# Any urban architects and/or social housing advocates in the ehMac community??



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Would like to chat.
Email me please [email protected]

Looking for info on urban density, small sq' low rise housing, zoning etc . and insight into current design/cost.

Thanks...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MacDoc, this is what the organization, Stella Burry Community Services, does here in St.John's. It is the organization in which my wife words as a program development manager and fundraiser from grants.

Stella's Circle


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Thanks.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

No problem. They do great work. I am a volunteer with their ABE Level 1 literacy program.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

In my opinion I think the biggest problem lies with municipal governments and their bylaws. When you start digging into it you will see how much that constrains an 'out of the box' development idea. After that the next biggest problem is NIMBY.

I think one of the easier problems overall is the Architectural design. There are all sorts of examples you can find. 

It's hard to get away from the traditional ft2 cost due to building codes and minimum standards. That you are always stuck with, hence the need for smaller units and smart layouts.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Vandave, I think you are correct with your NIMBY contention. This is what Stella Burry Community Services experienced with some of their homes. What turned out was that property values rose in the areas they purchased run down home and rebuilt them and placed low-income apartments in these homes.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

A good example of a recent social housing related development is Woodwards in Vancouver. It is a mix of market and non-market social housing.

Woodward's - The Future of Woodward's . . .

I did the environmental cleanup for the Site (old gasoline station on it).


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

If you are interested in the operational and managerial aspect of social housing, have a look here:

InnovativeCommunities.org

My father founded this organization and they currently manage two buildings in Victoria.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

VD, I think that your cases maybe specific to your area....

While I agree that by-laws can be a hindrance, there is often ignorance and the lack of political will.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

It's all up the line - allocation is always made for other social aspects, fire stations, libraries, community centres, police stations, roads, sidewalks, hydro right of way.......

no social housing....and the consequences are horrid.

Lack of vision, leadership and political will at all levels is odius. The real estate objection to the Toronto transaction tax is symptomatic of an addiction gone crazy. ( if you consider the vested interests that are addicted it's appalling )

There is no question in my mind that NIMBY and bylaw issues are a prime stumbling block.

What's missing is a model that brings the disparate parties together including those that require the facilities.

It needs a model......damn - start it at the end of every Go train if it needs seeding.
It needs to get onto a cashflow stream for services basis and off the land inflation model.

Every new subdivision should be required to have dense low rise dense housing on each corner. No agreement, no building permit. Just as they HAVE to fund schools and parks.

Municipalities complain there are not enough riders to put on more buses.....duh...force the density into mixed communities.

It also needs a rethink in terms of tenants needs and goals.

What sparked this was this article and with all the Leopard release I have not had time to re-address it.
I do think design is not lacking - it's political will and a new vision in peoples head that this is just as important - maybe more so than the other social aspects such as roads etc - that a community is incomplete without it.



> *A 3-point strategy for better housing*
> 
> Oct 28, 2007 04:30 AM
> 
> ...


I think $500-600 for 3-400 sq' is the key - fast build - 6 plex no inner stairs. KISS in the same space as a mid range four bedroom.
Also using above retail and above light industrial.
It used to be there.
Companies built housing for workers ( yes it was abused ). There are still areas in Etobicoke with mixed use - Dufferin/Liberty St comes to mind as well.

But it needs to spread along the transit corridors and with fast build times - not decades.

We have social medicine.
We have social transportation, schools, libraries and public spaces.
Public spaces compete with private spaces for spare time activities.
Local community centre versus pay for play etc.

*There is no bloody reason why social housing should not be of similar critical importance.*

THIS is wealth building for the nation....something forgotten.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"There is no bloody reason why social housing should not be of similar critical importance.

THIS is wealth building for the nation....something forgotten." 

Amen, Brother. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Homelessness has become a huge problem out here over the past couple of years. The problem has been exacerbated by the rapid increase in housing costs, which has been driven by both rapid in migration causing demand to outstrip supply, as well as by real estate speculation. There also haven't been a whole lot of affordable rental suites built recently - developers would rather add granite counters and stainless appliances to their small apartments and sell them for top dollar as "luxury condos" rather than rental suites.

As a result, many of the homeless are the working poor who are able to find jobs, but are not able to afford housing - even on what would otherwise be a decent wage.

