Social Housing in Vancouver - The 14 Sites - Page 29

LeftCoaster · #**561** Posted **May 21, 2021, 5:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

That 1050 Expo Blvd site should be at least mid-rise.

I really do wonder what the plan is there. Strange it's been quiet for so long with all the other sites and many more progressing.

officedweller · #**562** Posted **May 21, 2021, 8:26 PM**

There's also the site at Beatty & Nelson that was slated for a 12 storey social housing building. I'll bet it'll be taller.

Sheba · #**563** Posted **May 27, 2021, 6:35 AM**

Vancouver rejects councillor's proposal to fast track future social housing towers

Quote:

Another multi-day council debate over a Vancouver housing proposal ended with the status quo prevailing.

On a 7-3 vote, council rejected a motion by Christine Boyle that would have asked staff to come forward with a future motion that could allow social housing buildings of up to 12 storeys to be built in certain neighbourhoods without a rezoning application.

Councillors Boyle, Jean Swanson and Mayor Kennedy Stewart voted in favour, with the rest voting against except for Michael Wiebe, who declared a conflict of interest.

"I'm disappointed that [rezoning], one of the strongest tools we have in our toolbox, the majority of council chose not to use last night," said Boyle on The Early Edition the next day.

"People can't live in imaginary housing, people need real housing, and it's our job to do everything in our power."

But Coun. Pete Fry, who voted against the motion, believed Boyle's motion wouldn't actually achieve those goals.

"I certainly acknowledge that there's a problematic history to how a lot of zoning is created, and the public hearing process is broken, and if we can expedite rezoning processes … then we should find ways to do it," he said.

"I don't think this, per se, was a tool to do it."

...

trofirhen · #**564** Posted **May 27, 2021, 12:08 PM**

I don't quite get it. Maybe Christine Boyle's motion was too radical But the rhetoric defending the defeat of her motion left me wondering "Why Not?"
To cut to the chase, perhaps a look at the French HLM ('Hébergement à Loyer Modére') or 'Housing at Moderate Rent' would be enlightening. Oh, and it's not just entire buildings that are sometimes dedicated and purpose-built for it. In numerous cases, the HLM apartments are sprinkled through buildings otherwise dedicated for market-rent housing. It seems to work (though the French paperwork is customarily cumbersome, and yes, there are in some cases pockets of immigrant-based poverty), nevertheless why not try something here in Vancouver. Sorry, I just don't get it. Perhaps I'm being too simplistic, but as I said, 'Why Not in Vancouver?'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_France#Different_kinds_of_social_housing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing

Vin · #**565** Posted **May 28, 2021, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheba

Vancouver rejects councillor's proposal to fast track future social housing towers

That's why Vancouver will never solve its homelessness crisis and drug problems. Too many elected councillors pandering to the Nimbys: must be a lot of them.

jlousa · #**566** Posted **May 28, 2021, 9:22 PM**

I think fasttracked any project because it fits the agenda of the day is asking for trouble. We should be looking at speeding up all applications and not picking favourites.

Migrant_Coconut · #**567** Posted **May 28, 2021, 9:51 PM**

It depends - if social housing, MIRHPPs or market rentals saved a developer a year's worth of applications, wouldn't we get more of them instead of condos? This kind of thing is effectively a municipal subsidy.

officedweller · #**568** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 7:29 PM**

Got this in the mail today:

990 Beatty - previously about 12 storeys - now 28 storeys.
1050 Expo Blvd (triangle site) - previously 9 storeys, now 29 storeys
450 Pacific St. - 7 storeys
Removal of non-market obligations for 431 Beach Cres, 1502 Granville and 900 Pacific Blvd.

Good to see the site taken to higher densities.

WarrenC12 · #**569** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 7:38 PM**

Great news. 990 Beatty in particular, a complete waste of valuable space for years. Any reason they aren't changing 450 Pacific as well?

officedweller · #**570** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 7:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Great news. 990 Beatty in particular, a complete waste of valuable space for years. Any reason they aren't changing 450 Pacific as well?

My guess is that the 450 Pacific site is too tight, though 10 storeys would be an improvement.

990 Beatty would be in a checkerboard to other towers
and 1050 Expo Blvd is on its own, so those can go tall.

Curious about the cancelled sites.
431 Beach Cres is across from King's Landing.
1502 Granville is west of Icon - would be good to get some commercial at grade facing Granville under the bridge.
900 Pacific Blvd is between Cambie Bridge ramp and the condos facing Cooper's Park - would also be good for commercial space in the lower levels to complement The Parq and One Pacific across the street.
Presumably, the increased density at the 2 sites compensates for the loss at the 3 sites?

Who would own those 3 sites?
If it's the City, would the City sell them off to developers, opening up the same dispute that occurred with 601 Granville (i.e. the transfer from Concord Pacific was only for the construction of social housing, not to flip and sell for a profit for market housing)?
Or did the resolution of that dispute open up the option to sell these off?

