Cambridge won't explore idea to build affordable housing over city parking lots

The City of Cambridge will not be looking into the possibility of building affordable housing over city parking lots.

The motion, brought forward by Coun. Scott Hamilton on Nov. 28, was discussed during a council meeting Tuesday night. It asked city staff to explore the possibility of building affordable housing units above city-owned parking lots and to report back with a list of potential locations for the creation of a pilot project.

It also asked city staff to share those findings with the Region of Waterloo, whichis in charge of building affordable housing.

Council heard from several people, includingthose representing groups like Citizens for Cambridge, For The City and Yes In My Backyard, who were infavour of the motion.

"The possibility of using open space above city-owned parking lots for affordable housing seems a terrific opportunity that should at the very least be investigated," said Amanda Maxwell withCitizens for Cambridge.

Hamilton spoke to the motion, saying the city already has examples of housing being built over parking lots, such as anew build on George Street and St. Andrews Street.

"What makes this unique is that the city, the taxpayer, could retain ownership of the land," he said, adding it would also be affordable land for not-for-profit housing developers.

"So what that doesis hopefullyincentivizepeople to come and build homes that people can actually afford because the cost of the land is recused tremendously."

Hamilton added herecognizednot all parking lots will be ideal for the project.

Concerns around costs, staff availability

The motion did get push back from some councillors, including Coun. Mike Divine and Mayor Jan Liggett, who cited concerns around full parking lots, construction costs and the availability of staff to look into the idea.

"Most of the parking lots are full and if we put buildings over top of them, I can assume that 50 per cent of the people may have vehicles, so that's going to increase the intensity in the parking lots. We need to find a better way and I'm not sure this is the way," Divine said.

Liggettsaid using downtown parking lots would not be suited for the project and it would be better for local churches or organizations like the YMCA or YWCA to take it on.

"These are not surplus lands. These are in-use parking lots," she said. She also said city staff would have to stop their current work to explore the feasibility of the motion.

"One would say that all we're doing is asking fora report to respond toquestions, but I can see that this will go to the next stage, where staff will be forced to stop or delay doing other work they're required to do," Liggett said.

"To pretend otherwise is false. To sayany of us who don't vote in favour is against helping with the lack of affordable housing is false," she added.

Councillors voted 5-4 against the motion.