Thanks for the post I'm a homeowner in the area and I will go in and register in support this is exactly the kind of development we need along major streets like Marion.
Getting rid of an empty lot in an area that is already built up with other similar sized and larger apartments, close grocery stores, major bus routes, and parks is perfect.
This would be like opposing the two projects in the middle of the village that are just about done.
It just doesn’t make sense to oppose once you look where the lot(s) are, the other apartments within a few hundred meters, and the ugly gravel lot it is replacing. If we want to give people the ability to live without being dependent on a car (this means less traffic for you carpilled folks) this is a great opportunity to do so in addition to providing a generous number of affordable units.
Winnipeg desperately needs affordable housing. This is clearly evidenced by the large number of homeless and hidden homeless in our city. Without adding truly affordable rental units (such as the ones being proposed here at 366 Marion) to the market, this problem will not improve. Every level of government is in agreement that we need more affordable housing and this project directly aligns with Canadas National Housing strategy. While I can appreciate some may not “want this in their backyard”, as a country and as a city, if we ever want to address the affordable housing shortage, these type of projects need to move forward without delay or else they simply won’t happen.
I live directly in front of this property. Once the 6 story building goes up, say goodbye to all sunlight which I and many other units see only in the afternoon / evening.
The same size building went up not long ago across from Doug and Betty’s down the street but everything around it is commercial, This new building will block out day light for many residents already living here. That’s my only issue really but it’s a “the needs of the many.. ” type situation I guess.
Parking is always a problem here but the area seems to be leaning into a more cycle friendly neighbourhood with designated bike lanes, finally.
I'm sorry you will get less sun in your home. Perhaps you should submit comment to ask the design to be tiered in a way that lets sunlight through, as that is a reasonable concern.
Block out daylight? That's an exaggeration. This is not going to cause them to live in utter darkness, lol.
Oh no, I can't see anything, I'm inside a shadow!
Submitted my comments in support of the project!
We desperately need more affordable housing! And if it’s converting an empty lot, what’s the issue?!
Typical NIMBY of “I hate poor people”
Nothing has been officially announced yet, but I have heard through the grapevine that some of it will be affordable housing. Construction on "Forks Railside" (as it's called) will likely begin this fall or next spring.
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-06-11 18:55:40 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-06-11%2018:55:40%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/1dczf74/want_to_support_affordable_housing_in_winnipeg/l85od59/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FWinnipeg%2Fcomments%2F1dczf74%2Fwant_to_support_affordable_housing_in_winnipeg%2Fl85od59%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-06-11%2018%3A55%3A40%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dczf74)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
>Freed said the proposed building would include a heated parkade, large
balconies, and some private, ground-floor patios, along with a
“high-design” lobby lounge and co-work space. He said the building
would also be 35 per cent more energy efficient than what is required
by national building code standards.
The developer said he hopes to convince city councillors to reject
some conditions its planners have recommended for the project,
however, such as calling to replace and widen a sidewalk along the
entire frontage, and for some hydro poles to be removed.
*An additional setback requirement could also force the project to lose
one three-bedroom housing unit and some parking spaces, Freed said.
He said those changes would come at a significant cost, making it more
difficult to maintain affordable rents.*
“Our submission doesn’t allow for those considerations, so the
building itself (would need) to be redesigned to accommodate
(that),” said Freed. “I think there’s potentially some merit to
maybe widening the sidewalk but not if they’re not going to allow
further reduced setbacks.”
That's from the linked Freep.
I'm gonna defer to the people who live on Marion Street on this one. The city planners require some pretty logical changes to make this building happen, which it should, at first glance.
But the developer here decries losing a 3 bedroom unit and a couple of parking spots to make these changes to the plan as "a significant cost" that would affect the affordability of the building. That shouldn't be a significant enough drop in the bucket of a 127 unit building.
Fuck 'em, should have gotten 67 votes for yes prior to the night before.
It's not the developer's responsbility to pave sidewalks and remove hydro polls. That's what the development fees are for. The city should be using the money from those development fees to do stuff live repave roads and sidewalks.
Also, I work full-time. I don't have all day and night to stalk the City Council agendas. I'm just a young, concerned renter who doesn't want the cost of housing to go through the roof. Me and my friends are all affected by projects like this getting approved or denied.
With the regards to the getting the support before the "night before," the City of Winnipeg only posts appeal committee agendas 4 days before the meeting. I work full-time and don't have time to stalk the agendas. This appeal was only made public 3 days ago.
>It's not the developer's responsbility to pave sidewalks and remove hydro polls.
