Two years after Valérie Plante’s administration said a new housing bylaw would lead to the construction of 600 new social housing units per year, the city hasn’t seen a single one.

The Bylaw for a Diverse Metropolis forces developers to include social, family and, in some places, affordable housing units to any new projects larger than 4,843 square feet.

If they don’t, they must pay a fine or hand over land, buildings or individual units for the city to turn into affordable or social housing.

  • ggleblanc@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the article: “Those fees have so far amounted to a total of $24.5 million — not enough to develop a single social housing project, according to housing experts.”

    I don’t know about construction costs in Canada, but in many cities in the United States, 24 million dollars could renovate at least 120 homes, assuming a cost of $200,000 per renovation. Renovation is more expensive than building new. You could easily build 240 modest homes on undeveloped land with 24 million dollars.

    I’ve left them half a million for administrative costs.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Houses are not ‘affordable housing’ and definitely are not housing projects. Medium size apartment building can easily have 100 apartments. That’s $240.000 per apartment which would be considered ‘affordable’ where I live. I’m guessing in Montreal it’s more expensive so yeah, they don’t even have money for 100 apartments which would be a small housing project.

    • Afrazzle
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Montreal is a relatively big city, there’s not much undeveloped land just sitting around there.

    • i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Due to the climate, houses need more isolation and heating that the typical US house. This leads to stricter regulations on house construction, which causes construction prices to rise even more…

      Removing our reducing these regulations would simply allow promoters to botch the job without reducing price… So we’re stuck with these prices but have houses that keep us warm in the winter.

        • blargerer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Of course you could trivially build a single house for that price (The solution to the housing crisis isn’t lots of single family homes, its high density housing). But land is expensive and construction costs are high, 240 houses is waaaay overshooting.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s split between multiple developers and you wouldn’t get 600 units out of that total

          It’s especially not worth it for them when you are wasting hours in the day working on that versus working on homes you can sell for over a million