Whitzman is an expert advisor to UBC's Housing Assessment Resource Tools, senior housing researcher at U of T's School of Cities, and author of Home Truths, Fixing Canada's Housing Crisis.
The problem is NOT restrictive zoning. Toronto 416 has 700,000 units in the pipeline - most will be approved and that is 35 years of housing at 20,000 a year recent rate, about 50% of GTA starts.
"we're building fewer homes now than we were in the mid 1970s when the population was half what it is now. I found that absolutely shocking."
Population growth was moderate - birth rates had dropped and immigration levels were moderate. But what was happening was demand for housing was high as the Boomers were maturing and moving out on their own.
BUT this also meant there was an increasing supply of unskilled workers to build housing, unlike our our current economic immigration which favours middle aged people with degrees.
So high demand and high labour force growth. And interest rates were low until the late 70s.
Then remember, there were NO rent controls in Ontario until 1975. Condos were legal only in 1967 and were not common. So developers were building a lot of rental units.
Then there were no limits on sprawl - no greenbelt. Land was still cheap and plentiful Detached homes do not require a lot of skilled workers, unlike highrises, and developers could build the same handful of plans - I saw this in the Denlow area of Don Mills at the time. Houses were also smaller, fewer bathrooms, little insulation, etc.
Nate, please stop with the "NIMBYism" claims. This is not a problem in Ontaro with the OLT/OMB/LPAT. This is not California. You've been listening to the wrong people. Multiplexes are not profitable - few people want to become small landlords and the costs of a 4-6 unit condo are not worth it.
The problem has been high population growth - which not only pushed up housing prices but pushing down wages and in particular, created a "population trap" pushing down GDP/capita, even according to bank economists.
The comments about long term planning have to do with TIME STRUCTURES as some people live in the moment and some people plan for retirement and some countries invest for future generations with multiple generation planning
Basic income.
The problem is NOT restrictive zoning. Toronto 416 has 700,000 units in the pipeline - most will be approved and that is 35 years of housing at 20,000 a year recent rate, about 50% of GTA starts.
"we're building fewer homes now than we were in the mid 1970s when the population was half what it is now. I found that absolutely shocking."
Population growth was moderate - birth rates had dropped and immigration levels were moderate. But what was happening was demand for housing was high as the Boomers were maturing and moving out on their own.
BUT this also meant there was an increasing supply of unskilled workers to build housing, unlike our our current economic immigration which favours middle aged people with degrees.
So high demand and high labour force growth. And interest rates were low until the late 70s.
Then remember, there were NO rent controls in Ontario until 1975. Condos were legal only in 1967 and were not common. So developers were building a lot of rental units.
Then there were no limits on sprawl - no greenbelt. Land was still cheap and plentiful Detached homes do not require a lot of skilled workers, unlike highrises, and developers could build the same handful of plans - I saw this in the Denlow area of Don Mills at the time. Houses were also smaller, fewer bathrooms, little insulation, etc.
Nate, please stop with the "NIMBYism" claims. This is not a problem in Ontaro with the OLT/OMB/LPAT. This is not California. You've been listening to the wrong people. Multiplexes are not profitable - few people want to become small landlords and the costs of a 4-6 unit condo are not worth it.
The problem has been high population growth - which not only pushed up housing prices but pushing down wages and in particular, created a "population trap" pushing down GDP/capita, even according to bank economists.
The comments about long term planning have to do with TIME STRUCTURES as some people live in the moment and some people plan for retirement and some countries invest for future generations with multiple generation planning