Vancouver Infill & Lowrise Updates Discussion

[Feathered Friend]

Opposition to Affordable Seniors’ Housing Wants to Preserve “Million Dollar Views” for Those who “Deserve Them”

2230 Harrison Drive
As Hannah had a late night volunteer meeting, I decided to head down to Victoria and SE Marine Drive area to learn more about this proposed below market seniors housing expansion. Plus, as the event was held at the Finnish Home, I thought I might get to try some unique snacks. While there was some Finnish Candy and Spice Bread, I never would have imagined that these 72 homes would face an uphill fight against their neighbours.

While I tried to take in the project boards, I was drawn to a commotion by the building model where a group of a neighbours were badgering staff. Clearly upset, they couldn’t understand why the City would fund these below market homes which would block their views. Staff tried to explain that even though this was below market housing, it was privately funded. Unfortunately, no one was interested in listening, insisting that the concept was good, but the homes belonged in a different location.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/07/04...dollar-views-for-those-who-deserve-them/

[officedweller]

Thanks.

I would expect that that's just the first of several redevelopments along that stretch.
This site is one of 3 existing Finnish Canadian Rental Housing buildings - the other 2 are to the west.
Never knew there was a concentration of Scandinavian care homes there.


http://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/2230harrison/index.htm

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Thnkas.

I would expect that that's just the first of several redevelopments along that stretch.
This site is one of 3 existing Finnish Canadian Rental Housing buildings - the other 2 are to the west.
Never knew there was a concentration of Scandinavian care homes there.

When I spoke to members of the Finish Home development team, they indicated that the other two buildings are in good condition, and estimated that they still have another 10-15 years of life left.

That said, I did hear some comments that the German-Canadian Care Home might have some news sooner than later. When that day comes, I'm hoping for pork hocks, bratwurst, and lager!

[Feathered Friend]

Tensions Spark at City Hall – Are Staff Too Afraid to Fix the Critical Flaws of the Marpole Plan?

8636 – 8656 Oak Street
It’s no secret that Hannah and I feel that the Marpole Plan has been a complete failure. Those feelings resurfaced at the recent open house for this rental housing proposal. What I didn’t expect at this UDP Meeting was to hear everyone in the room, the panel members, the applicant, and even city staff echo those feelings...

...The majority of panelists, once again, expressed their deep frustration with the requirements of the Marpole Plan. Their comments highlighted the many ways the plan fails to respond to other city polices, and the demands of our city. They felt that requiring a separation between buildings would only make rents more expensive, and result in less homes on the site.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/07/05...-the-critical-flaws-of-the-marpole-plan/

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

When I spoke to members of the Finish Home development team, they indicated that the other two buildings are in good condition, and estimated that they still have another 10-15 years of life left.

That said, I did hear some comments that the German-Canadian Care Home might have some news sooner than later. When that day comes, I'm hoping for pork hocks, bratwurst, and lager!

Thanks. What's on the menu from Iceland? Blubber?

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/07/04...dollar-views-for-those-who-deserve-them/

I'm sorry, but this is the kind of thing I expect out of folks from the West End or the North Shore.
Ignoring that stereotype, how goddamn disconnected from reality can you be to think saying anything remotely in the same context is a sensible thing to say at all and to do so on the record? Part of me understands why the article doesn't give names.

When I suggested they could request permit parking on the street, this person decried the idea of paying an extra “tax” (a permit would cost about $40 a year).

These people want to live in a goddamn bubble. This has to be satire. I refuse people this stupid can exist let alone coexist with a spine.

[Feathered Friend]

UDP Debates Whether the Wants of Harrison Drive’s Few Outweighs the Needs of Vancouver’s Many Seniors

2230 Harrison Drive
One thing that never ceases to surprise Hannah and I is the blatant hypocrisy of some of those who attend open house events. From groups who “support” growth, as long as it’s not near them, to those who complain that low-rise buildings result in large areas of shade, yet support families being stuck in mortgage helper basement suites, we’ve seen it all. So, I wasn’t surprised to hear the applicant team reveal that one of the nearby single family home owners, who complained about the height of this building, also asked if they could get a suite if these below market homes were approved.