I wonder what, if anything, will come of this: Home | Calgary Committee to End Homelessness. A lot of the people involved have a track record of getting things done, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

The Provincial government seems to be putting some focus on homelessness these days as well: Stelmach unveils new homelessness office 
edmontonsun.com - Alberta - Stelmach pledges $196M to aid the homeless
It will be interesting to see what comes of it, they certainly aren't lacking funds to address the problem.

The big cities aren't the only places with an affordable housing problem, it's even an issue in some of the small towns where people earning anything close to an "average" wage find it difficult to find an affordable place to live: Affordable Housing Strategy Report Released | OurFernie


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

PenguinBoy said:


> There also haven't been a whole lot of affordable rental suites built recently - developers would rather add granite counters and stainless appliances to their small apartments and sell them for top dollar as "luxury condos" rather than rental suites.


I cannot remember where I found this tidbit of info, but I do recall it was on a tenant's rights website.

In any case, back in the 70's there were incentives offered to build rental apartment buildings... consequently, most of the existing rental stock (in Toronto anyway--not sure if this was municipal or provincial incentive) was built in the 70s. The incentives was taken away, there was a sudden drop in the housing being built. So what you have now is a lot of old rental stock, a lot of which needs major repair. 

Condos are simply more profitable--it's a lot more legal headache to do, but also less management headache. If rental apartment buildings were more profitable to build, more would be built. (Generally, a developer is not going to build it and manage it, but they could build it, fill it, and sell it.) 

Currently, there's no shortage of investors for a good rental property, but there is a shortage of supply.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> As a result, many of the homeless are the working poor who are able to find jobs, but are not able to afford housing - even on what would otherwise be a decent wage.


Yes and municipalities and the medical system end up footing extra costs associated.

Indeed it's not a big city issue either.

It's an issue with it getting into everyone's head that it's just like any other social aspect...perhaps next to water THE most critical.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Sonal said:


> Currently, there's no shortage of investors for a good rental property, but there is a shortage of supply.


The replacement cost for that 70's style building is roughly double the going rate that investors pay for such a building. When these buildings burn down, they don't get replaced. The margins for owning and operating such buildings is actually quite low. The way investors make money is by upgrading the suites (to get higher rent) and increasing effective occupancy rates (by getting rid of bad tenants). 

The rental supply market has shifted from this style of building to single suites within newer developments. Of course, such units have higher rental rates. 

From a strict economics point of view the rental rate is likely too low. Eventually, rental rates will go up (supply and demand) such that new units are brought into the market. 

The alternative is government subsidy or re-thinking municipal bylaw issues. I prefer to the later as a first step.

It's also worth pointing out that home ownership rates have gone up over the last 20 or 30 years. This is really the preferable system (i.e. people taking care of themselves rather than big brother).


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Higher home ownership = higher unemployment. Labour needs to be mobile and never more so than at the lower end of the income spectrum. More density also helps schools where enrollment is dropping due to lower birthrates in wealthier areas.

The game needs to change to be based on cash stream not property appreciation.

You don't evaluate libraries or roads or schools or bridges the way you just did - you're brain washed by the vested interests who NEVER want to see anything be offered cheaper - who benefit from higher mortages, higher "values" for mill rates and higher commissions.

Need to design a low rise 6 plex - plumbing electrical in the core - fits on a standard lot.
300-400 sq' each ala the small Japanese city apts..many of which are less than that.

Key is to treat like a library or school - public wealth - so no flipping of the property ever.

Second key to vest an interest with the tenant so they get a modest return as if they owned it - needs to be like a franchise - cookie cutter to keep costs down.
Ikea style. Basically urban manufactured housing. No inside stairs. Student, immigrant, low income, fixed income.
Ground floor pays a bit more.

Put $5k down - get 1% return above bank rate - as "rent" gets paid 10% ( whatever number works ) goes to increase that $5k "stake"- forced savings effectively that gets returned on move out.
So there is a sense of "getting something back".
$500 a month target - that gives $3000 per month from a 6 plex on standard lot.
Municipalities have to flex their muscles to make it happen. and it needs a visionary like the iKea guy to drive it.

If this kind of social housing is competing with rent and "buy/sell" you gotta know prices will drop just as competition drops other prices.....something I deal with daily. WHY should housing get MORE expensive - it's treated as if it's a law of nature when in fact it's a con job thanks to weak kneed politicians.

Cities and employers need workers, in stable cost effective housing - not as some sort of charity but as integral to the community as a road or school, water or lighting.

