Raise the Hammer

I definitely agree that development should start sooner rather than later, but that the development vision should not be driven by the desire to get some emergency funding to solve a short term cash crisis at CHH.

Again, there are examples of public developments that do more than just sell off land at firesale prices. Even Vancouver insisted on a lot of public amenities in the north shore of False Creek.

In fact, I would like to see higher densities than 4-8 stories and a more urban approach to design. I'd also like to see the City put some teeth into the Vision desire for 'high quality design' and construction. How are they actually going to ensure this?

The impression I got from the meeting and the Deloitte report is that the entire process is driven by the urgency to extract whatever cash they can from selling off the three properties as soon as possible. In fact, this was the remit given to Deloitte.

I can see why Council is attracted by the simplicity of having private developers take over all the waterfront development so the city can can concentrate on putting up to 400 affordable units all on single site at Barton-Tiffany.

It's simple, it doesn't cost any tax money (in the short term) and it might provide extra affordable housing.

But it is a very short term solution that doesn't actually address the roots of the CHH funding crisis, the money wouldn't come close to covering the cost of the new developments, and the City loses some very valuable real estate that the public has increased in value through GO, LRT etc.

At the meeting Councillor Collins made it seem as if the only alternatives were either to sell off the land and build some new housing at Barton-Tiffany (how the total cost would be funded was unclear), or that CHH would go bankrupt and 500 MacNab and Jamesville would eventually be unusable and Barton-Tiffany would be undeveloped. He implied that those skeptical of this deal were happy to let the needy stay in substandard accommodation.

But this is a false choice. There are (more complex) solutions that would provide a much better outcome for the community, and left unsaid was why more tax dollars couldn't be put into CHH or why partnerships with private charities, developers and other levels of government were not even considered.

The Deloitte report actually said that the Cities are the best at doing affordable housing developments and since the pier 8 land is currently unoccupied and the Jamesville and 500 MacNab sites are already social housing I doubt NIMBY would be much of an issue. Buyers would know what they are getting into and the other properties would be developed into mixed income communities.

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2016-03-02 12:21:35