• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 days ago

    In order for housing co-ops to exist, the land needs to be zoned to allow dense multifamily. If you want to fix housing affordability, that’s where you have to look.

    • moonbunny@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      You need both ideally, especially since real estate developers tend to stall or shelve housing projects if they feel like they’ll get less of a return on investment and wait until prices go up again before doing anything

  • acargitz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    – Wait so it is socialism or barbarism?

    – Always has been.

  • rbesfe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    We need far fewer condos in this country. They’re practically a scam that lures people in with the promise of “equity”. The vast majority of condos have terrible energy performance because first cost is all that the buyer cares about.

    • Cyborganism
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I disagree. The problem is the construction regulations that require buildings of more than x stories to have two staircases per floor. This leads to poor design architecture with small units with no ventilation. Also we don’t need 45 storey condo buildings either. 4-6 storeys can be plenty to increase density in some surrounding neighborhoods.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Also we don’t need 45 storey condo buildings either. 4-6 storeys can be plenty to increase density in some surrounding neighborhoods.

        The 45 story condo towers exist mostly because those surrounding neighborhoods are zoned single-family. If density weren’t literally illegal everywhere outside the downtown cores, there wouldn’t be so much pent-up demand to make those high-rises necessary in every minuscule scrap of land where the density is legal.

        • Cyborganism
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          That depends on the city. That may be true for Toronto, but not Montréal for example.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Full disclosure: I’m an American whose impression of Canada comes mostly from Canadian urbanist youtubers, specifically “Oh the Urbanity” and “Not Just Bikes.”

            From that, I get the impression that Montreal is indeed way better than other Canadian cities – but that it’s basically the only one that is (give or take other cities in Quebec, maybe?). Like, the French-Canadian attitude towards zoning and city design is an outlier compared to the rest of Canada (and the anglosphere in general, possibly because mid-century American city planners with bad car-centric ideas had less influence).

      • Avid Amoeba
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        If there’s nothing stopping me from cramming more shoebox units in place of that second staircase you let me remove, I will do just that and pocket the margins.

        BTW, my building has two staircases per floor, with 10 1400sqft units per floor, with fine ventilation. It was built before I was born.

        But yes about the 4-6 rises. Even a bit higher should be fine, as long as complexities are kept low.