Dear Editor:
I read the letter Hospital Staff Not Immune to Affordable Housing Crisis (March 8 Mailbox) with interest. The author shines light on a serious consequence of our housing crisis and the impact it has on the completeness of our community.
However, I strongly disagree with the notion that new multi-family development contributes to unaffordability and widespread vacancy. This thinking, when translated into opposition to new multi-family development, contributes to the very crisis the author would like to solve.
The North Shore has a growing population. To keep a generationally and economically diverse community here, new housing must be created. But without new land to develop, the next era of housing will have to be denser than the previous.
As a resident of a new condo building and with relatives in new rental buildings here, I can assure readers that new multi-family buildings on the North Shore have vacancy rates at or close to zero. These buildings are full.
To illustrate with my own building, housing has been created for nearly 100 families on land previously occupied by just four homes.
It is true that new buildings are priced at a premium to older buildings, but let’s keep some perspective. First, we should dispel the notion that condo living is one of “luxury” (reinforced by every condo marketing campaign, ever). Condos are a practical solution for a generation of families priced out of detached home ownership. Raising two energetic kids in a two-bedroom condo, “luxury” is not the first word to come to mind.
Second, new buildings reduce overall demand for older buildings. The nearly 100 families living in my building would doubtless be competing for space in older buildings had mine not been built.
And finally, new buildings aren’t new forever. The new building price premium declines over time, and these buildings contribute to a larger and more diverse pool of quality housing options for everyone.
The author specifically notes his objection to large condo buildings displacing older, smaller rental buildings. However with a vast majority of residential land restrictively zoned for detached homes only, is it surprising that the few areas zoned for multi-family housing are developed at the maximum possible density?
If the author would prefer a more gentle form of density, I would look to European cities, where widespread allowance for townhomes, row homes, and small apartment buildings results in vibrant and diverse neighbourhoods – and nary a condo tower in sight.
Chris Berry
North Vancouver
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
