Langley Times - Bateman takes issue with housing editorial

The Times' website has published a letter to the editor I wrote regarding their housing affordability editorial:

Your recent editorial, "Greedy Government"(The Times, Jan. 27), does a grave disservice to the work of local governments when it comes to affordable housing.

All local taxpayers should be troubled by your unsupported comment that Development Cost Charges are too high. DCCs are calculated by the cost of what it takes to service a lot with water, sewer, drainage, and parks. There is no profit or gouging by the municipalities - the costs are simply calculated and divided by the lots being built.

Surely you are not suggesting that existing residents should heavily subsidize new residents moving in? This infrastructure must be paid for, and it should be paid for by those who are benefiting from it - not the rest of us.

You also claim property taxes as being too high (although they would need to be even higher if we followed your suggestion and cut DCCs). But look at the value for money. A townhouse with all the urban services will pay more for its Shaw bill (with telephone, HDTV cable box, another cable outlet, PVR, and Internet connection) than it will for the municipality's share of property taxes (which gives them police and fire protection, clean water, a working sewer, streets that don't flood, great parks and recreation amenities, roads, snow clearing, and other Township services).

I also disagree that there is no "glaring" price difference between Vancouver and Langley home prices. In Vancouver, $615,000 will get you a brand new, 2 bedroom, 2 bathroom, 779 sq. ft. condo on Smithe St. But in Murrayville, $609,000 will get you six bedrooms, four bathrooms, three levels, your own yard, and 3,445 sq. ft.--all brand new. Plus you'll save $240 a month in strata fees - that's pretty much your total monthly property tax bill, with school taxes, transit levies, library tax, and everything included. That's glaring.

The comment that local government has done "nothing" to help housing affordability is unfair. The Township of Langley has mandated, quite aggressively, that a mix of housing be built in Willoughby, at a higher density than ever seen before in Langley. We are seeing condos, townhouses, rowhouses, fourplexes, compact single-family homes, and other options being built in Willoughby, all of which offer different price points for different needs. Further, the Township has created a bylaw to allow mortgage-helping secondary suites in single-family homes. And the City of Langley has the highest per capita number of affordable housing units in all of Metro Vancouver.

There is no doubt that housing affordability is a significant issue in the region. But to lay the blame on local government is unfair. Can we help it that the Lower Mainland is such an incredibly desirable place to live? Where does personal choice come in? Do all new homes need granite counter tops, top-of-the-line appliances, and other luxuries? Perhaps that has an effect on the cost? Or what about the marketing costs for developers looking to sell in a crowded marketplace - perhaps The Times should cut their ad rates for new developments? And what about land values, driven up by a dwindling supply thanks to the firm urban containment boundaries we have - the mountains, the ocean, the border, and the Agricultural Land Reserve?

Local governments must balance all the interests in our community, including the ones of existing residents who don't feel they should be stuck with the bill for growth. Yes, we need to continue to look at our development processes and charges and find ways to streamline and manage them. Time is money, and we should be looking to save builders and buyers both. But we must balance the livability of our community and make sure we keep Langley a place where people want to live. True housing affordability will take adjustments by buyers, land owners, builders, and all levels of government.

Councillor Jordan Bateman
Langley Township