The idea that’s being sold with the housing accelerator funds is not just specifically them building homes with it but forcing cities to adopt more development friendly policies that would allow for additional housing.
From the article and it also mentioned twice.
Fraser said of the Vancouver deal that the cash from the government’s Housing Accelerator Fund would cut barriers to building homes and “incentivize changes” at the municipal level.
It really wish people would stop being coy with what they want.
how the 4,000 homes/year would affect the housing market
Fraser said of the Vancouver deal that the cash from the government’s Housing Accelerator Fund would cut barriers to building homes and “incentivize changes” at the municipal level.
This reads like a press release. There’s no explanation of what the money will be used for.
What are the changes? Why will they cause extra building? What’s the likelihood that the homes will actually be built? Who will be able to afford them?
It really wish people would stop being coy with what they want.
I’m not sure what you mean. Are you asking what I want?
If so: I’d like to be able to afford a home in the near future. I’d also like my kids to be able to afford a home in a decade or two.
This reads like a press release. There’s no explanation of what the money will be used for.
The article is about a press release. If you actually read the article you’re grossly misinterpreting what is being conveyed.
how the 4,000 homes/year would affect the housing market
If so: I’d like to be able to afford a home in the near future. I’d also like my kids to be able to afford a home in a decade or two.
Asking this to get what you want is like asking a doctor how a good night of sleep next Tuesday effects your overall health for the year. There’s no reason for anyone to spend time trying quantify a singular activity when the results will clearly be determined by much larger aggregate of them.
Add comment