The Housing Crisis and the Catalogue of housing Solutions
- Luis Morgado
- Mar 20
- 9 min read
The housing crisis is one of the defining issues of our time. It is not a new problem, but it has worsened in recent years due to the incredible rise in prices, especially in large cities, driven by limited supply, increased demand, speculation, and low interest rates. In our case, the phenomenon is further exacerbated by public disinvestment in housing, the historically dysfunctional rental market, the massification of tourism in cities, and the explosion of the short-term rental business.
Among the various discussions I have followed, one of the most interesting took place in a podcast called “Partida de Xadrez”, in which Gonçalo Moura Martins (CEO of Mota-Engil) and António Ramalho (Chairman of Touro Capital Partners, former president of Novo Banco) reflected on the housing crisis in the context of the government's strategy for this sector. Both presented this complex problem in a simple and structured way, identifying it as having two main components: on one hand, the crisis of access, and on the other, the crisis of supply.
Leaving aside the issue of those who are entirely excluded, the difficulty of access to housing for the middle class is related to the gap between the average salary and the cost per square meter of living space. A 100m² home, with a cost of €2,000/m², would require a monthly loan payment of around €800 for someone earning €1,600 per month, which is clearly not ideal. Since a widespread increase in wages to resolve this issue is not foreseeable, one of the most effective ways to facilitate access to housing —beyond government support — is by increasing supply.
Solving the problem should not simply consist of making a greater number of housing units available on the market; it also requires limiting the cost to a level that aligns with the purchasing power of potential buyers. In Partida de Xadrez, the components of construction costs that should be targeted by measures aimed at achieving this goal are identified: land, taxes, and construction.
Regarding land, much has already been discussed, and some measures have been introduced, then reconsidered. It is well understood that in the absence of land for new construction, investment should be directed toward rehabilitation. It is also known that the state must mobilize its available assets. Furthermore, it is widely accepted that some rural land could be converted into urban areas, and in cities, an increase in building density and height—through what is known as a construction bonus—could be considered. However, these measures face many obstacles that make them ineffective on their own.
As for tax reductions, their importance has already been recognized, and they are included in legislation, particularly in urban rehabilitation projects. A broader application of the reduced VAT rate for housing construction, for a defined period, could serve as an incentive for rapid development. This idea was initially well-received but later failed to gain political consensus. However, even this measure alone would hardly resolve one of the fundamental issues: the time required to construct a residential building—from the moment a developer makes the decision until a resident moves in.
The cost of construction is the third component. Reducing it requires innovation. Lightening the burden of labor, standardizing and industrializing processes, minimizing variability in solutions, and shifting production off-site are all strategies that, despite being conceived over a century ago—particularly by modernist architects and successfully implemented in social housing projects in many countries—have yet to become widespread in conventional construction, which still suffers from the inefficiency of treating each building as a prototype. It seems evident that reducing labor costs (one of the primary drivers of high expenses) along with streamlining project timelines would have an immediate impact on the final cost of housing.
Reducing costs, therefore, requires improving the overall efficiency of everyone involved in the process—whether in the relationship between regulatory authorities and designers or between designers and builders. In the first case, the need to simplify procedures has already been identified, aiming to shift towards greater accountability of stakeholders (SIMPLEX administrative reform). In the near future, efforts should also focus on simplifying building regulations by eliminating subjectivity, contradictions, and redundancies.
As for the state's role as a developer, the philosophy behind contracts between public administration and construction companies could also be completely revised. Instead of relying on distrust and prioritizing the lowest price, why not consider the opposite approach? Why not involve contractors in the early stages of the process, allowing their expertise in efficiency, innovation, and technical feasibility to be integrated into project planning from the outset? Why not adopt the Early Contractor Involvement approach, as practiced in Anglo-Saxon countries?
Among all the possible solutions, one stands out as particularly interesting—though not new, as it has been successfully applied in specific cases: the concept of a “standardized project.” In Partida de Xadrez, an architect was quoted as saying that every project ultimately ends up being a prototype. From an efficiency standpoint, and in pursuit of the goal of building quickly and at scale, the idea of developing standardized projects, meta-projects, or even ready-to-use design catalogs does not seem entirely unreasonable—despite conflicting with the traditional architectural perspective that emphasizes the uniqueness of each site, client, and project.
In fact, I believe that architects themselves would be the first to recognize that the defining characteristic of the housing projects that still need to be built is, above all, the urgent need to provide effective and rapid solutions — while, of course, ensuring the quality of the final product.
In this regard, I found it relevant to analyze one of the many measures adopted in Canada to address the housing crisis: the introduction of a catalogue of solutions available to builders and developers. The idea is that this could serve as a useful tool to streamline an already highly complex process.
Following the example of what the Government of British Columbia had already done, the Federal Government of Canada launched a plan on April 12, 2024, called Solving the Housing Crisis: Canada’s Housing Plan to address the challenges of housing access. The plan is based on three key pillars:
Building more homes;
Facilitating homeownership and rentals;
Improving access to housing for vulnerable groups, including the homeless, young people, and the elderly.
One of the measures introduced under the goal of "building more homes" is the initial phase of a housing solutions catalog, inspired by similar catalogs developed between the 1940s and 1970s. Many of the models featured in past catalogs were widely implemented across Canada. The practice of using design catalogs is well-established in North America, offering an alternative—sometimes advantageous—to the traditional iterative process, which involves successive revisions to reconcile technical and design requirements and resolve conflicting demands.
