Housing Bubble II: The Quest To Build Enough Homes Where People Actually Need Them

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

I remember many discussions over the past years about making all those who wish to live in the burbs/sprawl areas pay (more of) the actual cost of building the infrastructure required to support their wish. Isn't this the greatest part of the why development/permit costs have risen? Maybe the idea was wrong-headed and recovering the cost of roads, wires and pipes, etc. should be captured via the general tax rate/collection?

[GlassCity]

It's a bit of a discussion on two different things, between initial capital putting in the infrastructure serving new development and ongoing operational funds to maintain the infrastructure. Low-density sprawl, even when initially entirely developer-covered for infrastructure, ultimately costs the government money when the resultant tax revenue doesn't cover service needs. On the flipside, if tax revenue is high enough (either with higher rates or higher density) then even the initial capital support isn't strictly necessary if that infrastructure can be amortized over the life of the development by the government.

That's the logic anyway. I'm personally open to it but not quite sold that development charges are inherently a bad thing. Governments going beyond what's strictly needed to service new growth is a bigger problem I think.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

I remember many discussions over the past years about making all those who wish to live in the burbs/sprawl areas pay (more of) the actual cost of building the infrastructure required to support their wish. Isn't this the greatest part of the why development/permit costs have risen? Maybe the idea was wrong-headed and recovering the cost of roads, wires and pipes, etc. should be captured via the general tax rate/collection?

Well a 100 unit apartment tower adding little cost of service pays more than a new exurban 20 house housing development. There is a inside outside greenbelt difference as well but building houses in Tewin is adding a lot more costs to the city than expanding a suburb in already dense Kanata. Realistically those buying new houses don't vote so it's the easiest way to collect revenue but also to put the thumb on the scale as suburbanites aren't going to agree to pay more taxes to cover their sprawl especially when they see the real expenses (social and being downtown problems.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

I remember many discussions over the past years about making all those who wish to live in the burbs/sprawl areas pay (more of) the actual cost of building the infrastructure required to support their wish. Isn't this the greatest part of the why development/permit costs have risen? Maybe the idea was wrong-headed and recovering the cost of roads, wires and pipes, etc. should be captured via the general tax rate/collection?

We're not talking about sprawl though. Any new development in Toronto is infill, and therefore denser than what it's replacing.

The reason why DC's have skyrocketed is because we have unsustainably low property taxes, and it's more politically expedient to fleece developers (and by extension, any prospective buyers/renters) than it is to raise property taxes on existing homeowners. It's essentially therefore a subsidy for those who buy/own existing housing stock (more expensive on average, and more costly to service) at the expense of those buying or renting new condos & apartments (cheaper on average, and more efficient to service).

There are still of course externalities associated with development, like lane closures and greater demand being placed on sanitation systems or other public services that DC's are meant to cover, but those costs haven't increased at nearly the same rate.

[goodgrowth]

It's very "convenient" that sprawl became a major issue but the funding model didn't become sprawl pays for sprawl BUT new density pays for sprawl

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Despite the high land values, we don't really lack for space - if governments were more proactive, they could open up small portions of excess public land (and I'm not just talking unused federal buildings, but things like municipal parking lots, grassy medians at the sides of roads, crown lands, etc - singularly small spaces, but considerable amounts of land in aggregate) for quickly & cheaply-built modular housing developments.

Similarly, create some sort of nationally standardized, quick-approval program for private property owners and allow & incentivize them to install modular "pods" on their properties. If zoning permitted it (or could be overrided), there's lots of space in backyards, sideyards, driveways for stuff like this: https://www.dezeen.com/2024/01/05/re...using-cutwork/

Yep. Somehow Tokyo in tiny Japan manages to constantly find space to build more homes than many North American megacities.

How Tokyo banned NIMBYism - ABC News In-Depth
https://youtu.be/R5pPcV54kiQ?si=Jr3E6k1Ja03LwSKz

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

Yep. Somehow Tokyo in tiny Japan manages to constantly find space to build more homes than many North American megacities.

How Tokyo banned NIMBYism - ABC News In-Depth
https://youtu.be/R5pPcV54kiQ?si=Jr3E6k1Ja03LwSKz

Even Japanophiles would admit the built urban environment in Tokyo is pretty hideous for the most part.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Even Japanophiles would admit the built urban environment in Tokyo is pretty hideous for the most part.

