Winnipeg | 634 Portage Ave | 20F | 215ft

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Jack1983

The key to affordability is increasing supply. The larger the supply the less pressure there is on rents everywhere. A low income person is unlikely to move into a new development; however higher income people may move out of their older apartments into said development. Thus freeing up space in the older cheaper building.

There is an indignant letter to the editor in the paper today that misses this point. This building simply wouldn't be going up if the landlords could only charge $900 rent. I mean maybe it could if governments kicked in subsidies, but that's a whole other issue and it has nothing to do with the developers. The point is that the new building will attract people at the higher end of the market, leaving other mostly less expensive spaces available for others.

Don’t need ‘luxury’ tower
Re: Proposal puts 20-storey tower on vacant corner at Portage and Furby (Oct. 26)

It’s a shame to see developers and city planners again out of touch when it comes to affordable housing and the economic realities faced by renters in Winnipeg.

In this new tower, one bedrooms are proposed to rent at $1,400, two bedrooms at $1,898 and three bedrooms at $3,118. I think the individuals interviewed in the story ought to take a look at the most recent vacancy rates for Winnipeg rentals: the majority of vacancies charge the highest 25 per cent of rents, while the lowest number of vacancies are for affordable, low-cost rentals.

It is upsetting to see greed and profit-seeking developers and planners waste an opportunity that could bring to the West End more than 200 affordable rental units (affordable meaning not exceeding 20-30 per cent of monthly income, as defined by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation). This tower would merely add to the proliferation of "luxury" developments, worsening Winnipeg’s affordability crisis.

Shannon Furness

Winnipeg

Interestingly, there is another letter about the same project that calls into question its appropriateness for the site. But the writer has unwittingly identified a shortcoming of Winnipeg's inflexible zoning rules, not the project itself.

Always find it interesting when those involved say "It is perfect for this piece of property," then mention the only problem is the property in question is not zoned for the purpose it is supposedly perfect for and will have to be rezoned. One would think if the property was in fact perfect, it would already be zoned for the purpose in question and not have to be rezoned.

James Roberts

Winnipeg

[biguc]

Ah yes, the old "we can't legalize that, it's illegal!" argument.

[optimusREIM]

In true Winnipeg fashion the negative Nancys are out. I believe the life cycle of these complain trains is that in about 10 years they’re all gonna claim that they were big supporters of the project at the time.

[The Jabroni]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

In true Winnipeg fashion the negative Nancys are out. I believe the life cycle of these complain trains is that in about 10 years they’re all gonna claim that they were big supporters of the project at the time.

Let me guess, "It'S tOo TaLL aND wILl TaKE uP tHE wHoLe SkYLIne!!"

Bich please! Lion's Place is LITERALLY next door and it's just as tall!

Goddam NIMBYs!!

[buzzg]

The first letter talks about it like it's the city who gets to decide what the owner charges for rent, and that its the owners responsibility to provide social or subsidized housing. Yes, we should have a minimum amount of "affordable" units per development, yes MH should subisize some units – but they aren't so the developer is rightly going to do their thing.

The second letters – so what you want another car dealership there?

[michelleb]

To offer one data point on rents...we moved into a newly renovated, ~1100sq.ft. 2-bedroom in a certain 35 year old downtown highrise last year at $1555/month. They've now notified us of a 7.07% increase ($110) to $1665 as of Feb 1. Rent control, what's that?

Where it gets interesting: this is after significant discounts. Our true "present rent" is $2027 before discount and the "proposed rent" is $2143 before discount. They see that as the "market rate". Which, wow.

[trueviking]

oh man that letter is unreal. If it won't rent at these rates, they won't build it. But that's the developer's choice.


Why would it be up to a private developer to provide affordable housing? If the government wants to give them money to make the units affordable I'm pretty sure they would take it.

We need housing diversity - market suites, luxury suites, affordable housing, supportive housing, social housing....not just affordable housing.

[WinCitySparky]

Originally Posted by trueviking

oh man that letter is unreal. If it won't rent at these rates, they won't build it. But that's the developer's choice.


