TEK Tower (30 Francis) | 45 fl | U/C

[tomh009]

If you look at what the city staff negotiate in exchange for (significant) zoning variances, affordable units (or funding for same) are typically part of that discussion.

I think that's the problem. The fact that most developments need to negotiate with city bureaucrats to get appropriate zoning hurts housing affordability. The fact that we expect home buyers to pay for below-market housing by increasing the cost of market rate housing hurts affordability. The fact that we need large developers to provide housing leads to increased market power for developers and hurts affordability.

The entire housing development system in the region is built around an assumption that we need to limit housing availability, and that is never going to lead to housing that everyone can afford.

I think we are getting a bit off topic here. I think there are serious issues with the zoning approach used by most western countries, and that certainly prevents increases in density and improvements in affordability. Imagine, for example, that all zoning we have today (including single-family housing neighbourhoods) were to be instantly changed to allow 2x the height and 2x the number of housing units -- there would be plenty of land available to increase density.

However, we are not there. So, the approach that the city has taken is to apply somewhat more restrictive zoning for areas where high density is expected, with the expectation that most developers will request variances, and the city can in turn negotiate other improvements to the projects (such as affordable units).

I don't think that negotiation as such hurts affordability. And I don't think it requires large developers. And I don't believe that including some affordable units in a large project would have a significant impact on the cost of the market-priced units.

I would be happy to discuss further, though, if you would like to open a thread in the Urban Issues forum.