New Housing Alternatives

In this episode of New Housing Alternatives, hosts Cherise Burda and Dr. Ren Thomas speak with Ann Gordon-Tighe, strategist at Y Station, a communications and research firm that works with governments, non‑profits, and housing providers. Ann explains how Y Station bridges the gap between quantitative public opinion research and qualitative public engagement, helping clients navigate contentious conversations around new affordable and supportive housing.Ann traces Y Station’s origins and name back to “Y stations” in the Second World War—radio towers that picked up signals and relayed them to code‑breakers at Bletchley Park. She uses this metaphor to describe how Y Station gathers signals from surveys, stakeholder interviews, and public meetings to give clients a holistic view of the “public conversation” around housing. For many non‑profit providers stepping into development for the first time, this support is critical: they are already stretched thin operating shelters and services, and often lack in‑house capacity to manage complex engagement and communications requirements tied to land sales and development approvals.The conversation then turns to the myths, fears, and human rights questions that surface when new affordable housing is proposed. Ann outlines common community concerns about property values, crime, and the loss of existing uses like parks, and contrasts these with neutral or supportive residents who simply want information. She describes Y Station’s approach to balancing radical transparency—including around contentious elements like harm reduction services—with a firm commitment to tenants’ rights. As she puts it, we don’t get to decide who our current neighbours have over as guests or what medications they take, and the same standard should apply to residents of affordable and supportive housing.From there, Cherise and Ren dig into what makes engagement effective—and why it often starts too late. Ann shares examples of humanizing strategies, including inviting prospective tenants into design workshops and using stories and data from existing sites to counter NIMBY narratives. She emphasizes the importance of proactive, non‑project‑based conversations led by municipal and community leaders, rather than placing the full burden on housing providers once a specific development is already on the table. The episode closes by contrasting the evolving approach of larger cities like Edmonton with the political dynamics of smaller municipalities, and by highlighting tools like good neighbour agreements, ongoing relationship‑building, and better data collection as ways to set both projects and future residents up for long‑term success.Key TakeawaysBridging research and engagement creates better housing conversations.Non‑profit housing providers face steep capacity and learning curves.Myths about affordable housing are persistent—but can be challenged.Tenants’ human rights must anchor engagement practices.Project‑based engagement starts too late and hardens opposition.Municipal leadership and good data can de‑risk housing debates.Good neighbour agreements and ongoing relationships matter.Chapters00:00 – Intro: New Housing Alternatives and this episode’s focus  00:20 – Introducing guest: strategist and facilitator Ann Gordon-Tighe 00:43 – What Y Station does: bridging research and public engagement  02:04 – The WWII “Y stations” origin story behind the firm’s name  03:13 – Quantitative research vs. qualitative engagement—and why they’re siloed  04:38 – How Y Station supports non‑profit affordable housing developers  06:53 – Common community concerns: property values, crime myths, and losing parks  08:45 – Human rights, tenant privacy, and what neighbours don’t get to decide  09:59 – Humanizing engagement: involving prospective tenants and sharing stories  12:31 – Urban vs. suburban/small‑town attitudes toward change and new housing  14:10 – Why project‑based engagement comes too late in the public conversation  15:47 – Who should lead broader housing education: elected officials and community leaders  16:50 – The role of municipalities vs. affordable housing providers in public engagement  18:28 – Using data (property values, 911 calls) to counter myths about affordable housing  20:00 – Good neighbour agreements and ongoing community relations  21:47 – How municipal politics differ between big cities and smaller communities  25:31 – Final reflections on public engagement as foundation for successful tenancies  26:27 – Episode wrap‑up, resources, and thanks to our guest  New Housing Alternatives is made possible with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Explore our Vision & Objectives, Research Clusters & Projects, and subscribe to our blog at:  https://newhousingalternatives.ca/blog

