3483 replies to this topic

[lanforod]

Could UVic build more student housing we get initiated with students who don’t have enough housing every fall year after year .
Could UVic build small no frills apartments maybe one price for students and have a percentage mixed use at a slightly higher rate .

 

UVic is working on student housing; 625 net new beds by 2023 or so.

[sdwright.vic]

New rental developments won't be more affordable unless they skip the outer neighbourhoods and suburbs altogether and go straight for the farmland and wilderness? Now I'm seeing what you were getting at re: infrastructure issues.

Brand new rental in View Royal/ Esquimalt (Craigflower/ Admirals) in a old hotel are going for around $1500 a month.

The new rentals on Boelskine in Saaich will be starting at that much.

So yes, to get affordable, density will need to "go straight for the farmland and wilderness".

Edited by sdwright.vic, 24 July 2018 - 06:18 AM.

[sdwright.vic]

Even my old building (1978) is $1250 a month now (for new renters) plus $50 for parking.

Edited by sdwright.vic, 24 July 2018 - 05:24 AM.

[Sparky]

^^ 15K a month?

[sdwright.vic]

Oops $1500 a month.... hadn't had enough coffee

[aastra]

 

So yes, to get affordable, density will need to "go straight for the farmland and wilderness".

 

Methinks economists will be puzzling over Victoria's unique situation for centuries to come. The only place in the world where less valuable things are equally as expensive as more valuable things.

 

We should note that the largest municipality in Victoria *still* accounts for only 12% of the city's rental stock, despite the fact that this housing crisis has been grinding away for decades. Giving Saanich a pass for its lack of rentals during the 1960s/1970s crisis is one thing, but giving Saanich a pass today and going forward seems quite absurd to me. Let the record show that little Esquimalt has almost as many rental units as all of Saanich (Saanich is 15x the physical size of Esquimalt). Let the record show that single neighbourhoods in Victoria city have as many or more rental units than all of Saanich. Saanich is 50x the physical size of James Bay. James Bay has more rental units.

 

 

FYI: this rental market report shows a pretty clear difference in rents between newer stuff and older stuff.
 

I wish someone would call my bluff and build 10 or 20 large rental buildings on the properties adjacent to Uptown. If nothing else it would get me off Saanich's proverbial back re: inefficient land use.

[aastra]

Summary: Victorians need to drop this idea that the only areas eligible for new stuff are a) the very heart of the city or b) the most distant suburbs/wilderness. An elephant named Saanich is right frickin' there, trying hard not to be noticed.

[Mike K.]

Folks aren’t particularly thrilled about development in Langford, either. The concensus is the only good development is city-centre development.

[Nparker]

...The concensus is the only good development is city-centre development.

And look how much furore even that generates from neighbourhood associations and NIMBYs.

[Mike K.]

Right, neighbourhoods outside of the city centre. I guess what I mean is downtown and periphery areas are the only reasonable areas for development as far as the status quo is concerned.

 

But then can you blame the status quo? Prior to the current administration the narrative was that if you (the CoV resident) grant us (politicians and planners) the power to densify the downtown core and build high density, highrise dwellings, we'll (the CoV) leave your (the taxpayer) single-family-dwelling neighbourhoods alone.

 

But fast-forwarding to 2018, officialdom has backed itself into a corner by:

- decrying suburban development and "sprawl," despite our region experiencing very, very little actual "sprawl"

- proclaiming Victoria and environs are in a housing crisis like never before

- proclaiming Victoria and environs are in an affordability crisis like never before

 

So what does that leave? Densification of urban single-family-dwelling-centric neighbourhoods that thought they were off the hook by agreeing to concentrate density in downtown Victoria and periphery.

[tjv]

Methinks economists will be puzzling over Victoria's unique situation for centuries to come. The only place in the world where less valuable things are equally as expensive as more valuable things.

 

We should note that the largest municipality in Victoria *still* accounts for only 12% of the city's rental stock, despite the fact that this housing crisis has been grinding away for decades. Giving Saanich a pass for its lack of rentals during the 1960s/1970s crisis is one thing, but giving Saanich a pass today and going forward seems quite absurd to me. Let the record show that little Esquimalt has almost as many rental units as all of Saanich (Saanich is 15x the physical size of Esquimalt). Let the record show that single neighbourhoods in Victoria city have as many or more rental units than all of Saanich. Saanich is 50x the physical size of James Bay. James Bay has more rental units.

