It's important to distinguishing between building affordable housing that is publicly owned, versus making housing affordable by providing vouchers (section 8).
The former approach locks in affordability, the latter is subject to the market price swings mentioned in this article.
I'm not familiar with the specifics of Alberta 72, but I suspect the affordability created there is based on a tax exemption, so would not be quite as volatile as section 8 housing.
Funny, that tag has been up for weeks and probably seen by thousands of cyclists passing by, but not really paid attention to by the construction crews, based on their not complete respect of the bike lane with their construction trash.
There's huge swaths of under-utilized land in Southeast Portand from the river to 12th ave and more over near (yup) South Waterfront. Meanwhile, pricey condos sit empty. If developers just detached from their hive mind and listened to the market, we'd have affordable housing. Instead we had a bubble because income never kept pace with the superstition that raising rent every 6 months is good business practice. We have the land and the demand. We need smarter developers.
Can we please stop calling it "affordable" housing? As chris smith clearly demonstrates, the issue here is SUBSIDIZED housing. If there were true "affordable" housing in this city, government wouldn't be involved in either its construction or management.
The former approach locks in affordability, the latter is subject to the market price swings mentioned in this article.
I'm not familiar with the specifics of Alberta 72, but I suspect the affordability created there is based on a tax exemption, so would not be quite as volatile as section 8 housing.