The Housing Shortage

[Elias Pettersson]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I know, used it for 5 years. We paid a separate bill for enerpro for the renewable power stuff.

 

People were dumb tho. We had water pipes in the ceiling but people kept drilling into them 

 

That's why they had all those leaks in the beginning, people didn't have a clue how those buildings were built.  Just doing a simple floor replacement could have flooded the entire building...

[Bob Long]

Just now, 420Fish said:

I suppose the true measure of success will be found in the people who get to own and maintain a proper home to live in, and those that do not.

 

Totally. For the record I love the co op home model, we need about 100,000 more of them in BC.

[Elias Pettersson]

4 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

 

 

Thanks, that's a great breakdown.  And it shows that this system is more efficient than the geothermal systems that alot of developers use.  I also forgot about the fact that some of the Olympic Village buildings have solar panels on the roofs to redistribute the heat...

[Elias Pettersson]

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Totally. For the record I love the co op home model, we need about 100,000 more of them in BC.

 

Co-ops are a good way to get people into the market at cheaper prices.  Problem is getting financing for these places.  Not alot of banks support the co-op model, it's mostly only the credit unions.

 

The concept is smart though.  You build a high rise and then people buy in to a small percentage of the whole building.  That way you can get the prices alot cheaper.  Developers can sell these off to the government and then the government can be in charge of managing the building.  You can also get corporations to buy in and be a part of it.  

 

I'm surprised we don't see this concept more and more in the city.  Owning a freehold strata is great, but purchasing into a shared co-op is alot more efficient for a buyer than renting.  At least they own something.

[WeneedLumme]

6 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

Nightmares? Where are you getting that from? Lived there for 5 years, it was great.

This is the first you have heard about this? It was pretty well publicised. 

 

https://www.fortpark.ca/village-condo-owners-giving-up-on-their-olympic-dream/

[bishopshodan]

NIMBY

 

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouver-votes-against-more-housing-density-in-shaughnessy-neighbourhood

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

NIMBY

 

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouver-votes-against-more-housing-density-in-shaughnessy-neighbourhood

 

Thankfully this seems to be the exception in Vancouver, most of it is properly zoned now. 

 

This also happens to be the most boring neighborhood in town, there's nothing to do there.

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

Thankfully this seems to be the exception in Vancouver, most of it is properly zoned now. 

 

This also happens to be the most boring neighborhood in town, there's nothing to do there.

Vancouver still has a long way to go.

 

This area is centrally located. The only reason they voted against it is because the rich live there. 

 

'Same as it ever was' 

[Bob Long]

6 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

Vancouver still has a long way to go.

 

This area is centrally located. The only reason they voted against it is because the rich live there. 

 

'Same as it ever was' 

 

It is but like I said, there really isn't much there. Walkability sucks. For sure it's nibmy but Sim has done a lot of good most other places. Kennedy Stewart was a disaster.

[bishopshodan]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

It is but like I said, there really isn't much there. Walkability sucks. For sure it's nibmy but Sim has done a lot of good most other places. Kennedy Stewart was a disaster.

 

That is a central area. I know it well. Lots of room to develop. 

 

Would be perfect.

 

As for Stewart, thats a low bar. 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

That is a central area. I know it well. Lots of room to develop. 

 

its such a weird zone to me. I agree it shouldn't be exempt from densification, but lets say they did that tomorrow, people are still driving to Cambie to do anything. Its actually going to take a while to build up the services side too. I guess more low-rise? dunno.

 

To me its just a boring-ass area. But I like east van, so maybe I'm just weird. 

 

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

Would be perfect.

 

As for Stewart, thats a low bar. 

 

this looks pretty good to me: https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/10/11/vancouver-ken-sim-housing-plan/

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

4 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

Vancouver still has a long way to go.

 

This area is centrally located. The only reason they voted against it is because the rich live there. 

 

'Same as it ever was' 

Why does this city council member want to put low income housing next to $20 million mansions?  Seems kinda stupid to me. Of course they voted it down. One dumb council member doesn’t get to decide how to shape the housing situation. 
 

Why doesn’t she start barking about putting more housing in areas where it’s actually affordable like Commercial Drive where there is a Skytrain station hub, Oakridge mall, Main Street area, etc. 

[bishopshodan]

36 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Why does this city council member want to put low income housing next to $20 million mansions?

 

Dont know, other than it's a central area, close to transit with very little densification and no rental units?

 

36 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 Seems kinda stupid to me. Of course they voted it down. One dumb council member doesn’t get to decide how to shape the housing situation. 

 

I gather that one member doesn't get to decide ( 3 voted for it). Why do you need to insult her? is she known for being dumb? I dont know her. 