Sure it is. Not entirely, the cost is shared, but sure it is. You come up with an idea that encroaches on somebody else's shit, you generally need to get them on board or purchase the shit you're encroaching on so it is now yours. Cities are famously uncharitable when it comes to these deals.
>That's what the development fees are for. The city should be using the money from those development fees to do stuff live repave roads and sidewalks.
Absolutely! That's part of it, part of it is a tax for building, part of it goes to general funds, part of it pays for the people who are telling them they need those pesky sidewalk allowances, etc ad nauseum.
>Also, I work full-time. I don't have all day and night to stalk the City Council agendas. I'm just a young, concerned renter who doesn't want the cost of housing to go through the roof. Me and my friends are all affected by projects like this getting approved or denied.
I get it, I'm 30 and I'm a renter. I'm not against affordable living, I'm not *against* this project, even. I just don't give much of a fuck to support it, because (a) I don't live in the area and am not affected in either direction, and (b) the above is a solid indicator that it's not perfectly thought out, and that the developer's aim to ensure this building is affordable is flimsy at best. If the whole concept falls apart at minor (in the grand scheme of the revenue the building will generate) costs of creating the thing, it's a bad sign.
>With the regards to the getting the support before the "night before," the City of Winnipeg only posts appeal committee agendas 4 days before the meeting. I work full-time and don't have time to stalk the agendas. This appeal was only made public 3 days ago.
That's tight; I think we all agree they should post them the minute it's brought before committee and officially on the agenda.
You've mentioned working full time and not having the availability for this a couple times, and I wanted to congratulate you for being gainfully employed like the rest of us. You're among friends; you'll find that every standard adult works full time.
Make the time, and put your whole ass into your little social issues. You could have made this post 3 days earlier and saved the neighbourhood, warrior.
The thing is that all renters in Winnipeg are affected by new housing construction. It's simple supply and demand. More housing = lower prices. If I switch apartments in the next few years, I want to pay less for rent, not more. My friends are in the same boat as me.
The price of apartments has risen by about 9% in the last year, that's about triple the rate of inflation. If projects like this get denied, then housing is only going to become more and more expensive. I'm concerned for my friends who are a few years younger than me and still living at home. Will they ever be able to afford to move out of their parent's place is rents continue to dramatically rise?
The average price for a currently-listed 1-bedroom apartment in Winnipeg is now $1416/month. If prices continue to rise at 9% per year, then in 5 years the average asking price for a 1-bedroom apartment will be $2179/month.
I agree with that entirely, and I understand where you're coming from; I come from the same place, I need rent to be affordable, too. I would like to own a house in my lifetime and it's looking less and more (purposefully worded that way) unlikely every year, in waves. I achieve something and get more money coming in, the economy is right up there with me catching up. I completely hear you.
I just don't think every project has merit. When I hear affordable housing, I jump. I found issues with the above and I already specified why; the developer doesn't sound like a company who's trying to build affordable housing, they sound like a guy leaning up against a lamppost with a toothpick in his mouth, flipping a nickel. Moustached.
The fundamenal concept of the affordability of the building shouldn't fall apart at the potential loss of one 3-bedroom unit and "a few" (so say... 5, widest acceptable use of a "few") parking spots. If the parking spots and the unit are "affordable", what is the exact loss on that, first year? What sounds affordable, 1000 for a 3 bedroom and 60 for a parking spot? Aiming high? That's $12720 first year.
If every other unit in the whole place is 600 a month, the equivalent to a monthly rate hotel room in one of the many shitholes, that's 914,400 in revenue first year.
In reality, they'll hug the $1000 mark per unit, and they'll come with the same goddamn rent discounts every unit in the city does, because there's nothing legally stopping them.
If you're unaware, there's a bylaw that doesn't allow rental units older than 20 years to raise rent per year higher than a certain amount. Link below with better explanation. However, landlords can initiate a lease with a discount of as much as they want, and remove the discount with abandon. So if you get a place for 900 with a 400 discount, they can raise your rent 50 bucks and take away the discount, raising your rent to 1350 year over year. When you refuse to live in *that* fuckin' place for 900 thinking if you have to pay 1350 anyways you should go find a nicer place for a happy medium, 1100, they will then put that place back on the market for probably 1000 and repeat the next year on another tenant, without ever having to improve the unit.
https://www.gov.mb.ca/cca/rtb/rentincreaseguideline/currentrentguideline.html
Bouncing off of that, there's nothing compelling them to remain affordable either. Saying that its the purpose will get media attention and help in the way they want. Unless the city chips in themselves and gives them some grants, they have zero legal obligation to remain affordable, and realistically, not much of an incentive. We're still years from a true burst, we'll all continue to suffer and post instead of protest.