Nah.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Even Japanophiles would admit the built urban environment in Tokyo is pretty hideous for the most part.

Nope.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Nope.

No, its lovely I tell you, just lovely!

[IMG]tokyo by bcborn, on Flickr[/IMG]
Credit: https://bencardsbites.blogspot.com

Anyone who has been there knows yes there are some beautiful spots but a whole lot that is just plain unattractive.

[giallo]

I found Tokyo to be extremely comfy for the world's largest city. Very pedestrian friendly, and downright intimate and quiet in many areas. It's the perfect mix of SFH/low/mid/highrise development. The architecture isn't great, but at ground level, it doesn't matter. It's urban design is almost without equal.

Hideous is not a word I'd use, personally. Pragmatic, maybe.


Housing protest in the DTES on Saturday.

• Video Link

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Even Japanophiles would admit the built urban environment in Tokyo is pretty hideous for the most part.

Have you ever visited?

Tokyo is one of the most pleasurable 'mega' cities out there; is generally quite human scale and puts a ton of priority on the pedestrian user. It's often misjudged because of the reaction to '30 million people' and scenes of people being pushed into a subway at rush hour, but 90% of the time is quiet, peaceful and rather sublime I must say.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by whatnext

No, its lovely I tell you, just lovely!

Anyone who has been there knows yes there are some beautiful spots but a whole lot that is just plain unattractive.

I only wish Toronto could have public spaces and parks are as remotely attractive as Tokyo's.

Even architecture wise, most Tokyo neighbourhoods are still more attractive and much more pleasurable to loiter in than the Toronto equivalents. Just in central Tokyo, Shibuya/Shinjuku is significantly more attractive than Yonge Street, Ginza/Omotesando beats Yorkville by a long mile, Meiji Jingu/Imperial Palace/Shinjuku Gyoen/Ueno Park are leagues prettier and better maintained than any Toronto park. Harajuku is much more appealing to wonder aimlessly around than any Toronto Main/High street.

It is not the Haussman masterpiece of Central Paris, but IMO Tokyo compares very favourable aesthetically with Canadian cities.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Have you ever visited?

Tokyo is one of the most pleasurable 'mega' cities out there; is generally quite human scale and puts a ton of priority on the pedestrian user. It's often misjudged because of the reaction to '30 million people' and scenes of people being pushed into a subway at rush hour, but 90% of the time is quiet, peaceful and rather sublime I must say.

Tokyo is wonderful. Easily one of my top favourite three cities in the world (I've been twice). A gigantic city that is incredibly safe, clean, accessible and very exciting. Step into one of their serene parks for a break from the hustle and bustle. It is really amazing just how peaceful parts of Tokyo are, and right in the centre of it all.

[goodgrowth]

Tokyo has less than double the amount of towers over 150m as Toronto but with 5-6X the population.

I think that says a lot about the differences in planning...

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

Tokyo has less than double the amount of towers over 150m as Toronto but with 5-6X the population.

I think that says a lot about the differences in planning...

This mostly because there is probably literally 100X or even 1000X more 50m + buildings rather than restrictions on height or are we saying the same thing?

[goodgrowth]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

This mostly because there is probably literally 100X or even 1000X more 50m + buildings rather than restrictions on height or are we saying the same thing?

TBH if you look at a lot of areas of Tokyo on Google maps it ain't even 50m buildings. It's endless dense low/mid-rise with narrow streets.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

TBH if you look at a lot of areas of Tokyo on Google maps it ain't even 50m buildings. It's endless dense low/mid-rise with narrow streets.

Yes you're right. 50 m is also probably true but it's the endless 6 story buildings so more like 50 feet that make it different than Toronto but even other cities of similar size like New York or even London

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

This mostly because there is probably literally 100X or even 1000X more 50m + buildings rather than restrictions on height or are we saying the same thing?

You really need to travel more.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Tokyo is wonderful. Easily one of my top favourite three cities in the world (I've been twice). A gigantic city that is incredibly safe, clean, accessible and very exciting. Step into one of their serene parks for a break from the hustle and bustle. It is really amazing just how peaceful parts of Tokyo are, and right in the centre of it all.

All true but none of your "plusses" have to do with the look of the built environment.