Affordable Housing in Kelowna

[tilma]

In regards to affordable housing I encourage you to look at the demographic statistics for Kelowna and see who lives here and what their incomes are. According to the City of Kelowna "Housing Needs Study - 1999/2000" in 2020 there will be 20% of 0-19 year old, 25% of 20-39 year olds, 32.5% of 40-64 year and 22.5% of those older than 65 (13). Now, if we look at who owns and who rents than it will quickly become apparent that those in owner occupied housing are older than 35 with the strongest group being the 65 year olds and over group.
That leaves those under 35 prone to renting or having exorbitant mortgages, living with roomies, living at home or what ever other arrangement there is. Here it should also be noted that over the long-term owners make capital investments that renters cannot make, since they are not building any equity. When a renter moves he moves, whereas a homeowner can work with the accumulated equity pun sale of the house.
There are many in Kelowna that do not and will not qualify for mortgages, such as people on fixed incomes, lone parent families, people who are socio-economically disadvantaged and stuck in many minimum wage jobs. Homeownership is not more affordable, but has been made somewhat easier to attain by credit institutions that earn big for a very long time. Remember, the mortgage holder only owns the percentage that he has paid for...
Places like the Centuria are fairly easy financed, but they are not affordable. We need housing that costs $80,000 or $90,000 for young families, lone parents, seniors, disabled and all the others that have a strict budget in this city. Last time that I checked a mobile home was the only option in that price range or an apartment. And the developer sells only a few units for $250,000 (if I remember correctly) and the rest is sold at the highest price ever.
There is also no set allocation of, let's say 25 percent, to be made to affordable housing by each developer in each and every one of their projects. There are also no provisions to discourage people from flipping new homes and as such artificially inflating the prices. And I could go on...
The reality is that 250,000 is more than most of us can afford. 30% of one's pre-tax income is considered the cut-off to qualify for a mortgage since the CMHC (Canadian Housing and Mortgage Company) is using the same number to see if a person can qualify for a mortgage. But the reality is that too many people spend more than 30% of their income on housing.
The City of Kelowna has not contributed to the housing stock since keep hiding behind the notion that they cannot do anything without other levels of government. There is no intention of moving forward there. But who says that we always need new housing. The City could help people convert illegal suites to legal ones to increase the current housing stock and to alleviate the tight rental market.
You see, more expensive homes contribute more to the tax base. The more taxes Kelownians pay the more is in the coffer for local politicians, policing, etc. Public housing is not considered to be an economic generator… So, Kelowna is really not a place where we can seriously say that affordable housing is on the agenda of City Council and the Mayor. Quite contrary our current council is encouraging development for high income transients.
I will stop here, but I think I will be back and bring some more of my thoughts forward as I feel the need arise…
There are a number of excellent sources for those interested in housing issues:
One could start at the City of Kelowna Website and look for the "Housing Needs Study 1999/2000", or the "Benchmarks and Resources for Affordable, Special Needs and rental Housing". The book by David Hulchanski "Finding Room - Policy Options for a Canadian rental Housing Strategy" (2004), published by CUCS Press Toronto is also most valuable. Dr. D. Hulchanski has been appointed to the only endowed chair in housing studies in North America. And last, there is the book "Canadian Cities in Transition" by P. Filion and T. Bunting (2000) Oxford University Press. That is an all Canadian book examining and describing the changes of Canadian cities in the 21st century. There will be a newer edition soon!

[Krisha]

The MoveForwardKelowna group claims it supports affordable housing but that is all rhetoric. They say that there was affordable housing in the Centuria project but nothing there was sold below $200,000 per unit. The city planning department defines affordable housing as units priced below $130,000. Do you honestly think that Lawson Landing will have units selling for below that amount? Why is MoveKelownaForward deceiving the public on this issue? You support all development and have no requirement that it contain an affordable housing component. Most of the highrise development you support is housing for the wealthy. As a result of your hypocrisy not to mention your childish personal attacks against members of CRCP, your credibility has been tarnished beyond repair.