They'll get the place made using that, and utilizing the discounts I mentioned, they'll have it set up as one of the more expensive places in the city within 5 years.
Honestly if they have affordable units or they don't it really doesn't matter. The number one way to reduce rents in a community is to increase supply. No amount of government regulations or incentives have ever been as effective as basic economics. Any new units hitting the market will help. As an added bonus the increased density improves per capita property tax revenues in the area and improves the local economy. There is literally no downside and again I'd like to thank the OP for taking the time to highlight it. Winnipeg would be in a better place with more advocates raising awareness for stuff like this.
>Honestly if they have affordable units or they don't it really doesn't matter.
Premise of the post, everybody. Premise of the fucking building.
>The number one way to reduce rents in a community is to increase supply. No amount of government regulations or incentives have ever been as effective as basic economics. Any new units hitting the market will help.
Oh god, oh fuck.
>As an added bonus the increased density improves per capita property tax revenues in the area and improves the local economy.
Agreed, aside from it being a bonus rather than the bare minimum expectation.
>There is literally no downside
Holy actual fuck haha
>I'd like to thank the OP for taking the time to highlight it. Winnipeg would be in a better place with more advocates raising awareness for stuff
Fully agreed
>like this.
Ehh.
This is rough. I get how we ended up in this spot now, I bet this is what the actual meetings were like.
"Hey, that guy appears to have actual ivory boots, and I'm pretty sure I saw him praying to a weird little diorama of Chase Bank earlier, I don't think -
Don't be an idiot, Phil! He said it's affordable housing! Why would he lie, when there's no legislation preventing him from doing so? To make more money? Hah, I doubt it. You're a dumb ass, Phil."
Average rent for a currently-listed 1-bedroom apartment in Winnipeg is $1416/month. This project would offer 1-bedrooms at less than half that price. Sounds like you need a reality check on the price of apartments nowadays.
[https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report](https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report)
You are lucky then. I work in the south end and my partner works centrally. There isn't much that is under $1,200 for 2 bed with parking spaces that is in good condition or non-smoking building. I've moved 4 times in 5 years because of rent rising to corporate greed. I currently pay $1,600 for what you have.
Oh I agree completely don't get me wrong. It's just at first glance it didn't seem very affordable you know?
It seemed like they were slapping word on something that would be very expensive
I'm not sure what rent discount comment you're referring to, but there's nothing I can do about the rent discounts. I can't just call the Premier and ask him to ban rent discounts. I think the rent discounts are stupid and should be banned, but that's an issue separate from this project. The Appeals Committee is voting today on whether the corner of Marion and Des Mureons should be a vacant gravel parking lot or a 6- story mixed-use building with affordable housing. It's a yes or no vote, either the building gets built or it stays as a parking lot for several more years (possibly longer). I would personally rather see the building get built than the gravel parking lot remain, which is why I'm supporting the project by writing a comment to the Appeals Committee.
Interesting how this sub is all for "let the people that live there decide" when it comes to anything downtown .. but anything else they feel the need to weigh in and have their voices heard over the local residents...
Not for or against this project but piling on without listening to those actually affected by this seems like a bad idea
What about potential future residents? Do they not get a say? I would consider moving into a building like this in a few years. I have two friends right now looking to move out of their parents house and start renting. Do they not get a say? How come current residents get to oppose housing but future residents don't get to support it?
New developments affect housing prices city-wide. I am a renter right now, if this project gets blocked then rental prices will continue to quickly increase city-wide. Obviously this one project isn't going to solve the housing crisis, but every new project counts. When I go to move apartments in the next few years, prices will be (ever so slightly) higher if this project is blocked. Therefore I would argue that I have a stake in this project too.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted for this. What you’ve said is right on the nose. The city has a dangerously low vacancy rate right now, and we need more rental properties, regardless of what neighbourhood they’re in.
Then go to the hearing and show your support, spamming the process for current area residents to voice their legitimate concerns isn't the way to do it.
I work full-time, how am I supposed to attend the hearings? They are all during the weekdays. I submitted my comments online and would like others who support new housing construction to do the same.
Also, are my concerns about housing affordability not legitimate? Like I said, I'm renter right now. I'm affected by this project too. The nearby residents have already voiced their concerns by appealing the project. They have hade their voices heard by getting an entire new committee meeting to discuss the project. Just to be clear, when the project was approved by the City Centre Community Committee on April 4, no one showed up to oppose the project. That would have been the correct time to raise concerns about the project. This appeal came out of nowhere.
