When it comes to building new units of housing, you couldn’t do much worse than the City and District of North Vancouver, the Fraser Institute says.
That sound you just heard was a host of council watchers doing a spit take.
Aside from the study’s egregious methodology (using only three of four survey responses to collect data), we take some rather large exceptions with its not-so-between-the-lines message: That if local governments would just get out of the way, do away with those annoying fees and charges and let the developers do their work, housing would be more affordable.
In other news: Foxes release report calling for deregulation of henhouses.
Zoning and bylaws are what prevent casinos from popping up next-door or toilet drains from emptying into streams. Development cost charges and community amenity contributions provide the revenue cities need to cope with population growth, which by the way, happens at the maternity ward and YVR arrivals gate, not the council chamber.
Maybe there’s an argument that increasing the housing supply will bring the price down. It hasn’t worked so far, but then we are dealing with extraordinary demand.
What we don’t agree with is that reducing or eliminating DCCs and CACs is going to somehow make new homes cheaper for the buyer. Developers set their prices based on what they think the market will bear and not a penny less.
The Fraser Institute is asking us to believe those savings would be passed on to the consumer — sort of like the dirt-cheap gas we’re getting at the pumps now that oil is below $50 a barrel.
We’re not buying it and neither should you.
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
