1731 replies to this topic

[grantpalin]

Modern shared laundries do not involve coins, they use cards.  And if they are awesome, they include 3x sized machines like some at a laundromat.  At least you get some extra bang for your troouble.

Where I live now (one unit over and across the hall from the laundry!) we use magnetic cards that can be topped up at a terminal in one of the laundry rooms. Way less hassle than tracking coins!

[lanforod]

^ that sounds easily hackable. Then again, coin ops are too.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ that sounds easily hackable. Then again, coin ops are too.

 

If it is, it's hackable with no damage.  The problem with coin-up is people tearing the machines apart to get quarters.

[Nparker]

...The problem with coin-up is people tearing the machines apart to get quarters.

To use in their own, old-school, laundry machines? 

[VicHockeyFan]

People break/slip into apartment buildings, condos even to get into laundry rooms. Not usually the residents.

[gstc84]

Where I live now (one unit over and across the hall from the laundry!) we use magnetic cards that can be topped up at a terminal in one of the laundry rooms. Way less hassle than tracking coins!

 

That's convenient. At my last building, we had magnetic cards but for some reason the top-up terminals were at various Mac's stores around town. And were often out of order. Or would eat my $20 and not add the credit. I spent many late night hours wandering around convenience stores on hold with Coinamatic when all I wanted was clean socks.

[Midnightly]

If it is, it's hackable with no damage.  The problem with coin-up is people tearing the machines apart to get quarters.

 

 

this used to happen in our building all the time to the point where the company pulled their machines because they were tired of coming to fix it

[sdwright.vic]

I had an issue topping up my card once. Didn't load, but was charged. Immediately tried again, loaded. Because i used my debit, I disputed with my bank and got the first one back.

[sebberry]

Several public speakers lined up now to address council on the short term vacation rental issue...

 

http://victoria.ca.g...=2&event_id=869

[VicHockeyFan]

Kimberley Hughes, general manager of the Delta Victoria Ocean Point Resort, said that a recently hired manager at the hotel was unable to find an apartment in Victoria and now commutes from Langford. Yet when tourist season is over, there will be “600 to 800 empty short-term rentals,” she estimated.

 

 

That does not seem like a crisis.

[VicHockeyFan]

The head of the DVBA commutes in to Victoria.

 

Three of nine City councillors commute in from Saanich.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 23 June 2017 - 05:24 AM.

[sebberry]

I love how 1/3rd of city council has to excuse itself from these discussions due to conflict of interest...

[DavidL]

It was an interesting meeting.  The anti STVR group at the start was obviously well organized and coordinated, all asking for the same things and referencing each others material.  The 600 - 800 empty short term vacation rentals at the end of the tourist season comment makes absolutely no sense, not only in terms of an outright made up number but also in the sense that why would they sit empty?  From experience I can say that a 70-80% occupancy rate is pretty normal year round, with most seasonal dips coming in October and November.

 

The tales of woe about how employees have to live, horror of all horrors, in Langford and commute instead of being able to live the carefree downtown lifestyle I felt were a little over the top.  Here's a thought, pay them more.  Now they can afford to live downtown.  Here's another thought, 20% of your property is vacant year round, why not create some staff housing?  Or are you too busy not providing space to the homeless with your empty rooms because you want me to rent my condo to your employee for undermarket rates so I can subsidize the dream of living downtown?

 

The guy from the snappily named citizens coalition against short term vacation rentals focused on the idea that strata owners in fact have no rights with respect to the use of their property and that legal non conforming uses can be ignored as a legal principle if transient use is down zoned.  Wrong on both counts.  Certainly a strata can choose to restrict the use of their building, but the threshold is purposely set high so as to protect individual rights from a minority mob mentality which seems to have developed around this issue.  Transient zoning is already quite valuable so moving forward will only be increasingly so.  A strata that chooses to restrict this use is certainly doing themselves economic harm.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ I agree David, it's all a little over the top.  Problem is that TAPS etc. know they have an audience that will listen in Victoria.  And make goofy decisions.  They won't even try that to approach Saanich councillors, the councillors would listen, but actually then think it through.  Saanich is the worst "offender" by far in terms of housing, if you think things should get built.  Most people live in Saanich, not Vic.  But Saanich people are by and large fine with things, no special interest groups operate there.  