In this episode of New Housing Alternatives, hosts Cherise Burda and Dr. Ren Thomas speak with Alex Laidlaw, Director of Impact Investments at the Calgary Foundation, one of Canada’s largest community foundations. They explore how community foundations sit at the intersection of philanthropy, government funding, and non‑market housing—and how tools like grants and flexible loans can help close the financing gaps that keep desperately needed projects from getting built.Alex traces the Calgary Foundation’s roots back to the 1950s, when large estates were locked into obsolete causes like carriage maintenance charities, and explains how community foundations were created so local partners could continually redirect those funds toward evolving needs. Today, that endowment of over $1.6 billion supports a wide range of priorities—but food insecurity and affordable housing are increasingly emerging as fundamental pressures across Calgary and the Treaty 7 region.The conversation then turns to the Resolve campaign, a collaborative, time‑bound effort by nine housing agencies that set out to raise $120 million for permanent supportive housing. Alex explains what made Resolve unusual in the philanthropic world: instead of competing campaigns chasing the same donors, organizations pooled their asks, coordinated messaging, and treated housing as a shared civic project. Even though the campaign ultimately raised just under $80 million, it was enough—paired with public funding and financing—to bring all of the planned projects to fruition.From there, Cherise and Ren dig into the broader role of philanthropic capital in the housing system: not as a replacement for government, but as one critical slice of the capital stack. Alex highlights the importance of using donations to build organizational capacity, fund feasibility work, and take early‑stage risks that public programs are often too rigid or slow to support. He also describes Calgary Foundation’s impact investing program, which uses short‑term, flexible “bridge” loans so non‑profits can acquire land and move projects forward while they wait on federal, provincial, and municipal grants.Throughout, Alex reflects on the current transition from CMHC programs to Build Canada Homes, and how well‑intentioned policy changes can create uncertainty on the ground that stalls non‑market developers already working at the edge of their capacity. The episode closes with a look beyond Calgary, as Alex points to more than 200 community foundations across Canada—from large urban institutions to smaller players like the Comox Valley Community Foundation—and invites listeners to see local community foundations as powerful, grounded partners in housing solutions.Key TakeawaysCommunity foundations keep philanthropy aligned with current needs.  Community foundations were created to unlock estate gifts tied to outdated purposes and redirect them toward evolving local priorities; today, they manage pooled endowments that can respond to issues like housing, food insecurity, and mental health as they emerge.  Housing and food insecurity are cross‑cutting pressures.  Across Calgary’s charitable sector, organizations are seeing food insecurity and affordable housing as fundamental barriers to stability—issues that touch everything from social services to health and cultural programming.  Collaborative campaigns can reshape donor behaviour.  The Resolve campaign showed how nine agencies fundraising together for a shared housing goal could reduce competition, simplify the donor landscape, and position housing as a unified, city‑wide priority rather than a fragmented set of projects.  Philanthropy is a catalytic slice of the capital stack.  Donations rarely cover full project costs, but they can play a decisive role by funding feasibility studies, early staff capacity, and non‑bricks‑and‑mortar elements that don’t fit neatly into government funding programs yet are crucial to getting housing built.  Impact investing can bridge timing gaps in funding.  Through loans rather than grants, Calgary Foundation helps organizations acquire land and undertake pre‑development work while they wait on slower public funding decisions—then recycles those repayments into future projects, multiplying the impact of endowed capital.  Local foundations are national infrastructure for housing solutions.  With more than 200 community foundations across Canada, there is likely one in or near most communities; their local knowledge and long‑term relationships position them to convene partners, identify gaps, and support context‑specific approaches to non‑market housing.Chapters:00:00 – Intro: New Housing Alternatives and this episode’s focus  00:20 – Introducing guest: impact investor and fundraiser Alex Laidlaw  01:41 – The origin story of the Calgary Foundation  03:51 – From broad philanthropy to recognizing housing as a core need  04:21 – Food insecurity, housing, and basic needs across the sector  05:47 – Is this focus on housing new for community foundations?  