Affordability of small footprint homes still questionable

Pieta, as always, a thought provoking piece, but I don't agree with your conclusions. Rather than be sceptical about the smaller, more affordable single family homes, I think you should be CELEBRATING them! After all, they are the first example we have seen in a long time of smaller, detached housing.

Yes, they are more expensive than an old hunker, but they offer a housing choice that has not been offered in the market anywhere else. And at today's interest rates, they would cost less than what you have calculated.

There is another important financial consideration you have ignored....the taxes paid to governments for the new unit, as compared to an existing unit. You might want to check these out. I think you will be surprised at how much they contribute to the cost of the unit. And sadly, many of the fees payable are calculated on a per unit, rather than per square foot basis. This is why most developers are not interested in building smaller homes for sale or for rent.

Now, over to laneway housing. Again, the cost of a new garden cottage is going to be more than that of a renovated basement. But it is still likely less than a similar sized suite in a new downtown concrete apartment building.

Now, as to whether laneway homes will be 'affordable',the city of Vancouver is to be congratulated for looking carefully at the applicable fees, recognizing these could be a deterrent, if too high. However, the units do have to be sprinklered and this will add to the cost. (As an aside, Pieta, would you argue against sprinklering?) The management costs of a small construction project are often higher than for a larger project...(which is one of the reasons I am promoting off-site modular construction) but again, laneway cottages (which can only be rented in Vancouver for the foreseeable future) will offer another housing choice which we currently don't have....legally that is!

So don't despair...be a bit more positive...and remember, compared to the $500,000 social housing units in South East False Creek, all these units are great bargains!

They are not bargains!

The social housing units, even at $500,000, cost exactly that. But for a family paying a mortgage, a $349,000 unit becomes a $924,535 home, after paying interest for 35 years.

I am more interested in what other jurisdictions are doing. In the U.S. and U.K., plus Northern Canada, governments are directly interceding in the housing market for public service workers, to make sure they have a chance at home ownership - not just rental. The programs are worth looking at, because the government MAKES money on them, rather than looses money (Vancouver's solution).

From http://www.straight.com/article-223352/middle-class-gets-help:

"In the U.S., the federal Good Neighbor Next Door neighbourhood-revitalization program offers teachers, firefighters, and police officers the chance to buy into their neighbourhood at 50 percent off the list price of a home. The goal is to improve the buying power of public servants and increase inner-city economic diversity.

Similarly, in the U.K., nurses, childcare workers, police officers, firefighters, and other skilled workers can take advantage of the national Key Worker Living program, offered through the Homes and Communities Agency. The government will “go halfsies” on a mortgage with the worker, and the equity is shared equally when the property is sold."

And the U.S. is hardly a hub of socialism.

Laneway housing as rental, without the ability to subdivide lots, benefits upper-class homeowners with disposable income, not Vancouver's new adult underclass of teachers, nurses, police officers, paramedics, retail managers, small business owners, and other essential urban workers.

I'm sticking to my guns on this.
I believe some more imaginative government thinking, which starts with a realistic grasp of Vancouver's housing problems, will result in a more appropriate public policy solution to "affordable housing" than rental-only laneway homes.

Wonderful ideas..But we're comparing apples and oranges. I agree with the need for 'workforce housing' that could be subsidized on city lands...check out my 10 ideas for affordable housing...it's on line. And I agree that ultimately, laneway houses should be subdivided and sold. But one step at a time....However, I now look forward to your presentation at the July 21 Public Hearing on Laneway Housing and suites within suites!!! Hopefully other Straight readers will sign up to speak too. cheers

That's all fine.

But if the goal is to get Vancouver's workforce to live in Vancouver - and thus cut the environmental and financial costs associated with commuting, you have to offer people homes they actually want to live in.

250-square-foot micro-lofts? Condos with suites? A 750-square foot laneway home that you don't own?

Sorry. For most families, those solutions can't compete with a townhouse in Port Moody. Or a duplex in Richmond. Or a house in Maple Ridge.

Look at the boom in the 'burbs. People are voting with their feet.

Providing affordable housing to the middle class on a charity model is not only insulting, but misses the real point of Vancouver's housing crisis.

Incomes, simply, haven't kept up with the cost of living here.

So is the solution to Vancouver's real housing problem to create government subsidized rental?

Or is it calling business and government to account for providing crappy wages?

Or is it looking at other cities' effective models for giving workers what they actually want?

Maybe Vancouver's city staff could start by surveying those who have already left, and asking what it would take to keep them close to where they work. That would seem like the logical first step in any kind of ecodensity scheme.

As the developer of Kettle Creek Station in Langford, just north of Victoria, I wanted to clarify a few facts about the development.
We are offering a wider range of homes than you had stated in your original blog post on June 23, 2009. The homes in the first phase of Kettle Creek Station range from $269,000 to $389,000 including net GST for homes ranging in size from 650 square feet to just over 1,000 square feet. One, two and three bedroom homes are available. You can find full details at www.kettlecreekstation.com. As a result of a recently successful public hearing, we will be able to reduce our lot sizes and set backs, which will allow us to offer homes at $200,000. This development will provide 20 homes to the Langford Affordable housing program , has donated 45 acres of parkland and is providing over $1.0 mil in community amenities.
Most notably , this development is on the identified Light Rail Transit corridor and is at an identified station. The development is currently serviced by BC Transit, is on the designated on the Regional Rail Trail, which is a direct link to downtown Victoria by bicycle. Further, we are less than a 15 minute walk by trail and sidewalk to downtown Langford.
Mortgage payments for a home at Kettle Creek Station would start from just $1042 per month, based upon a five per cent down payment, at four per cent interest for 35 years.
The demand for these homes has been incredibly strong with young couples looking for their first home, single men and women of all ages, and couples looking to downsize and retire. In the Victoria market these homes have definitely been seen as much more affordable and desirable when compared to other products that are currently available. Since the opening of our sales centre this May, 44 out of the 49 homes in the first phase have sold.
I am extremely proud to pioneer this project. More than ever there is a need for developers to really look at the needs and wants of a community, rethinking housing in general. Kettle Creek Station is an example of what can be done to better utilize land, create more affordable home ownership options, and benefit the community with local job creation. This is a model that other communities on Vancouver Island are already looking to for solutions to their own regional housing issues.
Les Bjola,
Turner Lane Development Corp.