The absolute key in my mind is to give those that use it a stake. Not in an inflation curve but in a cash for services stream.
Once a property is paid off there is a continuous cashflow stream and participants can be involved.
Work hard pay off a forward stream - say a years rent ahead - get a return on it.

Own a part of the cash stream - not the inflation curve of the property.

The elements are present in society....pulling them together and fighting the vested interests the hard part.
Miller made a start with the transaction tax.

Micro financing made a huge difference to low income families in the third world.

Micro housing with a "user stake" could as well. It should NOT be charity tho it needs a smart finance stream and of course funding to buy and build initially until developers are forced to.

Yes a Soros or a Rockefeller would make a huge difference in kick starting this.
Put up your hand how many know how much of public health worldwide is owed to the Rockefeller Foundation.

Realtor et al vested interests have been sucking at the city teat too long and feel they have an absolute right at the feeding frenzy.
Time for rethinking and putting housing on a similar footing to other social institutions where there are both private and public interests at play.

The ideal situation would be to work with a major employer say Toyota near their plants to built a variation on company housing but modelled on the idea of the tenant having a vested interest BY THE OCCUPANT.

A sixplex can be built in a couple of months instead of this multi-year nonsense for high rises. Habitat already has concepts projects on the go.

The elements are there , the NGOs like Habitat and others have the designs, TCHP ( Toronto Community Housing Corp) have the organization - it needs a visionary to drive it, put the pieces together and get the municipalities on board.
Basing it around a standard lot and standard 2000-3000' house footprint is the key. Low rise, outside access and vested interest.

Like public education then there is a choice. Go for the plain vanilla social housing or pay more for private housing.

It might even be a good idea to have a variation where say an older couple engages in management of a single 6 plex and gets an enhanced revenue stream by providing the build capital/property acquisition capital.

One key is the units need to be in a decent transit zone...that becomes a positive feedback as greater density then supports better transit.
Go corridors are ideal start points.

There could also be a 4 plex variation that sits above lowrise retail and above light industrial industrial.....those are areas are good employment opportunity creators, are already serviced and have transit bringing employees in bound and home bound. Magnify the density there are well by mixing light industrial and low income/high density housing.

It's exactly what IS happening now in say Brampton- larger houses with multiple families or generations - empty nesters renting out rooms etc but it's not designed properly.

Needs a Tommy Douglas for housing.

Works on so many levels.
Higher density for cities.
Less wage pressure
Less "buy our own home" pressure as there is a return to the tenant
Consistent build quality ( important I think- make it a manufactured stream - not sticks and bricks one off each time. )

Rely on "pay for services" revenue stream rather than property speculation /inflation. A six plex on a standard lot has a very good revenue structure but it requires initial long view - 40 year finance stream. Should easily self finance after a pretty short period.

Done right - it would also pressure the vested interests to reduce costs to the end user just as the XO and OpenSource community have done for computers.

This is micro-co-ops
They could even be engaged with local Credit Unions as part of the picture.....it's what the CUs USED to be for.
The entire key is the municipality flexing its zoning muscle and mandating that any new developments and in particular re-developments have a certain percentage of units of these just as the schools and parks are part of a requirement.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Vandave said:


> The replacement cost for that 70's style building is roughly double the going rate that investors pay for such a building. When these buildings burn down, they don't get replaced. The margins for owning and operating such buildings is actually quite low. The way investors make money is by upgrading the suites (to get higher rent) and increasing effective occupancy rates (by getting rid of bad tenants).


Well smart investors (e.g., me) make money that way, but from my own experience it seems like most investors are treating apartments as a passive investment strategy, so they are looking for buildings that are already upgraded and well-tenanted--those are the ones that seem to go into multiple offers or are snapped up quickly. Seems to be a great fear of investing huge amounts of money in upgrading a building, or in buying a building with a lot of problem tenants... this is good news for me, since it means competition is staying away from buildings with good upside.

Though absolutely, replacement costs far outstrip the market price of a building.



Vandave said:


> From a strict economics point of view the rental rate is likely too low. Eventually, rental rates will go up (supply and demand) such that new units are brought into the market.
> 
> The alternative is government subsidy or re-thinking municipal bylaw issues. I prefer to the later as a first step.


