Vancouver's Affordable Housing Bait and Switch: A Promise Made, A Promise Changed, A City That Forgot
An open letter to investigative journalists — and to Vancouver
Dear investigative journalists,
I found an old City of Vancouver video today.
It is one of those little pieces of Vancouver history that makes you stop and stare.
The video says:
“By 2020, Southeast False Creek is anticipated to be home to 12,000 people, with a plan to have 1,250 units of affordable housing…”
I watched it again.
1,250 units.
Not 250.
Not 252.
1,250.
And I thought: Wait a minute. What happened to those?
So I started digging through the City's own records.
And this is where I think investigative journalists need to pay attention.
This wasn't just a dream. It was a plan.
In 2002, City planning documents contemplated approximately 6,000 residential units in Southeast False Creek, including about 20% non-market housing on City-owned land.
Then something much more ambitious happened.
In 2005, Vancouver's proposed Official Development Plan changed the housing vision for the City-owned lands to:
⅓ low-income
⅓ middle-income
⅓ market
The City's own planning document says this explicitly.
A January 2005 City document described the target as 33.3% affordable housing and 33.3% modest-market housing, specifically because the City wanted a socially mixed community with access to housing for different income groups.
This was not some activist's fantasy.
This was City policy.
And then the numbers changed.
Then came the Olympic Village
In January 2006, Vancouver City Council was considering the financial strategy for Southeast False Creek and the Olympic Village.
The Council report presented different options.
One option would provide 20% affordable housing across the City lands while retaining a minimum 250 Olympic Legacy affordable units in the Olympic Village.
The report calculated that this would increase revenue to the City's Property Endowment Fund by approximately $16.6 million.
Another option proposed trying to find alternative funding to get back toward 33% affordable housing.
Read that again.
The affordable-housing percentage was being discussed in relation to the City's land revenues.
And the difference was measured in millions of dollars.
This is where I want someone to investigate the entire chain of decisions.
Not because I am claiming that one mayor personally “stole” 1,000 homes.
That would be an irresponsible simplification.
Council made these decisions.
But the political and financial choices deserve to be examined.
What did Vancouver ultimately get?
The Olympic Village was eventually built with approximately 1,100 residential units.
The City now says 252 are affordable housing units, with another 100 units described as modest-market and market housing.
A 2009 City report confirms that the affordable-housing component was 252 units. It also records that the original Olympic Village commitment was 250 affordable units, with 125 intended for families with children.
So let's put the numbers beside each other:
The old City video
1,250 affordable units
The later Olympic Village commitment
250 affordable units
What was ultimately delivered
252 affordable units
Those are not remotely the same promise.
And this is precisely why I am writing this.
Where did the other 1,000 units go?
That is the question.
And I don't mean that rhetorically.
I mean:
Where did they go?
Were they transferred elsewhere in Southeast False Creek?
Were they replaced by another form of housing?
Were they simply removed from the plan?
Which Council decisions changed the target?
Who advocated for those changes?
What financial considerations drove them?
What commitments were made to replace the lost units?
Which of those commitments were fulfilled?
And, most importantly:
Who was keeping track of the original promise?
Because apparently, it wasn't the public.
This is how a housing crisis gets created
This is what bothers me most.
We talk about Vancouver's housing crisis as though it appeared yesterday.
It didn't.
For decades, Vancouver has been planning massive developments while promising that affordable housing will be part of the deal.
The public hears:
“Affordable housing will be included.”
Then the project gets redesigned.
The percentage changes.
The definition changes.
The funding changes.
The number changes.
The development proceeds.
And twenty years later, somebody says:
“Look! We built affordable housing.”
And technically, they did.
But that's not the whole story.
The question is:
How much affordable housing was promised at the beginning — and how much survived the process?
And this is why I am asking investigative journalists to look at Vancouver
I am particularly asking ICIJ and investigative journalists who investigate systemic failures and abuses of power to look at this.
ICIJ describes its mission as investigating stories involving corruption, abuses of power and systemic failures that harm the public interest. It also specifically invites story tips.
I think Vancouver deserves this kind of investigation.
Not just one development.
The pattern.
Take the original promises for major Vancouver developments.
Put them beside:
- the final approved plans;
- the rezoning documents;
- the affordable-housing targets;
- the actual units delivered;
- the definitions of “affordable” used at each stage;
- the public subsidies and land contributions;
- the developers involved;
- the Council votes;
- and the eventual ownership and affordability restrictions.
Then ask:
How many affordable homes did Vancouver promise?
How many were actually delivered?
And how many disappeared somewhere between the promise and the ribbon-cutting?
Because Vancouverites deserve to remember
I don't want to call this a conspiracy.
I want to call it what the documents show.
A promise changed.
And then another promise.
And another.
And eventually people forget what they were originally promised.
Until someone finds an old video.
And suddenly there it is.
1,250 units.
A number that once appeared on a City of Vancouver screen.
A promise made to the public.
A promise we should have kept track of.
To the journalists reading this: please investigate it.
Don't take my word for it.
Follow the documents.
Follow the money.
Follow the land.
Follow the Council votes.
Follow the numbers.
And most importantly:
follow the housing.
Because Vancouver's housing crisis didn't happen overnight.
We have been watching the promises disappear for years.
No comments:
Post a Comment