the main CN Rail line. This project included medium and high density residential, a community park, and retail commercial uses. The restoration of the site included the removal of asbestos from the former industrial buildings prior to demolition, PCB removal and storage, and the removal of contaminated soil (Mississauga Planning & Building Department, 2001).

Another example is Port Credit Village which is located on Lakeshore Road at the foot of Hurontario Street. This is the site of the former St. Lawrence Starch plant. This multi-phase waterfront redevelopment replaced the industrial use with a mix of mid-rise apartments, townhouses, street-related live/work residences, heritage preservation, and public waterfront parkland enabling greater access to the Lake Ontario waterfront (Mississauga Planning & Building Department, 2001). Given the scarcity and cost of land for affordable housing development, it is suggested that the Region consider working in collaboration with the area municipalities and federal and provincial governments to identify opportunities for the redevelopment of brownfields, greyfields and bluefields for affordable housing development. In addition, it is suggested that the Region advocate for increased funding from senior governments towards the remediation of brownfields in order to make brownfield development a more viable option for affordable housing and to help meet intensification and sustainability requirements of Places to Grow. 4.10.8 Land Banking

Typically, land banking involves the acquisition of land by a municipality prior to expanding urbanization. Considerable savings can be realized if open space land (greenfields) is bought prior to urban growth pressures, when land prices would go up as a result of speculation. In addition to saving money, a municipality that practices land banking could reserve that land for a use that it deemed best in meeting the objectives of the municipality, such as the creation of affordable housing. Land banking offers a municipality a chance to control prices, direct growth, establish and achieve planning objectives, and meet social goals that otherwise not be met (Sewell, 1994).

169


City of Saskatoon The City of Saskatoon is one Canadian example of a municipality that is very active in land banking. The City of Saskatoon Land Branch plans, services and sells residential, commercial and industrial lots owned by the City. They use the ―profits‖ from the sale of surplus City owned land (difference between the original cost of the purchase and services and the market sale price) to support broad public policy objectives such as the physical development of neighbourhoods, neighbourhood services, as well as to make money for public programs. Some 10% of Saskatoon‘s land sales go into the Affordable Housing Reserve to support housing programs, which can be a substantial contribution. Approximately $7.2 million has gone into the reserve since 1987, including a one-time initial contribution of about $5.2 million and about $6.4 million has been spent on housing activities since then - a total of 1,328 housing units, including social (public) housing, private sector market affordable housing, and new homeowner co-operatives. It is suggested that the Region consider the use of land banking as a potential strategy for addressing the limited supply of land for affordable housing development. 4.11 Affordable Housing: Streamlined Approval Process

The approval process covers the administrative process involved in development, including the application for permits, site plan applications, zoning amendment if necessary, and any appeals processes that may apply. Although necessary to ensure the adherence of development to municipal and provincial standards, the approval process for housing development was identified as an element which can impose significant costs to housing projects, potentially affecting their affordability. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help minimize the impact and streamline the approval process in the Region of Peel. 4.11.1 Fast Tracking Approval of Applications

Fast tracking refers to processes used to streamline planning and building permit approval processes for priority developments or projects. British Columbia A recent example is an agreement between B.C. Housing and City of Vancouver to streamline the process of approval and construction of 1,200 units of affordable housing in the City. The agreement outlines the cost and development responsibilities of each party, for example the City is using its own lands but is responsible for any remediation work and costs, while B.C. Housing will assume all the permit and application costs.

170


State of Massachusetts The State of Massachusetts in the United States, under General Law Chapter 40b, allows for a streamlined approval for developers of ―low to moderate-income‖ housing. The law essentially allows for eligible developments to submit a single application to the zoning board instead of multiples, and grants the Zoning Board of Appeals the power to override local requirements deemed ―inconsistent with local needs‖ (Massachusetts Law Links, 2008), and decisions are subject to appeals. It appears that the law was first created in the late 1960s to enable easier construction of affordable housing, especially developments facing restrictive municipal zoning and other legislation or requirements. A 2007 update report reiterated earlier findings that showed the 40b process to have mixed results, and highlighted the fact that public debate surrounding it has seemingly ―increase[d] direct[ly] proportionate[ly] to its use‖(Heudorfer, 2007). Although some 30,000 units have been created since its implementation, with many more under construction, the report highlights that about 40% of the proposals were ―negotiated down‖, but in another 30% of proposals, the number of affordable units increased. Furthermore, the provisions are largely market driven, meaning that slower markets will result in lower production of affordable units. It is unclear whether such legislation would be of benefit within the legislative framework of Ontario. It is suggested that the Region in conjunction with the area municipalities further explore opportunities where fast-tracking of priority projects or developments could be coordinated. 4.11.2 Performance Based Planning

Performance based planning is a type of flexible zoning which determines land use locations and characteristics through the application of a system of performance criteria. The performance criteria establish the basic development standards and limitations, and specify the conditions under which developments will occur. A typical list of performance criteria may include compliance with density standards, neighbourhood compatibility, traffic generation, proximity to existing infrastructure, parking, proportion of open space, and protection of natural features. The approach is therefore one that looks at the desired end result, and considers what the acceptable impacts may be. This contrasts current conventional zoning which is based on early 20th century ideas about segregating incompatible uses, and that regulates development by controlling the use of land and density that is permitted. Research by CMHC has highlighted work that indicated that conventional planning and regulatory systems can increase developments costs, and stifle technical and design innovation (CMHC, 2000).

171


Municipalities using performance based planning regulate the land use not based on proposed use, location, and dimensions of the development but on the basis of the actual impacts measured against predetermined standards or performance criteria. Performance zoning provides developers with maximum flexibility that in turn encourages them to build a broader range of housing types, including affordable units. Performance based planning has been used in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Scandinavia. There are mixed reviews of the actual impacts of performance based planning, having been highlighted in a 2004 paper by Baker, Sipe and Gleeson, with these authors having stated that one problem is lack of research that more clearly examines the impacts of such planning. In a study done in 2000, CMHC examined several of these international experiences in order to better evaluate its potential for use in Canada. The paper recommended that if performance-based planning were to be implemented in a Canadian context it should be a top-down voluntary approach (due the provincial involvement in planning in most cases), it should not replace traditional zoning but be used in conjunction with it, complexity should be avoided at all costs, and recognize the reality that innovation will be an incremental process. The findings of Baker, Sipe and Gleeson highlighted that most purely performance based approaches morphed into hybrid systems, and there are numerous challenges involved, including the speed at which planners adapted to the new system, the development of the performance measures, and how to concretely implement the promised flexibility of the system. The main strength of performance-based planning appears to be its use of impacts measures to evaluate the final outcomes, and its end-result view of development. It is suggested that the Region of Peel, in collaboration with area municipalities, explore the feasibility of utilizing performance based planning to help streamline the planning approval process and possibly as a way to limit community opposition to affordable housing developments. The Region should also investigate whether performance based planning could be used to fast track developments which adhere to the principles of compact complete communities. 4.12 Affordable Housing: Community Acceptance

Community acceptance, and conversely community opposition to projects can be important supports or roadblocks to development. Opposition to projects can affect the length of the approval process and development, potentially

172


impacting costs but also fostering negative associations or feelings which may not be well-founded. Increasingly groups and municipalities are recognizing the importance of involving the community in projects, and working to create acceptance in order to better integrate the projects or developments in question. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help foster community acceptances in the Region of Peel. 4.12.1 Municipal Mitigation and Acceptance Strategies

The phenomenon of ―not-in-my-backyard‖ also known by its acronym of NIMBY, or NIMBYism, can be an issue in many types of developments, but have often resulted in significant opposition in cases of affordable housing or social housing projects. For the purposes of this report, the following definition shall be used:

―the protectionist attitudes and exclusionary/oppositional tactics adopted by community groups facing and unwelcome development in their neighbourhood.‖(Wolch and Dear, 1993)

NIMBY can represent a significant roadblock to certain forms of development in communities across the Region. In some cases it may refer to the building of a group home in a neighbourhood, a business locating close to a residential area, high density development, ―big box‖ retail, and even certain design features of buildings may cause NIMBY in a certain communities. Other communities may experience NIMBY towards simply rental housing. In some communities NIMBYism has resulted in some projects being delayed considerably and even cancelled. In many cases, the opposition is driven by unfounded fears, usually fed by erroneous assumptions, misconceptions and a lack of information as well as concerns for community safety and property values. These points were highlighted in the findings of the CMHC study Gaining Community Acceptance: Case Studies in Affordable Housing, which studied the cases of projects across Canada and analysed their experiences with the NIMBY phenomenon. The CMHC findings underlined in the conclusions were that early open communications throughout the project, along with developing relationships with local politicians were important elements to success. A clear plan and the understanding of the community process were others. In many cases, the delays due to community opposition and the consultation processes that follow are the biggest concerns regarding the construction of affordable and social housing. In the course of the City of Montréal‘s affordable housing program, Solidarité 5 000 Logements, NIMBY related issues of some projects caused between four to six months of delays. Subsequently,

173


the City developed its own community consultation strategy which included information about the projects from the very start. By listening to the concerns of the local residents, they were able to better tailor the responses and the mitigation of the local opposition, while taking into account these concerns and working to address them by education.

There exists growing wealth of research and tools that help debunk NIMBY myths, and can help developments experiencing community opposition. A recent report by the Wellesley Institute studied several supportive housing complexes with the City of Toronto to analyse their effects on the neighbourhood. Their findings revealed that the residents, in part due to their lower-incomes, tended to shop within the community, benefiting local businesses. A 1992 report by the Region of Peel also examined the effects of non-profit housing in Brampton and Mississauga. The study found no negative effects on property values in the Cities. Given that redevelopment and infill development will become increasingly important forms of building in the Region as growth continues and available land becomes scarcer, it is suggested that the Region of Peel continue to take a proactive approach to community acceptance and involvement, and consider the development of a community acceptance strategy or guidelines for development. 4.12.2 Community Acceptance Tools

4.12.2.1 Strategies of Gaining Community Acceptance Workshop

CMHC, the National Secretariat on Homelessness, and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada formed a partnership to undertake the Strategies for Gaining Community Acceptance Workshop and Train the Trainer session. The Workshop and workshop material are designed to provide municipalities and service providers with the tools, capacity and best practices to overcome NIMBY opposition as it relates to homelessness and affordable housing, and to deliver the Strategies for Gaining Community Acceptance Workshop within their community. It includes a learning component on understanding NIMBY, a review of case studies throughout Ontario and Canada, and four interactive exercises and an action planning tool. 4.12.2.2 Yes, In My Backyard

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association (ONPHA), and groups such as the Homecoming Coalition offer many good reports and tools on their websites, such as the publication Yes, In My Back Yard. The publication is a guide for supportive housing providers in

174


Ontario that discusses the various issues surrounding, and dispels myths about NIMBYISM. It also provides information about the planning approval process. It is suggested that the Region of Peel, in collaboration with area municipalities, encourage the development of community education and information strategies that will help mitigate any possible effects from NIMBY-type reactions to future development. This would include helping disseminate information to non-profit groups and agencies that develop and provide affordable and supportive housing to ensure future development is made easier. 4.13 Affordable Rental Housing: Cost of Development and Financing

Development costs and financing costs of project development are important components of a project‘s financial feasibility. Through consultation with industry stakeholders, these elements were identified as being of concern as they affect the capacity to develop affordable rental and ownership housing. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help mitigate or reduce the cost of development and help provide financing for housing in the Region of Peel. 4.13.1 Community Improvement Plans & Affordable Housing

Community improvement areas are sometimes ideal opportunities for the creation or renovation of affordable housing as shown in the following two examples. As a part of its EDGE plan (Encouraging Development for Growth Efficiency), the City of Kitchener has adopted the Downtown Kitchener Community Improvement Plan for its downtown area. This area forms the boundary for the its Downtown Incentives Program for property owners, which includes the Façade and Interior Loan Incentives for interior and exterior improvements to buildings, the Upper Story Renovation incentives to encourage the redevelopment of upper building floors as residential units, a tax rebate program for assistance and encouragement to redevelopment for up to three years, as well as City and Regional development charge exemptions. The City of Oshawa enacted its Brownfields Renaissance Community Improvement Plan in 2005 (approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in 2006), which targets brownfields sites within a defined territory. It encourages the rehabilitation and reuse of contaminated sites through incentives that include study grants for environmental studies, waivers of municipal property taxes to encourage rehabilitation, including applications for the Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive program, and redevelopment grants to encourage property owners to redevelop their sites.

175


4.13.2 Alternate Development Standards

Development standards describe the set of elements that guide the design and construction of communities by municipalities. These standards include such elements as lot sizes and frontages, the orientation of houses on lots, street pavement and right-of-way widths, the provisions of on-street and off-street parking and location of sewer, water and utility lines. This section provides suggestions for the creation of cost-effective development standards for new residential development or redevelopment. Alternate development standards are flexible planning and engineering standards that provide a range of alternatives to the current standards used for the design and construction of communities. It should be noted that alternative development standards do not necessarily imply reductions in standards of construction, or levels or service but rather different or more efficient methods of offering the same level of service with significant benefits such as better affordability, and reduced environmental impacts (Haldimand County, 2003). Alternative development standards encourage affordable housing by allowing the developer to build various components of a housing project to a lower standard than conventional. Some standards which may be altered to encourage affordable housing development include: reduced setbacks, narrower lot sizes, reduced road allowance, reduced parking standards, and on-street parking. An example of the use of alternative development standards in Ontario is the Cornell development in Markham Ontario, which used garages placed in the rear of units, and reduced setbacks. CMHC Modifying Development Standards Research CMHC has published findings from an Ottawa development, completed in 1996 as part of its Modifying Development Standards research. They found that the use of alternate development standards, especially relating to reduced lot sizes, setbacks, right-of-way widths, and density led to savings of about $8,500 per unit. These alternative standards, in some cases minor, were able to help the development be accessible to first time homebuyers (CMHC, 2008). However, CMHC cautioned that alternative development standards will not necessarily contribute to affordability without a proper supportive planning framework, and any cost-savings that arise will not necessarily be passed on to the consumer. City of Ottawa As part of the Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) demonstration project initiative, the City of Ottawa developed the 165 unit townhouse and carriage house Pineglade development with Minto Developments in the community of

176


Gloucester in 1993 that used alternative development standards. Monitoring of indicators showed a savings of about $8,500 per unit when land and development costs were considered, with about $4,400 of these savings being attributed to placement of infrastructure and services. The alternative development standards were done through changes to the planning and engineering standards, as well as the community‘s comprehensive zoning by-law. The alternative standards used included reduced lot sizes which were decreased by about 50%, reduced right-of-way widths and a reduction of the paved width of the roadway from 8.5 m to 8.0m, frontage was reduced accordingly, and the allowed density was increase, and street setbacks were reduced. Costs were also lowered through the use of common service trenches, driveways were twinned to increase on-street parking spaces. Monitoring was done in conjunction with the study of a nearby development using the conventional development standards which was also developed by Minto. A CMHC evaluation study highlighted that the overall impact on affordability was significant, with the Pineglade homes selling for about $13,000 less than those in the conventional development, and the alternative standards were also used in other developments in the Ottawa area subsequently. In addition, the City of Ottawa includes Alternate Development Standards in its Official Plan. One innovative policy which reduces the cost of developing housing is a policy on utility trenching which allows for the joint construction of four utilities (hydro, cable, telephone and natural gas) into one single trench. Banff, Alberta Another example of alternative development standards, also a demonstration project in the ACT program, was applied in the community of Banff in Alberta, which has been dealing with housing shortages and affordability problems due to growth and other restrictions that arise from its location with the National Park. The Banff Housing Corporation applied for relaxed standards to better develop a 2.1 acre site in its possession as a subdivision. New regulations were not required, and existing ones were allowed flexibility, the changes that were made included the creation of smaller lots, the use of at-grade open parking spaces, narrower street widths for the development, and providing sidewalks only on one side of the streets. The completed project incorporated 21 two-storey row-house units in a variety of configurations that would accommodate households in different stages of life. The units, which were certified at the R-2000 building and energy efficiency standards, sold between $176,000 and $230,000 as compared to similar market units that would have cost between $240,000 and $280,000.

177


City of Brampton The City of Brampton is the only area municipaliy that has a policy for alternative development standards for affordable housing. Its policy is as follows:

4.1.6.5 The City shall give consideration to alternative development standards to facilitate housing affordability objectives in accordance with the principles of sustainability.

