A Rent-to-Own Agreement is a contract that allows a tenant to rent a property with the option—or obligation—to purchase it after a set period.
Why Do Rent-to-Own Agreements Matter in Real Estate
In Canadian real estate, rent-to-own agreements are often used by buyers who may not currently qualify for a mortgage but plan to do so in the future. These agreements typically include:
A lease term (usually 1–3 years)
A portion of monthly rent set aside as a future down payment
A locked-in purchase price or formula for future value
An option or requirement to purchase at the end of the lease
Benefits for buyers include:
Time to improve credit or save for a down payment
Price certainty in a rising market
Risks and considerations include:
Loss of credits if the purchase doesn’t proceed
Responsibility for maintenance and insurance
Higher monthly payments compared to standard rentals
Rent-to-own agreements must be carefully reviewed by legal and financial professionals to ensure fairness and clarity for both parties.
Example of a Rent-to-Own Agreement in Action
A family enters a rent-to-own agreement for a $600,000 home, paying $2,500 monthly, with $500 credited each month toward a future down payment.
The back-end ratio, or debt-to-income ratio, measures the percentage of a borrower’s gross monthly income spent on total monthly debt obligations,. more
Absorption rate analysis is the evaluation of how quickly available properties in a given market are being sold or leased during a specific time period.. more
Sustainability in real estate refers to designing, constructing, and operating properties in ways that minimize environmental impact, support social. more
A rendering of the Bristol master-planned community set for 13301 104 Avenue in Surrey. / SvN Architects & Planners, Bosa Properties
After unveiling their Bristol master-planned project last year, Vancouver-based developer Bosa Properties has submitted a new rezoning application for the sprawling project, expanding on the design they proposed last year.
The subject site of the project is 13301-13355 104 Avenue and 13280-13362 105 Avenue, a 6.4-acre square property bounded by 105 Avenue on the north, a row of apartment buildings on the east, 104 Avenue on the south, and 133 Street on the west, with University Drive about half a block to the east and the Expo Line SkyTrain's Surrey Central Station about a 10-minute walk southeast from the site.
The property is currently occupied by a group of low-rise rental buildings called the Bristol Estates that Bosa Properties acquired sometime around July 2022 for $170 million in a deal brokered by Goran Bucan of Sutton Group. The properties have been consolidated into a single legal parcel, 13301 104 Avenue, which BC Assessment values at $158,537,000 in an assessment dated July 1, 2024 and is now held under Bristol Estates 13301 Holdings Ltd.
Before the site was acquired by Bosa Properties, the previous developer submitted a rezoning application in 2022 for a six-building project with approximately 2,200 units. Last year, Bosa revised that application to five towers with a total of 2,686 units, which was granted third reading (conditional approval) in October 2024. However, Bosa has now submitted a new rezoning application.
"Subsequent to Council granting Third Reading to the application, Engineering advised that the proposed north-south road through the site was not required as a public road, which has led to changes in the site plan and underground parking layout," said City staff in a planning report last month. "In addition, in light of difficult market conditions, the applicant has revised the project to lower the towers and has added a tower (going from 5 towers to 6 towers)."
An overview of the 2024 design (left) and 2025 design (right) for the Bristol project. / SvN Architects & Planners, Bosa Properties
The updated 2025 concept includes six towers with the amount of units increased to 2,730, split between 600 studio units, 1,155 one-bedroom units, 942 two-bedroom units, and six three-bedroom units, along with 27 townhouses. Comparing the 2024 concept with the 2025 concept, the updated version reduces the height of all but one of the towers. The two towers on the western half of the site have now also been repositioned in order to accommodate the new tower and meet tower separation requirements. Most of the building podiums also appear to have been redesigned.
Tower One will be 33 storeys with 383 units and will be located at the southwest corner of the site, at the intersection of 133 Street and 104 Avenue. The second tower, the newly added one, will rise 35 storeys, have 367 units, and front 133 Street. Tower Three is located on the southeast corner of the site, along 104 Avenue, and will rise 32 storeys and contain 378 units. Tower Four will be located near the middle of the site and rise 52 storeys, making it the tallest of the proposed towers, and will house 578 units. Tower Five will be located at the northeast corner of the site, rise 46 storeys, and include 518 units. Finally, Tower Six will be located at the northwest corner of the site, rise 44 storeys, and bring 506 units.
Notably, however, the phasing plan for the project is now in a different sequence than initially proposed. The project will be delivered in six phases — one tower per phase — in the following order: Tower Three, Tower One, Tower Four, Tower Two, Tower Five, and Tower Six. A phasing plan included in the rezoning application suggests that portions of the site may be converted into a community garden as the earlier stages progress.
