Social Housing in Vancouver - The 14 Sites

[SFUVancouver]

I expect that the full sale price of the properties was applied to the provincial balance sheet at the time of sale, too. After all, accounts receivable are still assets.

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by misher

Onni seems universally hated everywhere in Metro Vancouver

Overall I'd prefer local over foreign, but this is a minor factor. A big developer who has a reputation to defend is preferred over a small developer with Onni being the exception. Also concrete over woodframe. And a developer who has built the same or a similar building before over one thats new and unheard of.

I love PCI and ASPAC because they are spending over a decade building developments that are similar to the last building they built and refining/improving the development each time. This makes for much less risk as they've done the same thing before and you can look at their last building next door to judge how the next building will be.

Onni has brought the hate onto themselves with shady business deals that goes back years. Look at the rental building they built down town that they turned into AIRBNB for years before they got caught. Then they got a slap on the wrist. Fast forward a couple years they got approved to turn it into an airbnb hotel again as there was not enough hotels in downtown. But if you ask the hotel industry they are empty because of airbnb.

I work in the industry and shake my head when I hear about some of the deals that happen. From land getting zoning where it has no business changing to land purchases that dont get paid for until the zoning happens to permits being closed on stuff that is still unfinished.

But it could be worse and then we call that place Montreal or Chicago toronto

[Vin]

Originally Posted by whatnext

"The province is still owed $137 million for Pearson-Dogwood, $233 million for Little Mountain, and more than $250 million from the 2016 sale of the Oakridge Transit Centre — totalling $620 million in outstanding payments."

Sickening, but totally expected from the scammers that make up the BC Lieberals.

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I expect that the full sale price of the properties was applied to the provincial balance sheet at the time of sale, too. After all, accounts receivable are still assets.

It's not like those lands sold are productive or benefit the people of British Columbia, unlike the federally-owned Granville Island. Might as well sell it to developers while they still could. With the depressed land price now, perhaps that was a smart thing to do. At least the province is still owed the money, and not simply a write-off scenario we are talking here.

[Sheba]

Government of Canada invest in housing across British Columbia

Every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable place to call home. That is why the Government of Canada launched Canada's very first National Housing Strategy, a once-in-a-generation investment to fight homelessness and improve access to affordable housing for Canadians and signed a new memorandum of intent (MOI) with the British Columbia government.

Today, the Honourable Jean-Yves Duclos, Minister of Families, Children and Social Development and Minister responsible for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), and Spencer Chandra Herbert, MLA for Vancouver-West End, on behalf of the Honourable Selina Robinson, British Columbia’s Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, announced a $75 million investment through the National Housing Strategy to support construction of 1,500 units of affordable housing across the province.

The MOI, signed by CMHC and BC Housing, outlines a five-year federal government investment that will help build 1,000 new units planned under the province’s Building BC: Supportive Housing Fund, and 500 new units planned under the Building BC: Women’s Transition Housing Fund.

...

The Government of Canada is currently rolling out its National Housing Strategy (NHS), an ambitious 10-year, $55 billion plan that will create 100,000 new housing units and lift 530,000 families out of housing need, as well as repair and renew more than 300,000 housing units and reduce chronic homelessness by 50 percent.

...

In total, BC Housing will invest $1.2 billion through the Province’s Supportive Housing Fund to build and operate up to 2,500 units of supportive housing for those who are experiencing, or at risk of, homelessness, and another $734 million through the Women’s Transition Housing Fund to build and operate up to 1,500 new units serving women and children at risk of experiencing violence.

To address the issue of housing affordability for British Columbians, the Government of B.C. is curbing speculation in the province’s housing market and building 114,000 affordable market rental, non-profit, supported social housing and owner-purchase housing through partnerships.

Budget 2018 launched the most significant investment in housing affordability in B.C. history – more than $7 billion over 10 years. As a result of that investment, in less than two years, more than 21,000 new homes are completed, under construction or in the approvals process in communities throughout B.C.

I can't help but wonder how much of this is election pandering...