In Toronto, I don't think the problem is the rental rate. Though we currently have historic highs in vacancy, it's still roughly 5%, which is low. Condominium development is simply more profitable.... if you compare price per suite, a top of the line, A-1 area, near-luxury rental might sell for $150,000 per suite, whereas the retail value of an average condo unit might be $250,000 - $300,000 per suite. And that's an expensive rental--an average rental might go for $70,000 per suite. It's a huge difference, plus with condos you can get your investment dollars our sooner, and there are fewer management headaches

As for zoning, well, zoning in Toronto is a mess and will likely stay a mess for 10 years or so--laws are inconsistent and inconsistently applied as despite the fact that we amalgamated years ago, zoning hasn't quite caught up. Still though, even in areas where rental housing could be built, all the notices are for condos.



Vandave said:


> It's also worth pointing out that home ownership rates have gone up over the last 20 or 30 years. This is really the preferable system (i.e. people taking care of themselves rather than big brother).


I would agree with you there. It's a bit odd in Toronto right now, as the city has a mandate to preserve rental stock at all costs, and yet, vacancy has gone up because more people are buying. Community housing hasn't quite caught on to the idea that more people buying might be a good thing. We had attempted to convert some rental townhouses into freehold townhouses and then sell it back to the tenants--carrying costs were actually slightly less than rent--and we lots of interest from the tenants, but it was a no go from the city because it was a loss of rental stock.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MasterBlaster said:


> How about some of the local Multi-Millionaires and Billionaires stepping up to the plate and building some social housing for the good of all?


Well the top 10% of earners pay over 50% of the tax in this country.

A lot of rich people give back to the community. You might want to read up on some of the recent Calgary initiatives on homelessness and who is funding such programs.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I'm not talking about charity and you're grinding a Geni gap that is seriously flawed. Your "high earner's burden mantra" is tiresome....where does the income derive??...in most cases, derived from other Canadians. Shall we examine the public feeding troughs across the country, notably Ottawa and the likes of the Ontario Hyrdro remains just to name two snuffle troughs.

There is no reason social housing can not be entirely self supporting through cashflow structuring. A meme change is needed so that social housing gets rid of the stigmata and is see as vital as schools and other social institutions.

This is the right approach from the private sector - density and green and much due to Portlands very progressive green initiatives. They have a large city department devoted to green.
A 4plex - very green, very dense, very liveable. Some vision there.

Both public and private housing can move in this direction with sufficient leadership and incentives.

Now THIS is getting there....density, efficiency.....and a smart city hall. 



> Not your average condo. In 2004 a 1904 pioneer farmhouse and a 1926 craftsman bungalow were moved in their entirety and set down atop brand new, all green - construction garden level homes. The result – a beautiful mix of old and new and a stunning example of green building. This innovative, smart urban development is known as the Albina Sustainability Community. Now you can be part of it, too.
> Portland, Oregon — Green Home For Sale
> 
> Green Home
> ...


Portland, Oregon — Green Home For Sale | Not your average condo. In 2004 a 1904 pioneer farmhouse and a 1926 craftsman bungalow were moved in their entirety and set down atop brand new, all green - construction garden level homes. The result –


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

and for the "hanging judge types"..here's how important this is.....



> Equation can spot a failing neighbourhood
> 
> * 04 November 2007
> * NewScientist.com news service
> ...


There is simply no better use of public effort than to create vibrant, affordable housing. The benefits are myriad....as are the ills when not done.
We see them in our cities every day.....lack of affordable housing is unacceptable in a nation as wealth as ours.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

After 20 years of house ownership in Toronto, I've had enough of this city and its ineffective management. The inability of council and the mayor to deal with the province and the feds in terms of downloading/uploading of services, TTC and fair taxation.

I sold the house on the Friday before the Monday vote on the Toronto Land Transfer tax. I took the money and ran while the market is still hot and buyers are competing for properties.

MacDoc you'll be glad to know I now rent in Mississauga.:lmao:


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Smart move. :clap:
Renting AND Mississauga.
•••

Could not have said it better



> *Fund affordable housing, not war*
> 
> Nov 15, 2007 04:30 AM
> CATHY CROWE
> ...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Voluntary serfdom.........

. and this written months and months BEFORE the heavy collapse in housing occurred. Late 2007....guess what.....the eyewall approaches.

We will NOT be immune.



> *Greenspans Cheap Money role in the US Housing Crash of 2007*
> Housing-Market / Analysis & Strategy Feb 07, 2007 - 01:00 AM
> By: Mike_Whitney
> 
> ...