The phasing plan for the Bristol master-planned project. / SvN Architects & Planners, Bosa Properties
In terms of amenities, Bristol will provide 54,541 sq. ft of indoor amenity space across the entire project, which is slightly less than the 54,702 sq. ft required for a project of its size. On a per tower basis, five of the six towers exceed the required amount of indoor amenity space, with the shortfall coming from Tower Three. The City says Bosa will provide cash-in-lieu to make up for the shortfall.
In terms of outdoor amenity space, however, Bosa is proposing 125,723 sq. ft of space, which far exceeds the 89,448 sq. ft that is required for a project of its size.
Overall, the project will also include 19,450 sq. ft of commercial space — including a childcare facility — that will primarily be located along 104 Avenue in Tower Three and Tower One. The proposal also includes 1,961 vehicle parking spaces and 1,092 bicycle parking stalls across the site.
Renderings of the Bristol master-planned community set for 13301 104 Avenue in Surrey. / SvN Architects & Planners, Bosa Properties
Renderings of Tower Three, which will be delivered in Phase One. / SvN Architects & Planners, Bosa Properties
Of the total 2,730 proposed units, 378 are proposed as rental units, which will be delivered as a full 32-storey rental building (Tower Three) in Phase One. The units will be secured as rentals for a tenure of 60 years, according to the City. Along with the master plan rezoning application, Bosa has also submitted a detailed development permit application for the first phase, which will also include just over 5,800 sq. ft of commercial space.
At a council meeting on July 28, Surrey City Council granted first and second reading to the master plan rezoning application and forwarded the application to a future public hearing. Council also gave the green light to Tower Three/Phase One.
For Bosa Properties, Bristol represents its third master-planned community in Surrey — all within close proximity to each other along 104 Avenue. In 2023, Bosa completed the two-phase University District located at 13409 104 Avenue, about one block east of Bristol. Another block to the east, Bosa is also currently developing the four-phase Parkway located at 10460 City Parkway.
With the national housing crisis demanding sharper tools and deeper collaboration, the 2025 PacificWest Conference arrives at a critical moment.
On October 21 and 22, Western Canada’s premier real estate conference will take over the Vancouver Convention Centre East, bringing together the country’s realtors, developers, brokers, and builders for two full days of learning, dialogue, and connection.
Hosted by the Fraser Valley Real Estate Board and Greater Vancouver REALTORS®, the 2025 PacificWest Conference builds on last year’s strong momentum, which saw more than 1,200 professionals from across the country gather for dynamic programming, a buzzing trade show, and a vibrant social scene (which is quickly becoming legendary).
This year, with an even larger turnout anticipated, PacificWest Conference is scaling up — but staying true to its community-first roots.
All speakers at this year's event are Canadian, with representation stretching coast to coast, from Newfoundland to Vancouver Island. Programming will explore the most urgent issues facing the industry — from affordability to innovation — through a lens that’s local, relevant, and real.
Anchoring it all will be a keynote from Jake Karls, co-founder of Midday Squares, who will take the stage with his partners Lezlie Karls Saltarelli and Nick Saltarelli to share an unvarnished take on brand building, business, and what it means to lead with boldness.
Before the conference's official start, attendees have the option to come in early for two marquee add-ons, taking place October 20. First up, the Managing Brokers Summit, presented by BCREA, will offer a full day of programming designed to address the evolving role of brokerage leadership. Then, that evening, the Pre-Conference Connect Social sets the tone for the days ahead with structured speed networking, drinks, bites, and music. (In short, it's a truly perfect conference kick-off.)
Once the conference begins, attendees will enjoy seminars, keynote presentations, and an expansive trade show — a vibrant marketplace of more than 90 vendors showcasing tech solutions, marketing tools, service providers, and sector partners.
Each day of the conference, doors open at 9am, with coffee served to encourage impromptu chats, dealmaking, and discovery. The trade show floor will be open from 10:30am to 5pm on Tuesday, October 21, and from 10am to 3pm on Wednesday, October 22.
And of course, on the evening of October 21, the Welcome Party is back.
Known for its high energy and creative themes — last year delivered a full "Havana Nights" experience, complete with tacos, margaritas, and music — this year’s party promises another unforgettable night, with details under wraps (for now).
Standard conference passes include trade show access, keynote programming, seminar attendance, the Welcome Party, six self-directed PDP hours, and morning coffee. Preferred pricing is available at $325 until August 31; after this date, the general registration rate will be $400 through October 22.
While VIP passes have already sold out, add-ons like the Managing Brokers Summit ($100) and Pre-Conference Connect Social ($90) are available during checkout.