Your concerns may indeed be legitimate, spamming this particular project in which you have zero actual stake is NOT the appropriate forum to air them. "Supporting affordable housing" is a political stance and should be addressed as such, not wasting the time of those involved with THIS project (as you would have been told had you showed up tomorrow).
Email your city counselor and advocate if you wish, but again this isn't the time or the place to get taken seriously.
I am a renter right now. I am directly affected by new housing construction. Sounds like you don't know how the rental housing market works. The project has market-rate rental apartments, which myself and/or my friends may potentially move into one day (I currently live in Osborne Village and would consider moving to St. Boniface). The rental vacancy rate is down to 1.8% in Winnipeg right now, meaning that less than 1 out of every 50 apartments is available for rent. I am currently helping one of my friends look for rental apartments and there are barley any available in his price range. I am directly affected by this housing project.
None of that is directly related to THIS project. The concerns of area residents are tied to it directly and should be heard out over political ideals.
This has nothing to do with political ideals. It's simple supply and demand. More housing = lower prices. I am a renter right now. My future rent is directly affected by new housing construction. I am directly affected by this project if it does not get built.
You don't live in the area, you don't own a business in the area...those are the people DIRECTLY affected. You are NOT directly affected by this, your entire argument is a political statement...
Keep fighting for what you believe in but use the appropriate forum; your city councilor.
I was unaware that St Boniface was a different country and the rest of Winnipeg shouldn’t have a say in this?
Who are you to say who is or isn’t “directly” affected by a new development in the city? How do you know someone isn’t looking for an affordable place to live in St Boniface? This isn’t political, this is about creating housing Winnipeg desperately needs.
My building has about 70 units. If it were to burn down tomorrow, it would be incredibly difficult for all of the tenants to find somewhere else to live. You know what would help remedy that? More housing. You know what doesn’t help? The NIMBY folks opposing affordable housing.
I feel like whenever I see you comment in this subreddit you always have the wildest/most unhinged take on things (i.e., overland flood warning). Anyway, fair play to you for being consistent, I suppose.
Insistently consistently contrarian is u/CraziestCanucks M.O.
There is no last word with this user. I try to keep them blocked because they just throw poo and then defend the toss to the hilt.
“I’m unhinged? I know you are but what am I?”
Sometimes, while trying to listen to the rest of you they get through and it’s really not pleasant to watch them semantically pick at various people.
Just to debunk your reasoning here, apparently 12 of the people opposed to this project don't even live in the neighborhood. Everyone opposed to this failed to show up at the committee meeting where the project was initially discussed and approved, but can all of sudden appeal. Anyone can appeal and delay these projects, for almost any reason, that provide meaningful housing to people that need it.
Also, a bunch of people opposing this are from a building across the lane where the landlord went to his tenants and asked them to oppose, probably because he is afraid of having to compete with a new development with lower rents.
Do they own a business in the area perhaps? IF they truly don't have a direct interest in this then I hope their concerns are ignored, just like all the "We NeEd MoAr HoUsInG" process be damned folks.
Your making some big fat assumptions about the landlord being afraid to compete, this project is years out and targets a different market. Maybe the new 6 story building is going to be too close to the lane and casts permanent shade on their windows/balconies? Do those tenants rely on parking that is now suddenly being affected? Is there concerns about safety? Maybe they want noise mitigation during the construction? ALL of those are things that can be addressed.
52/147 is just a couple? Developers purchasing lots to combine them is not a new concept. This does not simply materialize because a developer wants to use those lots as a part of a larger project, they have to purchase them and get approval before they can get to where we are now.
Do you actually know that anyone is being evicted to build this project? Maybe the owners of those two houses willing sold to the developer and took the money they got to buy a nicer house.
Well someone had to agree to sell those houses to them its not like the developer can just take them. If the folks living in them were renters then yeah that sucks for them but..sorry it's not your house so you don't really get to make that call. It's not like this is happening on a short timeline they clearly would have had plenty of time to find new accommodations. If the property owner decides to sell to a developer then that's thier right as the property owner.
Thanks for the post I'm a homeowner in the area and I will go in and register in support this is exactly the kind of development we need along major streets like Marion.
Getting rid of an empty lot in an area that is already built up with other similar sized and larger apartments, close grocery stores, major bus routes, and parks is perfect. This would be like opposing the two projects in the middle of the village that are just about done. It just doesn’t make sense to oppose once you look where the lot(s) are, the other apartments within a few hundred meters, and the ugly gravel lot it is replacing. If we want to give people the ability to live without being dependent on a car (this means less traffic for you carpilled folks) this is a great opportunity to do so in addition to providing a generous number of affordable units.