[SFUVancouver]

Pandering or not, and it is pandering, this is still good news. The evidence is clear: housing for homeless people improves health outcomes and reduces public expenditures vs not housing them.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Government of Canada invest in housing across British Columbia



I can't help but wonder how much of this is election pandering...

Isn't everything?

[WarrenC12]

Another article from CTV calls it $184M for "Over 1100 units" in the City of Vancouver. Is this a different announcement?

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/feds-pledge-184m-t...ble-housing-units-in-vancouver-1.4539841

Anyway, more details:

The first of the federally-funded affordable housing developments is a co-op that's currently being built in Vancouver's River District, and set to open next year with 140 units.

The full list of projects slated for construction includes:

1001 Kingsway
1210 Seymour Street and 560 Davie Street
177 West Pender Street
3310 Marine Way
3279-3297 Vanness Avenue
1190 Burrard Street and 937 Davie Street
3183, 3245 Pierview Crescent
288 East Hastings Street
2305-2344 Vanness Avenue

[Vin]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Pandering or not, and it is pandering, this is still good news. The evidence is clear: housing for homeless people improves health outcomes and reduces public expenditures vs not housing them.

Again, a balance needs to be made. Too many freebies without conditions actually harm people, especially when it's done at the expense of the hard-working middle class, who can only afford to be housed further and further away from their work. One can't be spoiled rotten to achieve productivity: follow-ups are necessary.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

Again, a balance needs to be made. Too many freebies without conditions actually harm people, especially when it's done at the expense of the hard-working middle class, who can only afford to be housed further and further away from their work. One can't be spoiled rotten to achieve productivity: follow-ups are necessary.

Do you have any evidence that this spending is "freebies without conditions" or are you just talking out of your ass?

These projects are for below market rentals, not homeless people.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by Vin

Again, a balance needs to be made. Too many freebies without conditions actually harm people, especially when it's done at the expense of the hard-working middle class, who can only afford to be housed further and further away from their work. One can't be spoiled rotten to achieve productivity: follow-ups are necessary.

Yes absolutely

It's always funny when it's suggested to build social housing outside of the core. Like god forbid social housing is in the burbs. Lol

[cov]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

Yes absolutely

It's always funny when it's suggested to build social housing outside of the core. Like god forbid social housing is in the burbs. Lol

would like to see more social housing in single-family neighborhoods for sure, commercial and Nanaimo comes to mind.

[whatnext]

Wow, sounds like some pretty major problems wth the building at Dunbar and 16th. How does this still happen? It's not rocket science!

Only nine years after a local company was paid $8.5 million to construct a 51-unit social housing building in Vancouver, provincial taxpayers are on the hook for extensive repairs there expected to cost $4.5 million.

It’s not clear who is responsible for the deficiencies at the Dunbar Apartments on Vancouver’s west side. For now, the province is footing the bill for the repairs, which a building maintenance professional described as a “hugely unusual” amount of work for a building that new.

B.C. Housing, which owns the building, said by email that repairs and upgrades were expected to take 12 months using money drawn from the province’s capital renewal fund. It said it had identified “deficiencies with some of the materials and construction methods utilized on the exterior of the building.”..

...“The scope of work includes a complete replacement of the brick veneer and replacement of the metal cladding panels in some locations due to inadequate strength of material and installation methods,” said the statement from B.C. Housing spokeswoman, Laura Mathews. “Crews will also be removing and reinstalling all windows to ensure proper waterproofing.”

Mechanical upgrades are also underway in the basement parking level, Mathews said, and the balcony drains are being replaced, because “water is accumulating up to the emergency balcony overflow drains.”

Building maintenance professionals at four different Metro Vancouver companies spoke on the condition they would not be identified in print because they did not want to hurt their prospects for future work.

They all agreed: Even without having access to a detailed building condition assessment, the basic details of the problems at the Dunbar Apartments raise unusual red flags.

“For a building nine years old, that’s an awful lot of money. Something went wrong,” one said. “Something of that age shouldn’t be going through these problems, that’s not common.”...

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...y-unusual-problems-at-vancouver-building

[Vin]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Do you have any evidence that this spending is "freebies without conditions" or are you just talking out of your ass?