For those working in real estate, housing, or development, the 2025 PacificWest Conference offers more than insight — it offers momentum. By bringing the sector together under one roof, PacificWest creates space not just to respond to the housing crisis, but to help reshape the future of how we live.
The federal government will table Budget 2025 this fall, and ahead of its release a new coalition of 13 developers has put out a suite of recommendations to address the housing crisis. Made up of big names in homebuilding like DiamondCorp, Fitzrovia, Mattamy, Menkes, and RioCan, the Large Urban Centre Alliance is imploring the Feds to push the envelope on policies like the GST/HST New Housing Rebate and foreign-buyer ban.
“New home sales in the Greater Toronto Area have all but evaporated,” says the pre-budget submission, which has been created in collaboration with the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) and Missing Middle Initiative. “Relative to the first quarter of 2022, new and pre-construction home sales in the first quarter of 2025 were down 89% in the Greater Toronto Area, 77% in the Greater Vancouver Area, and 51% in the Ottawa Region.”
“Given the lag between new home sales and housing starts, new home construction is expected to remain exceptionally low in these three markets for the foreseeable future,” it adds. “Other large markets — Calgary, Edmonton, and Montreal — have not yet experienced the same level of weakness but remain vulnerable to similar pressures,” it adds. Combined, these six urban regions account for over 50% of Canada’s housing starts, making their recovery critical to meeting national housing targets.”
First-quarter new home sales over the past five years/BILD, GOHBA, Zonda Urban via the Missing Middle Institute
The submission also points out that while purpose-built rental construction has been on the rise (nearly quadrupling in the course of a decade), estimates from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) call for an additional 60,000 units beyond what’s currently projected. “In the GTA, rental demand is projected to outpace supply by 121,000 units over the next decade, on top of an existing deficit of 114,000 units accumulated from 2016 to 2024.”
Bearing those realities and the severity of the situation in mind, the Alliance is putting its weight behind 10 recommendations to help Canadian markets work towards their housing goals and brace against economic uncertainty, according to the submission. Of those, four have been identified as “immediate priority actions.” Those include:
Expanding the GST rebate program currently available to first-time homebuyers on new homes up to $1 million to all buyers of new homes up to $1 million for a period of three years, while expanding the partial rebate for new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million from first-time buyers to all buyers;
Implementing a model where development charges (DCs) are billed directly to buyers rather than builders, with protections embedded to prevent mid-stream DC increases;
Exempting rental developments currently under construction that are not eligible for the GST rebate from GST and HST, and also exempting new and pre-construction properties from the foreign buyer ban, and;
Putting more capital into the Apartment Construction Loan Program (ACLP) so that it can accommodate a larger volume of applications.
Senior Director at the Smart Prosperity Institute and Founding Director of the Missing Middle Initiative Mike Moffatt tells STOREYS that the priority actions were determined based on what could be “implemented very quickly, and what would have the most immediate impact.” He acknowledges that there are plenty of nods to existing government policy in the top four points, and notes that that’s entirely by design.
“Part of what we wanted to do is make sure that what we were recommending aligned with what the government is trying to do,” Moffatt says. “We're not saying, throw out everything you're doing and do something completely different, you know, because then there's going to be a lack of interest there. Instead, we’re building on what [the government is] doing and integrating these ideas with the other things that they're working on implementing.”
With respect to the remaining six recommendations, Moffatt says they’re no less important, but are anticipated to take more time to put into place. Those are as follows:
Accelerating homebuilding by tying federal infrastructure funding to pro-housing supply municipal reforms (for example, accepting surety bonds in subdivision agreements and site plan agreements), and putting automated approval programs in place in a similar manner to Edmonton;
Enforcing the conditions set out in Housing Accelerator Fund agreements by increasing the variety of housing types;
Stimulating more global capital in Canadian real estate by exempting real estate and housing-related infrastructure investment from the Excessive Interest and Financing Expenses Limitation (EIFEL) rules, and reviewing OSFI mortgage stress test rules to ensure they suit the current economic environment;
Investing in more missing-middle rental housing and ensuring that the proposed MURBs tax provision will apply to rental projects that begin construction on or after January 1, 2026;
Increasing capital for the MURB and establishing an incentive program for investors willing to sell their non-purpose-built rentals in favour of investing in projects eligible for the MURB incentive, and;
Allowing for condo construction to be financed after investor dollars have been put towards MURB-eligible projects, allowing banks to reduce pre-sale requirements on new developments through federal backstop facilities.
