Sane Housing

Members of council and fellow Vancouverites, The Official Development Plan before you rests on a simple but mistaken premise: that adding more housing supply will make housing more affordable. It is an appealing idea. But Vancouver’s own history shows it simply isn’t true. For more than fifty years this city has been the most aggressive builder of new housing in North America. Since the 1960s our housing stock has increased by 200 percent, while population has grown by only 78 percent. We have densified our neighborhoods, built towers, embraced mixed-use, and added units at a pace that outstrips most comparable cities. No other centre city matches this feat. And yet our housing, when measured against average household income, is the least affordable anywhere on the continent . Working families - the very people who make the city function—are being pushed out. Density has brought real benefits: lower emissions, healthier communities, better transit. But affordability has not followed supply. The market does not naturally produce housing ordinary wage earners can afford. It produces what the highest bidder can pay for. That is why this plan needs a different foundation. If we want a city that still houses its teachers, nurses, tradespeople, and young families, then at least half of all new housing must be permanently affordable - homes costing no more than 30 percent of income. We have tested the supply theory for decades. Vancouver’s own experience tells us it is time to try something that actually works.

California’s severe housing shortage is a top issue facing our state. Our next Governor must lead on housing. I’m thrilled the candidates are taking it so seriously. This is a really solid plan.