Affordable housing was initially introduced under the Rental 100 program in 2012 when construction costs were significantly lower than today’s. Rents were tied to 30% of median income, meaning developers typically constructed affordable units and operated them without any profit or loss. Building these units without any incentive constituted an “amenity” for the city and waived the Development Cost Levies (DCL) and later the Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) charge.
Affordable housing’s intention is to be non-subsidized housing, keeping rents within a reasonable range for people to afford and still allowing the building to operate without any profit or loss.
Social housing has low rental rates and is heavily subsidized by the operator, which is commonly taxpayer dollars.
Over the last decade, these two distinct types of housing have blended as people expect social housing rents when they hear about affordable housing. A good example is Burnaby requiring “affordable housing“ to be 20% below Canadian Mortgage Housing Companies’ (CMHC) average rents. These rental rates are significantly below sustainable levels and require the units to be consistently subsidized by the operator, so they are incorrectly labeled “affordable housing“ when they should be labeled “social housing.”
First, we must clarify the difference between affordable and social housing. Social housing is a massive burden on society and kills the feasibility of new development, which should only be mandated under unique circumstances. Affordable housing should be net neutral in terms of profit and loss on building and operating the units, providing long-term viability. Making the affordable housing units viable means we must keep adjusting the allowable rents as building costs and median incomes rise. Keeping rents at reasonable levels will reduce incentives for tenants to sublease units, raising the barrier for bad actors. Finally, there needs to be penalties if a tenant illegally subleases a unit. Having consequences for gaming the system will create huge disincentives and remove the need for costly government oversight.
Affordable housing may be a worthwhile amenity if implemented correctly, but we need to ensure its long-term feasibility with proper checks and balances in place so society doesn’t end up in an inevitable scandal a decade from now.