“A lot of it does pull from other jurisdictions,” notes Moffatt. “Recommendation 3 is similar to [what's in place] in Australia. Recommendation 7, around exempting real estate and housing-related infrastructure from EIFEL rules, that's something that currently exists in the United States. Recommendation 5 explicitly advocates for the kind of approval systems that they're currently using in Edmonton. And some of the MURB recommendations build off how the program used to work in the 1970s.”
More broadly, Moffatt’s hope is not just that the federal government will take the Alliance’s submission into consideration, but that it will help to “trigger a larger conversation” about the housing challenges facing major Canadian cities. “We're hopeful that it's not just the recommendations that get discussed,” he says, “but also how dire the situation is, particularly in the GTA and Greater Vancouver area — and, to a lesser extent, Ottawa — and the decline we're likely to see in housing starts over the next few years unless there [are] changes coming.”
On Wednesday, Hamilton City Council adopted a motion to decrease development charges (DCs) on all residential and non-residential development by 20% starting from September 1, 2025, to August 31, 2027. The two-year pilot program is intended to boost housing supply and bring down home prices for Hamiltonians, but those in the development industry say the discount isn't enough.
DCs are taxes that builders pay to a city in order to help fund increased infrastructure needs that may be required as a result of growth, including services like roads, transit, water, and sewer systems. But over the last 15 years, DCs in the region and across the GTA have skyrocketed, placing additional strain on already struggling development pipelines.
DCs in Hamilton are somewhat lower compared to other Ontario municipalities, but while inflation has only risen by about 30% in the last decade, Hamilton's DCs have increased by a whopping 227%, CEO of the West End Home Builders’ Association (WE HBA) Mike Collins-Williams wrote in a news release in December 2024. As of June 1, DCs for a single detached in The Hammer will run you $98,511. With the 20% discount, that price will fall to $78,809.
Prior to Council's decision, Collins-Williams penned another open letter on July 30 making the Association's case for a temporary 50% DC decrease, rather than the proposed 20% discount. He cited year-to-date housing starts in Hamilton hitting a 10-year low in June and the potential for 41,000 jobs to be lost in the GTHA as sales plummet and projects fall through. "The need for action has surpassed immediate as we are hemorrhaging opportunity and jobs," he wrote.
Collins-Williams also pointed to Peel Region, which also recently dropped their DCs by 50%. Other efforts from nearby municipalities include Mississauga reducing its residential development charges by 50% and by 100% for three-bedroom units in purpose-built rental apartments, respectively, and Toronto, where DCs were recently dropped for sixplexes and a 4% May increase to the city's DCs was frozen after Council voted instead to offer reprieve for struggling housing development.
While WE HBA, which represents 320 land development and residential construction companies in Hamilton, has been clear on its stance that the industry and greater Hamilton economy would benefit from lower DCs, some councillors have expressed concerns surrounding the incentive's effectiveness and viability.
Councillor Brad Clark (Ward 9) raised concerns about a lack of infrastructure grants from the provincial or federal governments to help the City pay for the 20% discount. "They're all saying, 'We want development charges lowered.' Prime Minister Carney went so far as saying by 50% [...] but do we have anything from them?"
The answer is no, the Feds and the province have not agreed to subsidize the discount, which is expected to cost $9.6 million annually. At Council, General Manager of Finance and Corporate Services at the City, Mike Zegarac, articulated the discount's financing, which will be sourced from excess 2025 budget funds, as was shared in a staff report on the proposed amendment to the DC bylaw.
"We had budgeted for development charge exemptions based on historic levels of development," he said. "And as those development levels have not met that historic average, we're able to accommodate the estimated $9.6 million from within the approved 2025 budget."
Councillor Cameron Kroetsch (Ward 2) also raised concerns about a lack of financial transparency from builders surrounding where the additional profit would go. Kroetsch expressed that the discount should only be adopted if Council could ensure the discount would result in more affordable home prices for Hamiltonians, rather than money pocketed for builders.
"I think it's extremely important that if we're giving incentives to people and they're taking money from the city, they should be required to meet some level, any level, of financial transparency. And what I continue to hear is that's not required in this situation," said Kroetsch.
On the other hand, Councillor Michael Spadafora (Ward 14) points out that it wouldn't make sense for builders to pocket the extra money given the GTHA's stalled housing market.
"They're not selling the houses at the prices now, so if they took the 20% discount and didn't change the price, why would anybody buy the house? No one would buy the house," he said. "[...] If they don't [lower prices], they continue to not sell houses, people continue to get laid off, and we keep going in a circle."
Mayor Andrea Horwath, who voted in favour of the motion, said she is excited to see how the pilot program plays out. "I'm looking forward to seeing what the pilot project yields in terms of unlocking some of those developments that are stuck in the pipeline right now because of the economic uncertainty that we're facing," said Mayor Horwath. "I think signalling that we're going to work with the community of builders and not for profits and investors who look at Hamilton as a possible place to invest and to build — I think that's a positive signal."
