The new version of the proposed EcoDensity Charter and its recommended-action plan go to considerable lengths in attempting to address the urgent issue of housing affordability in Vancouver.

After all, affordability was a major concern expressed by many residents throughout the several public meetings attended by staff and the marathon public hearings conducted by council on the initiative started by Mayor Sam Sullivan. Although the drafts talk about creating opportunities and options to facilitate more housing choices, the staff report accompanying the documents makes it clear that “more housing most likely will not reduce the cost of housing from what it is today.”

But these options “can moderate future price increases from what they would otherwise have been”, according to the report principally authored by Vancouver city planning director Brent Toderian.

And the same report states: “Higher density development in itself can generate some improvements in affordability because of unit size and building and land efficiencies.”

In a phone interview, Toderian emphasized that EcoDensity as a whole is a program that aims to give Vancouver three equally important attributes: ecological sustainability, affordability, and livability.

“The documents needed to answer the question of what kind of density [the city needs] and where, because people were weaving in the worst-case scenarios from their perspective, which was often about high-rises everywhere,” Toderian told the Georgia Straight.

The five-page charter points out that unless new and diverse housing is built in the city, Vancouver’s “already expensive housing will only get more unaffordable while sprawl is pushed out elsewhere”.

One undertaking identified in the 44-page action plan provides that all rezonings that involve two or more acres of land will require greener features like reduced energy consumption and a sustainable transportation strategy.

However, “with [two acres or greater] sites accommodating housing, a range of unit types and tenures will be considered and negotiated to enhance the affordability that market can provide, while providing in accordance with Council policy, opportunities for the development of non-market housing to be funded through senior government housing programs,” the plan states.

Another action item proposes that staff report back to council about an “interim EcoDensity Rezoning Policy” that will facilitate approval of various housing choices that are acceptable in different communities. “It will also set locational parameters for where incremental change in the lower density areas of the city should be focused,” the document explains. “A balance will need to be struck between recognizing the affordability inherent in the existing housing stock, and providing new housing types and choices through redevelopment.”

The plan also talks about exploring new types of mid-rise buildings higher than four storeys along the city’s arterial roads. “This Action concentrates on the 6-8 storey form because there is very little zoning for this in the City and it could be a useful new model for broader use,” the plan states. It noted that buildings of six to eight storeys may “provide opportunities to develop purpose-built rental housing and other forms of affordable housing, as well as address neighbourhood amenity needs”.

The plan seeks to have staff return to council with a report on options for laneway housing in single-family zones, usually referred to as coach houses, carriage houses, garage apartments, and granny flats.

“This is a form of ‘hidden’ density as it does not change the nature and character of blocks from the sidewalks,” the document explains. “Laneway housing supports EcoDensity objectives by using land efficiently and contributing top neighbourhood housing diversity and affordability.”

If approved by council, the action plan will direct staff to come up with proposed bylaw amendments or at least reports dealing with more options for “rental secondary suites”. These will apply to both single-family zones where one suite is already allowed and areas where secondary suites are not permitted.

“More options for suites were a frequently raised idea in the public process,” the document states. “Suites are a form of ‘invisible’ density in terms of their impact on the physical character and appearance of a neighbourhood. Yet, they have significant environmental and affordability benefits.”

The action plan also contemplates allowing additional “discretionary density for development projects in the Downtown and Central Broadway areas, without a rezoning, where urban design, form, and architecture are deemed appropriate”. Developers can purchase additional density, and proceeds will be used to “fund public benefits”. The plan states that these benefits could include community centres, parks, affordable housing, and libraries.

Non-Partisan Association councillor Suzanne Anton described the revised drafts as major discussion papers on how to accommodate growth in the city in a sustainable manner.

“We can’t bury our heads in the sand,” Anton told the Straight. “All growth in the city of Vancouver will come through additional density.”

Council will discuss the revised EcoDensity Charter and action plan on June 10. The official EcoDensity Web site (www.vancouver-ecodensity.ca/) provides a guide on how the public can submit feedback, by e-mail, post, or fax.

In separate phone interviews, EcoDensity critics Mel Lehan and Alicia Barsallo asserted that the documents are basically a density charter that won’t give ordinary citizens a respite from housing affordability challenges.

“At the end of the day, we want to ensure that those who live in the city are able to stay in the city,” Lehan, a member of Neighbourhoods for a Sustainable Vancouver, told the Straight.

For her part, Barsallo, convenor of the Coalition Against EcoDensity and For Liveability, asked: “If we agree to live in a crowded environment, where are the assurances that the developers won’t just move to the next green patch and build some more?”