These projects are for below market rentals, not homeless people.

Evidence is out there for you to see: Billions sunk into the system and DTES/homeless issues are getting worse. Only you think that the system is actually working.

Below-market housing is fine, but we are referring to social housing here, as this thread suggests.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Wow, sounds like some pretty major problems wth the building at Dunbar and 16th. How does this still happen? It's not rocket science!

Only nine years after a local company was paid $8.5 million to construct a 51-unit social housing building in Vancouver, provincial taxpayers are on the hook for extensive repairs there expected to cost $4.5 million.

It’s not clear who is responsible for the deficiencies at the Dunbar Apartments on Vancouver’s west side. For now, the province is footing the bill for the repairs, which a building maintenance professional described as a “hugely unusual” amount of work for a building that new.

B.C. Housing, which owns the building, said by email that repairs and upgrades were expected to take 12 months using money drawn from the province’s capital renewal fund. It said it had identified “deficiencies with some of the materials and construction methods utilized on the exterior of the building.”..

...“The scope of work includes a complete replacement of the brick veneer and replacement of the metal cladding panels in some locations due to inadequate strength of material and installation methods,” said the statement from B.C. Housing spokeswoman, Laura Mathews. “Crews will also be removing and reinstalling all windows to ensure proper waterproofing.”

Mechanical upgrades are also underway in the basement parking level, Mathews said, and the balcony drains are being replaced, because “water is accumulating up to the emergency balcony overflow drains.”

Building maintenance professionals at four different Metro Vancouver companies spoke on the condition they would not be identified in print because they did not want to hurt their prospects for future work.

They all agreed: Even without having access to a detailed building condition assessment, the basic details of the problems at the Dunbar Apartments raise unusual red flags.

“For a building nine years old, that’s an awful lot of money. Something went wrong,” one said. “Something of that age shouldn’t be going through these problems, that’s not common.”...

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...y-unusual-problems-at-vancouver-building

Everyone has an opinion.

I think its pretty clear what went wrong.

There wasn't a sufficient level of QC on the Project Management side to deliver this thing up to spec.

The issue is simple - they multiple levels of consultants design these things over complex for nothing. We seldom have qualified people assembling these building systems.

They are then reviewed by JR Engineers who get sent out into the field to review the work of a Senior design engineer.

The whole thing is a mess.

We have buildings still standing, dry and strong, from the 20's. With hand saws, common sense, and a handful of nails they built housing that still works today, nearly 100 years ago.

With CAD, 3 layers of consultants, and modern marvels of engineering and materials we build leaking piles of shit.

Some things don't need to be over complicated or improved.

Its so insanely frustrating.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Sheba

My friend just got a notice as he lives in the area: Notice of Rezoning Application and Open House for 3279 - 3297 Vanness Ave.

The proposal is for a six-storey residential building that includes: 102 social housing units, a FSR of 3.49, a building height of 22.7m, and 27 vehicle parking spaces and 208 bicycle spaces.

This has a public hearing coming up on Tues Oct 1 at Van City Hall. It'll be interesting to see how the road access works out - there's the Skytrain and bike path on one side (with no direct road access) and a (not wide) lane on the opposite.

[SpongeG]

I know someone who lives in Social housing in Kitsilano. I am sure every rental building has someone in their building who could live in Social Housing but don't. In our building, there are numerous renters who live on welfare or social assistance of some sort and have been in there for decades.

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by rofina

Everyone has an opinion.

I think its pretty clear what went wrong.

There wasn't a sufficient level of QC on the Project Management side to deliver this thing up to spec.

The issue is simple - they multiple levels of consultants design these things over complex for nothing. We seldom have qualified people assembling these building systems.

They are then reviewed by JR Engineers who get sent out into the field to review the work of a Senior design engineer.

The whole thing is a mess.

We have buildings still standing, dry and strong, from the 20's. With hand saws, common sense, and a handful of nails they built housing that still works today, nearly 100 years ago.

