City creates housing committee
The city is creating a housing committee to advise it on creating social affordable housing, to be led by a triumvirate composed of Benoit Dorais, the president of developer Broccolini, and a leading community representative. As the mayor says here, all this should have started happening ten years ago.
SMD 03:23 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
Affordable housing, not social housing. The definition of which can be quite murky.
Margaret 08:00 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
Given the Montreal Childrens’ Hospital site fiasco, developers should be required to have the social / affordable housing component built and occupied before being allowed to continue on with the rest of their project, from which they will reap huge profits for years to come.
Kate 08:32 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
SMD, extremely cromulent observation. It’s a supremely weasel word. Affordable – for whom? Others are asking the question.
Joey 09:43 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
How much longer are we going to promote ‘affordable’ housing policies that require developers to act against their interests before we realize it will never work? Take all that money and energy and focus on two things:
1. Major expansion in the housing supply, with a focus on the kinds of housing that are particularly scarce (e.g., anything that isn’t a 500-sq-ft apartment, but especially two- and three-bedroom units for families). There’s only so much construction capacity, both in materials and labour, so governments will have to manage the trade-off decisions among potential projects – the focus should be on sustainability and density.
2. Tackle the affordability issue on the demand side by making money available (loans? Grants? A mix?) to those priced out of the housing market. This includes better rent control and tenant protections. Let the developers build and use the state’s money to help citizens overcome the affordability hurdle.
Relatedly, I saw an interesting infographic on twitter the other day that showed that about a third of the sale price of a new housing unit in Toronto goes to government, in the form of taxes on the sale as well as the various permits, etc. I didn’t realize how lucractive new housing starts are to governments. Only about 10% winds up as developer profit: https://twitter.com/benmyers29/status/1531732342385127425?s=20&t=9cvPgbhtA68bP95PqaFyLg
GC 09:45 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
I’m curious how we would define the difference between “social” and “affordable” housing. Not that I can’t see the difference…I’m just not sure how to articulate it. My condo is affordable to me, obviously, but not to everyone. (And I suppose it would be peanuts to someone wealthy…) I am glad that I bought when I did, though, as I’m not sure I could afford to buy in my hood now.
Kate 11:04 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
I believe social housing is pegged at 1/4 of whatever the tenant is bringing in, be it a low salary or some form of social benefit. Whereas “affordable” is probably relative to the average cost of a similar space at the moment.
SMD 13:58 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
@GC, by my understanding social housing is socialized, in that there is some form of public ownership and control. This could be owned and run directly by a level of government, or by a cooperative or other type of non-profit. Affordable housing includes unit owned by private, for-profit entities but whose price is kept lower than market value by government policy or subsidies.
Kate 21:16 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
It has to be socialized or else speculators will flock around like the vultures they are, and soon the “affordable” places will be the same price as anything else.
GC 23:51 on 2022-06-02 Permalink
Those seem like reasonable definitions. I’ve probably used the terms interchangeably in the past, without really thinking about it.