1896 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Any idea what the rough rental population is? Not sure if there is any kind of stats for that, though the census must speak to that?

So, 1200 rental units is great for the region, but does that even make a dent in the vacancy rate? Or does 1200 new rental units bump the vacancy rate to 10%. I really have no idea.

I believe, but please don't quote me here, that there are some 55,000 purpose-built rental apartments in the region. This does not include condos-turned-rentals and secondary suites.

So 1,200 units, plus nearly 1,000 that have been built since 2010 will make some impact, but we're also growing as a region so we really need to sustain this level of construction for the next 20 years to accommodate growth, replace aging inventory and keep pace with growing local demand.

In terms of percentages, with all that's currently under construction at least we won't be seeing a further erosion of the rate and will see some lift. What this also achieves is it gives people living on the worst rental conditions to better their situation when someone else vacates their better unit to move further up the chain themselves, and so on.

New stock, even if it's at the high end, still has a tremendous trickle down effect throughout the entire market spectrum.

[Mr Cook Street]

^thanks! Definitely need to maintain the current pace for a few years before a real dent is made. 

[Nparker]

...we really need to sustain this level of construction for the next 20 years to accommodate growth, replace ageing inventory...

I think this part of the equation is often forgotten by many of the local low-density naysayers. A great deal of the CoV's current rental stock is close to 50 years old (or soon will be) and even with a significant reinvestment in these properties they won't accommodate any additional residents. Eventually there will be a need to replace the 4 storey projects that dominated rental construction in the 1960s & 1970s with - dare I say it - taller and more dense buildings.

[Dietrich]

One must be able to afford to move up the chain to something better, which many can not.

[aastra]

Rental market report from Fall, 2015:

https://www.cmhc-sch...A01.pdf#page=13

[North Shore]

Eventually there will be a need to replace the 4 storey projects that dominated rental construction in the 1960s & 1970s with - dare I say it - taller and more dense buildings.

Can't come too soon, IMHO. When I was a-courtin' Mrs.Shore, she lived at 1138 View. Any news, or hint of an earthquake was enough to have me chewing my nails for a week. The sooner all of those places are knocked down and replaced with something up to seismic code, the better!

[VicHockeyFan]

Can't come too soon, IMHO. When I was a-courtin' Mrs.Shore, she lived at 1138 View. Any news, or hint of an earthquake was enough to have me chewing my nails for a week. The sooner all of those places are knocked down and replaced with something up to seismic code, the better!

 

I don't think 3 and 4-floor wood-frames are that vulnerable.

[North Shore]

No, dude, solid concrete - and supported at her end, over the parking lot, by cylindrical steel pillars with ~ 3" diameter.

[VicHockeyFan]

No, dude, solid concrete - and supported at her end, over the parking lot, by cylindrical steel pillars with ~ 3" diameter.

 

Hmmmmmm.  Are we talking about an old 4-storey building?  Those usually have concrete first floors only.

 

I think you'll find that steel pole is not really holding much up.  Especially if it's where a car can hit it.  The weight is balanced elsewhere.

[North Shore]

Hm, you might be right, by Jove!  Just looking at the building again on street view (it's right next to the BMW dealership, on View) the bottom floor was definitely concrete, but you are correct that the top floors may well have been wood.  Perhaps my paranoia was mis-directed?  OTOH, the place was a dump, so it should be replaced anyway!

[Mike K.]

One must be able to afford to move up the chain to something better, which many can not.

That's where supply comes in. With enough supply, rates are depressed to attract tenants. When supply is tight rates will rise.

[Bingo]

 

Complaints over wrongful evictions are rising fast, according to the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre, and Gazzola can now count herself among thousands of B.C. residents who have fought evictions in the past year. Some critics and experts say the penalty for landlords found breaking the rules is too weak, allowing owners to consider it as a minor cost of doing business in a hot — and lucrative — rental market. 

 

Andrew Sakamoto is the executive director of the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre, a tenants protection group commonly called TRAC. He said it handles about 8,000 calls a year from concerned tenants.

There has been a major jump in calls about “bad faith evictions” in the past 12 months, 157 calls compared with 62 in the year prior, Sakamoto said.