 

It was also apparently supported by these dummies too..  'the motion was supported by the non-profit housing community, Vancouver Coastal Health, housing advocates and the development community '

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/real-estate-news/vancouver-unlocks-housing-for-mid-income-earners-near-schools-but-not-shaughnessy-7837787

 

 

36 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Why doesn’t she start barking about putting more housing in areas where it’s actually affordable like Commercial Drive where there is a Skytrain station hub, Oakridge mall, Main Street area, etc. 

 

She should. More development everywhere and there probably is better immediate areas. However, no more of this NIMBY stuff. The Province should step in and take these decisions away from the municipalities. I lived in nice 1 bedroom+ den near the Westend. Beside me was 4 high end towers being built, across the street and within 2 blocks were low-income units and addiction centers. All walks of life can, and should be blended in major cities. So, sometimes the city gets on it but waay too slow and too political.

 

Is she barking? do you have personal beef with this person or just very defensive about the very mega rich?

 

ABC said it was political so I think I know where you might be coming from but why do the rich get a free pass? in fact one of ABC concerns was 'would seek to drive a wedge among Vancouver communities along class lines,' ....haha, what? we protecting the hard done by mega rich here?

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by bishopshodan

[Elias Pettersson]

3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Dont know, other than it's a central area, close to transit with very little densification and no rental units?

 

 

I gather that one member doesn't get to decide ( 3 voted for it). Why do you need to insult her? is she known for being dumb? I dont know her. 

 

It was also apparently supported by these dummies too..  'the motion was supported by the non-profit housing community, Vancouver Coastal Health, housing advocates and the development community '

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/real-estate-news/vancouver-unlocks-housing-for-mid-income-earners-near-schools-but-not-shaughnessy-7837787

 

 

 

She should. More development everywhere and there probably is better immediate areas. However, no more of this NIMBY stuff. The Province should step in and take these decisions away from the municipalities. I lived in nice 1 bedroom+ den near the Westend. Beside me was 4 high end towers being built, across the street and within 2 blocks were low-income units and addiction centers. All walks of life can, and should be blended in major cities. So, sometimes the city gets on it but waay too slow and too political.

 

Is she barking? do you have personal beef with this person or just very defensive about the very mega rich?

 

ABC said it was political so I think I know where you might be coming from but why do the rich get a free pass? in fact one of ABC concerns was 'would seek to drive a wedge among Vancouver communities along class lines,' ....haha, what? we protecting the hard done by mega rich here?

 

 

 

 

I have a beef with anyone who doesn't have a brain.  Sorry, I've been around enough of these council members to know that some have no clue how to shape the housing situation and shouldn't be in charge of making any decisions.

 

Out of all of the areas of Vancouver, she has to single out literally the most expensive area in all of Vancouver where there are acres and acres of unaffordable land for 99.9% of the population, and she wants to "densify" it with low income housing, co-ops, rental housing.  I can name 50 other areas in Vancouver that are close to transit and shopping that make much more sense to densify.

 

Ken Sim is doing a great job, I trust what he is doing.  Yes, there are "lots" more areas that can be considered for rental and low income housing.  Why start with the absolute most expensive land in the city?  What point is she trying to make, that she has the power to tell these rich people to go stuff themselves?  Is it a power grab for her?  Because that's what alot of these council members like to project, that they are smarter and more powerful than anyone else.  I know alot of council members.

[bishopshodan]

16 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Sorry, I've been around enough of these council members to know that some have no clue how to shape the housing situation and shouldn't be in charge of making any decisions.

 

If that's the case, you have made my stance even firmer. 

 

Take it out of the municipalities hands.

 

 

[moosehead]

48 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

Dont know, other than it's a central area, close to transit with very little densification and no rental units?

 

 

I gather that one member doesn't get to decide ( 3 voted for it). Why do you need to insult her? is she known for being dumb? I dont know her. 

 

It was also apparently supported by these dummies too..  'the motion was supported by the non-profit housing community, Vancouver Coastal Health, housing advocates and the development community '

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/real-estate-news/vancouver-unlocks-housing-for-mid-income-earners-near-schools-but-not-shaughnessy-7837787

 

 

 

She should. More development everywhere and there probably is better immediate areas. However, no more of this NIMBY stuff. The Province should step in and take these decisions away from the municipalities. I lived in nice 1 bedroom+ den near the Westend. Beside me was 4 high end towers being built, across the street and within 2 blocks were low-income units and addiction centers. All walks of life can, and should be blended in major cities. So, sometimes the city gets on it but waay too slow and too political.

 

Is she barking? do you have personal beef with this person or just very defensive about the very mega rich?

 

ABC said it was political so I think I know where you might be coming from but why do the rich get a free pass? in fact one of ABC concerns was 'would seek to drive a wedge among Vancouver communities along class lines,' ....haha, what? we protecting the hard done by mega rich here?

 

 

 

 

I agree 100%.