[Dave D]

As for the Lawson landing having affordable housing. Where else in the world, in any city anywhere, can you find cheap housing either downtown, near a lake or ocean side, you can't, that doesn't mean that no one should build it there though. I think it sucks that not everyone can afford it, (I can't) but that is the way it is, so why does the Lawson landing keep getting attacked for this. Try buying a place in downtown Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, how about ocean side in Hawaii. or California, Vancouver Island, all of a sudden Lawson landing will start sounding like a steal of a deal. I support this development because that area is ugly and it would create more green space downtown and make it more beautiful, bringing more people down town to spend there money helping all the business there make more money.

Inflation is on the rise and guess what, its not just in Kelowna, but you would think that is was by they way people talk around here and feel sorry for themselves. Again this does suck and I am one of those people who cannot afford to buy a house or even an apartment but I'm not going to blame kelowna city council for that or sit around fealing sorry for myself. Why not spread the blame where it is due like every on who lives and breaths. We are all to blame, not just one single person, group or cooperation.

Its already cheaper to live here then on the Lower Mainland or Calgary, the two places that a lot of people move here from, so why don't we make it cheaper still? Because that would bring them (people) faster and harder here. You don't have to read any books or do any studies to know that. This is sad, but it is life. It is very hard to have affordable housing in a market where the consumers will bid each other up, even on rental units. This happens here, and quite often to. I have had friends who have been out bid on rental houses.

I could move out to Saskatchewan and buy a house where they are cheaper, ye right, no thanks, I have grown up in kelowna, I like it here even though I have to pay the price to do it sometimes. I would rather be poor here then rich in a lot of other places. We are a four seasons play ground. Everything is more expensive here, food, gas, clothing, vehicles, its the sunshine, mountains, views, skiing, golf and lake that keep us here. Its the lifestyle that people want, and are willing to put up with hardship to have. No one is twisting my arm telling me I have to stay here, that I can't go some where else that is more affordable. That is a choice that I have made. I have seen people leave good jobs in other city's to move here, without even knowing what they are going to do when they get here and try to find a job that ends up paying less then the on they left behind, why? Because they had a holiday here sometime, and liked it. That was there choice, and that, is what life is all about.

[Dave D]

GROWTH CONTROLS AND HOUSING PRICES

To date, most of the debate over growth controls has focused on a single question: How much, if at all, do growth controls raise the price of housing? Economic theory suggests that local growth controls may increase housing prices in three ways (Dowall, 1984). The first way is to raise the direct costs of construction through unnecessary subdivision or development requirements. A second way is to limit the supply of new housing, thereby allowing home-sellers and builders to act as monopolists and charge higher prices. A third way is to encourage builders to shift to larger, more expensive, and more profitable homes. Growth controls may also generate ripple effects in neighboring communities, as growth displaced from the controlled community spills over into surrounding area's. Empirical studies of the price effects of local growth controls- most of them done in California using housing sales data from the late 1970s to early 1980s- suggest that controls can add as little as 2 percent or as much as 35 percent to the price of housing, depending on the community and the severity of the restriction.
Do to our location here in the Okanagan valley and the demand for housing here I think that this is exactly what would happen if we were to try and control growth to the extreme like some in our community are suggesting, and trying to do.

[Administrator]

Hi Dave - just got in and heading out again so I will keep this brief. Regarding the growth controls and prices that is exactly right - it is a supply and demand issue which is basic economics. The fact is you CANNOT change the desirablility ( preceived and actual ) of a local. Even the fires and all the publicity has created an increase in desirability to move here. People watched and then saw how nice it is and said let's examine this area as a choice to move to.

This city has all the big ammenities that attract new citizens - major airport - major university - growing high tech sector - major shopping - major hospital - and the natural surrondings. The fact is we are a reginonal city and that alone is a major consideration of a lot of people wanting to move here.

later...