 ....continued


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> This suggests that the greatest threat to “democratic institutions” is not repressive legislation (as most believe) but monetary policy. The manipulation of currency can precipitate economic divisions in society which make democracy impossible. That's why Thomas Jefferson said:
> 
> “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of our currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around (the banks) will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
> 
> Jefferson understood that monetary policy is central to the maintenance of personal freedom and should not be ceded to a few “unelected” and unaccountable men whose interests diverge from the public good. The Fed's ability to “inflate and deflate” the currency allows privately-owned banks to decide the country's future and remake society according to their own inclinations.


Greenspans Cheap Money role in the US Housing Crash of 2007 :: The Market Oracle :: Financial Markets Forecasting & Analysis Free Website

Housing policy is critical and leaving it open to predation a far far greater risk than any "enemy abroad".

Walt had it right...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Somewhat off topic but representative of "fresh thinking" big time. :clap:

Incredible Building In Paris ! Video


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

You're not seriously impressed with that...are you?

Amateurish, if anything. Silly even.

The problem with architects is that they think of themselves as artists and drop out of reality.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I find nothing wrong with that kind of innovation. It's good for the cities that undertake it.
Buildings do not have to be utilitarian.

Ever been to Barcelona???









Casa Batllo - Antoni Gaudi - Great Buildings Online
People had the same pejorative view of Frank Lloyd Wright as well....and in Paris the Pompidou Centre was initially dissed.
Very different view of it now.



> *Parisians consider the Centre Georges Pompidou to be the cultural pulse of the city. *This modern art museum and cultural center, located in the neighborhood affectionately dubbed Beaubourg by locals, opened in 1977 to honor president Georges Pompidou. The Center's signature skeletal design, which evokes bones and blood vessels, is either loved or reviled-- no in-betweens. If wacky design isn't your cup of tea, the permanent collection at the National Museum of Modern Art is a must and features works by Modigliani and Matisse. Rooftop views of the city are also in order.


I'd live there










I think it's an amusing satire on the Parisian apartment block.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I'm not being pejorative, I don't think it's all that innovative (thre's a building in Praque with a similar theme) or even extreme. Like I said...amateurish. It's like someone took an image of a standard building and went crazy with the 'Liquify' filter in photoshop. I like all kinds of architecture, especially extreme stuff, but this doesn't do it for me.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Um that was the point in Paris.

There are very strict standards for skyline codes for Paris so this building will have had to conform to those while at the same time "melting".

I think it's brilliant AND exceptionally hard to execute in reality .....easy in photoshop.....incredibly hard in glass and stone.
It both fits code and makes a unique and indeed a wildly visual statement.

Hard to come up with that combo.

It's one thing to do a Gehry with no limits and it's own space. Quite another to pull something like this off.

a New Years







to the architect.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Whatever the point in Paris, I'll agree regarding the execution, but there the credit must go to the craftsmen, industrial/civil engineers, manufacturers, etc. To them I'd gladly raise a glass of Beaujolais.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yes indeed the builders need to be included in the toast to a unique building. :clap:


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sweden has the correct approach.....

This is fabulous policy - 20% of the housing stock owned by the local municipalities. :clap: 












> *Overview of the social, co-operative and public housing system in the country*
> During the post-war period, Swedish housing policy developed as part of the general welfare policy. *The goal was to ensure that everybody, including poor households, had access to good housing without a means test. Thus, access to decent housing became a social right*. Within this framework, a very important tool for Swedish housing policy have been the municipally owned but legally independent public housing companies. The umbrella organisation representing these companies is SABO. Public Housing companies work as limited companies in almost every municipality in Sweden. Their shares are owned by the local authority. These companies own and manage some
> 860 000 dwellings all over Sweden, which represents some 21% of the total housing stock. Public Housing companies are allowed to work only within the local municipality, and they have to compete with private landlords. Rents are cost based, and they are set and changed every year by local negotiations between the local Municipal housing company and the local Union of Tenants. Negotiated rents create the ceiling for the rents in similar dwellings in private landlords’ estates. Hence, public housing companies have a regulating function for both municipal and private rental housing. *The allocation of public dwellings is not based on income ceilings; SABO Companies accommodate all kinds of tenants and a major concern is to avoid social segregation.* Furthermore, there are two major national co-operative organizations in Sweden (HSB and Riksbyggen). Their business concept is “co-operative owner occupation”. Together, these two co-operative organisations represent some 18% of the total housing stock in Sweden, and they produce co-operative dwellings for sale.


it's a good read and should be pasted to every politicians door in Canada 
Cecodhas - Sweden


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Glad we're not getting into that sinkhole here. The government of Sweden has to make this housing stock available because it has impoverished its own citizens with some of the harshest tax regimes in the EU. 

