A commentary by a resident of Vic West who hopes to walk with his son to a library in his neighbourhood.
Further to Edy Bradley’s “Victoria council needs to be selective about housing it approves,” Aug. 12, here is a different perspective on how the City of Victoria is responding to the housing crisis.
I interpret figures presented in the Victoria’s Housing Future report differently. The document states that Victoria will need between 15,800 and 17,600 new units of housing in total from 2016 to 2041 to meet both the unmet housing needs as of 2016, while providing 11,300 new units for projected population growth between 2016 and 2041.
Bradley’s interpretation focuses only on the new units to meet growth projections. Her use of “13 communities” instead of “13 neighbourhoods” could lead one to think she’s referring to spreading out the projected Victoria growth amongst the 13 municipalities in the Capital Regional District, but I will assume she refers to the 13 neighbourhoods in Victoria.
To keep up with the housing demands elucidated in the report, Victoria needs 632 to 712 units per year, equal to 49 to 55 units per neighbourhood per year. Bradley’s estimate of an average of 49 units per neighbourhood per year aligns with the low end of this assessment.
The report suggests that the housing deficit figures are likely conservative.
It says that “combined, these indicators illustrate that as of 2016, there was a gap of between 4,500 and 6,300 housing units or more in Victoria’s market. This figure is based on just a few key indicators and is likely a conservative estimate of how much catching-up is needed. The housing market is complex and demand fluctuates with supply – even if 7,000 units were added to the market today, we’d likely still feel some of the same pressures.”
Further, as the rate of population growth in Canada has increased from one per cent per year between 2011 and 2016, to two per cent per year since 2016, the housing need will likely be even greater.
Bradley’s main contention, built on the figures she has chosen, is that this council is not being “selective” enough in its housing approvals, and that by adding most of the units to certain neighbourhoods (including hers and mine), the city is putting too much of the burden there.
I disagree.
This council has been responding to a housing deficit by approving more than 2,000 units of badly needed housing in its first six months in office — mainly affordable housing and market rental, with some supportive housing and condos. I believe that they have done so while also being selective in their housing decisions.
There are two recent examples in which council has shown sensitivity to esthetics, heritage,and neighbourhood character, while still moving forward on approving housing overall.
The first example is the recent Geric Construction proposal at Quebec and Montreal Streets in James Bay. Council sent the proposal back to the proponent to generate a design that is lower and fits better with the neighbourhood.
The second example is the Bayview-Roundhouse proposal in Vic West. Bradley said council approved this proposal; they did not.
As with the proposed development in James Bay, council sent this proposal back to the proponent to work with city staff on a second draft. Council is requiring the proponent add three additional floors of affordable housing to one of the buildings, retain the heritage buildings, provide a new on-site daycare space, and is seeking other amenities, such as a library.
Council also required the proponent to lower some of the heights, and is asking for a floor space ratio of 4.4 – which seems an acceptable compromise on a complicated and expensive site.
Concerns about traffic are often raised, but if housing is added while creating complete neighbourhoods, with access to services, transit, active transportation routes, and car share vehicles, it does not need to generate a commensurate increase in vehicular traffic.
The Roundhouse project alone could even be enough to justify revitalizing rail service in Victoria.
I understand the fairness concern that housing is increasing in only some neighbourhoods. Central neighbourhoods are generally the most desirable, given their proximity to downtown.
We have been fortunate to have a few large, central plots of land for development. It would be great to start seeing more projects being spread out across other neighbourhoods as well.
In short, council is meeting what I believe was the ballot question in 2022 – to add badly needed housing – while still demonstrating a discerning eye towards housing proposals.
This is not an easy task in a housing crisis when the pressure is to add housing as quickly as possible. This council’s decision-making has been a relief after the inconsistent approach to housing of the last council, who rejected or punted many important decisions to this Council, which I believe has handled these challenges with professionalism and due consideration.
I am a middle-aged parent struggling with the increasing cost of living. I care for an elderly parent, who lives in a long-term care facility, and I have a young child who will hopefully be able to afford living in Victoria as an adult.
I want this council to continue to do its job and bring along a diverse housing supply to benefit not only my family, but everyone in Victoria who needs a home.
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