 

Sometimes I wish we had only the problems of Saanich.  Financial impacts of a special zone on multi-million dollar waterfront homes is their only housing "crisis".

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 23 June 2017 - 07:13 AM.

[Mike K.]

That's because the social housing industry is deeply entrenched in Victoria. There are some Saanich properties, but that's not ground zero.

[gsihin]

Hello. I am a new Airbnb host (since June) and find myself in the midst of Victoria enforcing regulations.

 

I invested in a home with two suites in Fairfield. I became I've had good experiences as a traveller. I travel using airbnb because it's more affordable, it can have a living room and kitchen that allows for socializing with travel companions, and I prefer to be in a residential neighbourhood than off a major road or downtown. 

 

Until the Tenancy Act provides owners with more rights than tenants, my preference is to continue short term rentals since it's not yet "enforced" by the Act, ironically ensuring I have more rights as an owner.  There are pros and cons to both long and short term rentals. I was a landlord of 3 apartments in Toronto for 10 years, where I had renters stay for longer than 2 years... and some for 5. I've also had renters not pay and had to wait 2 months before they left (that, I'm told is a relatively a short duration of major annoyance). I've considered both short and long term rentals thoroughly and am inclined to accept the cons of short term rentals in order to 1. make the most money I can from my investment and 2. protect my property as best I can. In my opinion, the Act is actually NOT helping the city's issue of not having enough long term rental properties. If the city cannot afford to build affordable housing for its residents and thus must rely on investors to provide additional accommodations, the city should really be making a better effort to thank people like me who don't buy houses and leave them empty purely for long term benefits, or absentee landlords who don't care what goes on.

 

And there clearly seems to be a big push by Tourism Victoria and hotels. Isn't competition healthy? Perhaps the city should consider how Airbnb promotes Victoria tourism by providing a more affordable alternative to travellers.  

 

With all the reporting in the paper lately, my neighbour has become unhappy because he says this "hotel" affects the quality of his home. I don't get it. All my guests so far has been courteous and respectful. There has been no noise issue whatsoever. Would my neighbour be happier if I rented out to a bunch of rowdy students who party every weekend? I will try to have a conversation with him about this. ARGH.

 

Has a group formed in support of short term rentals? I don't mind paying my share of taxes and having some regulations in place. However, those regulations shouldn't be written to shut down anyone who wants to make a little money and be fair to the property owner. It is expensive to live in Victoria. Shouldn't we be able to do what we can to better our living situations? ... even if I already have a roof over my head?

 

 

 

 

[sebberry]

Welcome, gsihin, thanks for providing your perspective!

[spanky123]

^^ Airbnb has an 'ambassador' in Victoria who lobby's on behalf of their local clients. The local 'tourism' industry wasn't too concerned when they had 500 units out of circulation for renos and were seeing record room and occupancy rates. Now that those rooms are coming back into the pool they want the rules changed for their own benefit as you would expect.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about any enforcement. If a City inspector shows up at your front door then just tell them that you will file a complaint against the Mayor's landlord and they will scurry away.

Edited by spanky123, 26 June 2017 - 06:12 AM.

[Jacques Cadé]

A sensible op-ed in today's paper: http://www.timescolo...sing-1.21082373

 

Our guests seldom stay for less than a week, but frequently for a month or more. As a short-term vacation rental, we occupy a space the local hotel industry has abdicated: the long stay and the snowbird.

We offer a pet-friendly, fully serviced private suite with washer and dryer, fully equipped kitchen and private patio. Where are these facilities in the current hotel market? Whose market are we eroding?

[spanky123]

^ I have been making the same point as the author for a while. All of the free and subsidized accommodation that the City is now providing to the homeless from across the country is coming from somewhere. Those 400-600 units (planned over the next couple of years) all came from the affordable housing market. Now that we have taken that capacity, surprise, surprise we have a shortage of affordable housing.

 

The Mayor and her comrades keep forgetting that for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction. Their continued interfere in economic drivers just creates an equally important problem in an adjacent sector.