Skeezix
Senior Member
I don't believe that the Regent Park redevelopment resulted in a decrease in social housing. Am I wrong on that?
I think you're right.. I believe some of the redevelopment was scattered though throughout the east end. The building across from the new Globe and Mail office is TCH as are a few beside River City.I don't believe that the Regent Park redevelopment resulted in a decrease in social housing. Am I wrong on that?
I don't believe that the Regent Park redevelopment resulted in a decrease in social housing. Am I wrong on that?
I'm not touching that one
I could be wrong then
Either way, the point remains that we're not even approaching the numbers necessary to reduce the numbers waiting to get housing right now, let alone for the future.
You are, the social housing content was increased dramatically by decreasing the allowable development in the immediate surrounding areas.
True, but who is at fault here? Why didn't TCHC buy the land and build social housing on it?
Regent park is also replacing ALL of the large family sized units. They have to. Which I find remarkable! Admittedly, I have a bit of a difficult time accepting new five bedroom townhouses being built for RGI tenants in downtown Toronto. Not that I think larger families do not deserve to live in the core, I just think that there are a lot of larger families living with less and wonder if that is the best option given the massive waiting list for affordable housing and how scarce land is becoming in the core.
But you know it's far from the TCHC's fault they didn't buy prime real estate when they have a $2.5 billion repair backlog.
re: five bedroom units - is it really necessary or a good use of resources though? I mean, even if you have what, 5 kids you can still have bunk beds, and having that isn't undue hardship. At the end of the day floorspace in social housing is a limited resource - and I am not sure if providing those units extensively is the best use of such, relative to the long waitlist, etc.
AoD
re: five bedroom units - is it really necessary or a good use of resources though? I mean, even if you have what, 5 kids you can still have bunk beds, and having that isn't undue hardship. At the end of the day floorspace in social housing is a limited resource - and I am not sure if providing those units extensively is the best use of such, relative to the long waitlist, etc.
AoD
Those units are most likely for families living with their extended family members, where in certain cultures it is customary to all live under the same roof.
Though there is a need for 4- and 5-bedrooms apartments, as these are almost non-existent in the city, I think only a handful of them should be offered and the emphasis should be on 2- and 3-bedroom units to serve the much greater need.