As this approach evolved throughout the 20th century, the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation launched architectural competitions to contribute to the catalog. At one point, the concept of a hypothetical client was introduced:
"The Client, Mr. Canada, an average Canadian in his middle 30s, has needed a house since the end of the war. He, his wife, his five-year-old daughter, and his two-year-old son are now living in overcrowded accommodation."
This was the fundamental idea behind the catalog: to offer standardized housing designs tailored to the needs of the typical Canadian family.
In July 2024, the Canadian federal government issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the development of housing concepts to be included in the Housing Design Catalogue. The selected proposals came from MGA | Michael Green Architecture for the British Columbia region and LGA Architectural Partners Ltd., working alongside five expert teams, including Dub Architects, 5468796 Architecture, KANVA, Abbott Brown Architects, and Taylor Architecture Group.
By 2025, the initiative had presented 50 housing solutions across various typologies, including accessory dwelling units (ADUs), single-family homes, townhouses, and low-rise multi-unit housing (four- and six-unit buildings). While one of the project's goals was to increase urban density by making use of underutilized spaces, the housing typologies remain suited to North America's tradition of low-density urban development. Canada’s major cities already implement high-density policies, characterized by the widespread construction of high-rise residential towers, or condo towers, which can reach up to 70 stories.
The catalog is structured to provide solutions tailored to the unique conditions of each Canadian province (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, the Atlantic provinces, and the Northern territories). The designs reflect regional differences in construction methods, materials, climate, and local regulations, though all adhere to the National Building Code of Canada – Part 9. The selected architectural firms were tasked with addressing key challenges such as adaptability to different uses, hygrothermal efficiency, construction efficiency and rationalization, standardization of building techniques, and the use of local materials and processes. The projects also integrate crucial accessibility and flexibility requirements.
Following the long-standing tradition of catalogues of housing solutions, this initiative aims to reduce costs, shorten construction timelines, and minimize the uncertainty associated with untested solutions. Having pre-approved designs speeds up the entire process, benefiting both developers and residents. However, the solutions remain flexible, allowing for modifications to meet specific requirements or unique site conditions. In addition to spatial design, construction methodologies, and the use of prefabricated elements, the catalog includes cost estimates and technical documentation.
For now, only the first phase of housing solutions has been released, featuring floor plans, key construction details, and renderings. These serve as a starting point, with further additions planned, including architectural and engineering drawings, energy performance reports, construction cost estimates, and alternative layouts for different accessibility needs.
Unlike the printed catalogues of the past, this modern version is a digital platform, where users can filter housing options by type, province, and size (small or medium). At this stage, it offers a curated set of high-quality, architect-designed base projects.
In Portugal, standardized housing projects (projectos tipo) have also been adopted, though in different ways. Public social housing initiatives — from the Estado Novo period to the democratic era — have consistently prioritized efficiency and rationalized construction methods. Two of the most notable examples are the Alvalade neighborhood in Lisbon, designed by Faria da Costa, and the Malagueira project in Évora, designed by Siza Vieira. Surprisingly, however, the “catalog” approach has been even more evident outside the realm of public policy. Take, for example, the work of Raul Lino, whose book Casas Portuguesas effectively created a housing catalog—whether intentionally or not—offering regionally adapted design solutions across Portugal.
Nowadays, some Portuguese architects have embraced construction rationalization as a core design philosophy, promoting repetition, standardization, and prefabrication to achieve greater efficiency. One of the most notable examples is Atelier Promontório, whose work demonstrates a classic sense of rationality that has led to significantly more effective construction processes.
More recently, perhaps the most interesting study in the field of standardized housing projects (projeto tipo) is the Concept Study from May 2019, developed within the Affordable Rent Program (Programa de Renda Acessível). It was designed by the Urban Rehabilitation Society (Sociedade de Reabilitação Urbana – SRU), coordinated by Susana Rato and Joana Couto. The goal of the study was to serve as a methodological support tool for large-scale housing project development and construction, aiming to be “fast, intelligent, and economically sustainable.”
The study focused on three key principles: rationality, functionality, and simplicity, while prioritizing spatial quality, construction quality, comfort, energy sustainability (nearly zero energy buildings – nZEB), and economic and resource efficiency in construction, maintenance, and conservation.
At the moment I am writing, we are witnessing yet another government collapse in Portugal and the beginning of another period of uncertainty. We do not know whether the housing policies of the outgoing government will continue or if they will be revised in the opposite direction. Unfortunately, the goal of building the housing necessary to uphold the constitution does not seem any closer.
News reports now indicate that shantytowns have returned to the city of Lisbon, and overcrowding is becoming increasingly common. Garages, offices, and schools are being illegally used as housing. Housing prices rose by 2.1% between January and February and by 13.6% between February 2023 and February 2024. The number of homeless people in our cities is increasing at an alarming rate.
"The Housing Crisis and the Catalogue of housing Solutions" is not an obvious topic among us, but perhaps when we realize that we can no longer postpone the construction of the many thousands of homes we lack, we will be forced to incorporate both this and many other good ideas that we can take from those who are a little ahead of us.
Luis Morgado