The Provincial Policy Statement calls on municipalities to consider flexibility and innovation in development standards, providing they meet basic health and safety requirements. Considering the intensification requirements of Places to Grow, the use of such standards will help in achieving these targets, and further encourage infill and redevelopment in the Region and its area municipalities. As such, it is suggested that the Region encourage area municipalities to consider utilizing alternative development standards for residential developments that provide new affordable housing. Further, it is also suggested that the Region encourage the City of Mississauga and Town of Caledon to include policies in their official plans to facilitate the use of alternate development standards for affordable housing developments. 4.13.3 Development Charges, Fees and Levies

Although development charges and other fees are useful tools for municipalities to offset infrastructure and development costs, they impose a significant financial burden on developers of affordable housing. As such, this burden can be alleviated in several ways. Inclusionary Zoning & Fees in-lieu of Affordable Units The City of Boston enacted inclusionary zoning provisions in 2000, overseen by the Boston Redevelopment Authority. Developers are able to pay in-lieu fees instead of building affordable units, which were initially set at about $200,000 but were later increased to closer to $400,000. The high cost is a closer reflection of the cost of developing affordable housing within the City. The proceeds from these in-lieu fees go directly into a municipal housing trust fund, and not to the general city coffers. Waivers, Deferrals, Grants in-lieu The City of Toronto has waived development charges, building permit fees, planning application fees, and parkland dedication requirements for non-profit housing. The Cities of Cambridge, Kitchener, Waterloo and Hamilton have adopted by-laws which waive development charges in downtown areas for all development including residential. The City of Ottawa‘s Action Ottawa initiative for affordable housing also waives development charges, planning fees, and parkland levies for affordable units.

178


Development Charge for Affordable Housing Conversely, the Region of Halton implemented a Region-wide development charge for social housing, which ranges from $112 for apartments of less than two-bedrooms, to $287 for single and semi-detached dwellings. These charges instead help to fund the development of social housing programs in Halton. This strategy is described in further detail below. Seattle Housing Levy In order to address a shortfall in affordable housing, the City of Seattle placed a policy question to voters on a referendum, asking residents if they were prepared to direct one percent of their annual property taxes towards a fund used by the City to develop social housing. Voters first approved the policy in 1981, and it has subsequently been re-approved in 1986, 1995, and 2002. The initiative has provided millions of dollars in funding, helping to create over 10,000 units of housing, and funding several important initiatives aimed at rental housing production and preservation, a neighbourhood housing opportunities program, operation and maintenance, homebuyer assistance, and rental assistance and homelessness prevention programs. An important aspect of the levy‘s success has been its use in helping to leverage public and private funding. The City of Seattle reported that for the 2003 to 2007 period, $3.60 of public and private funds were matched for each $1 invested by the levy funds. A total of $86 million dollars were made available through the levy for the 2002 to 2009 period. The current levy will expire in December 2009, and a levy renewal question will appear on the November 2009 election ballots. It is suggested that the Region, in collaboration with the area municipalities, explore the feasibility of implementing waivers, deferrals or grants in-lieu of development charges and other municipal planning and building charges, a property tax levy for affordable housing, and adding social/affordable housing as a charge under the Regional development charges bylaw. 4.13.4 Property Tax Incentives

A further impediment to affordable rental housing in many areas is the local property tax on multiple rental housing. This is a problem common to many municipalities in Ontario and has been well documented in several studies, such as the Ontario Housing Supply Working Group. Multi-residential rental housing in most Ontario communicates is taxed at a much higher rate than ownership housing and acts as a barrier to offering affordable rental housing. In Peel Region, the multi-residential property tax rate in all three area municipalities is more than 50% higher than the residential rate.

179


The Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program requires that, in order to participate in the program, municipalities must bring the taxation rate for multi-residential rental housing projects built under the program to a level equal to the single family residential rate. There are a few ways that municipalities can meet this requirement. Under the Assessment Act, a new 35-year multi-residential property tax class may be adopted by municipalities (by October 31 in any given year for the ensuing year) and the rate set lower than the existing multi-residential rate. In this case all new multi-residential buildings, including those under the AHP, would benefit. Alternatively, municipalities, through a municipal housing facilities by-law, may provide grants-in-lieu of property tax reduction on specific properties. This would enable the municipality to reduce the effective property tax only for those buildings receiving incentives specified in the by-law. The City of Toronto has given the mandate to its Committee to provide ―development fee and charge waivers, and property tax reductions or waivers for affordable housing projects‖ (City of Toronto, 2008). The City of Toronto currently waives property taxes for affordable housing projects within its boundaries. 4.13.5 Tax Increment Financing

In Ontario, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is generally provided through a grant and is essentially the difference between future tax payable and current tax payable that would result from re-development. This incentive is often seen in redevelopment areas or brownfield strategies. It is permitted through Section 28 of the Planning Act, but must be accompanied by an adopted community improvement plan for the area in

Table 8: Property Tax Rates, Region of Peel and Area Municipalities, 2008

Residential and Multi-Residential Tax Rates by

Municipality, Region of Peel 2008

Municipality Residential Multi-Res Ratio

Mississauga 1.034762% 1.635017% 1.58

Brampton 1.244053% 1.934990% 1.56

Caledon 1.003437% 1.524739% 1.52 Source: City of Mississauga, City of Brampton, Town of Caledon, 2008

180


question. Once approved by the Province, the municipality may offer TIF, grants, loans or other such incentives within the area covered by the plan. The City of Toronto, under the City of Toronto Act has been granted the authority to implement TIF within ―prescribed areas.‖ The City of Cambridge has used tax increment financing to stimulate improvements and developments within its downtown core. The City of Regina, in Saskatchewan, has been offering tax exemptions for residential developments, condominium and rental, in its downtown. The exemptions are provided for five years, and only apply to the residential building assessments, thus excluding any portions used for commercial or other purposes. The exemptions start the January of the year following the commencement of construction. 4.13.6 Land Value Taxation

Land value taxation (LVT), sometimes referred to as site value taxation (SVT), is an old concept with more recent roots in the 18th and 19th centuries. It proposes to tax the value of the land, rather than current systems which are typically based upon current use and the value of the land, or market/current value assessments. Proponents of LVT highlight positive aspects of the system, including its neutrality with respect to land use, and reduced speculation. LVT systems have been used in many countries including the United States, Jamaica, Denmark, Australia, Hong Kong and New Zealand. The experience with LVT systems is mixed, with pure land value taxation systems being rare. The American experience, specifically in the State of Pennsylvania where about 20 cities use, or have used an LVT system, has been in using a hybrid two-rate system in which land value is taxed at a higher rate than the value of the buildings and improvements upon it. The City of Pittsburgh is an often cited example of LVT use, the system was implemented between 1913 and 2001. Several problems contributed to the system being repealed, including underassessment. However, the City still uses land value taxation in its downtown improvement area. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has also used the LVT with success in revitalizing its troubled downtown core. Although not the panacea some authors have held it to be, there is evidence that the use of LVT in Harrisburg was an important element that did contribute to the successful revitalization efforts. In western Canada, many municipal and provincial taxation systems do tax land values at a higher rate. This is also accompanied by exemptions of various percentages on improvements many cases, this includes municipalities in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Henry George Institute, 2008). Many provinces also tax land value indirectly through land transfer taxes, as does Alberta and Ontario.

181


Land value taxation through actual experience has received mixed reviews, with positive and negative aspects and it remains unclear from the evidence how in the Ontario and the wider Canadian context an LVT system could be implemented. However, the Pittsburgh and Harrisburg experiences highlight the use of LVT in certain situations, in this case revitalization and redevelopment, as being or interest. It is suggested that the Region of Peel, in collaboration with area municipalities, further investigate the feasibility of implementing strategies to reduce or eliminate property taxes for affordable housing projects in an effort to reduce the cost of developing these projects. 4.13.7 Municipal Financing

Municipalities are starting to explore, in a limited way, the feasibility of directly financing the construction or long term financing of affordable housing projects. Such initiatives could include the use of debenture or capital reserves as funding sources. Developers and builders participating in Peel Region facilitated workshops also indicated that loan guarantees or securities for private mortgages, as well as a preferred or reduced mortgage rate would also help address the financing challenges they are currently facing. As described in Section 2 of this report, the new OSIFA funding is now available to municipal housing agencies and represents an important funding source which could help in supplementing available municipal funds for the creation of affordable housing. It is suggested that the Region consider assisting private and non-profit affordable housing developers with the provision of construction and take-out financing for these developments, for example by providing security or direct financing at reduced rates. 4.13.8 Affordable Housing as a Municipal Service under DC Bylaw

Halton‘s new development charge by-law was passed on May 28, 2008, and came into effect on August 18, 2008. The Region of Halton, based on previous reviews, conducted a review and consultation process between April of 2007 and 2008 which included background studies and reports indicate an expected increase in demand related to growth. Social housing development charges were calculated based on existing and future demand from the existing population and that of new development. As such, Social Housing is listed under Section 8 of the municipal bylaw (8.g):

―That development charges under this By-law shall be imposed for the following categories of services to pay for the increased capital costs

182


required because of increased needs for services arising from development[:]‖

The Region of Peel currently list affordable housing as a municipal service under its development charges. It is suggested that the Region investigate the feasibility of increasing the charge for affordable housing based on existing and future demand of the current population and for new development. 4.13.9 Capital Assistance Program

Various forms of support and incentives are needed to help address the high cost of developing new forms of housing so that they become affordable to low and moderate income families and individuals. As a result, many municipalities have provided capital funding (in the form of grants, forgivable loans, or repayable loans) to supplement these incentives and any funds received by senior levels of government. The City of Vancouver, for example, was instrumental in providing financial support for VanCity Place for Youth, a 50-unit housing development for street youth. The City‘s total contribution to the $4.5 million project was $2.1 million, including land at no cost as well as a capital grant. In addition, the VanCity employees undertook a fundraising initiative that resulted in a total of $1 million in donations. No senior government funding was used for this project. The City of Toronto operates a Capital Revolving Fund for affordable housing, which lends financial assistance up to 25% of the project capital costs to eligible non-profit groups. The City of Ottawa, through its Action Ottawa initiative offers capital grants of up to $60,000 per unit. Most of the Peel Build affordable housing projects have received some form of capital assistance in addition to federal and provincial grants. 4.13.10 Convert/Renovate to Residential Loan Programs

Another financial approach to meeting affordable housing needs is the convert/renovate to residential loan program. In the US, this is referred to as adaptive reuse. It is also a way to introduce housing into non-residential areas. Renovation and reuse of previously vacated or deteriorated buildings can be less expensive than new construction since infrastructure and other site improvements are already in place, as well as the structure. Utilizing this approach to creating affordable housing involves various steps, including making inventories of potential adaptive reuse sites, amending local zoning regulations, arranging for possible property transfers of publicly-owned buildings, and providing assistance in obtaining sources of funding such as loans and grants.

183


The City of Hamilton, as part of its downtown revitalization incentives has established a residential loan program for downtown conversions or renovations. The purpose of the loan is to cover the cost of converting upper floors of commercial buildings into apartments or renovations to bring existing apartments into compliance with the Property Standards By-law and Fire Code. The loans are interest-free, and the principle is repayable to the City within five years in annual amounts of ten percent, in 12 equal monthly payments. Payments commence one year after construction has been completed.

4.13.11 Housing Trust Funds and Community Land Trusts

Housing Trust Funds (HTFs) are locally-based ways of supporting affordable housing. In the US they are organizations that have secured a permanent source of on-going revenue committed to the provision of affordable housing. This revenue is usually established through legislation or ordinance and it nearly all comes directly or indirectly from local government sources, such as fees or taxes on some activity (e.g. linkage fees, surcharge on property taxes) or the interest on some public account (e.g. real estate escrow accounts). In the way the funding is less vulnerable to shifting political priorities and it provides a better basis for creating long-term policies and programs. In addition to the on-going revenue, most HTFs in the US received some form of start-up fund, such as a government grant, endowment and/or contributions from other sources. In Canada, the feasibility of HTFs has been studied by CMHC and other groups. The Edmonton Housing Trust Fund has been operating since 1999; it is an independent non-profit organization which receives funding from all three levels of government, as well as private businesses, foundations and citizens. It also raises money through its own activities. Its activities are centered on providing for persons who are homeless, have low-income or have special needs. The most recent numbers show that between 2001 and 2004 it produced funding for 956 units and spaces for the City‘s homelessness plan, as well as funding about 276 temporary emergency spaces during the winter.

184


Community land trusts (CLTs) are locally-based private non-profit organizations created to acquire and hold land for the specific purpose of making it available for housing affordable by lower-income households. The fundamental objective of CLTs is to hold permanent title to land for the benefit of the community. Behind this objective is the belief that land is a fundamental resource in which the community-at-large has an on-going interest. CLTs see themselves as performing a stewardship role over the land on behalf of the community. Most CLTs focus on homeownership, particularly through acquiring and renovating existing houses. They use a particular mixed-tenure arrangement, in which the land is leased while the buildings are sold to the leaseholders. In this way, CLTs can typically provide ownership housing at the outset at a price 25% or more below the going market rate, and often more over time. The land is leased typically through a life-time or long-term renewable agreement. Leaseholders retain most of the rights and responsibilities that go with ownership. The leasehold payments are kept to a minimum and the leaseholders are required generally only to pay the property taxes and the administrative and insurance costs. The leaseholders are not expected to carry the cost of the land purchase, nor to make down payments or obtain mortgages for the land. The CLT model does not lend itself to producing high volumes of new housing. What it does do well is preserve existing housing as affordable. CLTs are particularly suitable for small communities and even neighbourhoods. They are an effective way of supporting affordable housing with only limited resources

The Burlington Community Land Trust The Burlington Community Land Trust (BCLT) was established in 1984 and is one of the most successful land trusts in the US. The BCLT was initially started through a $200,000 grant from the City of Burlington, as well as some private land donations. The BCLT receives assistance from the Vermont Housing and Conservation Fund, which is a state-supported funding agency that provides grants, loans and technical assistance to non-profit organizations, municipalities and state agencies for the development of permanent affordable housing, as well as for the conservation of land (historic, recreational, agricultural, and natural land areas). The BCLT is governed by a 12-member board and has a membership of over 1,000, and buys and renovates existing homes and then sells the house at an affordable rate to an income-eligible homebuyer while leasing the land at a nominal rate on a long-term basis to the homebuyer. The sale of the house is subject to an agreement whereby the owner agrees to sell the house for no more than the original purchase price plus only 25% of the increase in value. The BCLT also helps owners in the purchase of the home by providing down payment assistance of between $6,000 and $24,000 based on the availability of funds and the homebuyer‘s

income.

185


and expertise. CLTs can be started and operated with one unit, and then expanded as money and property become available. It is suggested that the Region of Peel assess the usefulness of housing trust funds or community land trust and explore avenues through which the Region, in collaboration with community partners, can establish one of these trust funds for the purposes of helping to finance affordable housing development. 4.13.12 Canadian Alternative Investment Cooperative

The Canadian Alternative Investment Cooperative (ACIC) is an agency that makes investments to support positive social change and promote alternative economic structures. They have supported a number of affordable housing projects in Canada, specifically cooperative development. They offer two funding programs; the Social Mortgage Fund and the Community Venture Fund. The Social Mortgage Fund invests in mortgages on properties to groups such as youth group homes, non-profit and cooperative housing and homeless shelters. The Community Venture Fund invests in projects of social benefit assisting the economic development of low income or disadvantaged people or communities. In Ontario, they have assisted groups such as the Bloor Information and Life Skills Centre, the Margaret Laurence Housing Cooperative in Toronto, the Margaret‘s Haven Community Housing in London, the Elizabeth Fry Society in Barrie and several others. 4.14 Partnerships

This section discusses other forms of partnerships including finding ways of involving the developer community, realtors, faith-based groups, in the development of affordable housing.

4.14.1 Public Private Partnerships

Partnerships for affordable housing can take many forms, such as joint ventures involving non-profit and private sector housing providers participating in a new affordable housing development. They can also be accomplished through agreements between different levels of government to make available suitable publicly owned lands at low cost, such as the various surplus land policies or the selling of municipal land for residential or affordable housing development. Other forms of partnerships have been between housing providers, support agencies and Provincial Ministries, and can be used to provide supportive housing or services within new affordable housing developments.