Sweden doesn't have citizens--it has clients.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Yet the Swiss themselves seem not to mind. Super-safe country, low crime rates, excellent health and education opportunities... hmmm, do you think they may be on to something?

On the other hand, I'm of two minds about the whole private ownership thing. As a homeowner building equity in the centre-core of the GTA, I consider our house to be critical as it's our principal investment.... why should I not sell it to the highest bidder when it's time to cash in and retire elsewhere? Why not make a handsome profit on real estate? Classic capitalism, really.

Which brings to mind the Swedes again. Some years ago now we met a Swede who was working as a tour operator and diver in the Yucatan. He was a real life-loving, swashbuckling type. It was clear he needed to get out of the stultifying, rigorously regimented society that his country is famed for. I'm sure he misses some aspects of his homeland but he also didn't fit the cultural mold they had carefully fashioned for themselves over the centuries. I'm sure there are many ex-pats like him, living abroad.

I suppose that whether or not one would enjoy living with the Swedish model has much to do with the nature of one's character and disposition regarding personal liberty.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Better to pay higher taxes than to have people homeless on the streets.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max: you're right about that. Some people are very comfortable with the hive mentality and it drives me absolutely ape****. Whenever we have new visitors over from Holland there's a moment when they're stunned by the reality of our economic opportunity and wealth here. It's often manifested as irrational anger and jealousy. I remember someone complaining that the ice cream cone they ordered was far too large--they didn't expect something so gigantic for that price.

Dr. G: Those ideas are too easily sloganized. We might say: "It is evil to put a price on a human lif." Yet OHIP has the price worked down to the dollar. 

If we're sloganizing, try: 

"Better to have improved economic opportunity than to have people homeless on the street."


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Macfury said:


> "Better to have improved economic opportunity than to have people homeless on the street."


I would love to see a study which show the benefits of "trickle down" economics on housing availability and homelessness.

Dude, where's Bonzo? I swear Reagan typed in that post.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury, I stand by my statement that it is better to pay higher taxes that are then focused upon helping those in need than to have people homeless on the streets.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr. G: If you see the homeless as so helpless that only the government can rescue them, I understand your preference. I have more hope for them than that.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury, I believe in giving somone a helping hand to help him or herself out of a tough time in their lives. I am not a believer in social Darwinism. Thus, a helping hand in a time of need is of greater value than a mere handout. I recall a wise person once talking about giving someone a fish or teaching him to fish .............. something like that. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> I recall a wise person once talking about giving someone a fish or teaching him to fish .............. something like that. Paix, mon ami.


The issue here isn't about teaching someone how to fish... so much as it is providing them the net and or fishing pole to accomplish the task.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Good point, dj. Thus, I am in favor of education, helping someone out with providing the initial fishing equipment, and then letting them fish. At some point, they will help out those in need as well. 

I was brought up in the Jewish faith, and a central core of this faith was helping others in need.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr. G: You have to differentiate your ideas from the notion of the city merely becoming the landlord for people permanently living in government housing.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Isn't it more the case that you wish Dr. G. would differentiate between the two, MF? Perhaps he's comfortable with the notion of people living permanently in government housing... unlike yourself.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max: I will clarify. Dr. G. must clarify between people living cradle-to-grave in government housing and some form of assistance if he believes, as previously stated: "I believe in giving somone a helping hand to help him or herself out of a tough time in their lives."

I'm much more in favour of subsidizing the rents of means-tested people who are having a rough time, than I am of having the government lending its proven "expertise" to ever greater areas of the economic sphere. At least a subsidy can be adjusted without too much grief. Government housing projects often become a permanent liability.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Macfury said:


> Government housing projects often become a permanent liability.


Growing up in subsidized housing I saw this all too often, children learning how to play the system from their parent(s) and gleefully repeat the cycle for themselves. There were several 4th and 5th generation families that lived in the same complex over the decades, disgusting. Not to say the gov't was much help in the matter though, just feeding the fire while trying to sweep it under the carpet in the hopes they will be forgotten. But I've stated in other threads, those who tried got out, but there were many happy to repeat the cycle.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

JumboJones said:


> There were several 4th and 5th generation families that lived in the same complex over the decades.


