...Have we lost all perspective?...

If by "we" you mean CoV council then yes. They are trapped by ideology that hinders more than it helps.

Supply and demand is a part of housing affordability but is not the whole picture. We've had years where the rental vacancy rate increased and rental prices still increased year-over-year. The trickle-down economics of "just keep building more high-end housing and eventually everything else will be affordable to low-income people" is honestly comical to me at this point. I think that claiming this project will benefit affordability in the community is delusional.

That being said, as the mayor pointed out in the council meeting, there are far more affordable housing projects in the works around the city right now than there have been in decades (Firehall, Crosstown, Vic High development, Burnside School, 210 Gorge Rd, Yates and Meares supportive housing projects, etc.). That's the kind of stuff that is ultimately going to be the greatest net benefit to housing affordability in the CoV. She made the point that we can make room for higher end developments like this one as long as we continue to see momentum in building affordable housing alongside it. I'd agree with her on that point. Most that were in opposition (Isitt, Loveday, Dubow, Potts) argued that the affordable housing that is being built is not equitable between neighborhoods and affordable housing is rapidly diminishing in neighborhoods like Fairfield. I'd agree with them on that too, but I don't think it's enough for me to give it a "no" if I was in their position, given the benefits that I think the development would bring in terms of public realm improvements and the creation of walkable/bikeable neighborhoods.

It isn't actually comical at all. The fact is that we have yet to build the same amount of units as the amount of people that move in every year. For the supply to begin to decrease in price there has to be a lessoning of demand but if you only build a 1000 units and 5000 people move in, prices continue to go up as they have. You can't just say "But we built a thousand units! That should have been enough to impact price!"

true. but lower prices will also induce demand.

you can bet if we had lots of $100,000 condos available tens of thousands of them would be bought by people as a second or third or vacation homes.

or people would move here that otherwise would not “need” to move here to retire etc.

The government is both creating the problem, and working to solve the problem.

A huge portion of your purchase price is municipal costs, taxes on construction materials, development cost charges, amenity contributions, permitting, and finally, the public planning aspect that can take years for a 40-50 unit project.

true. but lower prices will also induce demand.

you can bet if we had lots of $100,000 condos available tens of thousands of them would be bought by people as a second or third or vacation homes.

or people would move here that otherwise would not “need” to move here to retire etc.

Possibly, but I don't think that prices would go down that significantly because there is an inherent cost to develop that is external to Victoria like the cost of steel and cement. Still when we restrict supply we do know for sure that prices will not fall especially as demand through in-migration increases. The TV slate is acting like deBeers with diamonds yet trying to get the opposite outcome.