 

Densification needs to happen throughout the city ... in all socio economic areas...  Not just in the more poor parts of town.

 

Try visiting London , Paris  or Barcelona and go look for single family homes on large lots like Vancouver West side... Good luck with that.

 

Vancouver needs to move  more to the future - invest in densification through out the entire city.      People with higher needs / care need to be evenly distributed across the city.

Not  housed in slums.

 

Some people have an agenda to support the uber rich only...     This is unrealistic .

 

Equity is needed in our city. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by moosehead

[Elias Pettersson]

10 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

If that's the case, you have made my stance even firmer. 

 

Take it out of the municipalities hands.

 

 

 

I agree.  They should set up a committee of like-minded people who actually know what they are doing and have that committee make all of these housing decisions.  Take it out of the government's hands completely...

[bishopshodan]

34 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I agree.  They should set up a committee of like-minded people who actually know what they are doing and have that committee make all of these housing decisions.  Take it out of the government's hands completely...

 

I never thought of that. I just assumed that the province should do it.

But, yeah...I have no problem with trusting experts on a committee to do their thing. Makes sense for pretty much everything else in our lives. 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

5 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

I never thought of that. I just assumed that the province should do it.

But, yeah...I have no problem with trusting experts on a committee to do their thing. Makes sense for pretty much everything else in our lives. 

 

Until the committee of "like-minded people" evolves and ends up as being solely from the development/construction sector, and the resulting committee only exists to fatten the wallets of that industry, at the expense of exacerbating the housing situation.  

 

There's a reason why elected officials are given these sorts of responsibilities - in theory, they need to remain accountable to their constitutents, who can vote them out if they feel their government is not doing the job they were elected to do.

[bishopshodan]

Just now, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Until the committee of "like-minded people" evolves and ends up as being solely from the development/construction sector, and the resulting committee only exists to fatten the wallets of that industry, at the expense of exacerbating the housing situation.  

 

There's a reason why elected officials are given these sorts of responsibilities - in theory, they need to remain accountable to their constitutents, who can vote them out if they feel their government is not doing the job they were elected to do.

haha. I know. 

I am hoping that the experts would not be as you describe. - in theory. 

 

And as for elected officials... well, I kinda think that most of them are bought and paid for too. 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

And as for elected officials... well, I kinda think that most of them are bought and paid for too. 

 

Definitely a possibility.  Funny what a bit of lobbying and some election-time donating can do.  

[moosehead]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I agree.  They should set up a committee of like-minded people who actually know what they are doing and have that committee make all of these housing decisions.  Take it out of the government's hands completely...

 

I would rather have the BC government making densification decisions than a group of like minded developers.... or like minded multi millionaires on 1 acre urban large lots parts of town. 

[The Arrogant Worms]

CMHC says annual pace of housing starts in October up 1% from September

 

https://canoe.com/business/money-news/cmhc-says-annual-pace-of-housing-starts-in-october-up-1-from-september/wcm/a0c070dd-453d-4fe0-8854-490f9635b7ab

[The Arrogant Worms]

B.C.'s speculation tax is expanding to these 13 municipalities

https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/bc-expands-speculation-tax

 

B.C. is expanding the speculation and vacancy tax to 13 municipalities.

 

They include eight in the B.C. Interior: Vernon, Coldstream, Penticton, Summerland, Lake Country, Peachland, Salmon Arm, and Kamloops.

 

The other five are on Vancouver Island: Courtney, Comox, Cumberland, Parksville, and Qualicum Beach.

 

“There is a housing crisis across the country and it is creating economic challenges, including people feeling pushed out of their communities and labour shortages,” said Katrine Conroy, B.C.’s minister of finance in a statement Wednesday.

[Gurn]

2 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

B.C.'s speculation tax is expanding to these 13 municipalities

https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/bc-expands-speculation-tax

 

B.C. is expanding the speculation and vacancy tax to 13 municipalities.

 

They include eight in the B.C. Interior: Vernon, Coldstream, Penticton, Summerland, Lake Country, Peachland, Salmon Arm, and Kamloops.

 

The other five are on Vancouver Island: Courtney, Comox, Cumberland, Parksville, and Qualicum Beach.

 

“There is a housing crisis across the country and it is creating economic challenges, including people feeling pushed out of their communities and labour shortages,” said Katrine Conroy, B.C.’s minister of finance in a statement Wednesday.

They might want to look into something in Powell River as well.

Lot's of new buildings going up, but the roads are not great, traffic is increasing, and we are likely getting to the max capacity of our sewage/waste facility.

Was years of having a 'dry turd' long box semi come on the Saltery Bay ferry, until they found another way.

As crew we tried to explain to management that it is a bad business decision to tick off thousands of dollars worth of revenue, to accommodate one foul stinky truck that paid  at about $350 fare.