That is a bit of an over exaggeration isn't it? How many housing complexes do you know of that have been around since the turn of the last century (assuming 20 years between generation).


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury, better the city being the landlord of some housing than slumlords.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

da_jonesy said:


> That is a bit of an over exaggeration isn't it? How many housing complexes do you know of that have been around since the turn of the last century (assuming 20 years between generation).


In some of these complexes, the first and second generation moved in together. New generations appeared with cycles of perhaps 15 or 16 years. The fifth could have arrived in 49 years. At 57 years old, Toronto's Regent Park could have achieved that with a few years to spare.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Macfury, better the city being the landlord of some housing than slumlords.


Because it is ill suited to managing housing, the city often becomes a slumlord. But I maintain that subsidizing existing housing on a temporary basis, except in cases of permanent disability, is a far superior solution to building the permanent liability of public housing. 

I also believe that zoning laws on infill housing should favour smaller private developments that might be more affordable than the larger ones currently mandated.


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Macfury said:


> In some of these complexes, the first and second generation moved in together. New generations appeared with cycles of perhaps 15 or 16 years. The fifth could have arrived in 49 years. At 57 years old, Toronto's Regent Park could have achieved that with a few years to spare.


Two things, you can't include the most current generation as they have NO choice about where they live as they are under 16 years of age... Secondly, this is not reasonable as how many people have Great Great Grand Parents still around? 

I believe that Jumbo's claim is an over exaggeration, and if it isn't then it is not an illustration of multi generational abuse of the public housing system so much as an example of multi generational cycles of abject poverty with no hopes of economic improvement.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

DJ: You said it was impossible, not that it was an example of something else. Add three years, and the next generation is included, well within the 57-year limit.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> That is a bit of an over exaggeration isn't it? How many housing complexes do you know of that have been around since the turn of the last century (assuming 20 years between generation).


Umm, no it isn't. The one I was in was built in the 60's, 4 generations doesn't take long when your 15 year old has children and you become a grandparent in your 30's. I personally knew a 3rd generation family when I lived there, that was 12 years ago, should be on their 4th real soon. tptptptp


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

da_jonesy said:


> Two things, you can't include the most current generation as they have NO choice about where they live as they are under 16 years of age... Secondly, this is not reasonable as how many people have Great Great Grand Parents still around?
> 
> I believe that Jumbo's claim is an over exaggeration, and if it isn't then it is not an illustration of multi generational abuse of the public housing system so much as an example of multi generational cycles of abject poverty with no hopes of economic improvement.


59 Rykert St, St.Catharines, feel free to do a survey yourself. Say hi to Tammy for me, her child should be around the 3rd generation by now.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Glacial progress.....but it's a start...maybe....



> *How to get more low-cost housing*
> 
> Jul 28, 2008 04:30 AM
> Comments on this story (6)
> ...


TheStar.com | Opinion | How to get more low-cost housing

Cities need to take the planning and agenda BACK from the developers.

At the same time part of the infrastructure package needs to be a goal of 20% dispersed, affordable social housing.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I know someone on that committee.... you know who suggested that idea? A developer. 

My understanding is that Vancouver has a scheme like this.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I don't have a problem with ALL developers, Daniels for instance - I have a problem with SOME developers and some city councillors. 

It's really the planning and willingness to enforce mixed cost housing that is dispersed where the problem lies.
There has been a tendency to ghettoize affordable units.

In my view anything that is developed along transit corridors MUST have mixed high density as it's mandate, NIMBY be damned.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Ghettoizing is much more of a city planning issue--and there are some mighty shortsighted people in planning. (I'm thinking of one guy in particular, who is also on that committee.)

Developers build what is profitable. If the city makes them jump through hoops to do that, they will jump through hoops as long as it is still profitable. If one of those hoops is affordable housing, it will be built.

One of the biggest lost opportunities I can think of is the deal that got struck to build the Minto Midtown. Minto had to build a high-rise rental building to replace the rental stock that was torn down to building two 50-story condo towers. (I'm assuming a deal was struck, since Minto does not normally build rental, and those are HUGE towers.) There's been virtually no new rental stock built in the city for years--this would have been a great opportunity to create affordable rental in a very desireable neighbourhood.

