I am referring to the latest Olympics buzz in Vancouver...about the housing complex called "Olympic Village" that was constructed (in high fashion, mind) to house Olympic participants. During construction, 252 units of the posh housing complex were promised by the city as social housing for low-income families, a promise that, according to the Globe and Mail article on the issue, is not likely to be kept. As the article details, the 252 units meant for social housing have already incurred a huge deficit, which the city had to pay. Now the developers owe the city money not only for the land and construction, but also for the bail-out. Although profits from the Olympics would pay off the construction and bail-out debt, it is not likely that the city will be reimbursed for the land on which this housing complex is built. On top of all this, it is very likely that any units converted to social housing would charge a high rent to make up for all the losses the city incurred, which only people with a certain income can afford.
Its clear that the whole thing was badly managed and not well thought out. First of all, the need for the Olympic village is perplexing in itself - I am sure athletes could very well have managed living in hotels. Secondly, posh housing complexes are not very economically viable to serve as social housing. How is it that no-one saw these hurdles and obstacles before going ahead with the project? As humans, one of our biggest flaws is our terrible foresight when it comes to things like this. We have always thought in terms of crisis management, and remedial measures instead of thinking pro-actively and enforcing preventive measures. Unless this attitude changes, we will always face economic issues.
