Maximizing Impact: Build Social Housing Where Land Is Affordable
The challenge with land is simple: they're not making any more of it. This inherent scarcity has always made land expensive, and the more desirable it is, the higher the cost. For instance, developable land in Toronto is twice as costly as in its surrounding suburbs.
A recent report from Bullpen Research & Consulting Inc. , in collaboration with Batory Urban Planning & Project Management , highlights that the price per buildable square foot in Toronto (the 416 region of the Greater Toronto Area) stands at $112. Meanwhile, in the surrounding suburbs (the 905 region), it averages around $54 per buildable square foot—less than half the price in Toronto.
These disparities hold significant implications for social housing development. If subsidies and incentives from provincial and federal governments are structured strictly within municipal boundaries, social housing investments will be directed to the areas of need, irrespective of land costs. However, taking a regional approach to address housing affordability can yield greater returns on investment. Targeting new social housing developments in areas where land is more affordable maximizes the impact of limited public funding.
领英推荐
Building social housing on costly land in Toronto, particularly when it isn't publicly owned, allocates a large portion of development costs toward land expenses. This means competing for land with private, for-profit developers, driving up prices and limiting cost-efficiency. Given land scarcity in desirable areas—more pronounced in Toronto than elsewhere—these dynamics further exacerbate the challenge.
A regional strategy that includes both Toronto and its neighbouring suburbs would enable the identification of affordable land along transit routes, such as rail or bus rapid transit, to develop non-market or affordable housing. This approach ensures that public funds are used effectively, delivering more units and fostering stable housing for those most in need. Being close to transit, residents in these developments would still enjoy connectivity to Toronto’s labour market.
The takeaway: public-sector investments in social housing should consider regional land values and focus on developments along transit routes in suburban regions where land is less expensive. This ensures sustainable, affordable housing solutions without compromising access to economic opportunities in the urban core.
Bottom line: Social housing development should adopt a regional, not a strictly municipal, perspective.
President and Founder at BGI Group- 23Milsf-$9Bil
1 周Use out of the box thinking with what is available. Sprawl or vertical shoeboxes unnecessary, to make it a City of livable communities. Answer is 'simple'. City wide faster solution. Maybe even please NIMBYs??). The City should pass a city wide bylaw on all 4 lane arteries deleting the parking lanes each side and making one of the 4 main travel lanes a turn lane for mutual turns. Turn the 3 deleted lanes into wide sidewalks and patios. Increase density on those roads from 2 to 8 floors with stores, and require Developers in return for the increased density to include 20% affordable housing and NOTE.. first UG level of parking as paid municipal parking to replace the deleted street parking. 50%spec tax. This will provide 1,000s of units of affordable housing and absorb the 2Mil increase in population. And.. the numbers work. #planning #design #salesandmarketing #affordablehousing #affordablerentals
The Government has no shortage of well-located, locally-serviced land that it already owns within high-opportunity neighbourhoods in the City of Toronto. The City, Province and Federal governments are generally NOT acquiring lands on a competitive private market. They are just repurposing lands that they already own, like under-priced surface parking-lots… https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-toronto-considers-joining-urban-trend-of-converting-public-parking-to/
Commercial Real Estate - The Olivier Effect podcast
3 周Housing would be more affordable if we could build more of it in less time and for less money. We need to look at the rule book and incentives.