There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By kevlahan (registered) | Posted November 05, 2015 at 12:08:39 in reply to Comment 114643
Affordable is relative to what prices actually are in Hamilton as a whole, which is what we want if the goal is to have mixed incomes. Maybe you mean affordable to people currently unable to afford a house anywhere. The average house price in Hamilton is now $433k. As you suggest, affordable in absolute terms is different from affordable compared to current options.
But you seem to have missed the whole point of the article: for downtown to achieve "mixed income" actually means attracting middle and upper income residents while not driving out low income residents. We will have achieved mixed income when the income mix is similar to the city as a whole: 80% middle and upper income and 20% lower income. The developments I mentioned are certainly attracting the missing demographic! The (future) danger is that we might lose lower income, but that is still a pretty distant scenario for downtown and lower city. Do you seriously imagine that we are currently in danger of seeing fewer than 15-20% lower income in downtown and the lower city?
It is important not to claim that a condo is not affordable because it is more expensive "for what you get" (e.g. number of bedrooms) compared to a house. That's about preference, not affordability. A family of four can live quite comfortably in a two bedroom apartment, if they prefer an urban lifestyle and the neighbourhood offers good urban amenities.
$261k is affordable by that standard for people who don't want a house and are happy with a condo. The idea that everyone should prefer a detached house is just not reality. Many people, given a choice, are actually choosing a smaller condo over a large detached house.
With an average household size in Hamilton of just 2.5, and the fact that 60% of households are 1 or 2 people, there are many many people for whom a one bedroom apartment or condo is perfectly reasonable choice. I lived in a 2 bedroom 80 m^2 apartment with my partner and two small children for almost a year and it was just fine. Giving people the choice of between a $433k house and a $261k condo downtown is giving them an affordable choice for a different lifestyle (note that even the smallest 52 m^2 condo has a separate bedroom it is not a studio).
And the bottom line is that we need to start demanding new policies geared to income units in larger developments. But we are certainly not at the stage where the handful of new developments, after decades of nothing, should be opposed on those grounds. And several of the new developments are actually rental buildings!
Comment edited by kevlahan on 2015-11-05 13:23:53
Permalink | Context