The City’s practice of granting density bonuses to developers of new market rental housing has had no demonstrable effect on the problem the City is trying to solve — making housing more affordable. It looks more like simply a transfer of a publicly owned resource (extra density) to privately owned companies so they will build bigger and taller privately owned buildings than they would have otherwise.
‘Density’ is the size of the building relative to the size of the lot and calculated as a floor space ratio (“FSR”) by dividing building floor space into lot size. Building lots have an entitlement to a given FSR according to existing zoning. When the City increases, ‘bonuses’, density, it increases property value.
The City can negotiate with the developer to share the increase in the value of the property, and it funded a new City Hall, new Operations Centre and many other public assets without having to increase taxes.
However, density bonuses simply to accelerate the construction of market rental housing does not help the affordability problem in the City. It might be making it worse as buyers speculate on the likelihood the City will increase the value of the land with a density bonus after they purchase it.
In addition to not being an effective way to address affordability, it’s a missed opportunity to create a public asset or contribute to the infrastructure required to support the development.
Jason
Hi Guy,
We have read the issues you identified, however, your action plans are not clear or specific.
Could you let us know your concise proposed solutions for each issue?
Looking forward to your response.
Thank you!
Jason
Guy Heywood
Fair comment and sorry for being slow to reply.
Density bonusing: stop it where it is not creating a public asset like affordable housing. Getting a commitment to being rental in perpetuity or 10% below some market index is not creating something of value for the community.
Affordable housing: Pursue the construction of purpose built affordable housing the cost of which is linked to income. There are new programs for this that have been well funded by the BC government and the City has not had the time or resources to access these programs because of the time they spend with developers.
Traffic: Follow the committee work of INSTPP with action by the local governments. Assign all the transportation planners now working at the City and District to a North Vancouver Traffic Authority that would be responsible to continue the work of the INSTPP committee and provide opinions on each development regarding the impact on traffic.
Harry Jerome: See my video on the topic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lAa7IghzgQ&t=2s
Jason
Thank you for taking the time to respond. You got our votes. Good luck!