PS - interesting about the new fire hall - presumably to replace Yaletown Fire Hall #8 at Smithe & Hamilton (freeing up that site?),
although I thought the Smithe and Hamilton one was getting upgrades.

Heritage Vancouver worried about fate of modernist fire halls
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/couri...out-fate-of-modernist-fire-halls-3068277

Googled and found a Hive article dated 2018 on this - but I don't recall this going back that far?

650 affordable homes proposed for Concord Pacific sites in Yaletown
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouve...etown-affordable-housing-sites?auto=true

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouve...etown-affordable-housing-sites?auto=true

whatnext · #**571** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Got this in the mail today:

990 Beatty - previously about 12 storeys - now 28 storeys.
1050 Expo Blvd (triangle site) - previously 9 storeys, now 29 storeys
450 Pacific St. - 7 storeys
Removal of non-market obligations for 431 Beach Cres, 1502 Granville and 900 Pacific Blvd.

Good to see the site taken to higher densities.

To clarify are these true "social housing" or non-market rental?

officedweller · #**572** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 8:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

To clarify are these true "social housing" or non-market rental?

Not sure.
You'd have to review the changes at the City's website to be sure.

Changing City · #**573** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

To clarify are these true "social housing" or non-market rental?

I don't think the definition has changed in 25 years. See the 2021 memo to Council. "The City’s current definition of “social housing” requires that 100% of units in the building must be owned by a non-profit or government agency, with at least 30% of units affordable to incomes at or below Housing Income Limits (HILs)".

GenWhy? · #**574** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 9:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

To clarify are these true "social housing" or non-market rental?

Page 10

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/false-creek-north/false-creek-north-information-session.pdf

Changing City · #**575** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 9:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Got this in the mail today:

990 Beatty - previously about 12 storeys - now 28 storeys.
1050 Expo Blvd (triangle site) - previously 9 storeys, now 29 storeys
450 Pacific St. - 7 storeys
Removal of non-market obligations for 431 Beach Cres, 1502 Granville and 900 Pacific Blvd.

Good to see the site taken to higher densities.

You're right; this follows the Memorandum of Understanding announced with BC Housing and Concord Pacific in 2018. Three sites become market, and three non-market rental (with greater density on two of them), assuming Council approves after a public hearing. Here's the Council statement: including this information.

"In 2022, Council approved an agreement between us and Concord Pacific for a new delivery model for housing. Under this agreement, we receive three sites for the development of 650 units or more of non-market housing (in partnership with BC Housing). These sites will also accommodate new community amenities, including a fire hall and childcare facility. Concord Pacific will also waive our $11 million option price on the three sites and provide us with $110 million in cash which can be allocated to fund the new street network contemplated in the Northeast False Creek Plan’s vision for a new vibrant waterfront community.

In exchange for the three non-market housing sites, cash payment and other benefits from Concord Pacific, we will release our options to purchase on the three remaining sites, allowing Concord Pacific unencumbered ownership to develop market housing."

whatnext · #**576** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 10:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Changing City

I don't think the definition has changed in 25 years. See the 2021 memo to Council. "The City’s current definition of “social housing” requires that 100% of units in the building must be owned by a non-profit or government agency, with at least 30% of units affordable to incomes at or below Housing Income Limits (HILs)".

So would this encompass buildings like the Creekview Housing Co-op (Community Land Trust) at Granville Island as well as buildings like the Marguerite Ford Apts (RainCity Housing) in OV?

madog222 · #**577** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

So would this encompass buildings like the Creekview Housing Co-op (Community Land Trust) at Granville Island as well as buildings like the Marguerite Ford Apts (RainCity Housing) in OV?

Co-ops aren't social housing in this definition even if they have income limits. The Marguerite Ford Apartments are a textbook example of social housing.

Also, non-market rental units in a development aren't social housing as they are operated by the for-profit owner with market rental units in the building.

officedweller · #**578** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Changing City

You're right; this follows the Memorandum of Understanding announced with BC Housing and Concord Pacific in 2018. Three sites become market, and three non-market rental (with greater density on two of them), assuming Council approves after a public hearing. Here's the Council statement: including this information.

Thanks.
They call it "non-market housing", but don't specify what type.
I would have concerns if a non-profit society is tasked with managing a 28-29 storey tower.

officedweller · #**579** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 11:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Page 10

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/false-creek-north/false-creek-north-information-session.pdf

Thanks.

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/false-creek-north/false-creek-north-information-session.pdf

Feathered Friend · #**580** Posted **Feb 13, 2023, 11:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Thanks.
They call it "non-market housing", but don't specify what type.
I would have concerns if a non-profit society is tasked with managing a 28-29 storey tower.

The proposal targets 40% of all non-market housing
units for families. Subject to Provincial funding approval,
affordability targets include:
» 20% at shelter and pension rate;
» 50% below Housing Income Limits; and
» 30% at Low End of Market.
» Additional deepened affordability for women fleeing
violence and Indigenous people

From page 10
https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/false-creek-north/false-creek-north-information-session.pdf