What city council can — and can't — do to improve Edmonton's housing system
When discussing neighbourhood renewal, the City of Edmonton often talks of "options and tradeoffs" as it looks at how something may need to be lost to make way for something else gained. Parking spots, for example, may need to go to make way for wider sidewalks. Trees may need to be cut down to make way for different landscaping that makes a neighbourhood more flood-resistant.
The idea of options and tradeoffs idea can be applied to Edmonton's housing system, too. Increased housing density might mean less available parking spots. Preserving a neighbourhood's heritage might mean fewer opportunities for dense housing near an LRT stop. Investing in affordable housing might mean property taxes increase.
In Taproot's Housing Complex series, we examined where Edmonton is at on housing supply, government subsidies for housing, rental housing, infill, sprawl, and more. To wrap the series, we will now look at what city council and the City of Edmonton can, and can't, do to improve Edmonton's housing system, and for whom. The context is the October 2025 municipal election, where housing is expected to be a main issue and the idea of options and tradeoffs will be central.
Complicating the discussion is the fact that the city is already pulling dozens of levers to increase housing supply, support subsidized housing, and slow the increase in housing prices. It's not always clear whether these actions actually help those who need help the most, however. For example, the city is encouraging density in key areas. That new housing will likely not be affordable for the lowest income earners in Edmonton, but there is a theory (that some challenge) that if you build more supply, housing affordability will "trickle down" to the lowest income earners. And Edmonton uses the Housing First strategy when moving homeless people off the streets, which is a best practice in much of Europe and North America. But experts suggest our approach of using a private landlord instead of government-operated housing makes the strategy less effective.
Do you support continuing with the strategy, even if it's not optimal? Do you support preserving heritage and property values in mature neighbourhoods? Do you support investing as much public money into subsidized housing as possible? Do you support increased density, even if the new developments are "luxury condos"? These are questions you may ask candidates when they show up at your door over the next year.
Why city policies matter on housing
Many city projects, procedures, and policies may seem unrelated to housing but end up being so, especially transportation infrastructure projects. For example, BILD Edmonton Metro CEO Kalen Anderson wrote in Canadian Architect that the 102 Avenue bicycle lane through Wîhkwêntôwin has led to growing private sector investment in housing there. At the time she wrote the column last fall, there were seven active development sites along the route and more than 1,200 residential units under construction. The Valley Line LRT is another example. Maclab Development planned two towers at Mill Woods Town Centre because of the new Valley Line LRT. When the Anthony Henday ring road was completed in 2016, Senator Paula Simons, then a Postmedia columnist, wrote that it "ignit(ed) huge residential building booms outside its boundaries."
In the same vein, council's choices today will impact how much housing can be built in another decade. This council has debated the substantial completion standard, a policy that would limit development in new suburbs until the adjacent neighbourhoods have been completed. Proponents of the strategy say it's a financially sound policy that will limit suburban sprawl, a development pattern that costs the city more to maintain than it generates through property taxes. Critics, on the other hand, say the city shouldn't limit housing construction at all when Edmonton's population is increasing as fast as it is.
Experts say Edmonton is a leader in creating the regulatory environment that encourages more housing supply. "In terms of getting the basics right to allow, let's say, the market to flourish, it's hard to imagine what more Edmonton could do," Damian Collins, professor of human geography at the University of Alberta and director of the Community Housing Canada Research Partnership, told Taproot. Edmonton is used as an example across North America for making big moves on the supply side of housing policy, mostly because it was one of the first cities on the continent to do away with parking minimums and eliminate single-family zoning.
That begins to cover housing supply that's financially accessible to higher-income earners — but what about low-income Edmontonians, those on fixed incomes, or those living on the street? As of September, there were about 4,700 people experiencing homelessness in Edmonton, an increase of nearly 2,000 in the past year, according to Homeward Trust's point-in-time count. Edmonton's rate of homelessness is about twice that of Calgary, Toronto, and Vancouver.