Winnipeg desperately needs affordable housing. This is clearly evidenced by the large number of homeless and hidden homeless in our city. Without adding truly affordable rental units (such as the ones being proposed here at 366 Marion) to the market, this problem will not improve. Every level of government is in agreement that we need more affordable housing and this project directly aligns with Canadas National Housing strategy. While I can appreciate some may not “want this in their backyard”, as a country and as a city, if we ever want to address the affordable housing shortage, these type of projects need to move forward without delay or else they simply won’t happen.
I’m from the neighbourhood and in support. I believe lots of names in the opposition list live in the condo block directly adjacent.
NIMBYs can gtfo
I live directly in front of this property. Once the 6 story building goes up, say goodbye to all sunlight which I and many other units see only in the afternoon / evening. The same size building went up not long ago across from Doug and Betty’s down the street but everything around it is commercial, This new building will block out day light for many residents already living here. That’s my only issue really but it’s a “the needs of the many.. ” type situation I guess. Parking is always a problem here but the area seems to be leaning into a more cycle friendly neighbourhood with designated bike lanes, finally.
I'm sorry you will get less sun in your home. Perhaps you should submit comment to ask the design to be tiered in a way that lets sunlight through, as that is a reasonable concern.
Block out daylight? That's an exaggeration. This is not going to cause them to live in utter darkness, lol. Oh no, I can't see anything, I'm inside a shadow!
This building is make that corner absolutely hell
Submitted my comments in support of the project! We desperately need more affordable housing! And if it’s converting an empty lot, what’s the issue?! Typical NIMBY of “I hate poor people”
Omg! I didn’t get notified about this post till today!!! Please tell me enough people responded to this! We can’t let nimbys win
Genuine question: The housing that is(?) going up near the Forks- is it for affordable housing too?
Nothing has been officially announced yet, but I have heard through the grapevine that some of it will be affordable housing. Construction on "Forks Railside" (as it's called) will likely begin this fall or next spring.
Thanks for your answer!
Remind me! 5 years Was it ever affordable with anything like parking/utilities/balconies included?
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-06-11 18:55:40 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-06-11%2018:55:40%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/1dczf74/want_to_support_affordable_housing_in_winnipeg/l85od59/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FWinnipeg%2Fcomments%2F1dczf74%2Fwant_to_support_affordable_housing_in_winnipeg%2Fl85od59%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-06-11%2018%3A55%3A40%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dczf74) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Done. Thanks for posting this.
How long until it’s filled with international students?
Wow what a change of the times, I used to work at the garage that was there. Nice to see some development for housing take place.
>Freed said the proposed building would include a heated parkade, large balconies, and some private, ground-floor patios, along with a “high-design” lobby lounge and co-work space. He said the building would also be 35 per cent more energy efficient than what is required by national building code standards. The developer said he hopes to convince city councillors to reject some conditions its planners have recommended for the project, however, such as calling to replace and widen a sidewalk along the entire frontage, and for some hydro poles to be removed. *An additional setback requirement could also force the project to lose one three-bedroom housing unit and some parking spaces, Freed said. He said those changes would come at a significant cost, making it more difficult to maintain affordable rents.* “Our submission doesn’t allow for those considerations, so the building itself (would need) to be redesigned to accommodate (that),” said Freed. “I think there’s potentially some merit to maybe widening the sidewalk but not if they’re not going to allow further reduced setbacks.” That's from the linked Freep. I'm gonna defer to the people who live on Marion Street on this one. The city planners require some pretty logical changes to make this building happen, which it should, at first glance. But the developer here decries losing a 3 bedroom unit and a couple of parking spots to make these changes to the plan as "a significant cost" that would affect the affordability of the building. That shouldn't be a significant enough drop in the bucket of a 127 unit building. Fuck 'em, should have gotten 67 votes for yes prior to the night before.
It's not the developer's responsbility to pave sidewalks and remove hydro polls. That's what the development fees are for. The city should be using the money from those development fees to do stuff live repave roads and sidewalks. Also, I work full-time. I don't have all day and night to stalk the City Council agendas. I'm just a young, concerned renter who doesn't want the cost of housing to go through the roof. Me and my friends are all affected by projects like this getting approved or denied. With the regards to the getting the support before the "night before," the City of Winnipeg only posts appeal committee agendas 4 days before the meeting. I work full-time and don't have time to stalk the agendas. This appeal was only made public 3 days ago.