186


Calgary – Home Builder’s Foundation, City of Calgary, Horizon Housing Society, Canadian Mental Health Association and Universal Rehabilitation Services An example of a public private partnership can be found in Calgary, where the Calgary Home Builder‘s Foundation spearheaded the development of the Bob Ward Residence, a 61 unit apartment building for persons with mental illness, brain injury, or other special needs. The land was donated by the City of Calgary, with funding coming from a variety of donors which included the Calgary Home Builder‘s Foundation, the Calgary Homeless Foundation, the federal government through its homelessness funding, the Horizon Housing Society, as well as private donors. The Horizon Housing Society owns the building, and has partnered with the Canadian Mental Health Association and the Universal Rehabilitation Service Agency which provide the supportive services to the residents. Daniels Corporation, Federal and Provincial Governments Initiatives can also leverage multitude of funding programs and fundraising initiatives to raise the funds required to develop and operate an affordable housing project. In the WAVE condominium project in Toronto, the developer, Daniels Corporation, provided below-market units to first-time homeowner low and moderate income renter households through its FirstHome program. Along with federal and provincial AHI homeownership funding, the developer matched the buyer‘s 5% down payment with an additional 5% loan which is payment free for five years. It was further supported by CMHC which extended the buyers‘ mortgage amortization period from 25 to 35 years. WinnipegREALTORs, City of Winnipeg, Manitoba Securities Commission Another example of a funding partnership is found in Winnipeg, with the Housing Opportunity Partnership (HOP), a non-profit organisation that was created by the WinnipegREALTORS Association in 1997. This partnership was aimed at encouraging homeownership and the renewal of some of the City‘s declining neighbourhoods, many of which characterized by low ownership rates, homes in need of repair and declining property values. The Partnership was established through funding provided by the Manitoba Securities Commission, using money from the interest of real estate broker trust accounts, and through capital contributions from the federal AHI. The HOP purchases and renovates the properties, which are then resold to eligible low and moderate income households. Martinway Contracting, Peel Region, Federal Government Peel Youth Village is the result of innovative partnerships. The builder, Martinway Contracting, collected donations from its suppliers that allowed the structure to be built with improved quality and resulted in a longer life span for the building and reduced operating costs for Peel on an ongoing basis. The

187


project is funded through the Region of Peel‘s social housing reserve fund, the National Homelessness Initiatives‘ Supporting Communities Partnership Initiative, the Federal Community Affordable Rental Housing Program, and a dedication of surplus land by Peel Living on the Weaver‘s Hill property (Peel Region). Faith Groups The Region of Peel has been working with the faith communities in the area to identify potential sites and other opportunities for partnerships between the Region and faith based organizations. One such partnership has evolved through the Region‘s efforts: the Coptic Orthodox Church in Brampton has partnered with the Region and a private developer to build affordable housing. Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) A series of meetings facilitated by the Regional Chair with the building and development industry has resulted in a two prong action plan for the creation of affordable housing in the Region:

1. Long Term Sustainable Solution

• To work collaboratively on a delivery framework that will inspire senior levels of government to provide necessary support for sustainable affordable housing programs

• Several steps are being proposed that will engage senior levels of government, including utilizing the media to assist with a public awareness campaign

2. Immediate and Direct Plan

• Region and BILD to work in collaboration to determine what can be done now with existing tools to build affordable housing through a demonstration/pilot project

4.14.2 Corporate Sponsorship and Donations

Corporate sponsorship is another form of public-private partnerships described above. One form of corporate sponsorship is that of volunteer workers, donor organizations and sponsor agencies that Habitat for Humanity and the Frontiers Foundation use to develop their self-help housing projects. More on Habitat for Humanity can be found under the Section on Self-Help Housing. An excellent example of corporate sponsorship can be found in the Region of Peel and its work with Martinway Contracting. For Millbrook Place, Martinway sold the land to the Region at a 40% discount which helped lower costs. Martinway further sought to lower costs by seeking out corporate contributions from the construction and trades sectors. This resulted in the ability upgrade

188


materials, either through donations or discounted prices. Energy efficient appliances were also obtained from the supplier at a discounted price. Martinway and the Region of Peel have partnered in developing several other affordable housing buildings in the Region, including the Summerville Pines affordable seniors housing complex, and Peel Youth Village. It is suggested that the Region of Peel continue its work in developing innovative partnerships with the development community, realtors, and faith-based groups in the development of affordable housing. 4.15 Housing Options and Supports for Persons with Special Needs

Unique housing options are needed for special needs groups including persons with physical disabilities, persons with mental illness, and persons with developmental disabilities. The following section discusses some strategies for encouraging accessible design and finding ways to meet the supportive needs of persons with special needs. 4.15.1.1 Modified Units in Social Housing Portfolio

There are a total of 380 modified rent-geared-to-income units in the social housing portfolio or almost 5% of the total RGI portfolio. This supply of units modified for person with disabilities represents the most affordable form of modified housing in the Peel community. The Region is working to ensure all new affordable housing developments funded by the Region incorporate universal design principles, and the its Universal Accessibility Standards (UAS) will be incorporated into all future Regional affordable housing developments. 4.15.1.2 Inventory of Modified Units in Social Housing Stock

Both the Region of York and Simcoe County carried out Special Needs Audits to determine the stock of accessible housing in their stock. The findings of these audits enabled each of the municipalities to ensure a better access and knowledge of the accessible housing stock for clients needing modified housing. The Region of York has incorporated photographs and descriptions of all modified units under each building, accessible online from its social housing directory. Similarly, Simcoe County has also developed an inventory and description of modified units that is available for clients needing modified units. It is suggested that the Region consider developing a comprehensive inventory and evaluation of current modified units within the Region‘s social housing portfolio.

189


4.15.1.3 Ontario Building Code and Visitability

Visitability is a concept which strives to change construction practices so that all new homes are built to be welcoming to persons who use wheelchairs, walkers, or have some other form of mobility impairment. Visitability has three basic requirements:

Wide doorways and hallways (at least 32 inch clearing)

At least a half bathroom on the main floor (large enough for a

wheelchair to enter and close the door)

A ‗zero-step‘ entrance on an accessible path

Other features of visitable design that can be added include reinforced bathroom walls, levered door handles, raised electrical outlets, lowered light switches. Similar to other housing design concepts such as the Flex Housing, Visitability allows for persons to age in place or to remain in their home through temporary mobility impairment. The Ontario Building Code has provisions for visitable apartments. Section 3.8.2.1.(4) states that: “In Group C major occupancy apartment buildings, not less than 10% of all residential suites shall be provided with a barrier-free path of travel from the suite entrance door to,

The doorway to at least one bedroom on the same level, and

The doorway to at least one bathroom,

Having an area not less than 4.5 sq.m. at the same level, and

Conforming to Sentence 9.6.3.3.(1). (which specifies that the doorway to such bathroom and to each bedroom at the same level as such bathroom shall have, when the door is in the open position, a clear width of not less than,

760 mm where the door is served by a corridor or space not less than 1 060 mm wide, and

810 mm where the door is served by a corridor or space less than 1 060 mm wide.‖

4.15.1.4 Accessible Design

Accessible design and Universal Design concepts generally refer the ability of something to be used by anyone. Accessible design is usually associated with improving accessibility for those with disabilities, while universal design takes a

190


broader, more inclusionary scope that is aimed at simply ensuring that there are no barriers to anyone --- that the products and environments be usable by all people, without a need for adaptation or specialized design (Center for Universal Design, 2008). Either visions is aimed at removing barriers to daily life to ensure that all individuals, with or without disabilities, can live better.

City of London’s Facility Accessibility Design Standards The City of London developed its own Facility Accessibility Design Standards in 2001, and has since updated it. The aim is to help City staff enhance accessibility beyond the minimal requirements of the Building Code when planning and designing municipal facilities. The document was created with the help of consultations with groups such as the March of Dimes, the Canadian Hearing Society, CNIB and others. The City of London freely allows the use and/or reproduction of its standards by other municipalities upon the submission of an authorization request. A complete list of the more than 50 municipalities that have used the standards is available on the City of London‘s website. The City of Brampton‘s Accessibility Technical Standards guide based itself off of the City of London‘s guide. Ottawa Municipal Accessibility Plan The City of Ottawa promotes increased accessibility in housing under the City of Ottawa Municipal Accessibility Plan (COMAP). This plan responds to the Accessibility for Ontarians Act, 2005. Under its Action Ottawa affordable housing program, the City provides funding to ensure that five percent of units developed under the program are fully wheelchair accessible to enable the occupant to live independently. In addition, 100 percent of the units must meet visitable standards for accessibility to the maximum extent possible. The City‘s Accessibility Advisory Committee has identified several requirements for visitable housing standards:

Level or gently sloping approaches to dwellings

Level no-step access at entry door

Sufficiently wide doors (32–36 inches or 80-90 cm) and corridors (36 inches or 90 cm) to accommodate a wheelchair

For multi-level units, a ground floor toilet facility for wheelchair users and the elderly and a ground floor family room and/or kitchen facility (City of Ottawa, 2007).

Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation Visitable Housing Policy The Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation (MHRC) encourages visitable design through its Visitable Housing Policy:

Where major renovations are being undertaken to address building

issues in MHRC-owned public housing, these renovations will include

191


basic visitable design features (where financially feasible and

practical)

MHRC will encourage non-profit groups and co-ops to implement

basic visitable features when renovating (where financially feasible

and practical)

Where MHRC provides funding for new construction under AHI

programs, projects that include visitable features will receive

additional weighting

Project proposals for development of new residential properties on

MHRC-owned lands, or proposals for the purchase of MHRC-owned

lands for residential development will receive additional weighting if

they include visitable features (Manitoba Housing & Renewal

Corporation, 2006).

In addition to the minimum visitable design features, the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation suggests other design features that would improve the convenience and suitability of a home. These include:

Reinforced bathroom walls (for the installation of grab bars, if desired);

Levered door handles and single-lever kitchen and bathroom faucets;

Raised electrical outlets – 18 inches (45.7 cm) from the door;

Lowered climate controls;

Lowered light switches – 48 inches (121.9 cm) from the door (Manitoba, 2008).

The inclusion of such design elements are important in improving the ability for older adults and those with disabilities to age in place, and live independently. For some older adults, the financial affordability of such units is possible, but not so for many persons with disabilities. Financial supports should be made more available for those in need. This includes ensuring that programs such as the RRAP and HASI are continued, and that individuals in the community are made aware of them. Given the forthcoming work related to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, and the demographic projections related to the increase in the older adult population, it is suggested that the Region of Peel continue its work to of incorporating and facilitating accessible design concepts within Regional

192


affordable housing developments, as well as encourage its area municipalities to use the guidelines. Further, it is suggested that the Region consider making it mandatory for all other new affordable housing developments conform to the accessibility and visitability requirements of the UAS. 4.15.1.5 Supported and Supportive Housing

Support services for people with special needs are primarily delivered by a range of community-based non-profit organizations. Funding for supported and supportive housing is primarily a provincial responsibility, undertaken by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, the Central West Local Health Integration Network (CWLHIN) and the Mississauga-Halton Local Health Integration Network (MHLHIN). The Region has limited involvement in administering (or funding) agencies providing support to persons of special needs. Its involvement is primarily through the Domiciliary Shelter program. It is suggested that the Region share information with the province on support service needs of special needs residents in Peel Region, support funding applications by community based non-profit organizations seeking funds from the provincial government, and make every effort to coordinate its services with those of the provincial government. 4.16 Housing Options for Diverse Populations

Individuals and households from diverse population groups have a particularly difficult time finding adequate housing due to various reasons but most often due to a shortage of the required housing type, or in some cases the lack of certain required design features or other elements. One of Places to Grow‘s vision is for communities to support social equity (Vision: 1.2.1). This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to address the needs of these groups, or facilitate housing in the Region of Peel. 4.16.1 United Way of Peel Region’s Role in Serving Diverse Populations

United Way of Peel aims to improve lives and strengthen communities by engaging the community through partnerships. It established the Community Priorities Fund which provides direct funding for programs that have a solid, reliable human care service network and that target the root causes of the five areas of need that have been identified in the Peel community. These key areas are:

Strengthening families and children

Helping abused women and children

193


Reducing hunger, homelessness and poverty

Supporting seniors to live healthy and independent lives

Helping newcomers and immigrants settle and integrate

Other funding and grant programs of the United Way of Peel include:

Community Response Fund, which supports community partnerships, roundtables and collaborative initiatives to address community issues that are aligned with United Way of Peel Region‘s priorities.

Social Purpose Enterprise Grant, which aims to develop an innovative poverty reduction strategy for individuals at risk by supporting existing social purpose enterprises. For 2008/2009, there is a total of $100,000 available for this grant.

Neighbourhood Development Grants, which was launched in 2007 to support the engagement of residents, community-based organizations, and other stakeholders towards the creation of activities, plans, and priorities to strengthen neighbourhoods. Requests can range from $500 to $25,000 and a total of $150,000 is available through this funding opportunity.

Strengthening Organizational Effectiveness Fund (SOEF). This grant supports organizational capacity building activities related to such things as business planning, evaluation, human resources management, and financial systems. Organizations that have been delivering services for a minimum of two years can receive funding of up to $20,000 per project.

Community Contingency Fund provides grants to help preserve already established and effective programs or agencies or to provide access to a much larger benefit to the community. The agency can receive a one-time infusion of funds and cannot access the fund again for a period of five years.

As part of the Region‘s comprehensive education campaign, it is suggested that housing providers and community agencies be kept informed about the funding opportunities for diverse populations, and, where appropriate, it is suggested that the Region work with the faith groups, cultural groups, and community organizations in identifying housing options and solutions for diverse populations.

194


4.16.2 Older Adults

Persons aged 55 and older are growing in proportion in Peel Region and are expected to continue to grow in the future. This section reviews opportunities for the enhancement of older adult housing options. 4.16.2.1 Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults’ Housing

The Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults‘ Housing (PAWGOAH) is a community-based group that was created in 2001 by the Peel Regional Council. Some of the group‘s accomplishments include a 2003 study on views of older adults regarding housing needs and choices appropriate to them in the Region, holding several forums with local builders and developers, as well as presentations to boards and associations. The group has also published information on housing choices and resources for older adults, Housing Options for Older Adults. With demographic projections showing significant growth in older population groups, and the future housing needs of this segment of the population, working with stakeholder groups that represent older adults is a sound policy. An older adult advocacy strategy can help in identifying the needs and developing current and future housing for this group. As previously mentioned, it is suggested that the Region of Peel continue its work and support for the Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults Housing. 4.16.2.2 City of Mississauga Older Adult Plan

As mentioned in the section on Age-Friendly Communities above (section 4.5.9), the City of Mississauga commissioned its Older Adult Plan (OAP) in 2008 as a response to the demographic projections that show an aging population in the City, with an expectation that the population of those over 55 years of age will double within 30 years. The OAP established demographics and needs of the older adult population, in order to establish policies and principles for Mississauga to further its age friendly vision. In addition to the policies and principles described in section 4.5.8, the Older Adult Plan makes several recommendations for subsidies which include the development of an ―access policy‖ as part of an ability-to-pay policy for programs and services which would be based on annual income and the number of dependents, implementing an access card to municipal facilities that would link to the information on the user‘s eligible subsidies for access to the municipal and regional programs and services, and also offering free programming to persons of all ages at specific facilities such as swimming or skating which would encourage community participation and activity days.