 

Victoria_Rental_Market_Report-Number_of_Apartments.png

 

FYI: this rental market report shows a pretty clear difference in rents between newer stuff and older stuff.
 

I wish someone would call my bluff and build 10 or 20 large rental buildings on the properties adjacent to Uptown. If nothing else it would get me off Saanich's proverbial back re: inefficient land use.

Here is the reality, most of the rental housing in the CRD was built during the 60's and 70's when for the most part Saanich and other communities were considered the suburbs where people bought houses with yards for their kids to run around on.  The "city" was where the density was.

 

Then came the 80's/90's/and most of the 00's.  Regulations came in that were not in the landlords favor so they stopped building rental apartments and prices during the 80's and 90's were still low so I don't believe there was demand for a lot of apartments when you could get a nice house for less than 200k.

 

These regulations are still there, limited by caps a landlord can increase the rent by even if the value of the asset increased by 15% per year.  Its extremely difficult to get rid of a bad tenant even if they don't pay rent.  Also the government is expecting you to hand over a 200k asset with only a tiny ~$750 damage deposit

 

Landlords are in the business of making money, not social workers.  They are also not there to supply subsidized rentals because they are still expecting a landlord to continue renting for say $900 a month, when the unit next door can be rented for $1500 because the tenant moved out.  I looked at investing in rental, but the returns are pathetic with a massive risk

[sdwright.vic]

Summary: Victorians need to drop this idea that the only areas eligible for new stuff are a) the very heart of the city or b) the most distant suburbs/wilderness. An elephant named Saanich is right frickin' there, trying hard not to be noticed.

The issue is when new stuff IS getting built in these areas the rental cost us equal to that of the new downtown stuff. Developers aren't looking at things as not being downtown as being lesser... they are seeing it as equal.

[Mike K.]

So you're saying a woodframed one-bedroom apartment built in Langford is renting for the same price, to the penny, as a concrete one-bedroom apartment in downtown Victoria?

[sdwright.vic]

No I am saying a woodframe in Saanich or Esquimalt us renting for the same. New wood frame rentals in Langford, when you equate additional travel expenses/ time might as well be the same.

[lanforod]

that has little to do with developers. It's still supply and demand. I'm not at all surprised that renting in Saanich is equally desirable to renting in downtown Victoria. If landlords are able to rent their buildings for the same prices as downtown, more power to them. The lower supply of rentals in Saanich does play into why rents in Saanich are relatively high, but I also think its quite desirable, particularly for small families, retirees, and people who don't work downtown (eg. UVic employees).

[aastra]

 

If landlords are able to rent their buildings for the same prices as downtown, more power to them. The lower supply of rentals in Saanich does play into why rents in Saanich are relatively high....

 

The abundance of rental options within Victoria helps to keep the rents within Victoria down, whereas the scarcity of rental options outside Victoria helps to keep the rents outside Victoria up.

[tjv]

The issue is when new stuff IS getting built in these areas the rental cost us equal to that of the new downtown stuff. Developers aren't looking at things as not being downtown as being lesser... they are seeing it as equal.

I could care less about living downtown.  Lets say I was interested in renting a condo for fun.  Lets see I can have a nice unit in say Saanich with views of a golf course, etc or I can live downtown and have views of the crack head shooting up, lights and sirens from the police and ambulance all night and the homeless guy sleeping in the doorway of my building in the morning.  And maybe I don't work downtown either?  Plus lots of great shopping and restaurants outside of downtown too

 

From the above I would expect downtown prices to be less than the suburbs

[PPPdev]

Attached Images

• 

[RFS]

I feel like the colours should be reversed

[Mike K.]

The disparity has a lot to do with banks stipulating that you can’t be spending more than 35% on your mortgage, insurance, power and taxes. Some banks can push that up a notch, but many won’t even let you cross 33%.

On the rental side there is no control or oversight. You could spend 80% on rent.