For all the national introspection around Canada’s housing crisis, far too little attention is paid to the mechanics of how homes are actually built. While we debate affordability, interest rates, and migration, the real constraint on supply lies in the production system itself, one that has failed to modernize in step with the urgency of our needs.
The latest report from the C.D. Howe Institute exposes that friction with sobering clarity. Canada’s housing shortfall, it argues, is not merely the result of low output. It stems from a deeper misalignment between our stated goals: rapid, affordable, large-scale housing and the fragmented, risk-averse, low-productivity methods we use to deliver it.
The housing sector does not lack talent or technology. What impedes us is a model of construction that has remained essentially unchanged while the demands placed upon it have intensified.
Permitting Purgatory, Before a Single Shovel Hits the Ground
Before we even get to labour shortages or modular innovation, Canada’s pipeline is choked at the municipal counter. It takes nearly 250 days to secure a general construction permit in Canada — 34th out of 35 OECD countries, slower than every peer except Slovakia and roughly triple the US timeline, according to the ICBA Independent.
That “second-slowest in the OECD” badge isn’t just embarrassing for a G7 economy; it means every policy aimed at speeding up housing delivery starts with a nine-month bureaucratic head-start against us. It is beyond embarrassing for a country that needs housing affordability solutions more than anyone else in the OECD. Until those approvals shrink, any talk of boosting supply is running a marathon in concrete boots. It is possible that standardized construction could deliver just as much benefit to the approval process as it can to the construction process. As the saying goes, time is money, and all of these savings translate to a more profitable housing model, which means greater incentive for builders to build.
Whether you like it or not, firms exist to make profit. That’s how the economy works. It is only fair for you to expect anyone else in the economy to do their job for free if you also do your job for free. Whenever I mention a builder’s profit and savings like this, especially when discussing removal of development charges, people tell me that builders will just pocket the spread. In a historically “normal” market jacked up on cheap debt, I might agree with those people. But in today’s market, any dollar that a builder can reduce from price gets them closer to the market’s bid, which increases their likelihood of selling or renting a unit. So, I can promise you, if builders save $50,000 on any input today, they’re not going to keep the unit priced at $750,000 so they can keep selling zero units. They’ll drop the price by $50,000 in hopes that they sell one, or two.
Ambition Without Capability
According to the report, restoring 2019-level affordability would require between 430,000 and 480,000 new homes per year. In 2023, Canada built just over half that number. The gap is profound, and there is little to suggest it will close under present conditions.
What makes this deficit even more stark is the rapid growth of the population. CMHC’s own data confirms that housing starts are not keeping up with demographic pressure. The imbalance is especially acute in urban centres but increasingly visible in smaller communities as well.
The visual makes clear what many feel in practice. There are simply not enough homes per person. The decline in dwellings per 1,000 residents reflects a structural shortfall that cannot be corrected without addressing the speed and scale of delivery.
Labour Inputs Alone Will Not Save Us
In a healthy system, hiring more workers should lead to higher output. But the data tell a different story. Between 2020 and 2023, the residential construction workforce expanded by 26%, yet productivity declined. More labour has translated into fewer completed homes per hour worked.
The Silver Tsunami: Replacing a Generation of Builders
Canada’s construction workforce is staring down a demographic cliff. Roughly 245,000 skilled workers, about one-fifth of the 2022 labour force, will retire by 2032, according to BuildForce Canada. That translates into nearly 300,000 new hires once population growth is factored in. Unless we industrialize more of the build process, every apprenticeship program in the country could run flat-out and still fail to plug the gap.
Capacity drag: Even if municipalities issued permits at record speed, projects would stall for lack of crews.
Knowledge drain: Decades of practical lore (how to pour a winter slab or sequence trades in a 600 sq-ft condo shell) walks off-site with each retirement.
Cost pressure: Scarcity bids wages higher, so any productivity we can automate or prefabricate is a direct defence against spiralling budgets.
This trend is not incidental. The report attributes much of the productivity decline to the sector’s continued reliance on on-site building practices, which remain vulnerable to weather delays, sequential scheduling, and rising labour costs. While much of the economy is automating and digitizing, residential construction has remained wedded to workflows developed in another era.
The Tools Exist. The System Rejects Them.
Elsewhere in the world, governments and industry leaders have responded to these challenges with urgency and imagination. Sweden builds nearly all of its homes off-site, relying on factory-assembled components and standardized systems. In Canada, despite strong examples like UBC’s prefabricated Tallwood House, Siksika Nation’s 3D-printed units, and the robotics-enabled housing pilots led by Promise Robotics, innovation remains on the margins.
