Last week, Ontario Premier Doug Ford said his government would not introduce legislation to automatically legalize fourplexes across the province, arguing that such a move would lead to pushback from some residents.
Trust Drug Fraud to stand up for the downtrodden rich NIMBYs.
Won’t somebody think of the NIMBYs!
And this is how we’re in this mess to begin with…
To access funding, provinces and territories would have to agree to a set of conditions, including the adoption of the recently announced renters’ bill of rights, which would create a national standard lease agreement and require landlords to disclose previous rent prices.
The federal government is also demanding that provinces and territories freeze development charges for three years and require municipalities to broadly allow the construction of fourplexes.
Seems like pretty good points! Densifying is definitely a good way to ensure affordability (by reducing the need for cars and impact of land availability). And knowing how much the rent increased seems like a good way to make the market more competitive (if we can do it for historical stock prices and home assessment, why not rent as well).
Densifying is definitely a good way to ensure affordability (by reducing the need for cars and impact of land availability).
I’m all for density, but I’m not sure how this will ensure new housing is affordable. Anecdotally, whenever a $600k house was torn down in my 'hood, it was replaced by 2-4 units that each went for $1m or more.
Supply and demand is a thing, but they’re so far out of whack at this point, that I think it’ll take concerted effort by non-profit builders to construct anything affordable.
Building a new structure in a city is about 1m$. Being able to split this 4 ways could help reduce prices if enough come online that demand starts to teter off. This will incentivize redeveloping aging single-family homes in downtown cores. Density isn’t just about being green, but helps reduce the cost of overall infrastructure maintenance, taxes, and helps the city remain financially healthier. That said, this is a single step towards repair… it will take decades to see the effects.
Being able to split this 4 ways could help reduce prices if enough come online that demand starts to teter off.
It could, but I have a hard time seeing a for-profit builder charging less than the market can bear.
On top of that, there’s a shortage of tradespeople, and the increased cost of borrowing, which makes it unlikely that we’ll see anywhere near the level of growth necessary for that to happen organically.
Our governments need to get back into the building game. They need to make like the 1940s and 1950s and build a tonne of affordable housing.
From the article, the $6B housing fund won’t directly build housing, it’s a carrot to encourage provinces and municipalities to loosen their housing restrictions. Other bodies will have to finance the construction.
For a moment I thought we were getting back to the good ol’ days when governments built (affordable) housing. Despite the headline, that is not what this fund is about.
Unfortunately the Liberals are pretty all in on the P3 model of doing things. We’d need either a (leftward) change of government or an ideological shift within the Liberal party to get that kind of direct involvement, I think.
Yeah. The free market has had thirty years to save us, and it hasn’t. You’d think they’d switch strategy at some point.
The free market is saving the bank accounts of the donor class.
So it’s working by design.
strings attached
Don’t worry about those strings, housing developers know exactly where to find those giant ceremonial scissors.
“Trudeau lights $6B on fire” - call me a pessimist but any time this happens it’s like “ok where did that money go?”, I don’t see this doing anything.
It’ll probably improve how we build housing. It may improve density. But I doubt it’ll make housing more affordable.
And the $6b is supposed to be spent in infrastructure, which could be good. Depending on what municipalities/provinces decide to spend it on.