07:24 – Alex’s path into housing and the Resolve campaign  07:49 – What made Resolve unique: nine housing agencies, one campaign  10:19 – Pooled philanthropy and the role of donors in capital projects  12:19 – Can campaigns like Resolve be sustained over time?  12:36 – Time‑bound collaboration and the challenge of ongoing capacity  14:00 – How community foundations relate to government funding  14:37 – Philanthropy as one slice of the housing capital stack  16:00 – Early‑stage risks, feasibility work, and building capacity  18:08 – Impact investing 101: Calgary Foundation’s loan program  18:40 – Timing gaps, land acquisition, and flexible bridge financing  19:54 – Build Canada Homes, CMHC, and the cost of uncertainty  21:20 – Why slow decisions and program shifts can stall local projects  21:56 – How listeners can find and engage local community foundations  22:30 – Examples from Calgary and the Comox Valley Community Foundation  24:05 – Closing reflections on local knowledge and housing solutions  24:37 – Episode wrap‑up and thanks to our guest  New Housing Alternatives is made possible with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Explore our Vision & Objectives, Research Clusters & Projects, and subscribe to our blog at:  https://newhousingalternatives.ca/blog

In this episode of New Housing Alternatives, hosts Cherise Burda and Dr. Ren Thomas speak with Chiyi Tam, urban planner, anti‑displacement organizer, and Managing Director & co‑founder of the Toronto Chinatown Land Trust. They explore how Chinatowns function as complex social and economic ecosystems, and how the community land trust (CLT) model can help protect housing, small businesses, and cultural spaces in the face of intense displacement pressures.Chiyi traces a lineage from historic tongs—diasporic clan and hometown associations that pooled funds to buy property, house workers, and offer near-interest-free loans—to today’s community land trusts in Toronto’s West Chinatown, Boston, and Los Angeles. She explains why conventional planning tools and “housing‑only” funding streams don’t fit a neighbourhood where people often live, work, and socialize in the same spaces, and shares how the Toronto Chinatown Land Trust is partnering with a tong to redevelop an ancestral hall at 217 Augusta into seniors’ housing and community space.Key TakeawaysChinatown is an ecosystem, not a single project. Rather than one organization “representing” Chinatown, the neighbourhood is sustained by overlapping networks of kung fu clubs, mahjong halls, family associations, tongs, BIAs, artists, and multiple levels of government, all tied together by relationships and mutual aid.  Community land trusts are governance models, not one‑off housing fixes. CLTs are neighborhood‑wide, multi‑stakeholder real estate cooperatives that permanently steward land and buildings for community benefit, resisting the extraction of profit from private property—even when projects focus on housing.  Housing, work, and culture are inseparable in Chinatown. From people sleeping behind laundries to nail salons in condo units, everyday life in Chinatown ignores the rigid separations of residential, commercial, and cultural uses that shape zoning, policy, and funding silos. Holistic solutions are essential.  Tongs were proto‑CLTs rooted in mutual aid. Historically, tongs bought property together, ran internal lending systems, and helped members survive racist labour regimes and exclusionary housing markets—functioning as democratically controlled, member‑based land stewards long before the term “community land trust” existed.  A succession crisis threatens deeply affordable housing. As 80- and 90‑year‑old tong leaders retire and pass away, many are selling off properties that have quietly housed low‑income seniors and bachelors for as little as $100/month, putting irreplaceable affordability and cultural spaces at risk.  Partnerships can unlock new models of community ownership. By partnering with the Hainan Association of Ontario on the redevelopment of its clubhouse, the Toronto Chinatown Land Trust is piloting a model where younger generations step in as development partners and long‑term stewards—supporting seniors’ housing, cultural practice, and community control of land.Chapters:00:00 – Intro: New Housing Alternatives and this episode’s focus  00:28 – Why look beyond “broken housing” narratives?  00:46 – Introducing guest: urban planner and organizer Chiyi Tam02:00 – What is a community land trust, really? Governance vs. “housing solution”  04:19 – From Kensington Market to Chinatown: what makes this CLT different?  04:55 – Why zoning silos don’t fit how people live and work in Chinatown  09:17 – Painting a picture of mixed homes, businesses, and third spaces  10:02 – The Chinatown ecosystem: Cooperation between Chinatown and many stakeholders  11:05 – Kung fu clubs, mahjong halls, tongs, BIAs, and elected offices  14:06 – Balancing culture, heritage, and staying focused on land stewardship  16:44 – Walking tour reflections and the question: what are tongs?  17:20 – Tongs 101: global Chinese mutual aid and association halls  19:20 – Railways, burial traditions, and the birth of Chinatowns  21:55 – Karaoke fundraisers, fictitious kin, and buying property together  23:55 – Tongs as proto–community land trusts and social finance systems  25:44 – The succession crisis and losing $100/month rooms  26:43 – “Now I want to buy a tong building”: urgency and opportunity  27:04 – Has the recent market downturn helped?  