What explains this disconnect is not technological unreadiness but institutional inertia. Off-site builders face longer permitting timelines, duplicated inspections, and transportation rules that vary so wildly between provinces that modular units often cannot move efficiently across borders. Development fees, which have risen by 700% over two decades, now account for as much as a quarter of a home’s cost. Lending practices still favour traditional, slower projects, as financing is tied to on-site construction milestones that modular builds cannot easily meet.
The result is a system that rewards convention and punishes speed. In 2024, one of Canada’s leading modular construction firms, Z Modular, closed its Kitchener facility and relocated to the United States, citing overregulation and financing delays. This case should not be seen in isolation. It reflects a broader trend: firms that try to build faster are often forced to leave.
Capacity Is Being Left on the Table
The C.D. Howe report invokes the concept of the production possibility frontier: a theoretical ceiling for how much can be built with current resources. Canada, it contends, is operating beneath that ceiling. The country has the workforce, the materials, and the demand. What it lacks is the coordination to bring them together at scale.
Research from McKinsey supports this conclusion. Modular construction, when implemented systematically, can reduce build times by as much as 50% and lower costs by 20%. These are transformative advantages. Yet in Canada, they remain largely theoretical, held back by misaligned rules and the absence of enabling policy.
Modular Housing 101: From Panels to Pods
When people hear “modular,” they often picture shipping-container homes. The reality is broader:
Volumetric (3-D modules). Entire room-sized boxes complete with plumbing, wiring, and finishes arrive on site and are stacked like giant LEGO. Ideal for repetitive layouts such as hotels, student residences, or stacked townhouses. Fastest method, but highway-oversize rules matter.
Panelized systems. Flat wall, floor, and roof panels are trucked in, craned into place, and weather-tight in a day. Interiors are finished on site. Works well for detached homes or tight infill lots because panels travel efficiently.
Hybrid or “kit-of-parts.” Think steel or light-gauge frames assembled on site, with factory-built bathroom or kitchen “pods” slid into the skeleton. Balances speed with design flexibility for mid-rise projects up to a dozen storeys.
Mass-timber / CLT. Large cross-laminated-timber panels (and sometimes volumetric cores) bolt together quickly and cut site noise. Favoured for carbon-conscious mid-rise and urban tight lots.
Different rules affect each approach differently. Policy that treats them all the same will inevitably hamstring at least one. This blog post on Valery breaks down how policy should interact with each modular housing format.
Reform Must Lead, Not Follow
Public investment alone cannot solve this problem. Recent federal initiatives, including the $25 billion Build Canada Homes program and the Housing Design Catalogue, mark a step in the right direction. But they will achieve little without deep structural reform.
Permitting timelines need to be shortened, particularly for projects that use certified off-site methods. Financing models must be updated to accommodate the upfront cost structures of modular builds. Insurance and mortgageeligibility criteria should reflect the reliability of prefabricated systems, not penalize them. Development fees ought to reward faster delivery and lower emissions, not simply size or location. And governments must support the development of a hybrid workforce, one that blends traditional trades with factory technicians, machine operators, and digital designers.
Most crucially, Canada needs real-time productivity benchmarks that compare building methods, timelines, and lifecycle costs. Without that visibility, policy decisions will continue to rely on assumptions rather than outcomes.
The Risk Is Not in Innovation. It Lies in Refusing to Change.
There is no path to affordability that does not run through reform of the construction sector. A system designed for bespoke, site-built housing cannot satisfy the demand of a country adding nearly half a million people a year.
The C.D. Howe Institute’s report offers more than critique. It lays out a pragmatic case for modernizing construction, not through ideology, but through operational clarity. The future of housing is faster, more standardized, and less vulnerable to the constraints of weather, geography, and manual scheduling. The tools are already here. What remains is the will to use them.
Productivity Must Step In for Cheap Money
Statistics Canada’s new Housing Economic Account pegs residential-construction activity at $143.4 billion of GDP and 1.2 million jobs in 2024 — roughly six cents of every GDP dollar. With the post-COVID era of 1-to-2% mortgages gone, that engine can keep turning only if the cost to build drops faster than borrowing costs rise.
Productivity, however, is hampered by chronic under-investment in research:
Canada: C$51.7 billion in the same year — roughly C$1,300 per resident (≈ US $970). (Statistics Canada)
We spend less than half as much on R&D, per capita, as our southern neighbour, yet expect to compete on build speed and cost. If Ottawa wants productivity gains anywhere, housing is the logical beachhead: it is both the largest slice of capital formation and the biggest drag on household finances.