Instead, they are doing luxury rentals--high-end and expensive. It would have been very easy to require Minto to rent at affordable rates. They may have scaled down their plans for the rental building (e.g., no granite counters or stainless steel appliances) but it still would be new rental stock.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Most city politicians are not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer and are easily duped by those in the private sector, if not, then they are easily bought by the private sector.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Seems to me that 'trickle down' usually translates to not a drop left by the time it hits the neediest.... it has an uncanny ability to be 'diverted' by crafty opportunists higher up the chain... you know, middle managers, trustees, bureaucrats, and the like.

On the other hand, far too many people with their hands out at the entrance to the local beer store appear distressingly young and fit. It's maddening.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

I've been picking up Canadian Architect magazine for the past 2 yrs (excellent publication-was a bargain at under 5 bucks until a few months ago).

They usually do a mix of private/public/corporate architecture regularly if not in each issue. They have had a few features on interesting smaller scale low cost residential projects.

The August 2007 issue has a great feature on Social Housing- specifically Evangel Hall, Toronto (Adelaide St). This is a mixed use facility "serving as a housing development for marginalized people and those suffering from mental health issues, a drop-in centre with wide ranging services for the poor, and a retail space for used clothing."
There are interesting and innovate projects for public and lower income housing, but in reality, the biggest obstacles are not funding or developer interest. The biggest obstacles are federal/provincial/regional building codes. It is almost impossible to do anything innovative, because the code is not flexible enough for innovation. Small scale works that challenge existing code are doomed.

I have read up on a few projects for converting shipping containers into housing. There are several interesting projects both in motion and already performing. Currently, there are over 750,000 empty shipping containers sitting in N. American ports and yards. It is too costly to ship them back to Asia empty, and the current trade/goods imbalance means most will never see service as a shipping container leaving N. America in the near future.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Developers build what is profitable. If the city makes them jump through hoops to do that, they will jump through hoops as long as it is still profitable. If one of those hoops is affordable housing, it will be built.


No, the original housing will be built elsewhere.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Still little progress



> *Housing strategy still not in sight*
> 
> Apr 05, 2009 04:30 AM
> 
> ...


more

TheStar.com | Opinion | Housing strategy still not in sight

*People are getting innovative*










The killer has been the speculation in land that cripples city's ability to innovate.
Municipal land should be under lease not freehold so that sales are based on the infrastructure not the land.

We think nothing of affordable residency for students and the elderly and then leave the rest to predation.....stupid. Did not used to be like that...job one after WWII was building affordable homes.










This is a superb approach 



> Cubes may solve housing shortage
> Cube home - pic by Sascha Kletzsch
> The homes were designed for German students
> Tiny cube-style houses could provide the solution to London's lack of affordable housing if councils give them the green light.
> ...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Thank goodness we're staying out of that mess. Property should be held privately, not publicly. I've seen the freehold system in operation in British council flats. Paris is flat broke, near bankruptcy. No thank you. Homes are unaffordable because people want to live on prime real estate or in large cities--end of story. Just placing the word "affordable" in front of a commodity doesn't mean everyone needs to own one: affordable car, affordable TV, affordable vacation... What you're essentially saying is that people who have skills that are not considered very valuable should be given what others work hard to get.

Subsidized housing is also a way for businesses to get cheap labour. They don't want to pay people to live in the city where jobs are, so they ask the taxpayer to do it for them.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Luckily, we have Stella Burry Community Services here in St.John's. 

Stella's Circle


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> The killer has been the speculation in land that cripples city's ability to innovate.


I believe cities and municipalities are their own worst enemies when it comes to ability to innovate. Add Provincial mud to the mix, there cannot be any meaningful or significant change in direction as far as innovative or 'new' ideas being implemented for at least 2 generations (if not more) even if those ideas were being presented now as viable models. Provincial building codes are getting ridiculously restrictive, and support the continuation of the current (outdated) 1950's American dream model of suburban tracts with 2 grass lawns and automobile parking.

As for new ideas and innovation, I would substitute the word 'adaptation' for 'innovation'. Within the parameters of provincial and municipal codes, I think 'adaptation' would be more accurate than 'innovation'.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If the city weren't so stringent about lot sizes, people could own very compact homes that stood perhaps 3 stories tall. An excellent starter home that cities forbid.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

Just finished watching * Garbage Warrior*.
Incredible documentary, for all the wrong reasons. The last 2 minutes with updates to the story is priceless. So typical of the lack of vision, or the lack of opportunity for vision. 
This film is one of the iTunes Hot Docs feature specials. Well worth the .99 cent rental.

iTunes Store - Hodge Oliver - Garbage Warrior


----------

