Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
We need more #SocialHousing.
We need our local, provincial & federal governments to stop using the term "affordable housing" because it's just PR crocktalk to avoid funding more social housing for elderly & disabled folks on low fixed incomes, in addition to more social housing for low income families & individuals, living at or below poverty lines.
Politicians love to use the "affordable housing" term a lot. It makes it sound like they may care, to the public. Yet, their idea of affordable is out of reach for citizens who are poor. They don't really care about poor people. It's not affordable if only privileged folks can afford to rent.
Call out your governments who aren't investing in much social housing developments. We are in a housing crisis. People need access to more social housing - immediately.
*Related to my post from yesterday.
#BCNDP's #HousingHub program is coming under #scrutiny after one #TaxpayerSubsidized #RentalBuilding in #Vancouver's #Kitsilano neighbourhood, touted as "affordable", is now listing units for $2,600 per month for a studio & $4,200 per month for a 2 bedroom unit.
The listed #RentalPrices are well above provincial #AffordableHousing thresholds & one #housing #researcher says it's an example of how difficult it is to build #AffordableRental buildings when market prices are so far beyond what average #renters can afford.
The leader of the #BCGreenParty called it an "infuriating" #misuse of #TaxpayerDollars.
The #BCNDPgovernment provided a $31.8 million #LowInterestLoan to Vancouver developer #JamesonDevelopmentCorp. for the 68-unit rental building through the HousingHub program, which is aimed at providing housing to middle-income renters shut out of the real estate market.
#BCPremier #DavidEby, who was the minister -responsible for housing at the time, was quoted in a December 2021 government news release announcing the project.
"Our government is investing in more affordable housing for people who work and live in Vancouver, and throughout B.C." he said.
The building at 1807 Larch St., called the L2, is set to be complete next month & is now advertising units.
According to the building's website, a 400-square foot studio apartment starts at $2,599 a month & a 840-square foot two-bedroom, two-bath unit is listed for $4,299 a month.
@PhoenixSerenity Isn’t this one the building that the subsidy was only a low interest loan? That loan is coming back so it’s not like the province is spending money on this. The building is only partly below market rate, so those prices on the website aren’t really surprising for the neighborhood. Looks like the project is working as intended, just a small nudge towards density in Kits and some BMR units added.
@villasbc The problem is that BC gov't touted HousingHub as their solution to rental affordability issues & taxpayers are subsidizing the projects(there's another one with same company happening on Broadway) - when these aren't truly affordable housing developments. They are at or above rental market averages. This is actively hoodwinking PR. BC Builds is doing same dishonest things that aren't helping middle income renters but actually making things worse. Increased density isn't helpful if middle income renters can't afford to live in them.
"The units are, in fact, at the high end of the current market rate, according to the recent rental rates on the building website."
"A year ago, Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon announced that the province would also partner with Jameson on a 258-unit, 28-storey tower at 2528 Birch St., at the old Denny’s restaurant site on Broadway. Again, it was a HousingHub project, with $165-million available to the developer in low-interest financing. The city of Vancouver waived the development cost levy waivers in exchange for committing 20 per cent of the building to below-market housing. The city used its own calculation to determine “moderate incomes,” separate from the province’s methods."
'“What types of renters can actually afford these new units?” asks Andy Yan, director of Simon Fraser University’s City Program. “Aren’t they the ones already serviced by the marketplace?”
The other issue is that the province’s definition of middle-income includes homeowners, which skews the income data. The median renter household income is $66,500, while the median household income for homeowners is $106,000, according to the census data. The city of Vancouver acknowledged this gap in a below-market rental housing report a year ago.'
@PhoenixSerenity I agree with you the messaging around affordability is very misleading, but it’s still a welcome project. The province should be doing way way way more than this, but this project successfully injected density in a neighborhood that has been staving off all similar projects for decades… and the cost was just a low interest loan. It’s a big win locally, even if not ambitious in the big picture.
@PhoenixSerenity I would never call these affordable, and they’re only BMR considering the context of insane pricing on Kits. I would never condone NDP calling this any form of “middle income” housing, that’s absurd.
Just wanted to highlight that the project behind the layer of PR and catchy headlines, is still a step in the right direction. Not a lunge, and we need lunges, but it’s in the right direction.
@villasbc BC NDP are infamous for shitass PR.
@villasbc In Victoria, the gray area & using the PR term "affordable housing" has pushed many middle income renters into insecure housing or no housing options locally. I don't think BC taxpayers should be on the hook for subsidizing at market builds. We should only be subsidizing below market builds. Otherwise there's zero real incentives for developers to work on building those, over more profitable builds. I have no problems with subsidizing below market rental builds or subsidizing much needed social housing developments.
We have working families living in motels here because they can't afford longterm rentals. That shouldn't be happening when we look at how much government subsidizes huge corporations that are not in public interests - I'm talking about more than subsidizing developers who aren't building affordable housing. I support banning all corporate lobbyists.
@PhoenixSerenity Fair enough, we can be more selective about what projects deserve provincial support. But I do think we should subsidize density even if near market levels specially in places like Kits, because it’s something the province can do to counteract the intentionally prohibitive permitting the city imposes there. It’s a way to tip the scales against municipal NIMBYs by facilitating credit for the project. It costs very little and it breaks through a precedent for the area.
@PhoenixSerenity I don’t think this should become standard practice, the province is not here for the developers. It should be here for the people. But doing this once or twice in a few neighborhoods might unlock more ambitious projects later on.
@villasbc I think it should be done differently, for at market developments & not subsidized by taxpayers. BC government can shift other costs in budget to help with at market builds. Reducing their huge political PR advertising alone would add much more funds to help with housing crisis issues. Even more monies available, if they stopped corporate welfare of ecocidal corporations too. Government spending priorities should be more transparent, overall. Financial government transparency is beneficial & in public interests.
@PhoenixSerenity For sure, if the NDP stopped kneecapping our ability to hold these companies accountable, this small win that *maybe* mitigates the affordability crisis a tiny bit could have been transformative to the lives of hundreds of families that need this right now. Apart from the fluffy PR, this project while still “productive”, it also demonstrates that baby steps are not cutting it and criticism is warranted.
@villasbc 100%. We, the citizens, have every right to criticize our publicly elected governments & any politician who tries to stop public criticism is likely shady as heck in backrooms with lobbyists. We deserve public transparency to how our tax monies are spent. We need lobbyists reform because our governments should be working for the peoples & not helping corporations more than helping citizens of BC.