27:31 – Why land is still expensive, and owners still need “full market value”  28:45 – First big project: redeveloping 217 Augusta with the Hainan Association  29:20 – Seniors’ housing, cultural space, and being first in North America  30:49 – Closing thoughts on optimism and community‑led land governance  31:20 – How to learn more and get involved: ChinatownLandTrust.ca  32:21 – Episode wrap‑up, research links, and credits  33:02 – Disclaimer: diversity of views within the partnership and funder  New Housing Alternatives is made possible with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Explore our Vision & Objectives, Research Clusters & Projects, and subscribe to our blog at:  https://newhousingalternatives.ca/blog

In this episode of New Housing Alternatives, hosts Cherise Burda and Dr. Ren Thomas speak with Graeme Hussey, President of Nesting Ground and Director of Affordable Housing at Windmill Developments. They explore how a sustainability‑focused private developer is partnering with non‑profits and co‑ops to deliver low‑carbon, mixed‑income housing, using the One Planet Living framework to make affordability and sustainability core requirements rather than trade‑offs.Graeme walks through flagship projects like the Kennedy Station co‑op community at 2444 Eglinton East, a nine‑storey mass‑timber building at 230 Royal York, and a 400‑unit, transit‑oriented mass‑timber development at 1460 Riverside Drive in Ottawa. He also breaks down the policy tools needed to scale this work—predictable low‑cost financing, municipal fee and tax relief, and federal support for offsite and prefab construction to unlock more climate‑aligned non‑market housing.Key Takeaways  Mixed market and non‑market housing is becoming the new normal. With high costs and declining affordability, many viable projects now blend market units with deeply affordable or co‑op homes in the same buildings, backed by partnerships and layered incentives.  Scale matters for non‑profit housing. It can take similar effort to build 20 units as 200; organizations like Nesting Ground aim to tackle the housing crisis by doing fewer, larger, multi‑hundred‑unit projects, often in multiple municipalities.  Sustainability is no longer optional. For long‑term non‑profit owners, energy efficiency, low operating costs, and low‑carbon materials (like mass timber) are central to both climate goals and affordability over the building’s life.  Modern methods of construction (MMC) and offsite building are key enablers. Prefab and offsite construction can deliver faster, better‑quality, more energy‑efficient buildings, and align well with federal priorities such as Build Canada Homes—if policy and funding de‑risk this sector.  Policy levers need to align across governments. Federal low‑cost loans, provincial support, and municipal waivers of fees and property taxes can dramatically change the math for non‑profit and co‑op projects, shifting resources from hard costs into deeper affordability.  Partnerships are the backbone of innovation. From co‑ops at Kennedy Station to mass‑timber towers in Ottawa, collaboration between private developers, non‑profits, community housing providers, and governments is crucial for delivering both affordability and climate action at scale.Chapters:00:00 – Intro & Episode Overview  00:37 – Why Focus on New Housing Alternatives? Models that Actually Work  01:39 – Introducing Graeme Hussey, Windmill Developments, and Nesting Ground  02:30 – What Makes Windmill Different as a Private Developer?  02:57 – Dockside Green, Zibi, and 25 Years of Sustainable Development  04:48 – One Planet Living: A Framework for Affordability and Sustainability  05:07 – Partnering with Non‑Profits to Deliver Affordable Housing  07:28 – Why Mix Market and Non‑Market Housing in the Same Projects?  09:34 – Nesting Ground’s Mission: Scaling Non‑Profit Housing Across Cities  09:58 – Why Small Projects Take the Same Effort as Large Ones  12:27 – Housing and Climate: How MMC and Offsite Construction Fit In  13:07 – From Energy Efficiency to Embodied Carbon and Mass Timber  15:16 – 230 Royal York: Ontario’s Tallest Residential Mass‑Timber Building  16:48 – Inside the Kennedy Station Co‑op Project at 2444 Eglinton East  17:31 – Co‑ops, Mixed Income Models, and Zero‑Carbon Design  20:00 – Three Things Policymakers Need to Understand About Financing  20:18 – No Magic Bullet: Why Every Sector Has a Role  21:08 – Predictable Low‑Cost Financing and the Scale of Investment Needed  22:20 – Municipal Tools: Development Charges and Property Taxes  24:36 – Federal Leadership, Build Canada Homes, and the Prefab Sector  27:16 – 1460 Riverside Drive: A 400‑Unit Mass‑Timber TOD in Ottawa  28:35 – What It Means to See Your Projects Built on the Ground  30:53 – Timelines, Construction Speed, and Mass Timber vs. Concrete  31:39 – Collaboration, Replication, and Competing to Build the “Coolest” Projects  32:40 – Closing Reflections, Optimism, and Credits  New Housing Alternatives is made possible with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Explore our Vision & Objectives, Research Clusters & Projects, and subscribe to our blog at:https://newhousingalternatives.ca/blog

