Based on what’s been publicly said so far, I don’t think any level of government is taking this seriously enough and no one is willing to make hard calls.
Hard calls include: unlocking plex housing everywhere as of right, removing zoning/planning impedimentsto adding ground-related housing up to 4 storeys,
You and I agree on so much, but you are indeed a glass 1/2 empty soul! LOL
Not that I have limitless faith in government, I know all too well the shortcomings of the institution, as I do the private sector as well.
That said, I'm not convinced that a lot of the tough calls so to speak won't be made; many already have; on the supply side.
I'm somewhat more concerned on lack of plans to deal with
A) Demand (population growth/concentration, ownership of multiple properties, commodification of housing etc.
B) The recognition that there in market mechanism to build housing for people earning $20 per hour, never mind $15, never mind on social assistance; and this requires some mix of boosting said incomes
(higher minimum wage, tightening labour supply, raising social assistance rates, and rent supplements); along with the construction of sub-market priced housing.
updating the building code to allow only single stairs
Sure....but in conjunction with mandatory fire suppression systems (ie. sprinklers). That's mandatory in Vancouver, no reason it shouldn't be here.
, adding a lifetime max on the principal home capital gains exemptions like the US
Agree in principle, not sure why we would just wouldn't eliminate capital gains rates entirely. I say that as someone who would be adversely effected by such a change.
But to me, the government should be agnostic about how you (legally) earn your income, and tax equally all types.
, creating an anti-flipping tax
Maybe, though if you ditched capital gains entirely, I think that would stifle an awful lot of flipping. I always like the least complex, effective solution.
, spending more on building and paying for deeply affordable housing
Yes
, aggressively going after tax cheats
Sure
, laddering taxes the more homes you/a company owns…
Why not just cap everyone at 2 SFH properties; an exemption can be carved out for developers who exercise options based on approved demolition/building plans.
But what about neighbourhood character!!
I don't see why multi-plexing has any inherent adverse impact on character.
I don't even see a low-rise apartment as inherently out of step with an SFH community.
Character (at its best) is defined by architectural style, by setbacks, by whether a veranda is the norm etc.
These things can easily be mandated while allowing additional density; they are not in contradiction.
www.theglobeandmail.com
