Evaluating Public Value

[7-minute read]

Executive Summary

This paper explores how governments recognize public value when that value spans multiple ministerial responsibilities. Although it uses housing as its case study, its central question is broader than housing policy alone.

The recently announced federal–provincial partnership to acquire approximately 2,200 newly constructed, unsold condominium units represents an innovative approach to addressing housing affordability while expanding access to homeownership through public acquisition and rent-to-own pathways.

This submission supports that objective.

It also asks whether, in carefully defined circumstances, governments should retain limited discretion to evaluate exceptional resale properties that generate measurable public value beyond housing alone.

Using one Vancouver condominium as a case study, this paper explores whether carefully designed principal-residence operating models can simultaneously advance objectives relating to health, housing, entrepreneurship, tourism, arts and culture, local procurement, accessibility, community development, and broader economic participation.

Rather than recommending a broad expansion of public acquisition to resale housing, the paper proposes a cross-ministerial public value framework through which exceptional housing assets may, in carefully defined circumstances, be assessed according to the total public value they generate.

Ultimately, it asks whether governments should preserve the flexibility to recognize exceptional cases whose measurable public benefits extend across multiple policy domains.

Purpose of this Submission

This paper does not advocate expanding public acquisition to resale housing generally, nor does it seek special treatment for an individual property.

Instead, it invites governments to consider a broader policy question:

Should governments retain limited discretion to evaluate exceptional principal-residence operating models capable of advancing multiple public policy objectives while generating measurable public value?

The proposal recognizes the importance of recent reforms intended to discourage speculative investment, housing hoarding, and inappropriate short-term rental activity. Those reforms pursue important public policy objectives and should continue to do so.

The question raised here is narrower. In pursuing those objectives, have current policy frameworks also reduced governments' ability to recognize exceptional principal-residence operating models that are demonstrably distinct from speculative investment and capable of advancing broader public interests?

Accordingly, this paper proposes not a new housing program, but an evaluation methodology through which exceptional housing assets may, in carefully defined circumstances, be assessed according to the total public value they generate rather than solely their residential function.

Defining Public Value

For the purposes of this paper, public value refers to measurable benefits generated across multiple public policy domains.

These may include, but are not limited to:

• Housing

• Entrepreneurship

• Tourism

• Arts and culture

• Employment

• Accessibility

• Local procurement

• Community participation

• Neighbourhood revitalization

• Fiscal sustainability

• Long-term economic participation

The central question is not whether every housing asset should be evaluated this way.

It is whether governments should retain the flexibility to do so in carefully defined exceptional circumstances.

Why This Question Matters

Housing policy has traditionally evaluated residential property primarily through the lens of shelter. Yet homes have long served purposes extending well beyond accommodation. They support entrepreneurship, generate tourism, enable artistic and creative practice, facilitate local procurement, strengthen neighbourhood economies, and create opportunities for education, mentorship, and community programming.

Increasingly, governments evaluate major public investments through multiple policy lenses simultaneously.

Hospitals are evaluated not simply as health facilities, but as drivers of research, employment, education, and regional development. Transit investments are evaluated not solely by transportation outcomes, but by housing, climate, productivity, and economic growth. Convention centres are assessed according to tourism, trade, employment, and tax revenues.

This paper asks whether the same multidimensional approach may, under carefully defined circumstances, also be appropriate for evaluating certain housing assets.

Beyond Market Value

Recent reforms addressing speculative investment, housing hoarding, and inappropriate short-term rental activity pursue important public policy objectives.

This submission supports those reforms. Its purpose is not to weaken them. Rather, it distinguishes speculative ownership from principal-residence entrepreneurship.

Canada has a long tradition of homes supporting economic activity through bed-and-breakfasts, farms, artist studios, live-work spaces, home offices, and other home-based enterprises. These models have historically enabled Canadians to build equity while contributing to local economies.

This paper asks whether that same principle might be thoughtfully adapted to contemporary condominium ownership, recognizing that condominiums have become the primary form of homeownership for many Canadians.

Housing as Productive Civic Infrastructure

This paper proposes that, in carefully defined circumstances, housing may be understood not simply as residential infrastructure, but as productive civic infrastructure.

A single principal residence may simultaneously function as:

• Housing

• Tourism accommodation

• Entrepreneurial workspace

• Cultural venue

• Educational environment

• Community gathering place

• Creative studio

• Local procurement hub

When these activities are intentionally integrated, one housing asset may contribute simultaneously to multiple public policy objectives.

The question therefore becomes not simply,

What is this property worth?

but rather,

What public value is this property capable of generating?

Accessibility and Inclusive Economic Participation

Flexible principal-residence entrepreneurship may expand opportunities for individuals who face barriers within conventional employment.

This may include:

• Persons with disabilities

• Survivors rebuilding after violence

• Caregivers

• Artists

• Founders

• Individuals living with episodic health conditions

For many people, entrepreneurship is not merely a career choice.

It is an accessibility strategy.

My own experience rebuilding after surviving near-fatal cross-border intimate partner violence demonstrated that, for some individuals, housing is not simply where economic participation occurs after work—it is where economic participation becomes possible.

Policies that recognize productive principal residences may therefore strengthen not only entrepreneurship, but also resilience, independence, housing stability, and long-term economic participation.

A Case Study

"Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody."
— Jane Jacobs

The following case study illustrates why I believe this question deserves consideration.

Beginning in 2019, I rented a privately owned condominium in Wall Financial's Strathcona Village development at 933 East Hastings Street in Vancouver.

