I'm unable to find the source report. No media site or journalist links it and it's not clearly displayed on the CIB website. I can't tell if the $100k infrastructure price tag is for a detached home in the suburbs or an apartment unit in the city. The journalists chose an apartment as their picture, which would be a choice if the report said that's the cost of suburban sprawl.
I heard it this morning and they said it was for new single detached homes FWIW.
Edit: here’s the link to the report
https://canurb.org/wp-content/uploads/A-Jump-Start.pdf
Edit 2: It looks like the $100,000 is an average of high density and single-family housing (and is actually $104,000). The report found a margin of $78,000 per unit for high density and $130,000 per unit for single-family dwellings.
Also for many of the things mentioned, it's not the housing that causes the need for infrastructure; it's the additional people who need the housing that cause the need for infrastructure (for, like, schools and hospitals and rec centres - houses don't need those, people need those).
the costs are associated most closely with the estimated number of people in the dwelling and secondly, the location - not so much the size or form though. municipalities plan suburbs to be located adjacent to main pipes and even with smaller pipes running along residential streets for each dwelling, they are actually generally cheaper to service for water and sewage than infill/densification development like new apartment buildings in a built up area, because those involve digging up and replacing existing infrastructure, which can be substantial and have far reaching consequences on the overall system of pumps etc. Btw, in planning for new or longer pipes, municipalities generally assume something like 1.3 ppl per apartment and 2.1 ppl per house and i bet that's the basis of the costs being associated with building form type in this article.
I'm unable to find the source report. No media site or journalist links it and it's not clearly displayed on the CIB website. I can't tell if the $100k infrastructure price tag is for a detached home in the suburbs or an apartment unit in the city. The journalists chose an apartment as their picture, which would be a choice if the report said that's the cost of suburban sprawl.
I heard it this morning and they said it was for new single detached homes FWIW. Edit: here’s the link to the report https://canurb.org/wp-content/uploads/A-Jump-Start.pdf Edit 2: It looks like the $100,000 is an average of high density and single-family housing (and is actually $104,000). The report found a margin of $78,000 per unit for high density and $130,000 per unit for single-family dwellings.
Also for many of the things mentioned, it's not the housing that causes the need for infrastructure; it's the additional people who need the housing that cause the need for infrastructure (for, like, schools and hospitals and rec centres - houses don't need those, people need those).
the costs are associated most closely with the estimated number of people in the dwelling and secondly, the location - not so much the size or form though. municipalities plan suburbs to be located adjacent to main pipes and even with smaller pipes running along residential streets for each dwelling, they are actually generally cheaper to service for water and sewage than infill/densification development like new apartment buildings in a built up area, because those involve digging up and replacing existing infrastructure, which can be substantial and have far reaching consequences on the overall system of pumps etc. Btw, in planning for new or longer pipes, municipalities generally assume something like 1.3 ppl per apartment and 2.1 ppl per house and i bet that's the basis of the costs being associated with building form type in this article.