In this episode of New Housing Alternatives, hosts Cherise Burda and Dr. Ren Thomas speak with Melinda Zytaruk, CEO of Tooketree Passive Homes, a social enterprise that factory‑produces low‑carbon, high‑performance building panels. Together, they explore how offsite construction can deliver faster, more affordable, and climate‑resilient housing—while also creating safer, more stable local jobs.Melinda explains how panelized construction works, from sourcing Ontario wood and recycled cellulose to assembling precision panels in a controlled factory environment and partnering with builders on-site. She challenges dominant narratives about “industrialized” modular housing—like the idea that big, robot‑filled factories are the answer—and instead makes the case for a distributed network of small and medium panel producers embedded in local communities.They also unpack how federal initiatives like Build Canada Homes and “modern methods of construction” can support (or constrain) this ecosystem, why integrated design and early collaboration matter more for cost than any single technology, and how offsite construction can align with non‑market housing, co‑ops, and land trusts to deliver long‑term affordability and climate resilience.Key TakeawaysOffsite construction is about people, not robots. Successful modular and panelized housing companies rely on skilled workers and collaborative teams—not vast, automated warehouses—creating safer, more accessible jobs (including for people traditionally excluded from construction).Factory‑built panels can be both low‑carbon and cost‑competitive. By integrating design early, reducing waste, and standardizing processes (while still customizing each building enclosure), panel producers can deliver Passive House–level performance without necessarily increasing as‑built costs.Local supply chains strengthen both climate and community outcomes. Tooketree’s panels use Ontario wood, recycled cellulose, and wood fibre insulation from Quebec, adding value to regional forestry and manufacturing while reducing emissions and supporting local economies.Distributed manufacturing builds resilience. A network of small, community‑based factories across Canada can share work, smooth demand, and avoid the vulnerability of “picking a few big winners” that may fail or face delays.Policy and finance must recognize pre‑construction and cash‑flow realities. Programs like Build Canada Homes can unlock capacity if they fund early design and collaborative planning, and address the “chicken‑and‑egg” problem of paying for materials and fabrication before panels arrive on site—especially for non‑profits, co‑ops, and land trusts.Chapters:00:00 – Intro & Episode Overview00:37 – Why Prefab and Offsite Construction for Housing?01:56 – Introducing Melinda Zytaruk & Tooketree Passive Homes02:38 – Trade Show Pitch: Building Faster, More Affordable, and Low‑Carbon03:48 – Why Build Panels Indoors? Jobs, Safety, and Work‑Life Balance05:17 – What Offsite Construction Really Looks Like (Not a Warehouse of Robots)07:16 – Custom Panels, Shop Drawings, and Design Flexibility08:39 – From Single‑Family Homes to Co‑ops and Non‑Market Housing09:55 – Acting as Project Integrator and Design‑Assist Partner10:44 – High‑Performance Goals: Passive House, Net Zero, and Low‑Carbon Enclosures11:17 – Social Enterprise Values and Scaling Up to Multi‑Unit Housing12:32 – Long‑Term Affordability and Operating Costs13:22 – Is Offsite Construction Too Good to Be True? Costs, Myths, and Evidence14:47 – Why Collaboration and Integrated Design Drive Cost More Than Technology15:52 – Certifications: CSA, Passive House, and Net Zero Builders16:23 – Sourcing Ontario Wood, Recycled Cellulose, and High‑Performance Membranes18:06 – Supply Chain Vulnerabilities and Local Supplier Relationships19:05 – From Tree to Home: Forest Jobs, Value‑Added Manufacturing, and Assembly19:45 – Training Builders and GCs to Assemble Panels on Site20:26 – How Offsite Construction Expands (Not Replaces) Local Construction Jobs21:01 – What Policies Support Distributed Panel Producers?21:40 – Build Canada Homes, Insurance, and Climate‑Resilient Housing23:10 – The Need for Pre‑Construction Funding and Early‑Stage Design Support24:18 – Cash Flow, Deposits, and the Modular “Chicken‑and‑Egg” Problem26:00 – Industrialization vs. a Diverse, Distributed Offsite Ecosystem26:27 – Why Small and Medium Local Factories Make the Sector More Resilient27:29 – Collaboration Over Cut‑Throat Competition in a Housing and Health Crisis28:43 – Centring Community, Well‑Being, and Human Rights in How We Build29:49 – Closing Reflections, Optimism, and CreditsLearn more about the Tooketree Passive Homes here: https://www.tooketree.com/New Housing Alternatives is made possible with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Explore our Vision & Objectives and Research Clusters & Projects, and subscribe to our blog at the link below:https://newhousingalternatives.ca/blog