The reason this hasn’t blew up is because it’s not as much of bombshell as one might think. Looks like you’re conflating two things: the definition of affordable housing vs housing affordability targets. The definition of “what is affordable housing” hasn’t changed, it’s still 30% if income.
CMHC updated its affordability benchmark which is its own separate thing it uses to track progress on affordability levels. It might sound the same but these are separate things. For example, we can still build projects that are in the “affordable housing” category but if whether we build enough of it is one of the factors in the hit or miss of the affordability benchmark set as the levels observed in 2019.
Thanks for your comment and the article. The link didn’t resolve for me but I’d guess that was a globe and mail article.
Was the affordability benchmark not the same as the affordable housing definition (from 2003 or whenever) until this reports and the decisions behind it at the CMHC this year decoupled them?
No, these have always been different things. They were similar numbers, one was and still is 30% and the other was close to 30% nationally in 2004 (but for BC the benchmark was already >40% for example) but these numbers were not “linked”, they were close to each other - which was a good thing, hence why it was a good benchmark at the time.
This did get media coverage: https://archive.is/ABVDl
The reason this hasn’t blew up is because it’s not as much of bombshell as one might think. Looks like you’re conflating two things: the definition of affordable housing vs housing affordability targets. The definition of “what is affordable housing” hasn’t changed, it’s still 30% if income.
CMHC updated its affordability benchmark which is its own separate thing it uses to track progress on affordability levels. It might sound the same but these are separate things. For example, we can still build projects that are in the “affordable housing” category but if whether we build enough of it is one of the factors in the hit or miss of the affordability benchmark set as the levels observed in 2019.
Thanks for your comment and the article. The link didn’t resolve for me but I’d guess that was a globe and mail article.
Was the affordability benchmark not the same as the affordable housing definition (from 2003 or whenever) until this reports and the decisions behind it at the CMHC this year decoupled them?
No, these have always been different things. They were similar numbers, one was and still is 30% and the other was close to 30% nationally in 2004 (but for BC the benchmark was already >40% for example) but these numbers were not “linked”, they were close to each other - which was a good thing, hence why it was a good benchmark at the time.
Thanks for the info!