3 ms·

> I fail to see how this will address affordability in any meaningful way Especially since it's unlikely that we can address the housing shortage by building s

by SamBam 2y ago

> I fail to see how this will address affordability in any meaningful way Especially since it's unlikely that we can address the housing shortage by building single-family homes.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
Especially when permit fees and taxes are fixed and ~30% of the cost to build (in cities like Vancouver: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-housing-government-fees-taxes-costs-may-2018 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-housing-government...) It could cost $250k to legally build a sandcastle in Vancouver.
- dghlsakjg 2y ago
  That was a study done by an industry group and included all fees and taxes in a contrived scenario. Not just permitting fees. So things like property tax during the build period, as well as sales tax and service tax charged by the builders contractors. The study assumed a 5 year build period and multiplied all yearly property taxes by that amount. It also tacked on things like the vacant home tax and speculation tax which are not applied to properties under construction. Many of the taxes and fees are also scaled to the square footage of the house. Lastly they also included things like sewer hookup fees, which is really not an unnecessary cost for a builder to pay. Permit fees are too high, and maybe we should exempt a lot of them given the current crisis, but this study is aiming for a quick headline. If you dig into their analysis it is a worst case scenario for what a house would cost for a foreign speculator who left the house vacant before flipping it and didn’t qualify for any homebuyer tax exemptions. A lot of those taxes and fees wouldn’t apply to a sandcastle is what I’m saying. The $250k figure is the number they quoted for a $900k 2-bed new-build condo in a transit corridor. Even in their own study the lower cost housing units were coming in at half that.
throwaway22032 2y ago
Why is it unlikely? Not enough physical resources? People working in the wrong jobs? Or just, we won't?
- SamBam 2y ago
  For one reason, fixing the 4-5 million unit housing shortfall by building endless sprawling suburbs is not at all environmental or energy efficient.

by SamBam 2y ago

> I fail to see how this will address affordability in any meaningful way Especially since it's unlikely that we can address the housing shortage by building single-family homes.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago

Especially when permit fees and taxes are fixed and ~30% of the cost to build (in cities like Vancouver: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-housing-government-fees-taxes-costs-may-2018 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-housing-government...) It could cost $250k to legally build a sandcastle in Vancouver.

dghlsakjg 2y ago
That was a study done by an industry group and included all fees and taxes in a contrived scenario. Not just permitting fees. So things like property tax during the build period, as well as sales tax and service tax charged by the builders contractors. The study assumed a 5 year build period and multiplied all yearly property taxes by that amount. It also tacked on things like the vacant home tax and speculation tax which are not applied to properties under construction. Many of the taxes and fees are also scaled to the square footage of the house. Lastly they also included things like sewer hookup fees, which is really not an unnecessary cost for a builder to pay. Permit fees are too high, and maybe we should exempt a lot of them given the current crisis, but this study is aiming for a quick headline. If you dig into their analysis it is a worst case scenario for what a house would cost for a foreign speculator who left the house vacant before flipping it and didn’t qualify for any homebuyer tax exemptions. A lot of those taxes and fees wouldn’t apply to a sandcastle is what I’m saying. The $250k figure is the number they quoted for a $900k 2-bed new-build condo in a transit corridor. Even in their own study the lower cost housing units were coming in at half that.

throwaway22032 2y ago

Why is it unlikely? Not enough physical resources? People working in the wrong jobs? Or just, we won't?

SamBam 2y ago
For one reason, fixing the 4-5 million unit housing shortfall by building endless sprawling suburbs is not at all environmental or energy efficient.