Aryze Developments has had the ear of Victoria council past and present. The company proposed a dense townhouse development in Foul Bay that, when ready to market, is to include two units at ‘below market’ cost. A company representative says that Aryze now wishes to be exempt from providing these two units, because ‘costs have risen.’ Instead, the developer will offer council $60,000 as ‘a community amenity.’
Another Aryze-owned property is on Toronto Street in James Bay. This condominium proposal (at market rates) will see three houses containing rental units, demolished. When the developer recently presented the building plans to the James Bay Community Association, it was revealed that instead of the initial four floors proposed to the city, another floor has been added. The rationale? Cost increases.
Now, this isn’t the first time the matter of increased costs has been cited for building more housing in Victoria. The lack of accustomed profit rationale is why the ‘missing middle’ policy has resulted in little uptake. Indeed, the Coreolis report on this policy, commissioned by the city, said as much. And was ignored by council in its rush to approve any policy that offered hope for more housing of various affordable and accessibility levels. The Coreolis report estimates that only townhouse developments would provide the approximate profit levels - 15% - expected by housing developers. And by including below-market townhouse units profits would be further affected.
As well, Coreolis suggests that the biggest profits would be attained by developing larger lots and that the city has to be less demanding of ‘bonus density’ contributions. Uh oh.
The trickle-down theory applied to the housing market is continually espoused by local, provincial and federal governments. Everyone is complaining of increased costs in most areas of life now. So where to start by making a real difference for those with incomes of less than $100K?
Firstly, do not make housing a commodity. Property developers/builders – anyone related to building housing – could adjust their profit expectations downward…including investors of housing developers.
Secondly, a more modest, sustainable approach to space, design, materials, finishings, and environment is required for new builds. The kind of housing we need most urgently doesn’t reflect what is promoted in local magazines.
Victoria councillors could consider taking a more thoughtful and rigorous approach when approving housing proposals and choosing those options that will truly respond to our housing needs. Giving housing developers a pass due to decreased profits isn’t the answer.
Pat McGuire
Victoria