Globe editorial: Cities promise housing – and then make new rules that prevent it
www.theglobeandmail.com
Politicians, most of whom are homeowners, have long failed to see the urgency in the country’s housing market
  • i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml
    0·
    1 year ago

    As much as I believe we need more good multi-plexes, the article makes it look like it’s evil not to allow promoters to replace single-family houses by massive skyscrapers of 12+ units on a land that is surrounded by single family homes.

    We don’t want to replace houses by cheap tenement buildings, we need a more elegant densification where each unit has at least land for a small garden.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      0·
      1 year ago

      There are areas which should have single family homes, but in my opinion if you have a single family home anywhere near the downtown core of a town or city you should be prepared to have your neighbourhood turn to skyscrapers and tower complexes. It’s just the way that cities need to go in order to survive. If you want a single family home you shouldn’t be living in the middle or a city, move to the outskirts and the suburbs where there is more space.

      • Pxtl@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        Allowing downtown to be surrounded by an ocean of suburban sprawl means that suburbanites get preferential access to nature. In hyper urbanized countries, the kids who live in skyscrapers can bicycle to the mountain wilderness. Suburbia creates an ocean of barrier to that.