Why would it be up to a private developer to provide affordable housing? If the government wants to give them money to make the units affordable I'm pretty sure they would take it.

We need housing diversity - market suites, luxury suites, affordable housing, supportive housing, social housing....not just affordable housing.

Exactly. I’m fucking sick of hearing about affordable housing like it’s the solution to all of society’s problems and that people/entities should be forced to solve the problem at their expense. It’s a government issue, take it up with government as a policy/funding issue, and stop hamstringing the private sector for building housing in whatever form the market will support.

[T'Cona]

Agreed. God forbid a residential development targets middle to high income residents; that's the last thing we need: more people with buying power to support shops and restaurants downtown.

[Jammon]

Originally Posted by trueviking

oh man that letter is unreal. If it won't rent at these rates, they won't build it. But that's the developer's choice.


Why would it be up to a private developer to provide affordable housing? If the government wants to give them money to make the units affordable I'm pretty sure they would take it.

We need housing diversity - market suites, luxury suites, affordable housing, supportive housing, social housing....not just affordable housing.

Exactly. We need more subsidized housing- co-ops, etc. My Mom runs a housing co-op and in her 20 years running, there has always been a waitlist for units, however, she said the longest waitlist she has ever experienced is right now and she receives calls daily. Some people have been waiting years for a unit to become available.

[Alexander 90]

Furby is the #1 Murder Street in Winnipeg.

[Alexander 90]

They duplicated my comment. delete this comment.........

[Authentic_City]

Originally Posted by Alexander 90

Furby is the #1 Murder Street in Winnipeg.

[Winnipeg Grump]

Is this project dead?

One sign has been removed and the other has shifted over to 'Investment Opportunity"

[esquire]

Another pandemic victim?

[peg]

P3 still has it listed on their website:

https://privatepensionpartners.com/p...-ave-winnipeg/

Hope this is not cancelled.

[WinCitySparky]

P3 is probably in over their heads on mega projects currently

[cllew]

If I am not mistaken they have 2 years to start construction before the zoning change expires unless they apply for an extension. I am not sure of the exact date the zoning bylaw was changed for their project but I'm thinking that it puts the end date into late 2023 or early 2024.

[borkborkbork]

Originally Posted by WinCitySparky

Exactly. I’m fucking sick of hearing about affordable housing like it’s the solution to all of society’s problems and that people/entities should be forced to solve the problem at their expense. It’s a government issue, take it up with government as a policy/funding issue, and stop hamstringing the private sector for building housing in whatever form the market will support.

It's bizarre that when commercial property gets developed, you don't have people angrily demanding "THIS DYNACARE SHOULD BE A HOSPITAL INSTEAD" or "WHY IS THIS A JOLIBEES IT SHOULD BE A SOUP KITCHEN"

like, yes, we need affordable housing, but this isn't the responsibility of real estate developers. it's government. if you think housing affordability is an issue (it is), lobby for major increases to Rent Assist and EIA. Lobby for incentive programs for developers to build affordable buildings or suites. Lobby for reduced restrictions on the things that make it hard to build affordable housing (height restrictions, parking minimums, etc.). but wanting a developer to build affordable housing just out of the goodness of their hearts?

[BAKGUY]

Originally Posted by borkborkbork

It's bizarre that when commercial property gets developed, you don't have people angrily demanding "THIS DYNACARE SHOULD BE A HOSPITAL INSTEAD" or "WHY IS THIS A JOLIBEES IT SHOULD BE A SOUP KITCHEN"

like, yes, we need affordable housing, but this isn't the responsibility of real estate developers. it's government. if you think housing affordability is an issue (it is), lobby for major increases to Rent Assist and EIA. Lobby for incentive programs for developers to build affordable buildings or suites. Lobby for reduced restrictions on the things that make it hard to build affordable housing (height restrictions, parking minimums, etc.). but wanting a developer to build affordable housing just out of the goodness of their hearts?

Yes, absolutely.
Private developers need to recoup their investment.
Plus, having a development as this. will spur others of all varieties , price points and make the area a bit safer with more people.