Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

I think maybe you should just go to Winnipeg, Sassy.

   

Greed is the cause of the housing shortage?



Socialists are the cause and I'll tell you why.

It was the socialists who changed the regulations governing basement suites in houses in Edmonton where they demanded enlarged windows, fireproof ceilings and separate furnaces etc etc. If they adopted laws like almost every other city in Canada low cost housing would open wide.

In Ft. McMurray I am one of many investors in the first real highrise that has stood on the drawing table for 3 years already so that every $%#@#$ envirnmentalist, civil servant, neighbour etc can have their say on how they'll be negatively impcated. 3 years before a shovel can be put in the ground on any development is BS. The province has also been stymied by the socialists/environmentalists when trying to open up new land for housing development.

BTW, I looked it up and couldn't find any real difference between a socialist and a communist. Enlighten me.

   

The ultimate cause of the housing shortage is that the present government in Alberta is a slave to the idea that unrestrained growth is a good thing, and any check on that growth is socialism.

The proximate cause of the housing shortage is the fact that there are more people coming in than we can build new homes for. Sounds simplistic, but that's what it boils down to.

So you can attack it two ways: speed up construction, or slow the influx.

Now, how do you speed up construction when there's a masive labour shortage? When there's a massive materials shortage? You can't. So: slow the influx.

All the Cons here love to boast about Alberta's white-hot economy. Well that's the source of all the problems! Everyone want's in, so to speak. So we've got housing crunches. We've got trnsportation crunches so we need more infrastructure which gobbles up concrete making it hard to build a house. We've got people streaming into Ft. Mac leaving vacuums everywhere else, including home construction.

And yet we've got a government which refuses to even consider slowing the pace of growth. You know what doctors call uncontrolled growth in the body? Cancer.

So: Slap a moratorium on further developments in the oilsands. Slow the growth and the problem will eventually solve itself.

   

GFPB, read my thread I started about us socialists. You will find we are not all bad, and we are not the root of all problems like you make us out to be.

   

I assume it was me you were addressing there. I want to thank you, I couldn't have scripted a better analogy.



No, it was the people in government who decided there had to be limits on capitalism, specifically where greed meets public safety.

There is a huge difference between 'low cost housing' and 'slum dwelling', and that is regulations. Since you've said you are a landlord, I assume your frustration lies in the fact you had to follow certain regulations in turning your duplex into a 4 plex. That is the cost of doing business.

I'm sure there are many landlords who simply wouldn't have followed those regulations; ones with the atitude 'sure it's a rat infested death trap, but I'm not charging you extra for the bedbugs no matter how much you beg'. Let me ask you this, would you have charged any less for the basement suites than you do now, if you hadn't done the renovations?



I used to own 2 condos in Abasand. I wanted to build my own place there, similar to your eco-home. There was lots of land up in Thickwood, and I had money. But the city, nor the province would sell me land. They wanted to sell it to developers. Developers weren't in a hurry to develop it. I was willing to pay to service it. Still, there was no land. I could have bought land way east of town, out by the airport - but I would still have been limited by the developer as to what I could build. That was unacceptable. So I sold for double what I pad, and bought a nice place back near Edmonton.

Simple greed to keep the land expensive. Housing at the time was in the $300k - $500k range, but in Edmonton it was still in the $190's.



Ahh young grasshopper, no one mentioned ethier ideology! There is your enlightenment. Next time, get a better dictionary and it won't be so confusing to you.

   

And again, it is alllll politics

I guess you might try the east coast too, Sassy!

   

You assumed wrong. It was to our resident communist.

Anyway, since your rankling to debate it I challenge you to prove to me that allowing a family in any RF3 zone in the city who rents out their basement equates to being a "slum lord". Almost every property on the northside south of Yellowhead is RF3 and many houses are brand new but due to almost insane rules basement suites in this city are basically not allowed. Did you know that in Edmonton statistically over 50% of people are renters? Did you know that almost every basement suite in Edmonton is illegal? Did you know the Conservative government recently announced that municipalities like Edmonton must relax the rules as these city bureaucrats and their regulations are the greatest barrier to the development of low cost housing? Did you know that Edmonton recently announced an amnesty for the existing illegal suites?

OK, so you are a Jan Reimer supporter who believed in government funded and rent subsidised townhomes mixed in every socio-economic neighbourhood in the city and support the regulations to force the private sector out of low cost housing so the government could take the responsibility. Fine. But it has not worked and these marvels of socialism you refer to are mini ghettos, the taxpayers are fatigued and we cannot afford new ones and the pre Jan illegal basement suites are slowly becoming slums by default because what incentive is there for an owner in keeping up a place if it is illegal?

It is unfair to paint the family trying to make a little more passive income by renting out their basements as "slum lords" with greed filled eyes. It is highly juvenile to believe that a low cost housing shortage can be resolved if only the capital holders would invest amounts that do not warrant the returns.

As for your Ft Mac comments....3 years to let all the people who want to object - object, is wrong. There is no end in site either. This highrise with hundreds of additional apartments could already have been built and in almost every other city in Canada it would have. Blaming developers for the housing shortage is like blaming soldiers for war....oh wait a minute.....



Again, this was directed at george123 who in this very thread DID mention ideology and claims not to be a communist but rather a socialist.

As we are debating economics the research I've done shows the ideology of both is virtually identical when it comes to government control or management of the economy and they differ in other areas. Again, if you are such a supporter of this ideology enlighten me to the difference?

   

Since you're so well-versed, why not give us a quick run-down on the existing Edmonton regulations so that we might have some more context.

