Courageous:

As reported;

Byron Shire Council(NSW) is considering letting homeless people set up an official shanty town.
In what would be a first for local Government; the council is preparing a report into whether it should zone a piece of land next to Mullumbimby sports field for “primitive camping”…etc.

Sunday Telegraph 13/2/2011.

<then tried to use that as proof that "massive building of substandard homes, meaning standards below the industry standards of the time" DID occur.>

Nonsense, courageous. I just thought that readers might like to see an example of what met the standard in the 1950s. And plenty of the housing was far worse than that.

Now you acknowledge that shipping container homes can be fantastic, but that they do not meet the standard. I agree with you that container housing can be aesthetic, meet health and safety standards, and can be very strong. So why is their use so restricted?

I can think of many areas where container housing would be a vast improvement on the existing standard. It could be quickly installed and would rapidly resolve the housing shortage. It would cause property values to decrease, but only because of its ability to be rapidly constructed and increase supply, not because of poor quality. And I dare say that most people would find such dwellings vastly superior to the many hideous shoe box condominiums that gain approval by local government in secret.

The only thing preventing a container home revolution taking off is government restriction.

Fester:

...Construction materials are but one problem in housing shortages. I have been employed in the building industry for many years. Conventional construction methods and materials are not the prohibitive factor in the cost of housing at all. Moderate and conventional construction, as depicted in one of your links back to 50’s commission housing , all in a row, with outside dunnies, was robust, economical and adequate.

...It becomes more obvious by the day though, that conventional free standing housing is not a remedy to shortages. A corporate fix will be the solution: More high-rise unit construction as the alternative, will work.

...Governments must take the responsibility to finance totally, infrastructure enabling the private sector to get on and build housing that is affordable to all sectors of society. All have the human need for shelter, not just the group resourced with wealth.
Entry levels for home ownership need to be at the rock bottom of cost, and freely available to all across society. Private enterprise and the market will deal with housing after that opening is presented.

...With the existing Government regulations giving environmental priorities precedence over the needs of people to be housed, the crises will not only continue but worsen, obviously.

...Unfortunately, owner building is not encouraged as a solution to the housing shortage. Local Government approvals for “Shanty Towns” re; my post above, highlight the absurdity and debacle housing for Australians has become

There's absolutely no doubt that the cost of a house itself is not the reason why poorer people can't afford housing.

Providing row after row after row of containers or dongas will not make housing affordable.

There's a MYRIAD of rules and regulations that spike final property costs to 10 times what they would otherwise be. The facts of life are, if people demand solid support infrastructure then they have to PAY FOR IT (either directly themselves or via taxes). If people demand certain property safety and health standards then they have to pay for it.

There is no viable solution to housing the poor, unless a way can be found to do it that doesn't devalue current properties. That's a fact of life. if that can be solved, then we can go on the all the HUNDREDS of rules and regulation impediments that spike the costs ten fold. It's an incredibly complex subject. There's no one quick easy answer.

Diver Dan

My thoughts were along the lines of allowing numerous suburbs with poor quality housing to be subdivided into smaller blocks. The purpose of prefab housing is to add to supply quickly, as it was in the 1950.

High rise as you mention is a great idea, especially if it takes advantage of existing infrastructure. But I think that with more options tried there is likely to be a quicker resolution to the housing shortfall. The building industry would stand to benefit substantially from a reduction in costs, but I feel that this is unlikely to happen unless some pretty radical decisions are made.