By Nancy Flood, Lindsay Harris, and Kim Naqvi
Nearly everyone in our community has a story to tell about how the housing crisis has shown up in their life or the lives of someone close to them. From students who live in cramped quarters with multiple roommates, to young professionals who can’t afford to move out or start a family, to restaurant owners who can’t recruit employees who can afford the neighbourhood, to families at risk of homelessness because they were renovicted and can’t find another apartment with enough bedrooms—this housing crisis has the potential to impact everyone in our community.
We have a critical shortage of affordable homes in Kamloops. As we consider how this issue is impacting our community, and the solutions we can focus on to address it, we want to prioritize the following strategic approaches:
- Investing in solutions that are more likely to permanently address the problem and its root causes, rather than short term solutions;
- Allowing for an abundance of pathways and solutions that can include community-led solutions, in addition to private sector and government-led development; and
- Identifying multifunctional solutions that can compound health and financial benefits, such as improved food security and green spaces, walkable neighbourhoods, and decreased social isolation.
Housing is generally considered affordable if it costs less than 30% of a household’s before-tax income (CMHC). In Kamloops, the median household income in 2021 was $88,000. However, typically income for renter households is much lower than owner households. Half of all renter households in BC make less than $64,000 after tax, which means that a monthly rent of $1,600 is more than what half of all renter households can afford (Housing Central). According to Zumper.com, the median rent in Kamloops is $2,109, well above what the typical household can afford.
Housing is treated as a commodity and a means of accumulating wealth, not as a human right.
This means that average individuals and families in Kamloops are facing steeply unaffordable housing costs. This isn’t just an issue that affects those living in poverty, it affects everyone. It means households are more likely to experience food insecurity, have fewer resources to support local businesses, have less time to invest in their community, and experience a decrease in their wellbeing. A recent study by the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis in the Greater Toronto Area showed that there is a clear decrease in wellbeing due to housing unaffordability and an estimated total negative social value cost for residents living unaffordably in the GTA of $37 billion in 2023.
The housing crisis we’re facing has many interconnected causes: rising land and construction costs, population growth, increased development charges, and zoning restrictions, to name just a few. However, there is one root cause that is particularly important to identify: housing is treated as a commodity and a means of accumulating wealth, not as a human right. To understand this better, let’s first understand the housing continuum.
Understanding the Housing Continuum
A housing continuum is a visualization of the range of housing types available in a community. Many different versions of the housing continuum exist; while they consistently depict the progression from emergency shelter to home ownership, there is often variation in the middle section of the continuum. This version was developed to demonstrate the importance of the diverse models for delivering affordability in the middle of the continuum. It also highlights the importance of identifying de-commodified or non-speculative housing as a solution to the root causes of the housing crisis.
Non-Market Housing = Non-Speculative Housing
Housing is an essential public good and a key social determinant of health. The critical lack of safe, adequate affordable housing is particularly difficult to address from an upstream perspective, because housing is treated as a commodity, and increasingly, financial actors are using housing as a tool for investor profits (called the “financialization of housing”) and as a wealth-building asset.
Non-market housing is an important solution, because it permanently de-commodifies housing, decoupling it from the rapidly escalating real estate market. Stephan Corriveau, Executive Director of the Community Housing Transformation Centre suggests that we “rename ‘non-market housing’ to ‘non-speculative housing’: It needs to be made clear that the aim of non-market housing is, in fact, non-speculative.” In this kind of housing, rent is set at the cost to operate it, without a profit motive. While the costs to build and operate these homes may start off at non-affordable levels (given the high costs of land and construction), it quickly becomes more affordable over time. Check out this video from About Here that explains how this works.
Unfortunately, after several decades without public investment in non-market housing, we have very little of this type of housing in Canada. A report from the Federal Housing Advocate notes that social housing represents just 3.5% of Canada’s total housing stock, or 655,000 homes. Researchers Yushu Zhu and Hanan Ali describe how this current crisis stems from policies in the 1980s that restructured the housing system, cultivating a culture of homeownership and market supremacy.
A recent report by the CCPA makes the case that “A bold BC-wide plan to build a new supply of dedicated, non-market affordable housing should aim for a quarter of a million homes over the next decade.” The Federal Housing Advocate also suggests that government investments should prioritize non-market housing so it represents at least 20% of the rental housing stock in Canada, and the non-market housing sector should be supported to build its capacity to develop and operate more housing.
We envision an upstream solution: a supportive local ecosystem for grassroots advocates who want to collaborate to increase community ownership of wealth-building assets such as land, housing and local businesses. We believe this is an essential strategy to enable communities to exercise meaningful control over their local economic futures and address complex root causes of inequities in health and wellbeing.
The KFPC takes a systems-change approach to food sovereignty and housing for all. We acknowledge that colonial, capitalist, racist, patriarchal systems are holding unjust and inequitable food and housing systems in place. More community-based ownership of land and wealth generating assets can create meaningful community-led power for change.
“It is time to reorient housing systems across the world away from financialization and toward housing as a social good and fundamental human right” (Make the Shift).
The Importance of Housing Diversity
Think about your neighbourhood. Are you surrounded by people living in the same style of dwelling that you inhabit—a single family home on an individual lot, or an apartment or condo in a building with many stories? Many urban planners—and citizens—think that the best neighbourhoods are not homogenous, but feature a diversity of housing types that cater to different family sizes, ages, preferences, needs, incomes and lifestyles. Increasing the density and variety of homes in a neighbourhood has a wide range of benefits: it helps reduce the critical need for additional housing, increases affordability and creates places where a diversity of people can connect with neighbours. Planning such neighbourhoods to include green spaces or other public common areas, and to be within walking distance of amenities like grocery stores, schools, etc. allows people to be physically active, as they meet their needs close to home. It also creates opportunities for community gardens, fruit trees, food commons, and other community food assets (Happy Cities).
There are many options, with a variety of names, which often overlap: duplexes, 3-, 4- and 6-plexes, townhomes, fee simple row homes, basement apartments, walk-ups, laneway homes, co-op and co-housing developments, “bungalow courts,” etc. Neighbourhoods full of a diversity of homes like these—as well as a scattering of single-family homes and apartment/condo towers, concentrate more residents and tax revenue in a single area and make efficient use of infrastructure—including water and sewer mains, streets, sidewalks and transit routes. This type of housing is often referred to as the “missing middle” in many cities, and their absence is considered to be part of the affordability crisis.
Not only does the missing middle include a range of housing types, but also a diversity of development types: co-ops, market housing and a mixture of market and below market housing, and they can be community-led, developer-led, city-led, or collaborative projects. They surround, or create increased demand for offices, shops, restaurants, services—and thus allow people to work, play and meet their various needs near home, more often by walking or rolling (on bikes, in scooters, etc.) than driving. Such neighbourhoods are often described as “complete.” Research has shown that they create resilient, inclusive communities where people choose to live because they are happier and healthier, spending less time commuting, and have more access to nature, as well as increased social connection.
Examples of Complete Neighbourhoods
Complete neighbourhoods are identified as an important value in the City of Kamloops Official Community Plan (KAMPLAN). The KFPC emphasises two additional dimensions: 1) generous and integrated greenspace for recreation, natural processes, and gardens, and 2) incorporating ecosystem services into every aspect of a neighbourhood. It is useful to look at examples of how complete neighbourhoods have been used effectively in other places to create more community wellbeing. Some such examples include Toronto’s St. Lawrence neighbourhood, or Benny Farms in Montreal. You can learn more about these examples and how they can benefit our community in our blog post: The Importance of Complete Neighbourhoods.