I recently read a piece by Jen Angel arguing that public space is essential housing-enabling infrastructure. It’s a compelling and necessary reframing, especially in a moment where the focus is so heavily on delivering units as quickly as possible. Her point is simple but important: if we want density to work, we need to invest in public spaces that make it livable. These are the places where community forms, where wellbeing is supported, and where climate resilience can be built into the fabric of our cities.
I agree with this entirely. But I think there is a layer of this conversation that is still missing, particularly in Toronto, and it sits in a place we rarely talk about with any seriousness: laneways.
In the last 8 years, Toronto has begun allowing new forms of housing. Laneway suites, garden suites, and multiplexes are beginning to reshape neighbourhoods that have long been constrained to low-density patterns. This has allowed us to grow within the city we already have, to make better use of existing infrastructure, and to introduce more diverse housing options into established communities.
But as we enable this new housing, we are not meaningfully rethinking the spaces that sit alongside it.
Laneways were built as service corridors for garbage, garages, and utilities. And yet, with the rise of laneway housing, they are increasingly functioning as front doors, as points of entry and exit, and as everyday public space. People are walking through them, spending time in them.
Despite this, there are no comprehensive standards guiding what a laneway should be in this new context. There is no coordinated investment strategy, no clear maintenance model, and no shared understanding of their role within the public realm. Responsibility is diffuse, and in many cases, these spaces are effectively unmanaged.
We are treating laneways like back-of-house infrastructure while expecting them to perform front-of-house functions for a denser city.
If we take Jen’s argument seriously, that public space is what makes density work, then laneways begin to look less like leftover space and more like a critical gap in our housing system.
They are, in many cases, the smallest and most immediate unit of public life in a neighbourhood. They are where neighbours encounter one another in low-stakes, everyday ways. They are where children play, where informal conversations happen, and where a sense of familiarity and trust can begin to take shape. This is the kind of social infrastructure that often goes unnoticed, but it is foundational to how communities function.
They also represent a significant opportunity from a climate perspective. Laneways make up a large, continuous network across the city, much of it currently paved and underutilized. With relatively modest interventions, they can begin to absorb stormwater, reduce urban heat, and support urban biodiversity. These are not large-scale, capital-intensive projects, but distributed, human-scale changes that can add up over time.
There is also a mobility layer here. As neighbourhoods become denser, having alternative, lower-speed walking and cycling routes becomes increasingly important. Laneways have the potential to provide this finer-grain network, complementing the primary street system rather than competing with it.
And while it is not their primary role, laneways can also support small-scale economic activity in ways that feel embedded in the neighbourhood. Studios, home-based businesses, and micro-retail can begin to animate these spaces, contributing to local economies without the need for large commercial footprints.
All of this points to a simple extension of Jen’s argument. If public space is housing-enabling infrastructure, then laneways are one of the most overlooked forms of that infrastructure in Toronto.
Right now, we are adding homes into a system that has not been adapted to support them. We are asking laneways to carry more social, environmental, and functional weight without giving them the attention or investment that would allow them to succeed in that role.
If we want intensification to feel like an improvement to neighbourhood life, rather than a pressure on it, we need to pay attention to these in-between spaces. Laneways need to be understood as part of the public realm, our social infrastructure, and our climate response.
This does not require a single, large solution. It requires a shift in how we see these spaces, and a willingness to invest in them accordingly, through design, through stewardship, and through meaningful collaboration with the people who live alongside them.
If housing is where we live, laneways are part of where we live together. They are the infrastructure between homes, and if we want density to work, we can no longer afford to treat them as an afterthought.