Boosting factory automation, digital twins, and standardized components in residential construction would:
Lower unit costs, keeping demand alive at higher interest rates.
Lift wages for tech-enabled construction roles without piling on debt.
Free capital so the broader economy can diversify beyond housing once today’s supply crunch is solved.
To ignore these findings is not a neutral act. It is a decision to keep building fewer homes, more slowly, at higher cost, while expecting a different result.
CMHC’s Blunt Bottom Line
Ottawa’s own housing agency doesn’t mince words: affordability won’t come back unless we build far more homes, far faster. In its June 2025 report Canada’s Housing Supply Shortages: Moving to a New Framework, CMHC calculates that Canada must double today’s construction pace, raising annual housing starts from roughly 250,000 to 430,000-480,000 units a year through 2035, just to return to 2019-level affordability.
According to CMHC’s chart above, anything short of that keeps price-to-income ratios “near pandemic-era highs,” the agency warns, stressing that “increasing housing supply is the key to restoring affordability.”
Let's not waste another year chasing affordability while preserving the very structures that stand in its way. Let's begin building as if the crisis is real.
Plans have been filed for a lofty double tower project slated to deliver over 1,200 new residential units to Toronto's Mount Pleasant East neighbourhood. The mixed-use development would reach 65 and 60 storeys, bringing substantial height and new housing within close proximity to existing and planned higher-order transit.
The plans were submitted by Toronto-based Crestview Investment Corporation in mid-July in support of Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-Law Amendment applications to allow for increased height and density on the site. Currently, the site is occupied by a four-storey commercial and office building.
Located at 245 Eglinton Avenue East, the 1.19-acre site spans the north half of the block between Mount Pleasant Road and Taunton Road, with Eglinton in the north. Future residents would benefit from easy access to nearby transit options, such as the Eglinton subway station on Line 1, which is located a nine-minute walk to the west, and Mount Pleasant Station on the forthcoming Eglinton Crosstown LRT, located immediately north of the development site.
Mount Pleasant East is home to a wide array of buildings, including single-family homes, walk-ups from the '40s and '50s, high-rises from the '60s and '70s, and newer high-rise infill apartments, with the taller buildings concentrated along Eglinton, according to planning materials.
In recent times, and in line with updated provincial and municipal planning policy that encourages intensified growth around existing and planned higher-order transit, there has been an increased emphasis on development activity in the Midtown region, with proposed and approved projects reaching significant heights.
Crestview's proposal marks the tallest of the nearby projects, but other notable developments include a 61-storey mixed-use proposal from Reserve and Westdale Properties at 808 Mount Pleasant Road and an approved 28-, 40- and 60-storey mixed-use complex at 150 Eglinton Avenue East from Madison Group.
The proposal for 245 Eglinton, which features designs by Superkül, Crestview is envisioning a shared two- to three-storey base building that would span the majority of the site, but leaving some space for public realm enhancements such as planting areas, sitting areas, trees, and the sidewalk along Eglinton. The 65-storey Tower A would rise from the west end of the podium while 60-storey Tower B would rise from the eastern end.
245 Eglinton/Superkül
At grade, you would find the entrance to the residential lobby along Eglinton and 30,677 sq. ft of commercial space divided into two separate areas along Eglinton and Mount Pleasant. You would also find three townhome units with street access to Taunton at grade.
In total, the development would deliver 1,278 residential units of unconfirmed tenure that are to be divided into 117 studios, 808 one-bedrooms, 230 two-bedrooms, and 123 three-bedrooms. Residents would have access to 40,117 sq. ft of indoor amenity space located on levels two, three, and four, and 14,908 sq. ft of outdoor space located on the terrace above level two. Additionally, plans call for 127 vehicle parking spaces and 1445 bicycle parking spaces across three levels of underground parking.
If approved and constructed, 245 Eglinton would be one of the tallest buildings in Mount Pleasant East, offering the bustling neighbourhood a substantial amount of new housing and commercial space within close proximity to some of the most efficient transit systems in the city.
After economic uncertainty brought on by a trade war with the US quashed much of the rebound initially expected for the first half of 2025, increased home sales in July are indicating that improved affordability may be reopening the door for a substantial number of Greater Toronto Area home hunters.
After an unremarkable spring and early summer that saw GTA home sales and prices fall year over year each month while inventory grew to levels not seen in 25 years, the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board's (TRREB) July data reveals sales ticked up on a seasonally-adjusted basis month over month and were up 10.9% year over year. In total, there were 6,100 home sales recorded last month — "the best home sales result for the month of July since 2021," reads the report.
