Which cant be built anymore in many many places because of NIMBY regulations adopted in the 70s-80s. Cant have a starter home bringing down local property values right?
I'm not certain that is the case where I live in Burlington. People would be very happy if this was the case.
Instead what's occurring is houses (just like mine) that were built in the mid 60's on nice 65-75ft wide lots, where the original by-laws stated that the house could not be built to within 10% of the width of the lot - meaning a 7.5ft distance from the wall of the house to the property line, on both sides, are being ripped down and the new bylaw says that the house can be within 1m (3.3ft) of the property line and a massive 2,500-3,000sq ft house is built on the lot. Homes are going from side and backsplits around 1,300-1,500sq with 8ft ceilings to 2 story 3,000sq ft with 10-11ft ceilings, with only 1m from either side of the property line. Where there was 15ft between houses there is now 6.6ft.
I have a pool in my backyard, we bought off the original homeowners who built the house in 1965. We bought the house in 2009 from them. During their 44yr ownership they put a pool in themselves (hand dug it....) back in 1976 and they finished the basement themselves (its a 4 lvl side split) and converted the 1/2ba on the 3rd floor into a full 3p piece bath. When I'm in my inground pool none of my neighbours can see me in the pool, except 1 neighbour from their master bedroom when I use the ladder to get into the pool. Once I'm in the pool and take 1 step they can no longer see me. BUT, if any of them sell their homes and a developer buys it and tears it down its game over for my total privacy in my backyard oasis.
Perfectly fine houses that are well maintained and well upgraded are being torn down throughout my neighbourhood because the younger generation don't want these style of homes - they want double the size of the house with 2 to 3 car garages and their 10ft ceilings and virtually no backyards because they are inside on their computers and phones all evening and weekend long. Perfectly fine homes are selling for 1.2 - 1.4 million dollars so they can be demolished, doubled in sized and then sold for 2.6-3.3m.
What could be done - but won't because of greed - is not allowing this to occur by the city and what could be allowed is the buying up for 2 adjacent homes that combined would be 140-150ft in width, the tearing down of both of them and then the rebuilding of 3 homes on 50ft wide lots with the size being 1,300 sq ft, again side or backsplit houses. The builder pays 2.3-2.4m for the 2 homes and then sells the 3 homes for 1.3 - 1.4m. The builder could still clear 1/2m in profit when its over and done. What you've done is kept the character of the neighbourhood the same, turned what was 2 homes into 3 homes and kept the prices for the new homes comparable to the exist prices of the neighbourhood. Is 1.3m still alot of money - 100% it is, but its the 'entry point' here as an example. Similar things could be done elsewhere at a lessor cost.