While a panellist joked that this was a valuable project as their own hair was getting grey, I don’t think anyone was impressed that a million dollar home owner would expect to be entitled to below market housing. Similarly, another member thought it was time this very timid 1961 CD1 zoning was updated. They were shocked that such an extremely beneficial project, funded by the people who live there, was only allowed 2 FSR.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/07/09...hs-the-needs-of-vancouvers-many-seniors/

[GenWhy?]

Good comments where they are needed. Let it be known that when given more flexibility in height and density that design can improve and benefit the surroundings.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Thanks. What's on the menu from Iceland? Blubber?

Hákarl.

[Vanville]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

That said, I did hear some comments that the German-Canadian Care Home might have some news sooner than later. When that day comes, I'm hoping for pork hocks, bratwurst, and lager!

https://www.gcch.ca/our-care-home/redevelopment-proposal/
Photo taken from the GCCH website:

[Feathered Friend]

Family Neighbourhood Fears New Rental Housing Will Lead to (Parking) Wars

686 East 22nd Avenue, 3811-3833 Fraser Street & 679 E 23rd Avenue
When the pre-application open house for this proposal was held back in November, the reception seemed muted, but generally supportive. However, as we made our way to this event, Darren joked that perhaps it was just the cold weather which had held people’s passions in check, as opposition to similar proposals in the neighbourhood has since grown. For instance, a recently approved proposal for a 6 floor building that would provide 58 non-market seniors homes was criticized by about a dozen people for being too tall and out of character for the area...

...Shortly after, a different person approached Darren and started to scream that they recognized him from an event in Kitsilano, and now they would make sure to remember his face in the future. This left my partner understandably quite shaken, and he shrunk away to fill out a feedback form afterwards.

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/09/13...ental-housing-will-lead-to-parking-wars/

[misher]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/07/05...-the-critical-flaws-of-the-marpole-plan/

Done up by bureaucrats in offices who aren't prioritizing housing supply increases and don't live anywhere near the plans they are proposing.


The Marpole plan is a failure, the amount of development is a joke and we're barely having density increase. They are structuring Marpole like its a backwater suburb instead of making it another city center. I strongly suspect the cheap rental supply down there kept them from going ambitious out of fear of having existing rentals knocked down.

[GenWhy?]

You're quite correct, about the second part, but unsure how tearing down one of the largest collections of the City's older and less expensive rental units would be good for renters or the city?


The plan was almost mainly implemented to deter issues that we see with Cambie, though in protecting older rental buildings, while adding townhomes along Oak / Granville and 10+ storeys on Ganville. The real plan was the Cambie Corridor in conjunction with densification of Marine Station while preserving industial lands (a large segment of area within the plan).

It's not perfect, but that's democracy.

[whatnext]

Some shots of Intracorp's Belpark, under construction a couple blocks east of Cambie on W.59th.

It's stumbling across projects like this that make me wonder what people are smoking when they say there is a "supply problem". There is so much supply being built away from the flashy towers like Vancouver House its mind-boggling.

[IMG]image1 by whatnextyvr, on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG]image2 by whatnextyvr, on Flickr[/IMG]

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Some shots of Intracorp's Belpark, under construction a couple blocks east of Cambie on W.59th.

It's stumbling across projects like this that make me wonder what people are smoking when they say there is a "supply problem". There is so much supply being built away from the flashy towers like Vancouver House its mind-boggling.

As supply gets built the COV population is simultaneously expanding quickly. Growth is around 1% a year so that’s 6000 people a year which means we need around 3000-4000 units a year just to keep up. Which is the equivalent of about 20-30 buildings being competed every year. A good measure of supply is the rental vacancy rate. COV’s is one of the lowest in North America and I believe it’s under 1%. This indicates we need much more housing as it’s all full of people. Lower rent won’t increase the amount of people in housing as there’s no extra housing to go around. A healthy vacancy rate that’s normal in most cities would be much higher.

