It's interesting to perspectives from elsewhere. The Netherlands is also facing a housing crisis, and they're also talking about significant increases in construction. Part of that will be to limit local control.

Interestingly, they're also talking about changing the type of construction: fewer rooms.

There isn't quite enough context to explain why that would help, but it's something I haven't really heard politicians saying here in Canada.

What changes would you make to speed up housing growth here?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is how Japan has "affordable" housing. 300 square foot per person or less on average. Bedrooms get reused during the day by putting the bed away.

Laundry is in the kitchen or bathroom, no dedicated space. No utility closets.

No yards, no property setbacks, and for a lot of apartments no parking at all or only single stalls for some people.

You can see all of this in the way they name their rental/sales listings.

1DK means 1 bedroom, with a dining room and a kitchen. Dining room meaning that the kitchen is large enough for a table, not a separate room.

1LDK adds a living room. That's still likely under 400 square feet.

1K also exists. It's literally 100-200 square feet and a kitchen in the main area, and a bathroom. The bathroom has a clothes washer, but no dryer. Most people hang dry in their room or balcony.

We honestly should build entire towers with a hundred 1K units here within 1 block of transit hubs and no parking.

Even our micro housing is not usually this small and most zoning bylaws dont allow for anything like that.

Giving people an absolute minimum option relieves stress on the other larger units which brings overall prices down. Such buildings would be much cheaper because they use less land and as the original post mentions they have zero luxuries. It's copy paste of the simplest possible housing unit and your only customization is wall paint colour.

[–] silverneedle@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We honestly should build entire towers with a hundred 1K units here within 1 block of transit hubs and no parking.

And we are looking for the cause why people aren't starting families...

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You are only thinking one step at a time.

A lot of people who would move into these units live in 2 and 3 bedroom units with roommates. That would free those larger units up for couples and families.

[–] silverneedle@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Don't take this the wrong way, but that reminds me of the adage of loosening laws to get companies to build condos and houses, even if most development consists of luxury housing units because somehow there is more on the market, ergo more supply. I am not sure how far either calculi hold true.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

A) most development marketed as "luxury" are not actually luxury in any sort of way. It's just a marketing tactic.

B) I wouldn't expect this to be built by for profit developers. The government should be the one building it.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 minutes ago

"Luxury" means "market value", i.e., will be rented/sold for maximum profit margin.

[–] silverneedle@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

B) I wouldn’t expect this to be built by for profit developers. The government should be the one building it.

I think this is a wholly sensible wish. The thing is however that the governments are building nothing in this political climate and would rather wait for people to die off to make room.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Those sound like rooms in a boarding house. That would be way better for some people than larger units, or living on the street.

I guess the key is that they need to be affordable.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

A boarding house usually has shared spaces as well. These units do not. They almost all have external facing doors too. More like a tiny motel than a boarding house or dorms.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

That's the problem. Here it would be billed as a "Luxury Tiny Home Experience" and they'd charge $3k/month rent. Corpos know plebs don't have money, so the only market is the luxury market.