( by the way I stated most of this discussion on the other board but it was deleted )

[michaelp]

Krisha said:

The MoveForwardKelowna group claims it supports affordable housing but that is all rhetoric. They say that there was affordable housing in the Centuria project but nothing there was sold below $200,000 per unit. The city planning department defines affordable housing as units priced below $130,000. Do you honestly think that Lawson Landing will have units selling for below that amount? Why is MoveKelownaForward deceiving the public on this issue? You support all development and have no requirement that it contain an affordable housing component. Most of the high rise development you support is housing for the wealthy. As a result of your hypocrisy not to mention your childish personal attacks against members of CRCP, your credibility has been tarnished beyond repair.

Krisha you forget $200,000 is WELL below the average house price in Kelowna average is $275,000

$200,000 for lake front property is cheap. all the houses near the lake are $300,000+

I live in SE Rutland and paid $174,000 for 1/2 duplex 3 months ago now its worth almost $200,000

for affordable housing you need to be mostly away from the lake. Lawson Landing @ $200,000 where do I sign up. Kelowna as a whole needs affordable housing the Lawson Landing project may not be considered affordable to some but I would think there is enough with the equity in Kelowna to fill Lawson right up. Even if used as a time share building.

Downtowns of all City's in the civilized world are not cheap to live in because you pay more due to being close to all amenities.

Dave D
"Its already cheaper to live here then on the Lower Mainland or Calgary, the two places that a lot of people move here from..."

Kelowna is actually the 2nd most expensive place to buy a home in Canada as of the last house price spike
1st most is Vancouver
2nd Kelowna
3rd Toronto
4th, Montreal
5th Calgary

the reason is the lack of affordable Housing

I agree whole heartedly that Lawson is a steal of a deal at $200,000 per unit

I also agree it will clean up that area and give us more green space. Now if we could just get more RCMP to patrol City Park and bust the druggies and homeless and Get Lawson Landing then Downtown might actually be nice enough and safe enough to take the family to for the day.

[michaelp]

Krisha said:

As a result of your hypocrisy not to mention your childish personal attacks against members of CRCP, your credibility has been tarnished beyond repair.

Krishna have you not read the childish insults thrown at supports on movekelownaforward by the CRCP

not too mention the countless hypocrisies of Mr. Zeger

Rick Shea has called numerous movekelownaforward supports insulting names and never apologized for his behavior.

I have read the letters since before the forums on both sites were ever put up and Zeger had written multiple personal attacks to Duane T before Zeger has even claimed one back to this date I have not even read a letter or post from Duane T that has personally attacked Zeger, Shea or anyone from the CRCP.

it is possible to support growth and affordable housing (Calgary has approx 1 million residents but their housing costs are far cheaper than here) in the same committee as growth has little to do with affordable housing. development of affordable housing has to do with it and since the CRCP wants to stop growth then how are we to create affordable housing?

[michaelp]

I wrote this on the CRCP forum and think it brings up an interesting point

Can any member of the CRCP say Victoria BC isn't beautiful??

it is absolutely gorgeous there and they have over 200,000 people (and large buildings)

its not about how big a city gets its about how it is developed.

and house prices are less than Kelowna hmmm wonder why?

[Krishna]

Where did you get the idea that you could buy a unit in Lawson Landing for $200,000. I said that all the units at the Centuria sold for over $200,000. Can't you guys even read?

[Dave D]

Kricha wrote
"The city planning department defines affordable housing as units priced below $130,000. Do you honestly think that Lawson Landing will have units selling for below that amount?

This is what I was responding to.

[Dave D]

I doubt there is anything else for sale for under $200,000 in the area were they are building the Centuria, it's still only 4 blocks from the lake.

[Krishna]

I originally said that nothing at the Centuria was priced below $200,000. I thought something may be priced in that area because that's what the developer told city council at the public hearing and as usual Council fell for it hook, line and sinker. That bunch is about as sharp as a paper clip with intellects to match. I just called the Centuria sales office and, sure enough, Tilma was correct. Units start at $250,000 for their smallest ones about 700 sq. ft. and there are only very few at that price. And where did you get the idea that the Centuria was 4 blocks from the lake? It's located at Gordon and Bernard which is closer to 10 blocks from the lake. If this still sounds like a good deal to you, you must be friends with the developer. Are you also buddies with Phil Milroy?