195


Collaboration and partnerships are an important component of the Older Adult Plan, as well. The Plan recommends that the City consider older adults for jobs within it, developing a partnership with the proposed Older Adult Advisory Committee, the Mississauga-Halton LHIN and other groups to improve health care communication and collaboration, and partnering with local hospitals and medical providers to offer health resources such as information sessions and walk-in clinics at certain community centres, libraries. The plan also prioritizes facilities within the City of Mississauga which will be geared towards older adults for a variety of items that include physical improvements, and services areas for increased older adult programs. The actions and monitoring goals are established over several time-periods that run from the short term, 2008 to 2009, to the long term, 2014 to 2022. 4.16.2.3 Types and Forms of Older Adult Housing

There are a range of types and forms of older adult housing that should be encouraged by the Region and area municipalities. They are described in the following sections. 4.16.2.3.1 Life Lease Housing

Life lease housing has gained greater acceptance in some communities (especially in Southwestern Ontario) as a desirable form of housing primarily suited for senior citizens. This type of housing is owned and managed by a community-based, not-for-profit group. Life lease housing provides residents with the right to occupy the unit for the rest of their life in exchange for a lump sum upfront payment and small monthly maintenance fees which can also cover on-site facilities and activities. In some developments, additional services such as meals and housekeeping can be obtained for a fee. There are currently about 125 life lease communities across Ontario. Gainsborough Development, London, Ontario The Gainsborough development in London, Ontario was built in 1995 and has 120 units of one-bedroom units of between 674 to 693 ft2 and two-bedrooms of 885 to 1,142 ft2. It is owned and operated by the Salvation Army sponsored non-profit, Grace Communities Corporation. Current listed prices show one-bedroom units starting at $95,000 and two-bedroom units starting from $127,000. Monthly maintenance fees range from $230 to $395, with residents paying their own property taxes and utilities. Luther Village, Waterloo In Waterloo, the Luther Village retirement also combines assisted living and life-lease units on its grounds, also operated by a non-profit. The life lease complex consists of 154 suites between 700 and 1,500 square feet of one and

196


two-bedrooms, and 72 townhouses ranging from 1,100 and 2,220 square feet. The data from recent sales showed one-bedroom units sold for about $195,000 and the larger two-bedrooms for about $400,000. The townhouses recently sold from $300,000 to $450,000 for the largest units. Monthly service fees range from $550 to $1,000 for the apartment units, to $725 to $1,100 for the townhouses. Tollendale Village, Barrie Tollendale Village in Barrie is operated by the faith-based non-profit group Simcoe County Christian Senior Homes, and operates its life lease units using the fixed-value model. Residents are given the option of purchasing the value of unit outright, only paying the maintenance and reserve fees monthly, or purchasing a percentage of the lease up front, the balance of which is paid on a monthly basis along with the maintenance and reserve fees. The group also offers conventional monthly rentals of certain units for tenants not wishing to use the life lease model. Units range in price from about $122,000 for a 770 ft2 one-bedroom unit to about $235,000 for a 1,500 ft2 semi-detached garden home. Reserve and maintenance fees vary based on unit size, ranging from a combined fee of $479 to $865 a month. Research to date has found that life lease housing has the potential for helping meet a range of seniors housing needs, often in combination with other forms of seniors housing that can help create an ―aging in place‖ opportunity within one site. At the same time, concerns have been expressed that life lease housing is not necessarily affordable by seniors of low and moderate income, especially those on low fixed incomes. Community agencies have experienced some difficulty developing life lease housing, in particular related to the start-up costs associated with new construction. A range of municipal support would be beneficial to assisting community agencies in developing life lease housing has been suggested. Examples of municipal support include providing sites at no cost or a reduced rate, providing loans to cover start-up costs, and providing incentives (such as grants-in-lieu of development charges) to reduce the cost of the units. There is considerable variation in the legal agreements and how people are compensated if they decide to move out; a reflection of this is the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing‘s publication of the Best Practices and Consumer Protection for Life Lease Housing in Ontario (2007). The guide outlines elements and issues to be aware of and consider for those interested in this form of housing. A 2007 report from CMHC, An Examination of Life Lease Housing Issues, also highlighted that another weakness is the current lack of education about this

197


form of housing, at once by the future residents, but also from the managers and the lawyers, key to ensuring proper legal agreements. Recent consultations on life lease in Ontario have led to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing reviewing recommendations on this type of housing in the province. In support of furthering life lease developments, it is suggested that the Region of Peel examine ways in which it can assist future life lease developments in the Region and monitor future provincial decisions on life lease. 4.16.2.3.2 Abbeyfield

There is a growing interest in the Abbeyfield housing concept in Canada. In Abbeyfield housing, a number of people share a large house and live like a family with a housekeeper. Residents have private rooms but share a dining room and living room. Usually about seven to ten people are accommodated in a house with residents sharing two meals a day in the communal dining room and a live-in housekeeper attends to the daily running of the house, the shopping and the preparing and serving of meals. Abbeyfield is an international society dedicated to providing older people with affordable, companionable and secure housing in a family type household within their local community. Community sponsored and supported, Abbeyfield Houses are set up and run on a not-for-profit basis under the management of a volunteer board of directors. Costs, which include all meals, are shared by residents. There are 29 Abbeyfield houses currently operating in Canada and another 12 in the planning stages. The Durham Abbeyfield house is a 12 room building that is wheelchair accessible, and has an elevator. The rooms are configured such that two can be connected and used as a large one-bedroom suite for a couple. The monthly costs for residents are of $1,281, and include two cooked meals daily and a self-serve breakfast bar. In the Region of Peel, the Caledon Abbeyfield Society is in the process of developing its house that will be situated in Caledon East. With the termination of most senior government funding, more Abbeyfield houses are likely to consider partnerships with other community organizations, as well as local municipalities. It is suggested that the Region continue its support of the Caledon Abbeyfield Society‘s proposed house.

198


4.16.2.3.3 Home Sharing

This is a living arrangement where unrelated people live in a single dwelling, sharing common areas such as kitchen, bathroom and living room. This is an ideal arrangement for homeowners or tenants who would like the companionship and security of living with another person. Home sharing may give homeowners some help with household chores and, if necessary, help pay for their mortgage or property taxes. Home sharing provides tenants with decent, affordable housing. Home sharing is considered a viable option for some older adults to help them maintain their home. 4.16.2.3.4 Care-Condominium

The Care-A-Minium model, which originated in British Columbia, is another housing option for seniors, primarily those of medium to high income. In this model, residents own their units, much like condominiums, but these usually come with a guaranteed support services ―package‖. This model has been implemented in the U.S., but appears to be restricted mostly to British Columbia. These typically include common facilities and areas, and the residents pay monthly fees. This model closely resembles life lease housing with the exception that the residents own their units outright. It is suggested that the Region consider exploring the feasibility of the Care-A-Minium model with local developers. 4.16.3 New Immigrants

The Region of Peel receives a large portion of the new immigrants coming to the Greater Toronto Area. New immigrants face many challenges when arriving in their new adoptive country including language, lack of recognition of their qualifications or education, discrimination, and lower earnings. Housing affordability is one of many key issues for new immigrant households, and therefore measures aimed at increasing and improving the affordability of rental and ownership housing, both new and existing, would greatly help new immigrant households. The Region of Peel has several supports for new immigrants to help them establish themselves in the community. This includes the Peel Newcomer Strategy Group, the Peel Immigration Web Portal, and the Liveable Peel Immigration Project. As part of the Aging at Home strategy, the Central West LHIN is funding in-home supports through local immigrant community service groups to provide culturally sensitive supports for older adults of various cultural communities. New immigrants, regardless of their professional or career training in their country of origin, typically earn less and many are not able to restart their

199


careers in their profession. Many immigrant households are also larger than the average households and often times, more than one generation lives together. As a result, many new immigrant households require larger forms of housing of affordable housing. Other possible design elements that can be important to some new immigrant groups are the orientation of the units, the size of family rooms or kitchens, and the ability to create a space for prayer or a prayer room. Both the built form and required elements may put added pressure on housing affordability of units desired by new immigrant families. To address this need, the creation of larger affordable and market units tailored to new immigrant families should be encouraged. This could include the use of modular or FlexHousing type designs that could help new immigrant families in terms of better adapting their needs to the housing form. It could also include promoting housing forms such as stacked row/town houses and other multi-family forms previously described in section 4.2. It is suggested that the Region of Peel continue its research and work aimed at helping new immigrant household, and that it work at developing more housing specific resources that may help this diverse population group. This includes continuing to build upon existing relationships with immigrant community groups, as well as developers and builders, and forging new relationships which can help in better defining the various needs of new immigrant groups. 4.16.4 Aboriginal People

Many Aboriginal peoples face significant challenges, and affordable housing for Aboriginal people is increasingly being recognized as a culturally appropriate way of providing supports for this community. Aboriginal people are also over-represented in some sectors such as the homeless population, which can create issues revolving around stigma and stereotype as well. In the GTA, Wigwamen Incorporated and the Frontiers Foundation are examples of non-profit groups that provide affordable housing and services for the Aboriginal community. Wigwamen is Ontario‘s oldest urban Aboriginal housing provider, with over 400 units in its portfolio and has established strong relationships with the City of Toronto through the years. All of the group‘s units with the exception of half of those units in their 20 Sewells Road building are designated for Aboriginal people. Wigwamen maintains their own waiting list for Aboriginal applicants, and uses Housing Connections for the 46 non-Aboriginal units at Sewells Road. All their units are rented out as RGI units. The Frontiers Foundation is a non-profit Aboriginal organization that is active in Canada and abroad. The Foundation operates several programs, one of which is designed to help build Aboriginal housing on reserves in northern and remote communities. It is associated with the independent non-profit group New

200


Frontiers Aboriginal Residential Corporation which developed ―Project Amik‖, a 74 unit RGI building in East York, Toronto. Amik is mandated to be 50% Aboriginal and 50% non-Aboriginal tenants. The group uses its own waiting list for the Aboriginal applicants, while non-Aboriginal applicants use the Housing Connections list. The building has community space that is occupied by a non-profit daycare. The Peel Aboriginal Network organizes cultural events and activities for Aboriginal residents, helping to organize Peel‘s Aboriginal Celebration. Activities such as this highlight the importance of Aboriginal culture, and the need to ensure it is represented to residents. West Parry Sound Health Centre An interesting example of working with the Aboriginal community to address their unique needs is the new West Parry Sound Health Centre which built a First Nation Healing Room in the building. The construction of this room included the installation of a separate ventilation system to allow smudging ceremonies to be held without setting off fire alarms or compromising the health of other patients while conforming to the building code. It is suggested that Region of Peel explore opportunities to work with Aboriginal community groups to see what possibilities exist for the creation of more culturally appropriate housing and resources for its Aboriginal population. 4.16.5 Youth

Youth are another group with specific needs that can vary greatly depending on their particular situation. The Region of Peel has several important resources for youth that include the Peel Youth Village, which is a combined community centre and housing complex that offers services to homeless youth between 16 and 30 years of age as well as the wider community. It has 48 housing units, 32 are designed for medium and long term accommodation, and 16 are designed for short term stays. Support services are provided for the youth which include counselling services, recreational activities, employment counselling, and life skills programs. Our Place Peel is a non-profit agency that provides emergency shelter and long-term transitional housing for youth, many of whom are homeless or dealing with issues of sexual, physical or emotional abuse. Resources include life skills workshops, counselling, employment support and services, as well as education support and mentoring.

201


Youth Services Bureau of Ottawa An example of a continuum of housing and care for youth is operated by the Youth Services Bureau of Ottawa. The Bureau provides a wide range of mental health, youth justice, community, youth engagement, and employment services and counselling. Housing supports are available and include emergency and transitional housing units for 24 young men and 18 young women, long term apartments in 65 units or various sizes, a downtown drop-in centre, as well as one-on-one housing search services. It is suggested that the Region of Peel consider continuing its current work aimed at helping and supporting youth, and work to further build relationships that will help it achieve these goals. 4.16.6 Low Income Families and Lone-Parents

Low income families and lone-parent households often encounter problems finding affordable housing that is large enough for their needs. Research has shown that adequate housing has positive impacts on individuals, and is just as important for children. Studies conducted in Canada and the U.S. found that there is a link between the condition of housing and living conditions and a child‘s educational achievements. City of Vancouver The City of Vancouver mandates that 25% of units built in ―new communities‖, typically areas being redeveloped, be suitable for families with children. These policies usually appear in the secondary plans for the various communities. Vancouver defines these family units as having two or more bedrooms, and be located within the first eight floors of the building, thus ensuring they overlook play areas and are within easy access to other amenities such as community services or recreation. There are no direct requirements, instead the City determines the number of units to be created through negotiations with the developers. Within its social housing units, the City has closely monitored the demands and needs of the various areas to better assess the sizes of the units to be built. It is suggested that the Region work in collaboration with area municipalities, housing providers and private developers to explore strategies for the development of affordable homes suitable for families with children. 4.16.7 Women

Women, as a group, more frequently experience housing affordability issues than their male counterparts. In particular, single parent female households, women fleeing abuse relationships and older women on fixed incomes experience housing affordability problems. Housing specifically targeted to

202


women provides safe and supportive environments for those women who require it. In Peel there are several options and resources available to women: the Salvation Army Family Life Resource Centre provides emergency shelter and services for abused women and their children, and Interim Place provides emergency and transitional shelter. Angela‘s Place offers transitional housing to families facing issues of homelessness or abuse. As with many other groups in which affordability is a factor to accessing adequate housing, strategies must be put in place to ensure there is an adequate supply of safe, affordable housing for all Peel‘s residents. Potential strategies are discussed throughout this report. Lifestyle Opportunities for the Future Through Sharing (LOFFTS) A housing option for single women that has recently been introduced is called LOFFTS (Lifestyle Opportunities For the Future Through Sharing)®. This concept, which was developed by Norma Gamble, is to create a cluster or hub of five houses where five women live cooperatively in an affordable, high quality, vibrant and creative living environment. The LOFFTS cluster can be replicated in communities across the country and offers creative opportunities to improve women‘s lifestyle by sharing the use of a hybrid car, travel expenses, wellness facilitator, micro economy, cultural, educational and volunteer opportunities and many more opportunities. The concept involves the renovation of a single detached house of about 3,800 square feet to five independent units. Each unit will be approximately 400 square feet and will have its own small kitchenette and bathroom designed for aging in place. Depending on the design of the selected house, each unit will have its own access to both the outdoors and common areas of the house. The common areas will include a fully functioning office for the administration of the house as well as for the use of the residents (e.g. includes computer, internet connection, printer). There will also be a gym, a hot tub in the garden, and a laundry room. The living and dining areas of the house will be retained and act as a common living area where the residents can gather and hold events. This common area can also be rented out to organizations, such as women‘s groups, in the community to provide extra income for operating expenses. The original kitchen will also be maintained for use during events or to be rented out to organizations renting the common living area. A small guest suite will be provided for family members and other guests of residents. In terms of energy conservation measures, an emphasis will be placed on using ‗green technology‘ which would entail the use of innovative approaches to enhance energy efficiency and sustainability. Energy efficient appliances, plumbing and electrical features will be utilized throughout the house.

203


It is suggested that the Region of Peel continue its work in partnering with groups to provide shelter and housing options for diverse populations such as women and consider exploring other diverse housing options for women, such as the LOFFTS concept. 4.17 Approaches to Address Homelessness

Peel Region has developed a comprehensive strategy to addressing homelessness in its community. However, the lack of stable, sufficient funding from senior levels of government has made it difficult for the Region and its community partners to implement the strategy. As mentioned previously, the Region should advocate to the federal government to make it a priority to develop a long-term national housing strategy, in partnership with the provinces, that has the flexibility to respond to the diverse needs that exist in communities across Canada. Addressing homelessness would be an important element of this strategy. Given that the Region has a strategy in place to address homelessness, the purpose of this section is to identify a number of practices of other jurisdictions that may be of interest to the Region and its community partners. 4.17.1 Social Enterprise

An innovative approach of employment help, prevention and rehabilitation is the St. John‘s Bakery, which is affiliated with the St. John the Compassionate Mission. The bakery, a retail and wholesale establishment, provides employment, apprenticeships and training for individuals who are homeless or at-risk persons suffering from addictions problems, mental illness or other issues. A framework of stable employment is provided from which the employees can pay for needs and rents, and while the onus is on the participants to get the help they need, the bakery provides a supportive and compassionate environment. The bakery‘s breads are organic and traditionally made, and are sold in many of Toronto‘s café‘s, restaurants and grocery establishments, a testament to their quality. The bakery was a recipient of the Toronto Enterprise Fund. In Montréal‘s neighbourhood of Hochelaga-Maisoneuve, the non-profit group SOS Vélo recycles old bicycles into completely refurbished ones that it sells from its workshop and store. The group hires at-risk youth with difficult or precarious employment prospects, little or incomplete education, and little employment experience. The youth must undergo an extensive training program that includes theoretical and practical sessions which focus on a variety of transferable skill areas including the manufacturing aspects of its

204


activities, as well as sales and office administration work. The group, which has been operating since 1995, has received recognition of its activities from the neighborhood economic development corporation, as well as having been accredited by the Ministère de l‘Emploi et de la Solidarité social‘s employment and job registry, Emploi-Québec. 4.17.2 Housing Help Training

The Toronto-based Resources Exist for Networking and Training (RENT) is a component of the East York East Toronto Family Resources (EYET) and was developed to help further knowledge and experience sharing of the housing help sector through capacity building and a peer-learning network. They offer training workshops, networking sessions between various sectors such as housing, income support, and legal services. The group also organizes mentoring and job-shadowing opportunities for staff orientation, and works at developing partnerships between landlords and housing workers to prevent homelessness by keeping strong tenancies. In 2006 RENT piloted an online service, www.landlordconnect.ca to help forge stronger partnerships between affordable housing landlords and housing help services. 4.17.3 Primary Care to Homeless Men

Seaton House, one of the City of Toronto‘s men‘s shelters developed a partnership with the St. Michael‘s hospital to offer primary care to homeless men with chronic health conditions. The difficulties of being homeless and living with a chronic disease such as HIV, cancer, or mental illnesses, compounded with the lack of family doctors and health care access and coverage prompted the development of a partnership which brought the practitioners to the patients. Multi-disciplinary teams of physicians, psychiatrists, nurses and shelter workers created The Annex, an integrated care and harm reduction program for the individuals at Seaton House. Data from the experience showed that emergency room visits diminished by 84%, and admission to detox centres by 93%. For those with mental illnesses, 45% were housed six months after the program starting, and 33% improved clinically. 4.18 Barriers to Accessing Housing

There are many other barriers to accessing housing which can affect many groups, including the special needs and diverse population groups discussed above. This section will examine potential tools and practices that can be used to help reduce or remove certain barriers to accessing housing in the Region of Peel.

http://www.landlordconnect.ca/

205


4.18.1 Increasing Minimum Wage and Shelter Allowances

An important component, and barrier to affordability, is how much people earn as it directly affects their capacity to access housing. This is especially true for lower income households, often working at minimum wage jobs or those on social assistance. As was discussed in section 2.2.2.9, the current maximum shelter allowances available for Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program recipients are not sufficient for average market rents to be affordable to these households. People working for minimum wage experience the same affordability issues. Until 2007, the minimum wage in Ontario had remained unchanged. The new minimum wages took effect as of the 2007 provincial budget and started in March 2008 with an increase to $8.75 per hour. This will continue to increase in March 2009 to $9.50 per hour, and in March 2010 will increase to $10.25 per hour. The following table compares the affordable monthly rent for households earning minimum wage to the average market rent. Even with increased minimum wages, the table above highlights the affordability gap that remains for households earning these wages as compared to the average market rents in Brampton. Increasing minimum wage rates is another way to help address the affordability problem being faced by some Peel households.

