83 replies to this topic

[spanky123]

In a strata, it's not the elected council that makes the decisions like it is with municipal politics.  All it takes is one stuck, fearmongering holdout to prevent a change a marjority of owners want.

 

Are you saying that the elected strata council doesn't make decisions? How does one holdout prevent the strata council from making a decision?

[sebberry]

But collectively you manage your own strata. And decide prior to buying in if you like it.

 

Using my strata as an example:  when I moved in, a maximum of 9/27 residential units could be rented at one time.  I don't think we ever passed 2-4 rented under this bylaw.  Not long after I moved in, owners dropped it to 5. We recently tried to raise it to 7, but that failed, with owners (who moved in when it was 9) complaining that the sky would fall.  Even if all the residential owners wanted to increase it, we had the commercial hold-out who opposed it anyway, likely out of retaliation for other ongoing issues.

 

So, I welcome a change that dials back the hyper-local, backstabbing strata politics that screws over owners.

[sebberry]

Are you saying that the elected strata council doesn't make decisions? How does one holdout prevent the strata council from making a decision?

 

A bylaw change in a strata requires 3/4 of the owners voting at a general meeting approve the change. If there are commercial units and the strata plan isn't sectioned, the resolution also must be passed by a 3/4 vote of the commercial units.  In theory this is good as it prevents the strata from imposing unreasonable bylaws on the operations of the commercial units, however it opens the door to retaliatory opposition by the commercial units.  In my case, there's one commercial owner, so this effectively gives them veto power over any bylaw change.

[Mike K.]

Classic misdirection. No one cares about the forms... We have the missing middle forms everywhere already.
The opposition is thus:

1. The removal of community rights to have a say in what is built in their established communities.
2. The upheaval of established neighbourhoods character and functionality.
3. The potential for it to make housing more expensive by making every property a development opportunity.
4. The potential that it will replace existing low cost inventory like suites and rooms for rent with new and unaffordable places.
5. The undemocratic fast track process that was attempted in implementing MMH.

Bingo.

[lanforod]

The removal of age restrictions for all but 55+ tells me everything I need to know about how sincere Eby is about all this. Pandering to voters, as usual. If he had real cohones, he'd remove age restrictions everywhere. 55+ prevents boomers from having their university student kid live with them, etc etc.

"The 19+ age restrictions in some stratas will be abolished so that young families don’t have to move out if they have a child. Strata restrictions for ‘seniors only’ will remain in place to ensure seniors have accessible retirement communities."

[sebberry]

The removal of age restrictions for all but 55+ tells me everything I need to know about how sincere Eby is about all this. Pandering to voters, as usual. If he had real cohones, he'd remove age restrictions everywhere. 55+ prevents boomers from having their university student kid live with them, etc etc.

"The 19+ age restrictions in some stratas will be abolished so that young families don’t have to move out if they have a child. Strata restrictions for ‘seniors only’ will remain in place to ensure seniors have accessible retirement communities."

 

The 55+ exists to keep pricing low in those buildings so that seniors on their fixed incomes aren't priced out of retiring in a blissful array of bleached oak cabinetry and pink carpets.  

[sebberry]

Here's an interesting one - our strata prohibits more than three people form living in a two bedroom unit.  Unexpectedly discover your pregnancy is with twins?  You get to move.

 

The only other set of condo bylaws I've seen has an occupancy limit of 10.  

[lanforod]

Your strata sucks

[Nparker]

Stratas can be a hugely invasive and restrictive form of local government...

No one is forced to live in a strata.

[sebberry]

No one is forced to live in a strata.

 

I suppose I could pitch a tent in the nearby park?  What's your alternative?

[Nparker]

Canada is a VERY large country , with lots of available housing options. With the relative ease of teleworking available to many people these days, living in larger urban centres really is a choice.

[sebberry]

Canada is a VERY large country , with lots of available housing options. With the relative ease of teleworking available to many people these days, living in larger urban centres really is a choice.

 

Thank you for knowing everything there is to know about me

[Mike K.]

I do think we’re going to see way more people giving up on the urban grind and instead moving to small communities.

This island is full of small towns that offer a lot of promise without the challenges in the cities.

[Nparker]

I am pretty sure I never made reference to you (sebberry) at all. I simply suggested there are alterate housing options available.

Edited by Nparker, 29 September 2022 - 01:56 PM.

[Barrrister]

Sebbery sometimes thinks everything is about them. 

[todd]

I do think we’re going to see way more people giving up on the urban grind and instead moving to small communities.

This island is full of small towns that offer a lot of promise without the challenges in the cities.

Why not focus on making those areas more liveable. Creating new vibrant communities that people desire

 

it’s a joke to say it’s a necessity to build up our current urban centres in a country that has the second largest landmass and a population smaller than california

[dasmo]

Why not focus on making those areas more liveable. Creating new vibrant communities that people desire

it’s a joke to say it’s a necessity to build up our current urban centres in a country that has the second largest landmass and a population smaller than california

This is driven by the UN’s agenda 2030 sustainable development goals. Globalism doesn’t care about local details…

[dasmo]

I didn’t get a say in this agenda… Yet it’s being pushed down our throats. Lisa has explicitly stated she is “inspired by this agenda” and has given two talks at UN conferences. Is she accountable to us? Or them? How about other politicians?
“ 52. “We the peoples” are the celebrated opening words of the Charter of the United Nations.It is “we the peoples”who are embarking today on the road to 2030. Our journey will involve Governments as well as parliaments, the United Nations system and other international institutions, local authorities, indigenous peoples, civil society, business and the private sector, the scientific and academic community— and all people. Millions have already engaged with, and will own, this Agenda. It is an Agenda of the people, by the people and for-the people— and this, we believe, will ensure its success.”

https://sustainabled...lopment web.pdf

Edited by dasmo, 29 September 2022 - 09:30 PM.

[Nparker]

...it’s a joke to say it’s a necessity to build up our current urban centres in a country that has the second largest landmass and a population smaller than california

Especially when building outside of the existing urban centres is almost guaranteed to be cheaper.

[Mike K.]

Why not focus on making those areas more liveable. Creating new vibrant communities that people desire

it’s a joke to say it’s a necessity to build up our current urban centres in a country that has the second largest landmass and a population smaller than california

Right. It’s pretty wild.

And in Europe the EU is planning Tricity, a massive, sprawling city from Brussels to Germany that makes Amsterdam the EU capital, which faces out towards London, the UK capital.