“There’s a lot of money to be made right now with tenant turnover. As a landlord, you can set the new rent at whatever you want,” he explained.

http://vancouversun....-are-up-sharply

 

 

 

[VicHockeyFan]

Coun. Fred Haynes, who brought forward the original motion along with Coun. Leif Wergeland, said allowing homeowners to build suites in small, separate buildings likely will go a long way toward solving the housing crisis in the region.

 

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.4We1ETVk.dpuf

 

​While I appreciate the effort, that's way too optimistic.  Victoria has allowed them for years and I'm not sure if more than a half dozen have been built.

 

Believe it or not, the vast majority of resident homeowners are not wild about building rental suites in their back yards. 

 

Haynes estimated that Saanich now has about 30,000 single-family detached homes. If only 10 per cent take the opportunity to build a secondary house, that would be an additional 3,000 living units.

 

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.4We1ETVk.dpuf

 

You'd be lucky if 10% of homeowners know how to choose a painting contractor.  10% are not suddenly going to become building contractors.

 

The take-up is going to be tiny, unless there are some really (overly) generous incentives.  But there won't be, there will be so many restrictions and rules (like off-street parking requirements) that the whole thing will be a blip, for the money spent developing the plan. 

 

Haynes estimated that these units could be built for as little as $25,000 and go as high as anyone wants.

 

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.4We1ETVk.dpuf

 

Haynes if off base.  Water/sewer and electrical servicing, and foundation work will nearly cost more than this.  

[VicHockeyFan]

If Haynes wants 3,000 more housing units in Saanich, let's just build great a complex somewhere.  Hey, there is a piece of ALR land by the hospital that I hear has been recently cleared of trees.  Imagine a fantastic 3,000-unit rental village there.

 

Or out by PISE, Camosun and the Tech Park.  Lots of land out there.

 

Here's another idea, why doesn't Saanich ring the Cedar Hill Golf course with housing?  If you shorten the course up a bit, you do two things.  You make it play faster, and that's what golfers want these days.  AND, you can narrow the fairways a bit.  So now you have room at the top or bottom of a fairway for housing (shortened) and at the sides (narrowed).

 

You sell that land to developers for rental housing.  YES, you have to expand the existing parking lot a bit.  But no harm in rental housing where you have to walk 2.5 minutes to your car, it's good for you.

 

Plus you have the Cedar Hill and Finlayson bus routes nearby.

 

 

 

Another idea is temporary, or portable, some type of really innovative housing at UVic.  Get UVic engineering involved in design.  Use UVic "future-expansion" land.  NEW IDEAS folks!  UVic already has great transit, and you could  allow free/cheap "evening/weekend" parking in many lots there.  M-F, working folks and there cars are gone, or if they are home, they will have to pay high hourly rates.

 

 

[Mike K.]

I too think the garden suite expectations are overblown.

[VicHockeyFan]

I too think the garden suite expectations are overblown.

 

Developers that do not live there, they'll go for it, give them the right conditions.  Individual homeowners, that have to live with a shed in their backyard?  Nope.  People like lawns and gardens, not strangers in their back yards. 

[Arnold]

I had the pleasure of viewing the Capital Park Heritage rental suites yesterday. Impressive renovation project. Well done.

 

The cost however is a staggering reminder that the price of housing in Victoria is taking a sharp turn upwards. At between $2,200 and $ 2,700 per month for a 2 bedroom rental, that's a lot to swallow.

 

Sorry you have to Google Capital Park Heritage rental as my IE browser won't let me copy paste on this forum.

Edited by Arnold, 24 August 2016 - 07:45 AM.

[VicHockeyFan]

I had the pleasure of viewing the Capital Park Heritage rental suites yesterday. Impressive renovation project. Well done.

 

The cost however is a staggering reminder that the price of housing in Victoria is taking a sharp turn upwards. At between $2,200 and $ 2,700 per month for a 2 bedroom rental, that's a lot to swallow.

 

Sorry you have to Google Capital Park Heritage rental as my IE browser won't let me copy paste on this forum.

 

http://www.concertpr...-heritage-homes

 

[Arnold]

Thank you VHF.

[Jables]

Or an "O" shaped building that completely encircles View Towers so it becomes hidden from the rest of the city.

 

Strangely enough, there is already a precedent for that.

Edited by Jables, 24 August 2016 - 08:28 AM.