Minimum wage and shelter allowance income supports do help, but still do not completely address the affordability gap for the poorest households. For this reason, it is suggested that the Region advocate to the provincial government to enhance minimum wage rates in high rent areas of the province with the objective of reducing excessive rent burdens of the working poor. It is also suggested that the Region consider developing its own comprehensive poverty reduction strategy that complements those prepared by senior governments.

Table 9: Minimum Wage Affordability Comparison, Brampton, 2007

Minimum Wage

(per hour)

Affordable Monthly Rent @ 30% of Gross Income (Based on 40hr work week)

Average Market Rent (Brampton)

80% of Average Market Rent

(Brampton)

1-Bdrm 2-Bdrm 1-Bdrm 2-Bdrm

$8.75 $420

$895 $1,024 $716 $819 $9.50 $456

$10.25 $492 Source: SHS Consulting calculations, CMHC Greater Toronto Area Rental Market Report, 2007

206


4.18.2 Municipally-Funded Rent Supplement Program

Rent supplements help low-income individuals and families obtain affordable and adequate housing in the rental housing market, either private or non-profit. Generally, rent supplements are the difference between rent-geared-to-income and average market rents. Such rent supplement programs can help income integration in communities and buildings, lessening stigma attached to concentrations of social housing and social housing assistance recipients. Funding for much of the existing rent supplement is cost-shared by the Province and Service Manager. Some municipalities in Ontario have implemented municipally-funded rent supplement programs. For example, the Region of Waterloo provides 100% municipally-funded rent supplements to 140 affordable rental units. This program mirrors the guidelines outlined in the Social Housing Reform Act. The one exception is that the Region charges the maximum shelter allowance, which is higher than the beneficiary allowance. As a result of this, however, the Region only signs agreements with landlords that pay for the utilities themselves so that tenants are not responsible for these costs. There is no specified term for this program. Applicants for this program come from the Social Housing Waiting List. The program costs the municipality approximately $550,000 annually. The following table illustrates the potential cost of a Region of Peel fully funded rent supplement program (the example average market rents for the City of Brampton and OW shelter allowance as the affordable rent).

The tables above illustrate that the potential cost to the Region for a municipally initiated and funded rent supplement program ranges from $5,568 to $6,468 per unit per year or an average of $6,108 per unit per year ($509/unit/month). Should the Region decide to fund 100 units through a municipally-initiated rent supplement program, it would cost, on average, $610,800 per year on an ongoing basis.

Table 10: Potential Costs for Municipally-Initiated Rent Supplement Program (Per Unit, OW Recipients)

Unit Size

CMHC Average Market Rent Brampton

Maximum OW Monthly Shelter

Allowance

Municipal Subsidy Requirement

(Per Unit)

Municipal Annual Subsidy Requirement

(Per Unit)

1 Bedroom $895 $356 $539 $6,468

2 Bedroom $1,024 $560 $464 $5,568

3 Bedroom $1,131 $607 $524 $6,288 Source: SHS Consulting calculations, Ontario Works, CMHC Greater Toronto Area Rental Market Report 2007

207


Given the number of applicants currently on the Peel Region social housing wait list an expanded rent supplement program would help address the affordability problems that many renters are currently facing. It is suggested that the Region investigate the feasibility of increasing the number of subsidized units by creating a rent supplement program that is fully funded by the Region in the absence of increased funding from the senior levels of government. 4.18.3 Rent Deposits

A challenge faced by many low income households is the ability to meet private landlords‘ requirement for the first and last month rent deposit. These households may have sufficient income to afford the monthly rent charges, but they have not been able to save sufficient funds to cover the cost of a deposit for first and last month rent. The Region may want to consider exploring the feasibility of providing a program which provides interest-free loans for first and last month‘s rent for households who do not qualify. 4.18.4 Individual Development Accounts (IDAs)

Individual Development Accounts (IDA‘s) are dedicated saving accounts that provide a structured way for encouraging lower-income households to save for certain specified uses, including most commonly a down payment for first-time home purchase. These programs are typically reserved for lower-income individuals and families having limited assets and earning less than a set income threshold. Individuals and families are encouraged to make regular savings through matching deposits from government and/or other sources. The matching deposits are provided at rates ranging from an additional $1 to $8 for every $1 saved by the participants. The savings of the participants remain their personal property, but the matching funds can be disbursed only for one or more of the uses noted earlier. To help them reach their savings goals, and also under the responsibilities associated with homeownership, the participants are required to receive financial training as well as one-on-one counselling. The local programs are typically managed by community-based organizations and the accounts are administered by local financial institutions. IDA‘s have emerged out of a new way of addressing poverty that has developed in the US since the early 1990s. The fundamental tenet of this new approach, generally referred to as asset-based social policy, is that the only sure way of enabling the poor to escape, and stay out of poverty is to help them develop and accumulate assets. There are nearly 400 local IDA programs in the US.

208


These programs are supported by two major national demonstration programs, and by 36 or more state programs. IDA programs do not increase the supply of affordable ownership housing, but they can be an important adjunct to supply programs for that housing. The reason is that they are a way of addressing a significant obstacle -- namely, that many of the lower-income households potentially benefiting from these programs will not have a sufficient down payment to qualify for a mortgage. In Canada, Social and Enterprise Development Innovations (SEDI) currently provides programs to assist lower income households to save for education or first and last month‘s rent deposits. The Home$ave program is currently being developed as a pilot project, with governments of Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba participating, as well as the Cities of Hamilton, Toronto, Regina, Saskatoon, Montreal, Fredericton and Halifax. Part of SEDI‘s work was to identify the major barriers faced by lower income 'households seeking to enter the homeownership market. As noted in the report prepared for Toronto Community Housing Corporation regarding the Regent Park project16, these barriers include:

Lack of information about buying a home

Lack of information about a personal credit rating

Lack of understanding on how to repair a poor credit rating

Inability to manage debt

Need for financial assistance which does not increase long-term debt. In 2003, the Region of Peel examined and evaluated various experiences with IDA‘s. The report concluded that the accumulation of assets for low income earners was positive for several reasons: financially, savings and assets help to cushion a person or a family against unexpected income changes, and can help to leverage other opportunities, for example, serve as collateral for loans. Additionally, it added that from a personal development perspective, savings and assets did help individuals by promoting self discipline and self sufficiency which in turn builds personal capacity, promotes social inclusion and gives the participants a sense of hope and control over their future. It is suggested that the Region continue to investigate the feasibility of establishing Individual Development Accounts (IDA‘s) and a complementary program to provide a structured way for low income households to save for a down payment to purchase a house.

209


4.18.5 Housing Location

There is evidence that the location of housing can affect other aspects in the lives of individuals, such as employment. Good housing must be well situated, and have access to the required amenities, services and employment opportunities to allow for a good quality of life. These principles must be applied without discrimination to affordable and market housing alike in order to support the creation of compact, complete communities as mandated by the Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement. Many municipalities have started to examine more closely the locations where new affordable housing is being built and assessing what amenities and services are accessible. Proper access to public transport is an important element within this as it allows individuals to access services and employment through the city. The City of Montreal worked with graduate students at the Institut d‘Urbanisme of the Université de Montréal to map out transportation access of social housing buildings throughout the City, and looked at major transportation axes and ease of access. The Region of York encourages new affordable housing to be located along transportation nodes. It is suggested that the Region consider ensuring that future development of affordable housing be located in support of the principle of developing compact, complete communities throughout the Region. It is also recommended that the Region seek out opportunities to better understand how its current social and affordable housing stock is serviced, and how easily these residents can access neighbouring services and amenities. 4.18.6 Social Concerns in Social and Affordable Housing

Social and affordable housing providers as well as private landlords provide housing to many different individuals, including those that are defined as hard to house or that may have some social concerns, such as behavioural issues with adolescent dependents for example. Providers may not be able to provide such tenants with the supports needed or required to help them maintain their housing. For some, these supports can be as simple as basic life skills, budgeting, personal care and employment assistance services. Many of the emergency, transitional and supportive housing providers in the Region of Peel do provide such services to their clients.

210


In Chatham-Kent there are several programs that are active within the region. One social housing provider, Chatham-Hope Non-Profit Housing, provides such services through its In-Home Support Program through an agreement with the Chatham-Kent Integrated Children‘s Service for tenants of Hope Housing. In addition to the above mentioned services, the program includes childcare issue support, healthy eating, positive parenting, problem solving and coping skills, and support services for loss, substance abuse and family violence issues. The Salvation Army division of Chatham also provides similar services to landlords and tenants within Chatham-Kent, funded by MCSS. The program operates as a drop-in service for landlords and tenants for various housing related issues such as evictions and tenant‘s rights educations, as well as landlord-tenant mediation and housing supports for individuals having difficulty paying rent or utilities. It is suggested that the Region consider conducting a survey of social housing providers and tenants in order to determine what supports are needed to promote positive tenant-landlord relationships and provide the necessary supports to tenants in order for them to maintain their housing. In addition, it is suggested that the Region consider exploring innovative initiatives for partnering with community organizations to provide the required supports. 4.18.7 Discrimination

Discrimination in housing can manifest itself in many forms, including racial profiling of tenants and racial discrimination, sexism, ageism, sexual orientation, and socio-economic profiling. Many individuals from all groups and demographics have experienced such discrimination. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has published several reports that highlight issues surrounding discrimination in housing, as have other groups and researchers. The Region of Peel currently has several awareness and anti-discrimination campaigns that includes AIDS awareness, gay and lesbian equity issues, and breastfeeding, and it has also developed a guide for residents of Peel Living. Other groups provide legal and informational resources that can help tenants with legal issues and discrimination issues. It is suggested that Region of Peel consider continuing its work on anti-discrimination education and seek out opportunities to work with private sector landlords, housing providers and community groups to disseminate information on discrimination and human rights as they relate to housing. 4.19 Public Education and Awareness

211


Housing strategies and other such policies should be accompanied by public education and awareness campaigns that can help residents better understand the needs and positive effects of housing in the community. Such campaigns can also help foster better community support by dispelling stereotypes and myths about certain forms of housing or their residents. Halton Region As part of its Comprehensive Housing Strategy, the Regional Municipality of Halton implemented an extensive public education and awareness campaign that aimed at fostering participation from the community. One such program aimed at youth, Be a Hero: Be a Voice for Affordable Housing was a contest aimed a high school youth and is now in its second year. The contest asks young people to enter a creative submission, such as a video, song, or poetry that illustrates the need of affordable housing in Halton. A grand prize of $1,000 is given to the winner, with second place and runner up entries receiving $500 and $100 respectively, all winners are publicly recognized in a ceremony, which was linked to community events held for National Housing Day. The other initiative, Voices for Housing Choices, is a group of people that share their experiences with affordable and accessible housing, and speak or present their experiences at public events. This initiative helps by allowing people to associate faces with households needing housing or assistance, humanizing this need. The Region of Halton has also posted on the Strategy‘s website various simple ways in which people can get involved and lend a hand, such as volunteering with non-profit agencies, organizing food drives, or advocating for housing to local MP‘s or MPP‘s. The Strategy won the 2007 Excellence in Planning Award for communication and public education from the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. City of Peterborough The City of Peterborough‘s Affordable Housing Action Committee (AHAC) has been publishing a community-oriented report and newsletter called Housing is Fundamental, which outlines current needs, achievements and changes with regards to housing in Peterborough. The information presented helps put the need and importance of housing in perspective, defining issues and terms to help the public better understand affordable housing. It is suggested that the Region consider developing a comprehensive public education campaign to release the findings of the Housing Strategy and garner support for the actions from the broader community, including private sector, community agencies, senior government and Peel residents.

212


It is also suggested that the Region create a directory of grants and loans for creation and rehabilitation of safe, affordable housing based on the information presented in the Tools and Practices background paper.

213


5.0 Potential Actions for Housing Strategy

The literature review of relevant publications, analysis of impact of various tools on affordability and interviews with a cross-section of proponents involved in the delivery and operation of relevant legislation, policies and programs helped identify their strengths and weaknesses and areas for improvement as well as gaps that are currently going un-serviced by any available programs. This information led to the identification of a number of potential actions related to federal and provincial legislation, policies and programs that Peel Region may consider for inclusion in the Housing Strategy. Most of these actions centre on the need for a long-term approach and funding commitments from the federal and provincial government to address housing and homelessness issues. The senior government programs and funding that has been available during the last 15 years has been limited, short-term, not well coordinated and not responsive to the changing needs of Peel. As well, these actions cannot be considered as standalones, as highlighted in the United Way of Peel‘s Investing for Resilience report: they must be mutually supportive, and be part of current Regional policies, programs and strategies. In the next phase of the study, the potential policies and strategies identified in this paper to address the housing needs of current and future Peel residents will be considered for inclusion as recommended actions in the Housing Strategy .

214


Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

Abbeyfield Housing Abbeyfield houses are small-scale accommodations for senior citizens who live like a large ―family‖ under one roof, each with their own bed-sitting room but who share facilities such as a communal living room and dining room. Typically a Cook/Co-ordinator prepares daily meals for the ten or so residents who otherwise live independently. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) This regulation establishes accessibility standards for customer service and it applies to every designated public sector organization and to every other person or organization that provides goods or services to members of the public or other third parties and that has at least one employee in Ontario (Ministry of Community and Social Services, 2008). Accessory Apartment / Secondary Suite / Basement Apartment A self-contained apartment consisting of a room or rooms in a single or semi-detached house and can be located in any part of the house, not necessarily in the basement. They are also called ―granny flats‖ or ―nanny suites‖ (City of Brampton). Affordable Housing In the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of:

Housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 percent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or

Housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 percent below the average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area;

In the case of rental housing, the least expensive of: a) A unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 percent of gross annual

household income for low and moderate income households; or b) A unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a

unit in the regional market area (Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Places to Grow, 2006).

Affordable Housing Program (AHP) Is the term that the federal government is using for its 2005 affordable housing program. In Ontario, it is called Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program (Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2008).

215


As-of-Right Means an allowable land use within an existing municipal zoning by-law (Halton Region, 2006). Assisted Housing Is housing that is available to low and moderate-income households for rent where part of the housing cost is subsidized through a government program. This is also referred to as ―Social Housing‖ (Halton Region, 2006 or City of Toronto, 2003). Boarding House

Is a structure where:

The building height does not exceed three storeys and the building area does not exceed 6500 sq. ft.;

Accommodation is provided for more than three persons in return for remuneration or provision of services, or both;

Accommodation is provided with meals;

Operator does not offer bathroom or kitchen facilities for the exclusive use of individual occupants; and

Residents may or may not require care or treatment because of age, mental or physical limitations (Region of Peel, 2006).

Bluefield Refers to older, unused institutional lands or buildings. Brownfield Sites

Undeveloped or previously developed properties that may be contaminated. They are usually, but not exclusively, former industrial or commercial properties that may be underutilized, derelict, or vacant (Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Places to Grow, 2006).

Built-Up Area

Refers to all land within the built boundary, which are the limits of the developed urban area as defined by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal in accordance with Policy 2.2.3.5 (Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Places to Grow, 2006).