The point of the empty home tax was to force people to add supply to the market.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by misher

As supply gets built the COV population is simultaneously expanding quickly. A good measure of supply is the rental vacancy rate. COV’s is one of the lowest in North America and I believe it’s under 1%. This indicates we need much more housing as it’s all full of people. Lower rent won’t increase the amount of people in housing as there’s no extra housing to go around. A healthy vacancy rate would be higher than 4%.

supply isn't the problem, the problem is most things being built are high end, many are left vacant and are not put on the market. the population and construction of new properties have pretty much kept up with each-other.

the problem is people using Vancouver real estate as a stock market/bank.

[Galaxy]

The flashy high-end units of today will age and in 30+ years down the line, it will become the affordable housing for the next generation. Like anything housing does get old over time the technology, building envelopes etc all age so today's new expensive housing will be the future affordable housing. What we need though is a greater mix of types of housing in sizes and a good mix of ages that fit a broad category of the population. I do think that it would be nice if builders built more of the mid-level housing as an option for the local population especially now with a slow down in the super luxury market.

[misher]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

supply isn't the problem, the problem is most things being built are high end, many are left vacant and are not put on the market. the population and construction of new properties have pretty much kept up with each-other.

the problem is people using Vancouver real estate as a stock market/bank.

Cough cough, and what do people who buy housing as an investment do with that housing? They rent it out and provide a home for someone ������

People buying homes as investment do not take away from the rental pool, in fact a large chunk of the rental pool comes from investors.

Right now the rental pool is maxed so we really need more investors. More investors=increased pace of development=more rentals. Scaring away investors means less supply is built as no one can afford the high wages to increase construction more than it already is.

And luxury condos are not what we need right now. However, more luxury condos means a lot of money going to the COV to pay for amenities and social housing (I believe a big chunk of the COV’s budget comes from these now?). Also more luxury condos means people leave their mid level condos so someone else can live in them. So every luxury condo built opens up a home for someone else.

In the end everything is math and economics and no homes are lying empty so it’s clear we need to build build build until we actually have some empty homes like a normal city.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by misher

Cough cough, and what do people who buy housing as an investment do with that housing? They rent it out and provide a home for someone ������

People buying homes as investment do not take away from the rental pool, in fact a large chunk of the rental pool comes from investors.

that is partly true. but if you look deeper into it you will see that many places that are owned, are vacant. they are NOT put on the rental market.

this is why they decided to put in a tax to try to discourage that. had investors actually been putting their places on the market, there would be no need for a vacant tax. yet i heard estimates of 10,000 units were sold, bought, owned yet left vacant.


you're assuming all the properties that are not lived in are being rented, that is a flawed assumption that has been proven to be wrong.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by misher

Cough cough, and what do people who buy housing as an investment do with that housing? They rent it out and provide a home for someone ������

People buying homes as investment do not take away from the rental pool, in fact a large chunk of the rental pool comes from investors.

Right now the rental pool is maxed so we really need more investors. More investors=increased pace of development=more rentals. Scaring away investors means less supply is built as no one can afford the high wages to increase construction more than it already is.

And luxury condos are not what we need right now. However, more luxury condos means a lot of money going to the COV to pay for amenities and social housing (I believe a big chunk of the COV’s budget comes from these now?). Also more luxury condos means people leave their mid level condos so someone else can live in them. So every luxury condo built opens up a home for someone else.

In the end everything is math and economics and no homes are lying empty so it’s clear we need to build build build until we actually have some empty homes like a normal city.

That's rubbish on may levels.

First many units are left vacant, or lived in part time when mommy comes to visit the kids she dumped in a Canadian school.

The capital would be far better directed at purpose built rentals. There's absolutely nothing stopping offshore investors from buying Canadian REITs.

At current price points everything built in the CoV (which contains 3 of our biggest employment hubs) would be considered "luxury". Offshore money bidding up land prices has ensured that. I believe those Belpark units start at @ $1.5 million.