   

Certainly.

There are a hundred and one minor things such as smoke detectors, fire doors, ceiling heights and hall widths and generally most people don't have a problem with these even the insulation and drywall must be removed and replaced with fire code compliant material but most are willing.

What bothers those of us who want to see the lack of affordable housing addressed is:

Window - Windows must be sized not for safety, but as a percentage of the sq ft. of the room. To be code compliant a typical bungalow must be either raised or it's landscape lowered then it's foundation cut apart to accommodate the 4 and 5 foot windows that must be installed.


Furnace - All basements suites must have a separate controllable thermostat with a separate air exchange system. No part of any air ducting is permitted to be exchanged between upstairs and down. Unit also requires separate fresh air circulation system.

Entrance - All basement suites must have a completely separate entrance. This seems logical on first glance but let me describe limitations. On a bungalow with a typical split rear entry this is not considered "private". If you put a closet in the upstairs landing completely separating the floors this will still be regarded as unacceptable. It must be a complete a new entrance. (This has nothing to do with safety as almost every townhouse in Edmonton has only one door and almost every apartment in Edmonton shares a hall.

These regulations were put in place to stop basement suites so that the government could get into the business of low cost housing. If you wanted to convert a bungalow near Griesbach to house a soldier buddy it would cost you roughly 140,000 to put in one suite. Your payback would never materialise as you are taxed much higher on passive income and basement suites command much lower rents.

It is not the evil landord but the evil government that has both caused and exasperated the housing crises. If you are truly the humanitarin you say you are I encourage you to become familiar with these regulations and champion their removal so that those of lesser means can live in dignity too.

   

Ahh, sorry, that's what happens when people don't 'quote'.



Not really, but my inbox is really empty now, so I have nothing better to do.

I challenenge you to quote me where I said that "allowing a family in any RF3 zone in the city who rents out their basement equates to being a "slum lord". I have no problem with people renting out basements to help with the morgage payments. But 'the Guy' (you know the one, he's on the news all the time) who rents out the basement suite with only 1 entrance and nothing but those little 6" windows good for nothing but letting rodents in is a slum landlord. Putting in windows and fireproofing that allow a person to escape a basement suite in the event of a fire is just being a responsible landlord.

Are the rules Edmonton has for basement suites overly strict? Probabally.




Yes, yes, yes, and yes.



Jan Reimer, that's funny. No, I never really cared for her. And, no. Mixing rent subsidised housing in every part of the city is just retarted. Especially in areas where mass transit is limited. And I didn't refer at all to rent subsidised 'mini ghettos'. Never referred to subsidized housing at all.



Nor did I paint that picture. I'm talking about the 'professional' slum lord, who puts 4 families in an 800 square foot, 2 bedroom home, and two more 'families' in the 'car port' that used to be for horses in the 30's.



I totally agree with you. Fort Mac needs many thousand rental units, as fast as they can be built. Congestion and year round occupancy of campsites proves that. And where did I blame housing shortages on developers? I saw (and still see) plenty of open land, that no one would sell to *me*. That I blame on developers.



I do tend to be more socialist, but I agree with you on Economic policies of both ideologies. I also see that there has never been a perfect Capitalist, Socialist or Communist economy on any sort of large (country sized) scale.

   

I took the liberty of looking up the regs too. I had thought they'd be harder to find than they were.

In general I agree, the regs do seem strict, and should be relaxed a bit, however I disagree with the implication that minimally acceptable safety should be the only regulation.

Some level of quality of life should be regulated too, otehrwise we will wind up with slum housing in our basements.

Windows should be larger than 15x15 inches so that a good amount of light may enter the room, though an open ended regulation I can easily imagine runs into rediculously large windows quite quickly.

A private entrance, such that the basement may be accessed in some way which is not accessible from the main level should be provided so that the occupant of the basement may have private access to their suite. You mention a closet being unacceptable - would such a closet be pass-through, or would it completely block access to the rear exit?

A separately controlled heat system I can see would be valuable so as to prevent landlords from freezing out their tenants in an attempt to do an end run around eviction rules.

Again, I agree that the regulations could stand to be softened somewhat, but I see at least some merit to all of them.

   

Skip Edmonton if at all possible. It's really a dusty hellhole of a city. Calgary is much nicer. Though in my opinion the 2 best cities in Canada are Vancouver and Halifax. Montreal is also really nice but can be challenging to find work if you don't speak French. If new to Canada I'd recommend going to BC.

   

Would you just go back to whatever shit hole you came from and stop bitching?

   

How strict you ask? The city claims there are 50,000 illegal basement suites in Edmonton but according to their website there were only 30 applications last year and only 7 of those were approved. Starting to get the picture of who is causing the housing shortage?

   

Uh huh. And how long did it take to complete those 7, from the time the decision was made on the part of the property owner to pursue basement conversion to renter moving in? Imagine how long it would take if 7000 were approved and completed.

The housing shortage is caused by shortages in construction workers and construction materials, not strictness in regulations regarding basement suites. When we bought our condo, we assumed the tenants from the previous owner. We signed the contract on about october 10 and took posession on October 31. They weren't able to move in to their new house (which they'd already had built) until December 23. The reason? There was a concrete shortage and the floor of the basement hadn't been poured. It took over two and a half months to get the concrete in to pour the floor.

Regulations on basement suites are necessary to ensure a minimum quality standard, and while they may seem draconian to a wannabe slumlord like you, they ensure quality of life. Ripping up the regs to apply a band-aid solution to an enormous problem is just insane.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next