216


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) Is the agency responsible for carrying out the current responsibilities of the federal government with regard to affordable housing (ONPHA, 2007). Caregiver A person who is responsible for attending to the needs of an older adult and who also helps in identifying or preventing or treating an illness or disability (Peel Region, 2006). Care Home A residential complex that is occupied or intended to be occupied by persons for the purpose of receiving care services, whether or not receiving the services is the primary purpose of the occupancy. Care services means health care services, rehabilitative or therapeutic services or services that provide assistance with the activities of daily living. These are often referred to as Retirement or Rest Homes. The tenant enters into a lease that sets out the rent and the care services and meals being provided and the charges for them (Halton Region, 2006). Cohousing Cohousing is a concept that came to North America in 1988 from Denmark where it emerged over 25 years ago. It describes neighbourhoods that combine the autonomy of private dwellings with the advantages of shared resources and community living (Canadian Cohousing Network, BC). Community Care Access Centres (CCACs) Are provincially-funded organizations providing information about the care options available in designated geographic areas. CCACs serve as a local point of contact and service coordination. They also determine eligibility for government-funded home and community support services and admission to a long-term care home (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2002). Compact Complete Community This refers to a well designed and properly scaled community which meets the daily, and lifetime needs of all people through an appropriate mix of employment, services, a full range of housing including affordable housing, community and cultural infrastructure, schools, recreation opportunities, open space, and access to public transportation as well as other options for safe, non-motorized travel (SHS Consulting, 2008 based on the definition of ―Complete Communities‖ in Places to Grow). Cooperative Housing (Co-op) This is a different form of social housing in that it is not rental housing. The households who live in the project are all members of the cooperative

217


corporation that owns the building. They elect amongst themselves a board of directors who are responsible for overseeing the management of the building. They are subject to rules in the Co-operative Corporations Act and are not considered to be landlords so are not subject to the Tenant Protection Act (ONPHA, 2007). Density Bonus A voluntary scheme in zoning by-laws that enables developers to build additional units in return for public amenities such as affordable housing, underground parking, parkland, and daycare facilities (West Coast Environmental Law). Development Charges (DC) Fees charged to developers of new residential and non-residential facilities. The fees are used to offset the municipal costs of providing services to these new facilities in accordance with the Development Charges Act (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2007). Disability The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act defines this as any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation or disfigurement that is caused by bodily injury, birth defect or illness and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, a brain injury, any degree of paralysis, amputation, lack of physical co-ordination, blindness or visual impediment, deafness or speech impediment, or physical reliance on a guide dog or other animal or on a wheelchair or other remedial applicants or device. It is a condition of mental impairment or a developmental disability. A learning disability, or a dysfunction in one or more of the processes involved in understanding or using symbols or spoken language. It is a mental disorder or an injury or disability for which benefits were claimed or received under the insurance plan established under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997; May also be referred to as a ―handicap‖ (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act 2005). Diverse Populations Diverse populations: distinct groups within our population that require different levels of services and needs which may include and are not limited to older adults, children, youth, diverse ethnic populations, Aboriginal persons, and recent immigrants. Domiciliary Hostels

Are permanent residences that are safe and supportive for people with special needs. The hostel operators enter into agreements with the municipality and are paid to provide residents (e.g., people with special needs,

218


including individuals with developmental disabilities, people with mental illnesses, elderly individuals with developmental disabilities, and people with addiction problems) with permanent accommodation and support for daily living (Peel Region, 2006). These residences are client-focused and tenants are supported in a manner that meets individual needs.

Emergency Shelter Is a short-term living situation in an emergency housing facility or motel for individuals and families who have no shelter. Greyfield Previously developed properties that are not contaminated. They are usually, but not exclusively, former commercial properties that may be undervalued, derelict or vacant (Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Places to Grow, 2006). Group Homes (from Toronto) Supervised living accommodation -

a) licensed or funded under Province of Ontario or Government of Canada legislation,

b) for persons requiring a group living arrangement by reason of their emotional, mental, social or physical condition or legal status, and

c) is for limited number of persons, exclusive of staff, living together as a single housekeeping unit.

Home in Peel Affordable Ownership Program This program is designed to provide low-to-moderate income residents who are currently renting a unit the opportunity to qualify for down-payment loan assistance to buy a home in Peel Region. This program will assist eligible applicants who have a total annual income of $75,800 or less to purchase a resale home in the Region of Peel that does not exceed a purchase price of $247,000 (Peel Region). Homelessness Homelessness is being absolutely without shelter; being forced to share accommodation under conditions offering no security of tenure or which are adverse to physical and emotional well being; or, being at substantial risk of being on the street in the immediate future (Peel Region). Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) This replaces the National Homelessness Initiative, which expired on March 31, 2007. It provides funding over two years to prevent and reduce homelessness by helping to establish the structures and supports needed to move homeless and at-risk individuals towards self-sufficiency and full

219


participation in Canadian society. Under the HPS, the federal government will offer the provinces and territories the opportunity to enter into bilateral partnerships, improve collaboration and develop linkages between the federal homelessness programs and provincial/territorial social services to help communities make strategic investments that will best serve their homeless populations (Human Resources and Social Development Canada). Human Resource and Social Development Canada (HRSDC) The federal agency that administers the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) (Human Resources and Social Development Canada). Immigrant Population

Refers to people who are, or have been, landed immigrants in Canada. A landed immigrant is a person who has been granted the right to live in Canada permanently by immigration authorities. Some immigrants have resided in Canada for a number of years, while others have arrived recently. Most immigrants are born outside Canada, but a small number were born in Canada (Statistics Canada, 1999).

Inclusionary Zoning The establishment of zoning regulations that require the provision of affordable housing as part of the rezoning for a development (Smart Growth BC). Intensification The development of a property, site, or area at a higher density than currently exists through: (1) redevelopment, including the reuse of brownfield sites; (2) the development of vacant and/or underutilized lots within previously developed areas; (3) infill development; or, (4) the expansion or conversion of existing buildings. (Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, Places to Grow, 2006). Key Stakeholders A key stakeholder refers to an individual or group that is or might be affected by the outcome of an individual or organization‘s actions, e.g., a decision related to the use of a particular resource. People‘s involvement in the use of this resource could be related to the economy, use, mandate, proximity, and/or values/philosophy (Peel Region, Retirement Homes Key Terms Definitions, 2006). Local Health Integration Network (LHIN) LHINs are not-for-profit corporations that work with local health providers and community members to determine the health service priorities of their regions. LHINs do not provide services directly but are responsible for

220


integrating services in each of their specific geographic areas (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2002). Lodging or Rooming Home

This refers to structures where:

building height does not exceed three storeys and the building area does not exceed 6500 ft2 ;

accommodation is provided for more than three persons in return for remuneration or the provision of services, or both;

accommodation is provided without meals; and

operator does not offer bathroom or kitchen facilities for the exclusive use of individual occupants (Peel Region, 2006).

Long-Term Care (LTC) Facilities Are facilities designed for people who require the availability of 24-hour nursing care and supervision within a secure setting. In general, long-term care homes offer higher levels of personal care and support than those typically offered by either retirement homes or supportive housing (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2002). Low and Moderate Income (from PPS) In the case of ownership housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for the regional market area; or in the case of rental housing, households with incomes in the lowest 60 per cent of the income distribution for renter households for the regional market area. Market Housing This is non-subsidized housing that is rented or owned (Peel Region). Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS) Is the provincial ministry responsible for numerous social service programs. In the housing field, it is directly involved in the funding and administration of special needs social housing projects that are occupied 100 percent by special needs clients (Ministry of Community and Social Services, 2005). Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (MOH-LTC) The department of the Ontario government that is responsible for administering the health care system and providing health care services to the public through such programs as health insurance (OHIP), drug benefits, assistive devices, care for the mentally ill, long-term care, home and community support services, public health, health promotion and disease prevention. It also funds and regulates hospitals and long-term care homes,

221


public health laboratories, coordinates emergency health services and operates psychiatric hospitals (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2002). Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) In terms of social housing, this ministry has responsibility for the Social Housing Reform Act. The Ministry also sets out and administers other municipality-related legislation (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2008). Modified Unit Social Housing Reform Act (2000) defines modified unit as a unit that has been modified so as to be accessible to an individual with a physical disability or so as to allow an individual with a physical disability to live independently (Social Housing Reform Act, 2000). Non-Profit Housing This is housing that is owned and administered by not-for-profit housing corporations, incorporated under the Ontario Corporation‘s Act. Non-profit housing is run by community groups such as service clubs, ethnic organizations, faith groups, unions, and advocates for people with disabilities. Operating on a not-for-profit basis, it is funded through tenants‘ rents with subsidies from various government programs. In the Region of Peel, there are 32 private non-profit housing providers, accounting for over 3,500 units (Peel Region). Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) Is a provincial income assistance program for people who are deemed to be unable to return to the workforce due to medical reasons (Ministry of Community and Social Services, 2005). Ontario Works (OW) Is the municipally administered financial assistance program that assists families and individuals who are in temporary financial need and who have no other source of income (Ministry of Community and Social Services, 2005). Performance Based Planning A type of flexible zoning which determines land use locations and characteristics through the application of a system of performance criteria, regulating land based on the actual impacts measured against predetermined standards or performance criteria as opposed to regulating on proposed use. Peel Access to Housing (PATH) Peel Access to Housing (PATH) is the ―one-window‖ point of access for people who want to apply for subsidized housing in the Region of Peel. It is managed by the Region and maintains a centralized waiting list for the various

222


social housing providers in Peel, and provides customer services to applicants on the waiting list (Peel Region). Peel Living Is the Region of Peel‘s non-profit housing company. It is also know as Peel Housing Corporation. It operates as an independent corporation of the Region of Peel and is administered by the Region‘s Housing and Property department (Peel Region). Peel Region Official Plan Review Program (PROPR) This work program outlines the approach the Region will take in reviewing its Official Plan. It was developed with input from area municipalities to ensure the work involved on the Region and area municipality official plans is complementary. The Official Plan Review is being undertaken to meet the requirements of the Planning Act for a municipality to revise its Official plan every five years to ensure that it conforms to provincial plans, including the Places to Grow Act, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Provincial Policy Statement (Peel Region). Places to Grow Places to Grow is the Ontario government‘s initiative to manage growth and development in Ontario in a way that supports economic prosperity, protects the environment and helps communities achieve a high quality of life (Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, 2007). Provincial Growth Plan Released on November 24, 2005, the Provincial Growth Plan entitled ―Places to Grow- Better Choices, Brighter Future‖ was issued by the Minister of Public Infrastructure and Renewal under the authority of the Places to Grow Act (2005). The proposed Plan provides a framework for implementing the Province‘s vision for managing growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe area in 2031. It expresses the Province‘s interests and directions on issues ranging from the distribution of population, household and employment forecasts to where and how to grow; and from the infrastructure needed to support growth to the protection of heritage and natural resources. The proposed Provincial Growth Plan received final approval on June 13, 2005.

223


Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) Provincial Policy Statement is a statement of the Provincial government‘s intention or desires regarding certain matters in the development of housing (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing). Public Housing In Ontario, this housing was funded through agreements between the federal and provincial governments. Housing developed in the 1950‘s to mid 1960‘s was cost shared on a 75/25 basis. Housing developed after the mid-1960‘s was cost shared on a 50/50 basis between the federal and provincial government. (Until the late 1970‘s, municipalities contributed 7 per cent of the provincial costs.) Public housing is 100 per cent rent-geared-to-income housing (Halton Region, 2006). Recent Immigrants Immigrants who came to Canada up to ten years prior to a given census year. For the 2006 Census, recent immigrants are landed immigrants who arrived in Canada between January 1, 1996 and Census Day, May 16, 2006. Similarly, recent immigrants in the 2001 Census were newcomers at the time of the 1991 Census, i.e. they came to Canada between January 1, 1996 and Census Day, May 15, 2001 (Statistics Canada). Rent Supplement Program

A form of social housing whereby units in buildings owned by both private sector landlords and non-profit/co-operative social housing providers are subsidized for residents who cannot afford market level rents. Rent supplements involve a contract between these private landlords or non-profit/co-operative social housing providers and the Region of Peel. Residents pay a rent-geared-to-income (RGI) portion of the rent directly to the landlord and the rent supplement program bridges the gap between the actual market rent for the unit and the resident‘s RGI rent. Rent supplement residents are selected from the centralized waiting list run by Peel Access to Housing (PATH) and they are seamlessly integrated into existing neighbourhoods and communities in Peel (Peel Region).

Rent-Geared-to-Income (RGI) The subsidy paid to a social housing provider which equals the difference between the actual rent paid by a low-income tenant (paying approximately 30 percent of their income) and the government-approved market rent of a unit (ONPHA, 2007).

224


Residential Intensification An increase in the number of dwelling units per hectare. Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) Is a federally funded and administered program that provides funding to upgrade housing. The program has components for homeowners, landlords and people who need physical modifications to their home. This program is delivered by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (Service Canada, 2007). Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) As of January, 31, 2007 this act replaced the Tenant Protection Act of 1998 which governs the relationship between landlord and tenant in Ontario (ONPHA, 2007). Retirement Home A retirement home, as opposed to a long-term care facility, is a residential home facility that allows retired residents who are 55 years of age or older to live independently with varying levels of support – for hire or gain – for daily activity, i.e., where common facilities are provided for food preparation and consumption and where housekeeping activities and on-site medical services are provided when residents become vulnerable; such a facility may also provide retail and recreational uses for residents (Peel Region, 2006). Safer Communities Program A community safety program which aims to respond to tenant concerns about safety and security. Key elements can include in-house security services, call centres that receive and coordinate maintenance requests and can dispatch staff in response to security and maintenance-related calls, community development staff that work with tenant associations to foster the active participation of tenants in creating healthy communities and help develop partnerships with community agencies, and safety planning which can help identify and resolve problems that may cause safety concerns in buildings. The Region of Peel‘s Crime Free Multi-Housing Program is a community safety program. Service Manager A municipal government responsible for carrying out the funding and administrative responsibilities of the Social Housing Reform Act. A Service Manager could be a regional government, a county or a separated city, depending on the local circumstances (ONPHA, 2007). Shelter

225


Shelter is short-term accommodation for persons who have no other suitable accommodation. Shelter Allowance Subsidy paid to a tenant on the social housing waiting list to help them pay the difference between rent-geared-to-income and market rent in the private rental marketplace (ONPHA, 2007). Single Room Occupancy Accommodation (from CMHC) Single room occupancy accommodation: is similar to a rooming house, but with a kitchen and a bathroom in each unit. Support services such as health facilities or assistance in finding employment may be provided. Social Housing Social Housing (sometimes referred to as ―assisted‖, ―subsidized‖ or ―rent-geared-to income‖ housing) is housing that is a sub-set of affordable housing. It refers to housing units provided under a variety of federal and provincial housing programs by the municipal non-profit housing corporation (Peel Living) and private non-profit and co-operative non-profit housing corporations. Residents in rent-geared-to-income units in social housing portfolios pay no more than 30% of their annual gross household income in rent. It also refers to housing units within the private rental sector, including the above affordable housing, where rent-geared-to-income subsidy is provided through a rent supplement agreement with the landlord (Peel Region). Special Needs Individuals who require ongoing personal care and support services in a supervised environment which is safe and which offers personal care services (e.g. meals, housekeeping and assistance with activities of daily living), as well as recreational and social activities to enhance quality of life. Special Needs Housing A unit that is occupied by or is made available for occupancy by a household having one or more individuals who require accessibility modifications or some form of social as well as financial support (examples include group homes, rooming houses, lodging houses, boarding houses, supportive housing, transition housing, and emergency shelters) in order to live independently in the community. Supportive Housing This type of housing offers separate and self-contained, affordable housing units with services that assist people live more stable, productive lives. Services may include help with personal care and assistance with medical care including diagnosis and treatment and distribution of medicine. Such services

226


may or may not be provided on site on a ―round the clock‖ basis and may be funded with government support and/or by the users of these services themselves (Peel Region, 2006). Transitional Housing This is a category of government funded housing that provides medium-term accommodation for those who have experienced homelessness or shelter use. It is meant to bridge the gap between costly emergency shelters and permanent housing and is also known as ―second stage housing.‖ Transitional housing usually involved support services delivered on site, building on those available at emergency homeless shelters (Peel Region). Universal Physical Accessibility or Universal Design A set of principles that guide decision-makers to create communities that are as inclusive as possible. These seven principles are:

Equitable use – the design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities

Flexibility in use – the design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities

Simple and intuitive use – use of the design is easy to understand regardless of user‘s experience and knowledge

Perceptible information – the design communicates necessary information effectively to the user

Tolerance for error – the design minimizes hazards

Low physical effort – the design can be used efficiently and comfortably and with minimum fatigue

Size and space for approach and use – appropriate size and space is provided for approach and reach, regardless of the user‘s body size or mobility (Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, 2003).

