These days, it is cool to be pro housing.

Unaffordability has apparently gotten so bad that we are now seeing a groundswell of support for increasing overall housing supply. So politicians are doing things. And this week, the Province of British Columbia proposed some new legislation related to transit hubs.

As proposed, the legislation will require BC municipalities to designate Transit Oriented Development Areas (TOD Areas), mandate minimum heights and densities within certain radii (broadly 800m in the case of rapid transit stations), and remove parking minimums.

Not surprisingly, a lot of people are excited about this and, there's no question, that this is directionally the right thing to do. But I have two immediate thoughts.

The first is that the devil is always in the details. This all sounds good, but: Are the proposed minimum densities and heights going to be enough to stimulate development? For example, is 4 the right minimum FAR for 300m from a transit station?

The second thought has to do with the level of excitement surrounding this announcement. (I'm going strictly based on Twitter, which admittedly could just be my bubble). The fact that city builders are so excited about this announcement tells us a lot about the current state of affairs.

Because what this proposed legislation is more or less saying is the following: "Hey, here's a great idea! Let's build more housing around higher order transit and not force the market to build unnecessary parking."

Is this really something that should be considered novel? I thought this was just how cities should work.