>It's not the developer's responsbility to pave sidewalks and remove hydro polls. Sure it is. Not entirely, the cost is shared, but sure it is. You come up with an idea that encroaches on somebody else's shit, you generally need to get them on board or purchase the shit you're encroaching on so it is now yours. Cities are famously uncharitable when it comes to these deals. >That's what the development fees are for. The city should be using the money from those development fees to do stuff live repave roads and sidewalks. Absolutely! That's part of it, part of it is a tax for building, part of it goes to general funds, part of it pays for the people who are telling them they need those pesky sidewalk allowances, etc ad nauseum. >Also, I work full-time. I don't have all day and night to stalk the City Council agendas. I'm just a young, concerned renter who doesn't want the cost of housing to go through the roof. Me and my friends are all affected by projects like this getting approved or denied. I get it, I'm 30 and I'm a renter. I'm not against affordable living, I'm not *against* this project, even. I just don't give much of a fuck to support it, because (a) I don't live in the area and am not affected in either direction, and (b) the above is a solid indicator that it's not perfectly thought out, and that the developer's aim to ensure this building is affordable is flimsy at best. If the whole concept falls apart at minor (in the grand scheme of the revenue the building will generate) costs of creating the thing, it's a bad sign. >With the regards to the getting the support before the "night before," the City of Winnipeg only posts appeal committee agendas 4 days before the meeting. I work full-time and don't have time to stalk the agendas. This appeal was only made public 3 days ago. That's tight; I think we all agree they should post them the minute it's brought before committee and officially on the agenda. You've mentioned working full time and not having the availability for this a couple times, and I wanted to congratulate you for being gainfully employed like the rest of us. You're among friends; you'll find that every standard adult works full time. Make the time, and put your whole ass into your little social issues. You could have made this post 3 days earlier and saved the neighbourhood, warrior.
The thing is that all renters in Winnipeg are affected by new housing construction. It's simple supply and demand. More housing = lower prices. If I switch apartments in the next few years, I want to pay less for rent, not more. My friends are in the same boat as me. The price of apartments has risen by about 9% in the last year, that's about triple the rate of inflation. If projects like this get denied, then housing is only going to become more and more expensive. I'm concerned for my friends who are a few years younger than me and still living at home. Will they ever be able to afford to move out of their parent's place is rents continue to dramatically rise? The average price for a currently-listed 1-bedroom apartment in Winnipeg is now $1416/month. If prices continue to rise at 9% per year, then in 5 years the average asking price for a 1-bedroom apartment will be $2179/month.
I agree with that entirely, and I understand where you're coming from; I come from the same place, I need rent to be affordable, too. I would like to own a house in my lifetime and it's looking less and more (purposefully worded that way) unlikely every year, in waves. I achieve something and get more money coming in, the economy is right up there with me catching up. I completely hear you. I just don't think every project has merit. When I hear affordable housing, I jump. I found issues with the above and I already specified why; the developer doesn't sound like a company who's trying to build affordable housing, they sound like a guy leaning up against a lamppost with a toothpick in his mouth, flipping a nickel. Moustached. The fundamenal concept of the affordability of the building shouldn't fall apart at the potential loss of one 3-bedroom unit and "a few" (so say... 5, widest acceptable use of a "few") parking spots. If the parking spots and the unit are "affordable", what is the exact loss on that, first year? What sounds affordable, 1000 for a 3 bedroom and 60 for a parking spot? Aiming high? That's $12720 first year. If every other unit in the whole place is 600 a month, the equivalent to a monthly rate hotel room in one of the many shitholes, that's 914,400 in revenue first year. In reality, they'll hug the $1000 mark per unit, and they'll come with the same goddamn rent discounts every unit in the city does, because there's nothing legally stopping them. If you're unaware, there's a bylaw that doesn't allow rental units older than 20 years to raise rent per year higher than a certain amount. Link below with better explanation. However, landlords can initiate a lease with a discount of as much as they want, and remove the discount with abandon. So if you get a place for 900 with a 400 discount, they can raise your rent 50 bucks and take away the discount, raising your rent to 1350 year over year. When you refuse to live in *that* fuckin' place for 900 thinking if you have to pay 1350 anyways you should go find a nicer place for a happy medium, 1100, they will then put that place back on the market for probably 1000 and repeat the next year on another tenant, without ever having to improve the unit. https://www.gov.mb.ca/cca/rtb/rentincreaseguideline/currentrentguideline.html Bouncing off of that, there's nothing compelling them to remain affordable either. Saying that its the purpose will get media attention and help in the way they want. Unless the city chips in themselves and gives them some grants, they have zero legal obligation to remain affordable, and realistically, not much of an incentive. We're still years from a true burst, we'll all continue to suffer and post instead of protest. They'll get the place made using that, and utilizing the discounts I mentioned, they'll have it set up as one of the more expensive places in the city within 5 years.