227


List of Acronyms AAC Accessibility Advisory Committee

ACIC Canadian Alternative Investment Cooperative

ACT Affordability and Choice Today

AHP Affordable Housing Program

AMO Association of Municipalities of Ontario

AODA Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005

BCLT Burlington Community Land Trust

BILD Building Industry and Land Development Association

CCA Capital Cost Allowance

CCAC Community Care Access Centre

CFMHP Crime Free Multi-Housing Program

CHPP Consolidated Homelessness Prevention Program

CIP Community Improvement Plans

CLT Community Land Trust

CMHC Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation

Co-op Cooperative Housing

CPTED Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

CWLHIN Central West Local Health Integration Network

DC Development Charges

DCR Debt Coverage Ratio

DOOR Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters

DPS Development Permit System

EA Environmental Assessment

EEF Emergency Energy Fund

EYET East York East Toronto Family Resources

FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities

GBI Green Building Initiative

GHG Greenhouse Gases

228


GST Goods and Services Tax

HASI Home Adaptation for Seniors‘ Independence program

HBA Home Builder Association

HIFIS Homeless Individuals and Families Information System

HOA Home Ownership Alternatives

HPNC High Performance New Construction

HPS Homeless Partnering Strategy

HRSDC Human Resources Skills Development Canada

HSC Homes for Special Care

HTF Housing Trust Fund

IDA Individual Development Account

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

LHIN Local Health Integration Network

LOFFTS Lifestyle Opportunities for the Future Through Sharing

LTC Long Term Care

MCSS Ministry of Community and Social Services

MHLHIN Mississauga Halton Local Health Integration Network

MMAH Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

MOH-LTC Ministry of Health and Long Term Care

NAHB National Association of Home Builders

OAP Older Adult Plan

OBC Ontario Building Code

ODA Ontarians with Disabilities Act

ODSP Ontario Disability Support Program

OMB Ontario Municipal Board

ONPHA Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association

OP Official Plan

OPA Ontario Power Authority

OSIFA Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority

OW Ontario Works

229


OWIP Ontario Works In Peel

PAWGOAH Peel Advisory Working Group on Older Adults‘ Housing

PATH Peel Access to Housing

PDF Proposal Development Funding

PHABIS Peel Halton Acquired Brain Injury Services

PHAN Peel HIV/AIDS Network

PHP Preventing Homelessness in Peel Program

PPS Provincial Policy Statement

PROPR Peel Region Official Plan Review Program

PST Provincial Sales Tax

RBP Rent Bank Program

REEP Residential Energy Efficiency Project

RENT Resources Exist for Networking and Training

RGI Rent-Geared-To-Income

RRAP Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program

RTA Residential Tenancies Act

SCPI Supporting Community Partnership Initiative

SEDI Social Enterprise Development Innovations

SEP Shelter Enhancement Program

SFRPHI Surplus Federal Real Property for Homelessness Initiative

SHIP Supportive Housing in Peel

SHRA Social Housing Reform Act

SM Service Manager

SRO Single Room Occupancy

TOD Transit-oriented Development

USGBC U.S. Green Building Council

230


Appendix 2 - Bibliography

Affordability and Choice Today (2008). ACT Solutions. Accessed from www.actprogram.com Affordability and Choice Today Program, 2003. ACT Solutions: Alternative Development Standards for Affordable Housing, Town of Banff, Alberta. Ottawa. Baker, Douglas, Neil Sipe, Brendan Gleeson (2004). Performance-Based Planning: Perspectives from the United States, Australia and New Zealand. Australia, Griffith University. http://www.griffith.edu.au/school/evp/Papers/SipeGleesonBakerPIApaper.pdf Calgary Community and Neighbourhood Services (2005). Ottawa, Ontario: A Case Study of Land Use Policy and Transferability. Accessed from http://housingaction.ca/learn/city_affordablehousinginottawa_3 Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Building Housing Incrementally. Accessed from http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/buhoin/buhoin_005.cfm Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Designing Flexible Housing. Accessed from http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/deflho/deflho_005.cfm Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Modifying Development Standards. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/pore/modest/index.cfm, accessed August, 2008. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Project Profile – Ucluelet Perpetual Affordable Housing Program. http://www.cmhc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/prpr/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=175695, accessed September 2008. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Renovation Fact Sheet – Garden Suites. Ottawa, About Your House – General Series. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/renoho/refash/refash_026.cfm, accessed October 2008. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Shared Facilities. Accessed from http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/shfa/shfa_001.cfm

http://www.actprogram.com/

http://www.griffith.edu.au/school/evp/Papers/SipeGleesonBakerPIApaper.pdf

http://housingaction.ca/learn/city_affordablehousinginottawa_3

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/buhoin/buhoin_005.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/buhoin/buhoin_005.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/deflho/deflho_005.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/deflho/deflho_005.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/pore/modest/index.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/pore/modest/index.cfm

http://www.cmhc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/prpr/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=175695


http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/renoho/refash/refash_026.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/shfa/shfa_001.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/shfa/shfa_001.cfm

231


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2008). Using Building Form and Design. Accessed from http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/usbufode/usbufode_005.cfm Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2007). An Examination of Life Lease Housing Issues. Ottawa, Research Highlight, Socio-economic Series 07-006 Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2007). Rental Market Report – Greater Toronto Area. Ottawa. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2007). Project Profile – Affordable Housing Program. Ottawa. http://www.cmhc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/prpr/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=154268 Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2006). Gaining Community Acceptance: Case Studies in Affordable Housing. Ottawa. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2002). Initiatives to Maintain Rooming House / Single Room Occupancy Stock and Stabilize Tenancies. 1-5. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2001). Environmental Scan on Youth Homelessness. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2001). Regulatory Factors in the Retention and Expansion of Rooming House Stock. 1-5

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2000). Alternate Tenure Arrangements. Ottawa, Research Highlight, Socio-economic Series 65. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2000). International Experiences with Performance-Based Planning. Ottawa, Research Highlight, Socio-economic Series. Canadian Federation of Apartment Associations (2008). Tax Deferral on Reinvestment – Facts and Recommendations. Ottawa, CFAA Statement. Carniol, N. (2006). Move over sprawl, there‘s a new plan in town. Toronto Star. Center for Universal Design (2008). About UD. North Carolina State University. http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/about_ud.htm, accessed October 2008.

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/usbufode/usbufode_005.cfm

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/afhoce/tore/afhoid/cohode/usbufode/usbufode_005.cfm



http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/about_ud.htm

232


City of Brampton (2007). Central Area Community Improvement Plan. Approved in December 2007.

City of Brampton (2006). City of Brampton Official Plan. Ontario, October 2006. City of Mississauga (2005). Mississauga Plan. Ontario, August 2005. City of Brampton (n.d.). Finance. Accessed from http://www.city.brampton.on.ca/finance/t-intro.tml City of Langford (2008). City of Langford Affordable Housing. British Columbia. City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department (2001). Brownfields Redevelopment Successes. City of Ottawa (2007) City Housing Strategy 2007 to 2012: City Housing Strategy – Direction 1: Building Healthy, Inclusive, Sustainable Communities. Accessed from http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/housing/housing_strategy/strategy/communities_en.html City of Ottawa (2003). Official Plan for the City of Ottawa. Ottawa. City of Toronto (2008a). Committees/Task Forces: Affordable Housing Committee. http://www.toronto.ca/committees/affordable-housing.htm, accessed, August, 2008. City of Toronto (2008b). Do We Need A National Housing Strategy. 2008 ONPHA Conference Presentation. City of Toronto (2007). Toronto Official Plan. Toronto, September 2007 Office Consolidation. City of Toronto (2001). Unlocking the Opportunity for New Rental Housing: A Call to Action. Ontario. City of Vancouver (2008). Community Services: Chief Building Official. Accessed from http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/CBOFFICIAL/vbbl/councilmandated.htm City of Vancouver (2006). Live-Work Use Guidelines. Vancouver, March, 2006.

http://www.city.brampton.on.ca/finance/t-intro.tml

http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/housing/housing_strategy/strategy/communities_en.html

http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/housing/housing_strategy/strategy/communities_en.html

http://www.toronto.ca/committees/affordable-housing.htm

http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/CBOFFICIAL/vbbl/councilmandated.htm

233


Daly, G. (1996). Homeless: Policies, Strategies, and Lives on the Street. Routledge. Design Centre for Sustainability at UBC (2005). Smart Growth on the Ground: Affordable Housing. District of Columbia (2007). DC Office of Planning Inclusionary Zoning Presentation. District of Columbia, Accessed from http://www.washingtonregion.net/docs/pdf/IZ%20Mapping%20Briefing%20Handout%20092506.pdf. Drdla, Richard & Associates Inc. Municipal Regulatory Initiatives: Providing Affordable Housing. Ottawa: CMHC, 1999. Expropriation Law Centre (n.d.). Down zoning. Accessed from http://www.expropriationlaw.ca/news/news.asp?id=23 Federation of Canadian Municipalities (n.d.). Affordable Housing and Homelessness. Accessed from http://www.fcm.ca/English/View.asp?mp=467&x=712 Finnigan, B. (2007). Code reigns king when it comes to green. Toronto Star. Given, Don (2006). Maintaining Prosperity and Creating Places to Grow. Presentation to UDI, Malone Givens Parsons Inc. Government of Ontario (2007). Best Practices and Consumer Protection for Life Lease Housing in Ontario. Ontario. http://www.ontla.on.ca/library/repository/mon/16000/271294.pdf Greer, S. (2005). Flexing for the future. Toronto Star, April 9th, 2005. Guelph Civic League (2006). Complete Communities: Four Places That Have Figured It Out. Accessed from http://www.guelphcivicleague.ca/page.php?p=54 Haldimand County (2003). Issues and Options Report. County Official Plan Project – Stage 2, Ontario. Heudorfer, Bonnie (2007). Update on 40b Housing Production. Citizens‘ Housing and Planning Association, Massachusetts. http://www.chapa.org/files/f_122089067040BUpdate2007.pdf

http://www.washingtonregion.net/docs/pdf/IZ%20Mapping%20Briefing%20Handout%20092506.pdf

http://www.washingtonregion.net/docs/pdf/IZ%20Mapping%20Briefing%20Handout%20092506.pdf

http://www.expropriationlaw.ca/news/news.asp?id=23

http://www.fcm.ca/English/View.asp?mp=467&x=712

http://www.ontla.on.ca/library/repository/mon/16000/271294.pdf

http://www.guelphcivicleague.ca/page.php?p=54

http://www.chapa.org/files/f_122089067040BUpdate2007.pdf

234


Housing Supply Work Group (2002). Creating a Positive Climate for Rental Housing Development Through Tax and Mortgage Insurance Reform. Ontario. Housing Supply Work Group (2001). Affordable Rental Housing Supply: The Dynamics Of The Market and Recommendations For Encouraging New Supply. Ontario. Human Resources and Social Development Canada (2006). Evaluation of the National Homelessness Initiative. Accessed from http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/cs/sp/hrsdc/edd/reports/2003-002435/page05.shtml. Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation presentation for the Canada Housing and Renewal Association December 14, 2006.

Manitoba, Government of (2008). Manitoba Family Services and Housing: Visitable Housing Design. Accessed from http://www.gov.mb.ca/fs/housing/visitable_housing.html.

Massachusetts Law Links (2008). Affordable Zoning Under Chapter 40b. Massachusetts. http://www.masslawlinks.com/new_page_2.htm, accessed October 2008. MacLennan, D. for CHRA (2006). Rent Supplements, Shelter Allowances and a Modern Housing Policy. McMurty, R. and A. Curling (2008). The Review of the Roots of Youth Violence. Government of Ontario, Ontario. Mitchell, James (2008). Affordable Housing Program – City of Langford. Housing Affordability Partnership, British-Columbia. http://www.cityoflangford.ca/Documents/brochures/AffordableHousing/Affordable%20Housing%20Program%20Case%20Study.pdf. Ontario Municipal Social Services Association (OMSSA); (2008). A Strategy to End Homelessness. Ontario Non-Profit Housing Association (ONPHA); (2009). Letter to MCSS and MFIN. January 26, 2009. Oriole Research and Design Inc. (2008). Shared Accommodation in Toronto: Successful Practices and Opportunities for Change in the Rooming House Sector. Component 1: Good Practices in Toronto‘s Rooming House Sector.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/cs/sp/hrsdc/edd/reports/2003-002435/page05.shtml

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/cs/sp/hrsdc/edd/reports/2003-002435/page05.shtml

http://www.gov.mb.ca/fs/housing/visitable_housing.html

http://www.masslawlinks.com/new_page_2.htm

http://www.cityoflangford.ca/Documents/brochures/AffordableHousing/Affordable%20Housing%20Program%20Case%20Study.pdf

http://www.cityoflangford.ca/Documents/brochures/AffordableHousing/Affordable%20Housing%20Program%20Case%20Study.pdf

235


Ottawa Community Housing (2008). About OCH: Safer Communities. Accessed from http://www.och.ca/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=69&Itemid=85. Ottawa Police Service (2008). The Ottawa Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program. Accessed from http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/crime_prevention/multi_housing/index.cfm.

Park Place (n.d.). The Development. Accessed from http://www.parkplacebarrie.com/dev-elopment.html. Peel – Halton – Dufferin Training Board (January 2008). Trends Opportunities Priorities Report. Peel Regional Police (2005). Crime Free Multi-Housing Program Fact Sheet. Pivo, G. (2005). Creating Compact and Complete Communities: Seven Propositions for Success. American Institute of Certified Planners – Practicing Planner. Raymaker, D. (2007). Another option for families in search of a new house. The Globe and Mail, Real Estate Section. Remington Group of Companies (2006). Downtown Markham. Accessed from http://www.downtownmarkham.ca/ Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton (1994). Alternative Development Standards for Affordable Housing in Ottawa-Carleton. Ottawa, Affordability and Choice Today Program Demonstration Project. Region of Peel (n.d.) Peel Youth Village. Accessed from http://www.region.peel.on.ca/ow/ourservices/community program/housing/pyv/live/facilities.htm. Region of Peel (2008). Growth Management in Peel. Background Paper, June 5, 2008. Region of Peel (2005). Region of Peel Official Plan. Ontario, Office Consolidation, November 2005. Region of Peel (2005). Long Range Transportation Plan. Ontario.

http://www.och.ca/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=69&Itemid=85

http://www.och.ca/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=69&Itemid=85

http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/crime_prevention/multi_housing/index.cfm

http://www.parkplacebarrie.com/dev-elopment.html

http://www.downtownmarkham.ca/

http://www.region.peel.on.ca/ow/ourservices/community%20program/housing/pyv/live/facilities.htm

http://www.region.peel.on.ca/ow/ourservices/community%20program/housing/pyv/live/facilities.htm

236


Region of Peel (2003). Individual Development Accounts (IDA’s). Ontario, General Committee Report, May 23, 2003. Region of Waterloo (2008). Housing Incentives and Funding Resource Guide. Prince William County Police Department (n.d.) CPTED Strategies: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Salmon Arm Economic Development Society (2007). Affordable Housing Project Final Report and Recommendations/Options. Shapcott, M. for the Wellesley Institute (2008). Wellesley Institute National Housing Report Card. Shapcott, M. for the Wellesley Institute (2007). Ten Things about Housing and Homelessness. Shapcott, M. for the Wellesley Institute (2006). Federal role in housing: Constitutional and legal issues. Smart Growth BC (n.d.). Compact Communities. Accessed from http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/Default.aspx?tabid=95 Service Canada (2008). Youth Employment Strategy. Accessed from http://www.youth.gc.ca/yoaux.jsp?&lang=en&flash=1&ta=1&auxpageid=707 Sewell, J. (1994). Houses and Homes: Housing for Canadians. James Lorimer & Company. SHS Inc. (2007). Ottawa Community Housing Healthy Communities Initiative. SHS Inc. and Richard Drdla Associates (2004). City of Toronto Rooming House Issues and Future Options. 1-45. SHS Consulting (2003). Brant/Brantford Affordable Housing Strategy. Starr, Edward and Christine Pacini. The Municipal Role in Meeting Ontario’s Affordable Housing Needs: A Handbook for Preparing a Community Strategy For Affordable Housing. Toronto: The Ontario Professional Planners Institute, 2001. Ucluelet Affordable Housing Committee, 2008. What Is PAH? http://www.ucluelet.ca/UserFiles/File/Planning/UAHC/001WhatisPAH.pdf, accessed October 2008.

http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/Default.aspx?tabid=95

http://www.youth.gc.ca/yoaux.jsp?&lang=en&flash=1&ta=1&auxpageid=707

http://www.ucluelet.ca/UserFiles/File/Planning/UAHC/001WhatisPAH.pdf

237


United Way of Peel Region, Sherri Torjman, (2008). Investing for Resilience: The Community Investment Review. June 2008. United Way of Peel Region (n.d.). 2008 Community Investment Policy Manual. United Way of Peel Region (2006). Accessed from http://www.unitedwaypeel.org/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx Town of Caledon (2008). Corporate Services. Accessed from http://www.town.caledon.on.ca/townhall/departments/corporateservice/index.asp#_TAX_ASSISTANCE_PROGRAMS. Town of Caledon (2004). Town of Caledon Official Plan. Caledon, December 2004. Wellesley Institute, 2008. We Are Neighbours: The Impact of Supportive Housing on Community, Social, Economic and Attitude Changes. Toronto, The Wellesley Institute. West Coast Environmental Law (2008). Urban Growth and Development: Smart Bylaws Guide – Compact Complete Communities. Accessed from http://www.wcel.org/issues/urban/sbg/Part3/compact/ Wolch, J. and M. Dear, 1993. Malign Neglect: Homelessness In An American City. Josey-Brass, San Fransisco.

http://www.unitedwaypeel.org/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx

http://www.town.caledon.on.ca/townhall/departments/corporateservice/index.asp#_TAX_ASSISTANCE_PROGRAMS

http://www.town.caledon.on.ca/townhall/departments/corporateservice/index.asp#_TAX_ASSISTANCE_PROGRAMS

http://www.wcel.org/issues/urban/sbg/Part3/compact/

238


Appendix 3 - Summary of Recommended Changes to Official Plan

Housing Priorities Region of Peel Official Plan

City of Brampton Official Plan

Mississauga Plan (older City Plan

referenced where relevant)

Town of Caledon Official Plan

Adequate Land Supply

Yes; Policies 5.2.2.1, 5.5.2.1

Needs to be updated to address Places to Grow time horizon.