TRREB President Elechia Barry-Sproule attributes the rise in sales to improved affordability, as home prices have largely flatlined and continue to fall on an annual basis each month, but says more relief is needed.
“Improved affordability, brought about by lower home prices and borrowing costs is starting to translate into increased home sales," said Barry-Sproule. "More relief is required, particularly where borrowing costs are concerned, but it’s clear that a growing number of households are finding affordable options for homeownership."
Just last week, on July 30, the Bank of Canada chose to hold the interest rate for the third time in a row, after seven consecutive rate cuts between June 2024 and March 2025 that brought the policy interest rate from 5.0% to 2.75%. TRREB's Chief Information Officer Jason Mercer further emphasized the need for additional rate cuts, highlighting the potential impact on the greater economy.
“Recent data suggest that the Canadian economy is treading water in the face of trade uncertainty with the United States. A key way to mitigate the impact of trade uncertainty is to promote growth in the domestic economy," said Mercer. "The housing sector can be a catalyst for growth, with most spin-off expenditures accruing to regional economies. Further interest rate cuts would spur home sales and see more spin-off expenditures, positively impacting the economy and job growth."
In the meantime, supply levels continued to climb in July, increasing 5.7% year over year with 17,613 new listings posted. Still, the market tightened last month as the month-over-month rise in home sales was much greater than the rise in listings.
Despite a slight tightening of the market, however, home prices continued to fall in July, with the benchmark home price decreasing 5.4% year over year and the average selling price down 5.5%. The average selling price last month was $1,051,719, compared to $1,101,732 in June and $1,113,116 in July 2024.
High-rise buildings in downtown Vancouver. / Lucas Inacio, Shutterstock
After an extensive market downturn caused by economic conditions, there are promising signs that the real estate market is turning the corner, according to the latest statistics published by Greater Vancouver Realtors (GVR) on Tuesday.
In July, the Greater Vancouver region recorded a total of 2,286 home sales, which was 2% below the 2,333 recorded in July 2024 and 13.9% below the 10-year July average of 2,656. However, last month's sales marks an improvement considering the significant gaps in recent months. May was 18.5% lower year over year, while June was 9.8% lower year over year.
On the other side of the equation, last month saw 5,642 new listings come online, which was 0.8% higher than the 5,597 added in July 2024 and 12.4% higher than the 10-year July average of 5,018.
With that new batch of listings, the total amount of active listings in the Greater Vancouver real estate market is now up to 17,168, which is 19.8% higher than the 14,326 total at this time last year and 40.2% higher than the 10-year July average of 12,249.
Although there are various concerns about the market downturn, one positive has been that prices have come down, and that trend continued last month.
The composite residential benchmark price is now at $1,165,300, which is down 0.7% from June 2025 and down 2.7% from July 2024. By property type, the benchmark price is now $1,974,400 for single-detached homes, $1,099,200 for townhouses, and $743,700 for condominiums. All three represent decreases of between 0.4% and 1.0% from June 2025, and decreases of between 2.3% and 3.6% from July 2024.
Market Analysis
According to the GVR statistics, the sales-to-active-listings ratio is now at 13.8%. A ratio of 12% or lower is considered a buyers' market and a ratio of 20% or higher is considered a sellers' market, thus the market is currently at a healthy balance that favours neither side. There are, however, nuances depending on the property type, as the ratio is 10.2% for single-detached homes, 16.7% for townhouses, and 15.9% for condos.
"With the rate of homes coming to market holding steady in July, the inventory of homes available for sale on the MLS has stabilized at around 17,000," said GVR Director of Economics and Data Analytics Andrew Lis. "This level of inventory provides buyers plenty of selection to choose from. Although sales activity is now recovering, this healthy level of inventory is sufficient to keep home prices trending sideways over the short term as supply and demand remain relatively balanced. However, if the recovery in sales activity accelerates, these favourable conditions for home buyers may begin slowly slipping away, as inventory levels decline, and home sellers gain more bargaining power."
Making matters better, perhaps, is the certainty stemming from the Bank of Canada's (BoC) decision last week to hold its policy interest rate at 2.75% — the third consecutive hold.
"The June data showed early signs of sales activity in the region turning a corner, and these latest figures for July are confirming this emerging trend," added Lis. "Although the Bank of Canada held the policy rate steady in July, this decision could help bolster sales activity by providing more certainty surrounding borrowing costs at a time where economic uncertainty lingers due to ongoing trade negotiations with the USA."
The BoC rate announcement last week is presumably a positive for the market, but trade tensions between Canada and the United States also started to rise again last week as the two countries failed to reach a trade agreement. We will have to wait until next month's statistics release to see which of those forces wins out.