According
to columnist Michael Geller, unless there is a dramatic reduction in the time
it takes to obtain development approvals, especially for purpose-built rental
projects, and “missing middle” forms of housing such as row houses and stacked
townhouses, Vancouver’s housing affordability will be no better than it is
today. Photo Dan Toulgoet
I woke up
Monday morning facing a dilemma. What should be the topic for this week’s
Courier column?
Related
- New rules could turn Vancouver home owners into criminals
- When is big too big when it comes to towers?
- Increasing supply and improving building permit timelines keys to affordable housing
Should I
write about my recent trip to Victoria where my wife could not help but compare
the beautiful planting along street medians and boulevards with the overgrown
weeds at the south end of the Burrard Bridge?
I told
her that I didn’t think it was just a question of money, but rather one of
attitude. While we want to be the greenest city in the world, many at City Hall
regard planting flowers as frivolous and contrary to the principles of
sustainability.
Another
topic idea was to follow up on two recent columns.
Taxation issues related to
laneway houses shocked many homeowners who had built laneway houses without any
thought to income tax consequences.
In another column, I asked,
“When is big too big when it comes to towers?” and alleged the height of taller
buildings is often the result of financial considerations rather than good
planning principles also attracted considerable attention.
The story referenced a Global News story in which Vancouver’s chief planner Gil Kelley
acknowledged that to secure rental and affordable housing, there need to be
trade-offs, often in the form of higher density.
Kelley
went on to say that in Vancouver there are still limits set under a plan and
“it’s not cowboy style negotiations. To earn the maximum height allowed under
the plan the developer needs to provide a substantial amount of affordable
housing and community benefits.”
While I
have found Kelley to be a very genuine and sincere guy, I would suggest he
spend time with Metro Vancouver real estate department officials where
project-by-project “let’s make a deal” negotiations are the modus operandi.
Since
housing affordability is so topical, I also considered revisiting my August 2016 Courier column
about increasing supply and improving building permit times to make housing
more affordable.
The
Foreign Buyers Tax had just been introduced and the Empty Home Tax was coming.
I wrote
then that a year from now we will have both the Foreign Buyers Tax and the
Vacant Dwelling Tax “without a significant change in overall housing
affordability.” Sadly,
this prediction has come true. In fact, housing costs are even higher than I
anticipated a year ago.
At the
time, I wrote “to truly improve the long-term outlook, we need to both increase
housing supply and dramatically improve municipal approval procedures. Until we
reduce the uncertainty and unnecessary complexities in our approval system that
severely restrict supply, housing in Vancouver will remain extremely
unaffordable. The 15 per cent tax is not the answer.”
This
issue had also been addressed in a Fraser Institute report that looked at
housing affordability in Toronto and Vancouver.
It too
concluded that “rather than simply focus on constraining demand, we need to
look at the long and uncertain approval timelines for building permits, as well
as onerous fees and local opposition to new homes… which contribute to the
housing supply’s inability to keep up with demand.”
A year
later, the City of Vancouver is talking a lot about improving the development
and building permit approval system. In March, senior officials made a
presentation to Council in which they proposed various initiatives, including a
program akin to the Nexus Lane.
However,
since then, the city has proposed a “housing reset” offering a dramatic
increase in the supply of affordable housing and new initiatives to encourage
retention of character houses in single family neighbourhoods.
These
will place even greater demands on staff time. So, I will say it again.
Unless
there is a dramatic reduction in the time it takes to obtain development
approvals a year from now, especially for purpose-built rental projects, and
“missing middle” forms of housing such as row houses and stacked townhouses,
Vancouver’s housing affordability will be no better than it is today.
Now you
know the topic for my latest Courier column.
© 2017 Vancouver Courier
2 comments:
Hello I am so pleased with your blog site,Thanks for talking about about the facts.Polanco rentals
Furnished Polanco
Houses for rent Lomas de Chapultepec
Houses for sale Valle de Bravo
Very nice post
Post a Comment