Requires tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1).

Yes; 4.1 general policies and goals, 4.1.9.1

Requires tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1, 1.4.3.b.2).

Yes; 2.2.2.7 and 2.3.2.3 generally reference residential supply.

Most commercial designations in residential districts permit residential development. In City Centre, a number of designations permit residential and there are is also a good supply of vacant land in this district.

Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 95 contains persons plus jobs and population and employment ratio requirements in Nodes.

Yes, 3.4.3.2

Requires tightening of wording to address supply is to be through residential intensification, as well as development and redevelopment as specified in PPS (1.1.2, 1.4.1).

Diversified Housing Stock Range of forms, densities, types Housing Targets

Yes; 5.1.2 general goals, Policies 5.3.1.5, 5.3.2.6 b, 5.3.3.1, 5.5.1.1, 5.5.2.3,

Requires addition of densities prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 h.

Requires slight modification to incorporate affordable housing needs under reference to range and mix (Places to Grow

Yes; 4.1 general policies and goals, 4.1.1.2, 4.1.1.3 4.1.1.4, 4.1.1.5, 4.1.6.3, 4.1.8

Requires addition of densities prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 h and 2.2.7.2.

Requires slight modification to incorporate affordable

Yes; 2.4.1.1, 2.4.2.1, 3.2 general policies, 3.2.3.2, 3.2.4.2

Requires addition of densities for greenfield areas prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.7.2.

Requires housing targets, including affordable housing targets (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to

Yes; 3.4 general policies, 3.4.2.1, 3.4.3.3, 3.4.3.4, 3.4.3.5, 5.10.3.25.7, 5.10.3.25.8

Requires addition of densities prescribed in Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 h.

Requires slight modification to incorporate affordable

239







2.2.3.6 i).

Requires housing targets, including affordable housing targets (PPS 1.4.3 a) and Places to Grow 3.2.6.6).

housing needs, and reference to the needs current and future residents under reference to range and mix (Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 i).


Grow 3.2.6.6). housing needs, and reference to the needs current and future residents under reference to range and mix (Places to Grow 2.2.3.6 i).


Residential Intensification

Yes; Policies 5.3.2.6 c and 5.5.2.2 a)

Requires reference to residential intensification targets and preferred location of intensification as per Places to Grow 2.2.3.1, 2.2.2.1 a, b, 2.2.3.7 e.

Yes; 4.1.5.1

Requires reference to residential intensification targets and preferred location of intensification as per Places to Grow 2.2.3.1, 2.2.2.1 a, b, 2.2.3.7 e.

Yes; 2.4.2.4, 3.2.4.1, 3.2.4.2, 3.2.4.3

Requires reference to residential intensification targets as per Places to Grow 2.2.3.1.

Yes; 3.4.2.2, 3.4.3.1, 5.10.3.14

Requires reference to residential intensification targets and preferred location of intensification as per Places to Grow 2.2.3.1, 2.2.2.1 b, 2.2.3.7 e.

Efficient and Effective Use of Land and Resources

Yes; 5.1.2, general goals, Policies 1.3.6.4, 5.3.1.4, 5.2.2.1, 5.3.1.5, 5.3.2.2, 5.3.2.3, 5.3.2.4, 5.3.2.6, 5.3.3.1.1, 5.3.3.2.1, 5.5.1.3, 5.5.2.2 a), 6.2.1.1, 6.2.2.19

Requires reference to built-up area and designated greenfields and possible links to

Yes; 3.1 & 4.1 general policies and goals, 4.1.1.7, 4.1.1.8, 4.1.5.1, 4.1.5.2, 4.10.3.3.1

Requires reference to built-up area and designated greenfields and possible links to

Yes, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.2.5, 2.2.2.6, 2.2.2.7, 2.4.1.2, 2.10.2.4, 3.17.2.3

Requires reference to built-up area and designated greenfields and possible links to transit.

Yes; 5.10.2 general objectives, 2.2.2, 3.4.3.1, 5.10.3.6, 5.10.4.1

Requires reference to built-up area and designated greenfields and possible links to transit.

240







transit. transit.

Complete Communities Mixed Land Uses

Yes; general goals and objectives 1.3.6.1, 5.1.2, 6.2.1.2, Policies 5.3.1.3, 5.3.1.4, 5.3.3.2.3 b, c, 5.3.3.2.6 c), 5.4.3.2.1, 6.2.2.19

Consider including a definition of complete communities.

Consider encouraging area municipalities to discourage or not permit reduction of densities.

Yes; 3.1 & 4.1 general policies and goals, 3.2.5, 4.2.2, 4.14.5, 4.1.1.11, 4.2.3.4

Consider adding reference to affordable housing when describing complete communities.

Consider altering the Upscale Executive Housing Special Policy Areas (4.1.2) to incorporate the principles of complete communities.

Consider adding reference to discourage or not permit reduction of densities (4.1.5.5).

Yes; 3.2.3.1, 3.2.3.2, 3.13.1.1, 3.13.1.2, 3.2.1.4


Yes; 2.2.2 & 2.2.3 strategic directions and goals, 5.10.2, 5.10.3.2, 5.14.2


Consider permitting certain multiple dwelling forms such as duplexes, and quads in low density residential areas to help encourage complete communities.

Retention of Existing Housing Stock

Yes; Policy 5.5.2.5.

May want to consider adding policies on rental demolition and conversion control.

Yes; 4.1.1.10, 4.1.5.8, 4.1.6.4


Yes; 2.4.2.5, 3.2.3.6


Yes, indirectly; 2.2.1 & 2.2.3


Energy Efficient Housing

Yes; Policy 5.5.1.3

Consider expanding to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly Regional

Yes; 3.1 & 4.1 general policies and goals, 4.5.3.8

Consider expanding to include specific measures and

Yes; 2.7.1.1, 2.7.2.9, 2.7.2.10, 3.15.4.7, indirectly 2.7.2.3

Consider expanding to include specific measures and

Yes, indirectly;

2.2.1 & 2.2.3

Consider adding policy to encourage and support energy

241







standards or requirements.

incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements.

incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements.

conservation and energy efficient housing.

Consider expanding to include specific measures and incentives for creating energy efficient housing and possibly standards or requirements.

Increase Supply of Affordable Rental and Ownership Housing

Yes, general objectives 5.5.1.2, Policy 5.5.2.4, 6.2.2.17, 5.5.2.2 b, 5.5.2.3, 5.5.2.4, 6.2.2.17, 6.2.2.20, 6.2.2.21, 7.6.2.15, indirectly, 6.2.2.18, 6.2.2.22, 6.2.2.25, 5.5.1.3

Consider strengthening this policy to identifying a role for the Region in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies.

Consider identifying various financial incentives the Region may consider in supporting the provision of affordable housing.

Consider encouraging the area municipalities to also provide financial incentives to support provision of affordable housing.

Yes; 4.1.1.3, 4.1.5.5, 4.1.6, 4.1.6.1, 4.1.6.2, 4.1.6.3, 4.1.6.5, 4.1.7.1, 4.1.7.2

Consider adding a general policy statement supporting affordable housing development.

Consider adding a policy to identifying a role for the City in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies.

Consider including specific measures and incentives for affordable housing.

Consider adding special Policy Areas that

Yes, indirectly; 2.4.2.2, 3.2.1.1 (City Plan), 3.2.3.6, 3.2.3.5, 2.5.2.3 (City Plan), 3.2.3.2

Consider adding a general policy statement supporting affordable housing development.

Consider adding a policy to identifying a role for the City in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies.


Consider adding a policy for alternative development

Yes, indirectly; 3.4.2.1, 3.4.3.4, 3.4.3.5, 3.2.3.3.4, 3.4.3.6, 3.4.3.6.1, 5.10.3.22, 6.2.13.3, 6.2.13.3.1

Consider adding a policy to identifying a role for the Town in supporting affordable housing developers through participating in community acceptance strategies.


Consider adding a policy for alternative development

242







Consider adding a policy encouraging area municipalities to streamline the approval process for affordable housing.

Consider adding a policy for encouraging area municipalities to provide alternative development performance standards for affordable housing.

Consider encouraging area municipalities to add a density bonusing provision for affordable housing and develop a policy framework around this policy.

Consider encouraging area municipalities to permit two-or-more-unit houses per lot, including secondary suites.

Consider encouraging area municipalities to add policies to explicitly permit single room occupancy accommodation, rooming, boarding and lodging houses.

Consider encouraging other measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or funding to include an affordable housing component.

facilitate the creation of affordable housing.

Consider strengthening alternative development standards policy (4.1.6.5) by developing alternative detailed development performance standards and design features for the Policy Areas, and throughout the City, to facilitate the creation of affordable housing and streamline the review and approval process.

Consider adding a policy to fast-track the approval process for affordable housing.

Consider adding affordable housing to list of provisions that may be exchanged for increased density.

Consider encouraging and permitting two-or-more-unit houses per lot, including

performance standards for affordable housing.


Consider adding density bonusing provision for affordable housing.

Consider encouraging and permitting two-unit houses per lot, including secondary suites.

Consider adding policies to explicitly permit single room occupancy accommodation, rooming, boarding and lodging houses.


Consider adding measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or

performance standards for affordable housing.


Consider adding density bonusing provision for affordable housing.

Consider removing the provision that requires that the names of the individuals who will be entitled to occupy the garden suite be included in the agreement registered on title.


Consider identifying and maintaining an inventory of available public lands and buildings suitable for housing for

243







secondary suites.



Consider adding measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or funding to include an affordable housing component.

funding to include an affordable housing component.

moderate and lower income households.

Consider adding measures such as Housing First, and requiring greyfield and brownfield redevelopments that receive municipal incentives or funding to include an affordable housing component.

Housing Options and Supports for Persons with Special Needs

Yes, Policy 5.5.1.2

Consider adding provisions on accessible housing and support services.

Consider encouraging area municipalities to add policies to explicitly permit special needs housing

Yes; 3.1 & 4.1 general policies and goals, 4.1.7.1, 4.1.7.2, 4.1.7.3, 4.1.7.6, 4.1.7.8, 4.1.7.9, 4.1.7.10

Consider adding policies to explicitly permit special needs

Yes; 2.4.1, 2.4.2.3, 3.2.1.2, 3.2.2.3

Consider adding reference to supportive housing in description of special needs housing.

Yes; 3.4.2.1, 5.23.16

Consider adding a general policy statement supporting special needs housing.

Consider reviewing group

244







such as emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing.

housing such as emergency shelters and transitional housing.

Consider permitting supportive housing facilities in areas designated Residential, Commercial and Public Uses in addition to Institutional.

home policies to provide permissions similar to (and not more onerous than) other forms of development.

Consider adding policies to explicitly permit special needs housing such as emergency shelters and transitional housing (crisis care facilities and hostels for the homeless or transients) and supportive housing in are residential and possibly other designated areas.

Housing Options for Diverse Populations

Yes;

General objectives 5.3.1.8, 5.3.1.8, Policies 5.5.1.2, 6.2.2.1, 6.2.2.17

Consider encouraging the area municipalities to add measures to provide opportunities to meet the housing needs of diverse populations such as older adults, diverse ethnic populations, Aboriginal persons, and recent immigrants.

Yes; 4.1.7.2

Consider adding measures to provide opportunities to meet the housing needs of diverse populations such as older adults, diverse ethnic populations, Aboriginal persons, and recent immigrants.

Yes, indirectly;

2.4.2.3


Yes, indirectly;

3.4.2.1


Remove Barriers to Accessing Housing

Yes;

6.2.2.18

Yes, accessibility; 4.1.8.3, 4.4.4.18,

Yes, accessibility;

2.11.2.13, 3.18.13

Yes, accessibility;

5.10.3.5

245







Consider adding a policy to identify a role for the Region in removing barriers to accessing housing including participating in public education strategies.

4.8.3

Consider adding a policy to identify a role for the City in removing barriers to accessing housing including participating in public education strategies.



246


Appendix 4: Summary of Funding Programs

Funding Program Priority Addressed

Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Affordable Housing Initiative

Seed Funding Program

Proposal Development Funding

Affordability and Choice Today

CMHC Mortgage Insurance Practices

Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program

Shelter Enhancement Program

Emergency Repair Program

Home Adaptation for Seniors' Independence

247



Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Homelessness Partnering Strategy

Aboriginal Off-Reserve Housing

Youth Employment Strategy

ecoENERGY Programs

CMHC Equilibrium Housing

CMHC Energy Efficient Housing Mortgage Rebate

Goods and Services Tax Rebate (GST)

Treatment of Capital Gains

Capital Cost Allowance

Deductibility of Soft Costs

248



Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Capital Taxes on Rental Properties

Low Income Housing Tax Credit

Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program

Affordable Housing Program - Brownfields Initiative

Ontario Trillium Foundation

Rental Opportunities for Ontario Families

Delivering Opportunities for Ontario Renters

Capital Funding for Repairs to Social Housing

Homelessness Prevention Program

Provincial Rent Bank

249



Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Shelter Allowances

Poverty Reduction Strategy

Local Health Integration Networks

Community Care Access Centres

Aging at Home Strategy

Supportive Housing and Community Support Services

Mental Health and Addiction

Residential Care Housing

MCSS Funding for Persons with Development Disabilities

Aboriginal Healing and Wellness Strategy

250



Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Victims of Domestic Violence

MCSS Funding for Persons who are Deaf and/or Blind

In-Home and Out-of-Home Respite Care

Home and Vehicle Modification Program

Community Start-Up Benefit and Maintenance Benefit

Infrastructure Ontario

Brownfields Financial Tax Incentive Program

Green Light for a Better Environment

Community Improvement Plans

Development Permit System

251



Adequate

Land

Supply

Div

ers

ifie

d H

ousi

ng

Sto

ck

Resi

denti

al

Inte

nsi

ficati

on

Eff

icie

nt

Use

of

Land

Com

ple

te

Com

munit

ies

Rete

nti

on o

f

Exis

ting S

tock

Energ

y E

ffic

ient

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Renta

l

Housi

ng

Aff

ord

able

Ow

ners

hip

Housi

ng

Housi

ng a

nd

Support

s fo

r

Specia

l N

eeds

Housi

ng O

pti

ons

for

Div

ers

e

Popula

tions

Rem

ovin

g B

arr

iers

to A

ccess

ing

Housi

ng

Ontario Power Authority Low Income/Multifamily Programs

Provincial Sales Tax Rebate