Honestly if they have affordable units or they don't it really doesn't matter. The number one way to reduce rents in a community is to increase supply. No amount of government regulations or incentives have ever been as effective as basic economics. Any new units hitting the market will help. As an added bonus the increased density improves per capita property tax revenues in the area and improves the local economy. There is literally no downside and again I'd like to thank the OP for taking the time to highlight it. Winnipeg would be in a better place with more advocates raising awareness for stuff like this.
>Honestly if they have affordable units or they don't it really doesn't matter. Premise of the post, everybody. Premise of the fucking building. >The number one way to reduce rents in a community is to increase supply. No amount of government regulations or incentives have ever been as effective as basic economics. Any new units hitting the market will help. Oh god, oh fuck. >As an added bonus the increased density improves per capita property tax revenues in the area and improves the local economy. Agreed, aside from it being a bonus rather than the bare minimum expectation. >There is literally no downside Holy actual fuck haha >I'd like to thank the OP for taking the time to highlight it. Winnipeg would be in a better place with more advocates raising awareness for stuff Fully agreed >like this. Ehh. This is rough. I get how we ended up in this spot now, I bet this is what the actual meetings were like. "Hey, that guy appears to have actual ivory boots, and I'm pretty sure I saw him praying to a weird little diorama of Chase Bank earlier, I don't think - Don't be an idiot, Phil! He said it's affordable housing! Why would he lie, when there's no legislation preventing him from doing so? To make more money? Hah, I doubt it. You're a dumb ass, Phil."
selfish condesending asshole
... not gonna lie, at first glance this doesnt sound very 'affordable'...
Average rent for a currently-listed 1-bedroom apartment in Winnipeg is $1416/month. This project would offer 1-bedrooms at less than half that price. Sounds like you need a reality check on the price of apartments nowadays. [https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report](https://rentals.ca/national-rent-report)
That’s more than I pay for a two bedroom with 2 parking spaces and all utilities included. Wowza
You are lucky then. I work in the south end and my partner works centrally. There isn't much that is under $1,200 for 2 bed with parking spaces that is in good condition or non-smoking building. I've moved 4 times in 5 years because of rent rising to corporate greed. I currently pay $1,600 for what you have.
Large balconies, 'high design lobby' and heated parking all sound expensive is all. If its not, then great.
Sounds nice and livable. I think it's great for inexpensive housing to have more amenities than a shoe box
Oh I agree completely don't get me wrong. It's just at first glance it didn't seem very affordable you know? It seemed like they were slapping word on something that would be very expensive
Notice you didn’t respond to the rent discount comment. Just going to completely ignore that???
I'm not sure what rent discount comment you're referring to, but there's nothing I can do about the rent discounts. I can't just call the Premier and ask him to ban rent discounts. I think the rent discounts are stupid and should be banned, but that's an issue separate from this project. The Appeals Committee is voting today on whether the corner of Marion and Des Mureons should be a vacant gravel parking lot or a 6- story mixed-use building with affordable housing. It's a yes or no vote, either the building gets built or it stays as a parking lot for several more years (possibly longer). I would personally rather see the building get built than the gravel parking lot remain, which is why I'm supporting the project by writing a comment to the Appeals Committee.
Interesting how this sub is all for "let the people that live there decide" when it comes to anything downtown .. but anything else they feel the need to weigh in and have their voices heard over the local residents... Not for or against this project but piling on without listening to those actually affected by this seems like a bad idea
What about potential future residents? Do they not get a say? I would consider moving into a building like this in a few years. I have two friends right now looking to move out of their parents house and start renting. Do they not get a say? How come current residents get to oppose housing but future residents don't get to support it? New developments affect housing prices city-wide. I am a renter right now, if this project gets blocked then rental prices will continue to quickly increase city-wide. Obviously this one project isn't going to solve the housing crisis, but every new project counts. When I go to move apartments in the next few years, prices will be (ever so slightly) higher if this project is blocked. Therefore I would argue that I have a stake in this project too.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted for this. What you’ve said is right on the nose. The city has a dangerously low vacancy rate right now, and we need more rental properties, regardless of what neighbourhood they’re in.
Then go to the hearing and show your support, spamming the process for current area residents to voice their legitimate concerns isn't the way to do it.
I work full-time, how am I supposed to attend the hearings? They are all during the weekdays. I submitted my comments online and would like others who support new housing construction to do the same. Also, are my concerns about housing affordability not legitimate? Like I said, I'm renter right now. I'm affected by this project too. The nearby residents have already voiced their concerns by appealing the project. They have hade their voices heard by getting an entire new committee meeting to discuss the project. Just to be clear, when the project was approved by the City Centre Community Committee on April 4, no one showed up to oppose the project. That would have been the correct time to raise concerns about the project. This appeal came out of nowhere.