With CAD, 3 layers of consultants, and modern marvels of engineering and materials we build leaking piles of shit.

Some things don't need to be over complicated or improved.

Its so insanely frustrating.

If you know anything about the process you will find out deep down the owner decided to go with inferior or nonstandard material example beatle kill lumber or a different process of waterproofing that is supposed to be a better but yet unproven.

Many time on projects we are forced to adopt the new way or the owner will say we will correct that design change after. As sometimes it slows the project down. I recently finished a project that was designed to have the deck water drain into the building. Of course the envelope consultant never caught it at design stage so decks and walls were built that way. The majority of the decks were corrected with a work around. The rest were left to the owner to deal with a future date.

You cant compare our building standards to 100 year old buildings. The design is so different along with the material. When was the last time you saw a old growth clear 2x6. Today we build high energy efficient buildings with vapour/air barriers insulation etc. A 1920s house would leak heat out and the stucco, brick or siding would dry out. Today there is no heat loss.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by cairnstone

If you know anything about the process you will find out deep down the owner decided to go with inferior or nonstandard material example beatle kill lumber or a different process of waterproofing that is supposed to be a better but yet unproven.

Many time on projects we are forced to adopt the new way or the owner will say we will correct that design change after. As sometimes it slows the project down. I recently finished a project that was designed to have the deck water drain into the building. Of course the envelope consultant never caught it at design stage so decks and walls were built that way. The majority of the decks were corrected with a work around. The rest were left to the owner to deal with a future date.

You cant compare our building standards to 100 year old buildings. The design is so different along with the material. When was the last time you saw a old growth clear 2x6. Today we build high energy efficient buildings with vapour/air barriers insulation etc. A 1920s house would leak heat out and the stucco, brick or siding would dry out. Today there is no heat loss.

The owner? You mean the city/province specified inferior products? I don't think so. I'm sure it was inferior finishing by the contractor as is always the case. Also it's a total misnomer that new buildings are more energy efficient as a whole.

...A BC Hydro report earlier this year found that newer highrise buildings use twice as much electricity as highrises built in the 1980s, even though the newer buildings are marketed as energy efficient...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/glass-buildings-climate-change-ubc-expert-1.5231234

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

The owner? You mean the city/province specified inferior products? I don't think so. I'm sure it was inferior finishing by the contractor as is always the case. Also it's a total misnomer that new buildings are more energy efficient as a whole.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/glass-buildings-climate-change-ubc-expert-1.5231234

It happens all the time. One example is Beetle kill lumber. The leaky condo was mainly caused by code change and building practices.


To bad that they never posted what they used for comparison. As heat is nearly free in this city. I lived in a electric heat apartment and my bill was around 40 or so a month. My heat never turned on mainly laundry, oven and AV. If you look at your bill and see what your power usage is, its small compared to all the surcharges.

There is a few commercial all glass towers that are upgrading HVAC to become energy neutral as the bio mass creates enough heat t=that has been going to cooling towers to be stored and used at night.

Hydro usage has gone up from the 80s is alot do to culture more than actual heat usage.

How many families now have TV's in every room, computers stereos and fridges that are a 1/3 bigger than what you could get 30 plus years ago.

[s211]

Originally Posted by cairnstone

It happens all the time. One example is Beetle kill lumber. The leaky condo was mainly caused by code change and building practices.


To bad that they never posted what they used for comparison. As heat is nearly free in this city. I lived in a electric heat apartment and my bill was around 40 or so a month. My heat never turned on mainly laundry, oven and AV. If you look at your bill and see what your power usage is, its small compared to all the surcharges.

There is a few commercial all glass towers that are upgrading HVAC to become energy neutral as the bio mass creates enough heat t=that has been going to cooling towers to be stored and used at night.

Hydro usage has gone up from the 80s is alot do to culture more than actual heat usage.

How many families now have TV's in every room, computers stereos and fridges that are a 1/3 bigger than what you could get 30 plus years ago.

BUT: also consider electricity usage being forced upon us by the City. Newer projects can't use natural gas, so electric ranges, electric heat, electric fireplaces; it all adds up.