[Dave D]

OK 4 or 5 Blocks, I wasn't counting all the little residential blocks, only the big city blocks. Water, Ellis, Richter, Ethel and then Gordon.
And no I don't now either of them.

[michaelp]

Rick shea wrote on

saveparadise.proboards26.com/index.cgi?board=growth&action=post&thread=1118191608&page=2

here is my reply



thats good you found web based stats

The stats I got my info from was the news about 1 month ago. Census 2006 although next year will be more accurate than either of our sources.

even your own link from Royal Legapage on Page 60 says Kelowna's average for the 1st qtr of 2005 is $280,000 yes Victoria is more by I was going by what the News had stated from their source. I stand corrected on that stat.

this source says that Vancouver as a whole is expected to have an average house price to top $400,000 by the end of the year. Kelowna is expected to have an increase by +10% by year end to $257,000

www.remax-oa.com/roafiles/marketreports/forecast2005_pr.pdf

don't you find it funny that two competing real estate companies are giving off different statistics??

I think we can both agree that affordable housing issues need to be addressed in Kelowna but stoping all development would only worsen the issue as it would create a monopoly of sorts allowing home owners to sell at what ever price they want

new housing and as per my link above is needed and the way to bring the average down is condos as they have always been cheaper to purchase that a house with a yard. space is at a premium in Kelowna and thus why the costs go dramatically.

Large scale condos can help bring the average cost per home down. but that brings up another point if the average house prices goes down it then attracts buyers from outside of Kelowna this is bad according to the CRCP so would it be fair to say that the CRCP would like house prices higher to ward off would be foreign buyers?

[Matt Phillips]

one of the cities Mr. Zeger mentioned in the US that had a population cap had the main housing price at well over $200,000 US.

if a cap was put on Kelowna, housing prices here would rise by thousands

[Krishna]

Great going, Matt. Once again, all speculation on your part with no supporting evidence.

[michaelp]

Krishna

it has been well docmented that little or no growth causes house prices to increased as it creates a closed market a "monopoly" if you will, no new homes being built allow home owners to sell at virtually any price they want the same can be true if growth occurs to rapidly. I do not believe Lawson Landing is too much at this time. Not to mention the increased park space and the numerous new families living in the downtown core. how about getting the current projected Lawson area cleaned up. there are numerous reasons to "do it"

Development must occur at a rate that complments the population increase percentage. lets not stop here think about the downtown businesses that will benifit from an increased population downtown.

[Matt Phillips]

...the City of San Diego passed various measures to cap residential construction permits and
attempt to slow growth.
The experiment however, was not a success. Actually the “county’s population grew more in three years
after implementation of the growth controls and environmental regulations than in the three years immediately
preceding their imposition (Neuss 1992).” Thus these San Diego County communities witnessed a severe
depletion in all types of housing and an increase in land prices. The combination of these two things is
especially problematic in terms of affordable housing supply when one considers that San Diego County has
a large population of immigrants from Mexico. It is said that the county saw a hike in the cost of a new
home at the median level of $150,000 to $245,000 in less than two years.


There is your evidence Krishna.

it is quite obvious that if a cap was placed on kelowna as Mr. Zeger suggests, that housing prices would rise.

[Krishna]

You didn't address my remarks on the "highrises in Rutland" thread having to do with pop. controls and housing prices. The studyI cited indicates that housing prices would not necessarily go up. I will be looking at the San Diego research though when I have time. I am presently busy with my meditation and devotional practices.

[michaelp]

Bringing back my point on Growth and Housing costs

Calgary is one of Canada's fastest growing City's and yet housing costs are way lower than Kelowna why is this?

in my opinion one factor is a greater portion of municipal taxes go developers to offset the costs of housing projects thus reducing the cost needing to be collected by the developers.

Kelowna needs to develop its own affordable housing stratagy that caters to our unique economy, and culture.

not just kill development because that will only make things worse. as I have previously stated and backed up with facts