Looking Back and Forward. SFU Lecture October 18, 2023

Many of the people making major planning decisions around Metro Vancouver were not even born when I arrived in Vancouver in 1974 to begin working with CMHC. Most are unaware of the history of CMHC housing programs and the major zoning and development decisions that have shaped our region, and other factors which have contributed to the unaffordability crisis we face today. 

Earlier this month Andy Yan of the SFU City Program helped organize a program 'Looking Back and Forward'. It reviewed some of the significant government decisions and projects over the past five decades that should not be forgotten. Joining me on the stage were Ray Spaxman, Vancouver's former director of planning from 1973 to 1989; Michael Epp, a former Director of Planning for the City of North Vancouver and currently Director of Housing, Planning and Development for Metro Vancouver; and Zoe Brook, a co-director of the Young ULI and an emerging real estate and development consultant.

A video of the presentation can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y--Qae6n3OY

For those who don't have enough wine or other spirits on hand to sit through the entire evening presentation, below are 12 'solutions' I put forward to address some of the housing affordability challenges we now face:

It seems we always focus on the cost of land when discussing housing affordability, but these other cost components can be equally significant. In another SFU presentation that can be found online, I review how to reduce the other cost components.

What many don't understand is that by allowing higher densities, a landowner may realize a financial gain, and the land cost may be reduced for a particular project. But developers buy land the same way most of us buy meat or fish...by the pound, or in the case of land, by the square foot. As a result, higher densities do not always translate into more affordable housing. You pay $100 psf regardless of the FSR

While we have a shortage of industrial land, I see many opportunities to combine light industry and housing around the region. I don't see housing replacing industry, just adding to it. In some cases, modular homes could be sited on the roofs of these buildings. Seriously!

Sadly, there were more extensive public transit networks in place 100 years ago, when compared to today. As these maps illustrate, Interurban and Electric Rail lines once served Richmond, Chilliwack and other communities. We need to replicate these networks, but not with SkyTrain. Rather we should place greater emphasis on light rail, rapid bus, etc. And reuse the existing tracks to Squamish.

 and elsewhere.

Growth should finance growth. But it's a mistake to burden new homeowners and renters with all the costs associated with new infrastructure, sewage treatment plant upgrades, etc. That's what is happening now. In the past, existing residents paid for new infrastructure over time. Unfortunately, as the price of new housing rises, all the existing housing rises too. A rising tide lifts all boats. The same applies here.

If we are going to tax existing property owners along with new homebuyers and renters, we should also revise BC Assessment classifications. There should be different mill rates for single-family and multi-family housing. For one thing, single-family lots often require more services. Also, why not reward those choosing to live more sustainably?

There was a time when municipalities could not sell density. Now that has changed. But while planners will deny it, some projects are approved at densities and heights greater than they should be from an urban planning perspective, so the municipality can charge higher Community Amenity Contributions.

This might seem like a minor point, but there is no reason we should require the same exiting requirements for a 3-storey building and a 30-storey building. By permitting a single exit, this could make it easier to design more cost-effective 'missing middle' buildings, like those in the past. 

While inclusionary zoning and density bonuses result in some more affordable housing, realistically, the private sector cannot build the very affordable housing that we need. In the 70s and 80s, it was the non-profits who built truly affordable homes with government money. We need to do more of this in future.

When we were young, many of us shared housing. However, today, most of us don't want to. But that said, the easiest way to create more affordable housing is to make better use of all the vacant bedrooms and other spaces that currently exist. What we need is a way to pair seniors with other seniors, and young people with seniors. The benefits could be very significant. It will happen, but let's promote it.

I must smile when I hear politicians talking about the hundreds of thousands of new homes that we are going to build annually. What they ignore is that our construction industry isn't geared for such dramatic increases in supply. But one way to increase supply is through greater use of factory-construction.

Better designed balconies may not make homes more affordable, but they will make them more livable. In Europe, retractable glass panels often make balconies more functional, especially in the late fall, winter, and early spring. Some Metro municipalities now allow their installation without the balcony area counting as part of the suite area. But Vancouver is not one of them. At least not yet! 

Thirty years ago, Ray Spaxman proposed the idea of an 'Urbanarium' - an urban museum where models of the city and new developments could be put on display. An Urbanarium would also be a place to foster discussion about planning and other urban issues. Singapore, Shanghai, Beijing and other cities have created such places. It is time for Vancouver build a gallery to showcase our planning successes.