The development represented a significant milestone in the evolution of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside Oppenheimer District as the area's first large-scale market condominium development. Combining market strata housing, social housing, commercial space, and legally permitted principal-residence short-term rentals, it was conceived as a mixed-use community intended to generate multiple forms of public value through housing, neighbourhood revitalization, economic activity, and community investment.

In many respects, the development itself embodies the principle explored in this paper. It was evaluated not solely as a housing project, but as infrastructure capable of advancing multiple public policy objectives simultaneously.

One such unit was retained by Vancouver developer Bruno Wall within his personal portfolio and, in 2021, he offered me the opportunity to purchase it.

The unit occupies an unusually strategic position within the development. Located on the north-west corner of the building, it offers panoramic views across Vancouver while sitting minutes from Gastown, Chinatown, Rogers Arena, BC Place, the Port of Vancouver, Hogan's Alley, and the city's expanding arts, tourism, and innovation districts.

Combined with the building's legally compliant principal-residence short-term rental framework, these characteristics created an asset capable of supporting substantially more than conventional residential use.

By that point, I had moved eight times in four years while rebuilding my life following severe cross-border intimate partner violence, which resulted in permanent disabilities.

Like many Canadians pursuing homeownership, I viewed the opportunity as more than a real estate transaction. It represented stability, the opportunity to build equity, and the foundation from which to build a business.

Those objectives quickly became inseparable.

Over the following two years, I developed the operating model attached as s.t.u.d.i.o.86 – Concept Overview & Growth Plan.

Initially described as a "Destination Airbnb," the concept evolved into what I now describe as a Strathcona Village Arts & Culture Residency—a principal residence intentionally designed to integrate tourism, entrepreneurship, arts and culture, education, and community programming within a single operating model.

The objective was to transform one housing asset into a diversified platform capable of generating returns across tourism, arts and culture, entrepreneurship, neighbourhood partnerships, local procurement, and community programming.

Although initially conceived around one condominium, the concept ultimately informed the development of s.t.u.d.i.o.86, This Woman's Truth, and Eden Technologies, demonstrating how one housing asset became the catalyst for multiple entrepreneurial and public-interest initiatives.

Ultimately, financing fell through as lending conditions tightened amid changing market conditions and evolving short-term rental regulations.

The transaction did not proceed.

Yet the broader policy question remained.

A Financing Gap

Current financing systems continue to distinguish primarily between residential and commercial property.

Traditional lending frameworks generally distinguish between residential and commercial uses. Principal residences intentionally designed to integrate lawful residential and entrepreneurial functions may therefore struggle to fit existing financing models despite their potential to generate measurable public value.

As a result, productive housing models may encounter barriers to financing even when they align with broader government objectives relating to entrepreneurship, accessibility, tourism, cultural participation, and local economic development.

This gap suggests that current financing frameworks may not yet fully recognize emerging forms of productive principal-residence entrepreneurship.

The Cost of Unrealized Opportunity

When productive housing models fail to proceed, governments may lose opportunities extending well beyond housing itself.

Potential impacts include:

• Reduced entrepreneurship

• Diminished tourism activity

• Fewer cultural initiatives

• Lower local procurement

• Reduced accessibility

• Unrealized tax revenue

• Diminished community programming

• Lost economic participation

These opportunity costs are rarely measured because traditional housing evaluation remains focused primarily on market value.

A Proposed Public-Interest Evaluation Framework

Rather than proposing a new housing program, this paper proposes an evaluation methodology.

Governments already assess major public investments according to their capacity to generate value across multiple policy domains.

This paper asks whether a similar analytical framework might, in carefully defined exceptional circumstances, be applied to certain individual housing assets.

Possible evaluation criteria could include:

Eligibility

• Principal-residence requirement

• Demonstrated operating model

Economic Contribution

• Measurable economic activity

• Entrepreneurship

• Tourism contribution

• Local procurement

Social Contribution

• Accessibility

• Cultural participation

• Community programming

Accountability

• Measurable outcomes

• Ongoing reporting

• Periodic evaluation

Such a framework would remain exceptional rather than routine.

Although this paper focuses on one condominium, the underlying framework may have broader application wherever governments evaluate assets capable of generating public value across multiple policy domains.

Conclusion

The federal–provincial condominium partnership represents an important innovation in Canadian housing policy.

This submission supports that initiative while asking whether governments should preserve limited flexibility to recognize exceptional principal-residence operating models capable of generating broader public value.

Ultimately, this paper is not about one condominium.

Nor is it principally about housing.

It is about how governments recognize public value.

As policy challenges increasingly span multiple ministerial responsibilities, exceptional assets may likewise generate benefits that extend across housing, entrepreneurship, tourism, arts and culture, accessibility, economic development, community resilience, and fiscal sustainability.

The question is therefore not whether a property is new or resale, residential or commercial.

The question is whether governments have recognized all of the public value it is capable of creating.

Author's Note

This concept was developed while I was a long-term tenant of the condominium used as the case study. Since completing the underlying business concept, I have been evicted, and the unit has been listed for sale.

Although my personal circumstances prompted many of the questions explored in this submission, the paper is intended to advance a broader policy discussion about how governments evaluate public value rather than to seek a particular outcome in my own case.

Appendices

Appendix A — s.t.u.d.i.o.86: Concept Overview & Growth Plan

Appendix B — Expansion Concept (Unit 901)

Appendix C — Recently removed from the market