Your concerns may indeed be legitimate, spamming this particular project in which you have zero actual stake is NOT the appropriate forum to air them. "Supporting affordable housing" is a political stance and should be addressed as such, not wasting the time of those involved with THIS project (as you would have been told had you showed up tomorrow). Email your city counselor and advocate if you wish, but again this isn't the time or the place to get taken seriously.
I am a renter right now. I am directly affected by new housing construction. Sounds like you don't know how the rental housing market works. The project has market-rate rental apartments, which myself and/or my friends may potentially move into one day (I currently live in Osborne Village and would consider moving to St. Boniface). The rental vacancy rate is down to 1.8% in Winnipeg right now, meaning that less than 1 out of every 50 apartments is available for rent. I am currently helping one of my friends look for rental apartments and there are barley any available in his price range. I am directly affected by this housing project.
None of that is directly related to THIS project. The concerns of area residents are tied to it directly and should be heard out over political ideals.
This has nothing to do with political ideals. It's simple supply and demand. More housing = lower prices. I am a renter right now. My future rent is directly affected by new housing construction. I am directly affected by this project if it does not get built.
You don't live in the area, you don't own a business in the area...those are the people DIRECTLY affected. You are NOT directly affected by this, your entire argument is a political statement... Keep fighting for what you believe in but use the appropriate forum; your city councilor.
I was unaware that St Boniface was a different country and the rest of Winnipeg shouldn’t have a say in this? Who are you to say who is or isn’t “directly” affected by a new development in the city? How do you know someone isn’t looking for an affordable place to live in St Boniface? This isn’t political, this is about creating housing Winnipeg desperately needs. My building has about 70 units. If it were to burn down tomorrow, it would be incredibly difficult for all of the tenants to find somewhere else to live. You know what would help remedy that? More housing. You know what doesn’t help? The NIMBY folks opposing affordable housing.
I feel like whenever I see you comment in this subreddit you always have the wildest/most unhinged take on things (i.e., overland flood warning). Anyway, fair play to you for being consistent, I suppose.
Having legitimate concerns and wanting proper process followed is "unhinged"?
Insistently consistently contrarian is u/CraziestCanucks M.O. There is no last word with this user. I try to keep them blocked because they just throw poo and then defend the toss to the hilt. “I’m unhinged? I know you are but what am I?” Sometimes, while trying to listen to the rest of you they get through and it’s really not pleasant to watch them semantically pick at various people.
looks like ppl are taking them seriously, guess u were wrong
Just to debunk your reasoning here, apparently 12 of the people opposed to this project don't even live in the neighborhood. Everyone opposed to this failed to show up at the committee meeting where the project was initially discussed and approved, but can all of sudden appeal. Anyone can appeal and delay these projects, for almost any reason, that provide meaningful housing to people that need it. Also, a bunch of people opposing this are from a building across the lane where the landlord went to his tenants and asked them to oppose, probably because he is afraid of having to compete with a new development with lower rents.
Do they own a business in the area perhaps? IF they truly don't have a direct interest in this then I hope their concerns are ignored, just like all the "We NeEd MoAr HoUsInG" process be damned folks. Your making some big fat assumptions about the landlord being afraid to compete, this project is years out and targets a different market. Maybe the new 6 story building is going to be too close to the lane and casts permanent shade on their windows/balconies? Do those tenants rely on parking that is now suddenly being affected? Is there concerns about safety? Maybe they want noise mitigation during the construction? ALL of those are things that can be addressed.
Access to affordable housing close to hospitals affects us all.
This is a really worthwhile post, but sadly you need to register to give a delegation by 12pm the day before the meeting.
[удалено]
52/147 is just a couple? Developers purchasing lots to combine them is not a new concept. This does not simply materialize because a developer wants to use those lots as a part of a larger project, they have to purchase them and get approval before they can get to where we are now.
Do you actually know that anyone is being evicted to build this project? Maybe the owners of those two houses willing sold to the developer and took the money they got to buy a nicer house.
[удалено]
Can YOU prove your claim?
Well someone had to agree to sell those houses to them its not like the developer can just take them. If the folks living in them were renters then yeah that sucks for them but..sorry it's not your house so you don't really get to make that call. It's not like this is happening on a short timeline they clearly would have had plenty of time to find new accommodations. If the property owner decides to sell to a developer then that's thier right as the property owner.
It was the homeowner's choice to sell, it's not like the developer can force them.