we can talk about "fewer people" and ideals of making people move to Northern Ontario, but that simply isn't reality. Nor is it really practical to "bulldoze" entire neighbourhoods.
Ideals are one thing - actual implementation tools which will actually deliver housing affordability are another. And what we are doing right now ain't it.
There is nothing impractical or idealistic about flat-lining population growth. The choice would be popular w/the public, its not like we require a one-child policy, people are self-implementing close to same. We simply need to admit far fewer new entrants, Its instantly decidable by the federal cabinet and there is no compensation to anyone required. Its far cheaper than building to support that growth, when we have a lot of catch-up to do as it is.
***
Equally, we can compel new entrants to settle where we wish them to, we do this now in fact, as a large portion of immigration is done through the provincial nominee program. You are required to move to the province that nominates you. That control does lift after a period time, but not the week after you arrive.
We used to require moving to specific places, many people on UT have either grandparents or great grandparents who did just this.
Additionally we already have 'carrot' tools of all sorts. For years we've had programs to rebate a material portion of medical school tuition for doctors who agree to practice in Northern Ontario for a set number of years.
We can do the same for engineers, IT specialists, University profs, architects or farmers or loggers or miners etc.
***
Finally, what's impractical about bulldozing a 400-home subdivision? We're expropriating about the same numbers of homes/properties for the current round of transit and highway infrastructure investments, its just that we're doing so in disparate locations rather than one focused location.
You pay people, for argument's sake, 400 homes at 1.5M each, so 600M, you remove any homes that aren't heritage that are in the way of the scheme, perhaps saving a handful that are in great condition and it would add architectural variety.
Demo costs at 200k per including backfill works out to another 80M.
You plow one new main street through, and build associated water/sewer etc. You open up/sculpt/connect a couple of cul-de-sacs and short-roads and leave most of the rest.
You're out 800M, plus construction costs, for freeing up 300 acres of already serviced land, that already has nearby parks. schools, community centres, fire halls etc.
When you consider a single new Rec. Centre can run north of 100M; a single new elementary school 50M+ I think those numbers look pretty reasonable, not like fanciful extravagance.
