Many illegal operations have illegal long term and illegal short term units in the same house.Owners will shut down the illegal long term units as they produce less cash flow. This will add to the housing problem.
Shutting down the illegal short term rentals will hopefully convince some to do legal long term rentals. Mayor Osborne says we are short 90 rental units in Tofino. Therefore shutting down the illegals in The Shore, South Chesterman and Eco Lodge should solve that problem.
The District should be focusing on providing incentives for making the construction of new traditional monthly rental housing apartments like Sin City a reality. A couple more of those would provide locals a stepping stone from "staff housing" to better quality and secure year round monthly rental housing. To expect single family home owners in Tofino to be responsible for providing Tofino's need for traditional monthly rental housing is just unrealistic, especially when home owners aren't even obligated to build a secondary suite. Sorry but The Shore and South Chesterman properties will never become the answer to Tofino's shortage of monthly rental housing units.
If I had some money that I was considering investing into real estate, the very LAST place I'd ever consider would be long term rental housing, especially in Tofino, especially to seasonal staff! I'd have to be a total idiot to ever think about such a thing! They move in, I get a half month's rent as "security", they party, they move in six "friends", four cats, and two huge dogs, they wreck the place, then they take off in October and don't pay the rent........ and I get screwed! Oh sure, I can file a complaint with Residential Tenancies...... and get a "judgement" ...... if I can ever find the guys again, and if they ever have any money, and if I can somehow manage to collect it.(Which ain't likely). Meanwhile, I've got $6,350.00 in damages to repair, cleaning costs, and carpets to replace, before I can rent the place again. No Thanks, let 'em rent a tent at Pooles, I'll vacation rental my property, make a buck, and NOT have the place wrecked.
you're exactly right 7:05....monthly tenants can be a revolving nightmare especailly with seasonal staff comng and going and if home owners are'nt experienced at being a "landlord". It seems " seasonal" housing is one thing that many resort owners are actively trying to accommodate so they can actually hire staff. Traditional long term monthly rental housing is what Tofino needs. Professionally managed under one roof.Going after owners who like you would prefer to do short term rentals dealing with appreciative vacationing tourists instead of monthly tenants is not the answer.
Sin City was originally built as housing for fish plant workers. The district supplied the land at a reasonable price and a builder took on the project as a free enterprise venture.The trailer park behind the Esso/Gas n Go was built for workers at Cypre River logging camp. The same with the houses on Cypre Crescent. All built by the logging company. The original plan at South Chesterman's condos was for a boutique hotel. That didn't work out so increased density was allowed as the units were all to be long term housing with no nightly rentals.
Between 1971 and 1977 the Federal AHOP (assisted home ownership program ) also helped build many homes in Tofino . The program ended in 1978.
It is somewhat ironic that some of those houses built under the AHOP program are now vacation rentals.
sin city was built under MURB program which gave a huge tax benefit to the developer. not just free enterprise.s. chestermans wasn't considered for a boutique hotel by anybody seriously . maybe the sellers.
Robin Fells had originally wanted to put a small hotel at South Chestermans . Thanks for the MURB info
Multiple-unit residential building (MURB) investment was a popular Canadian tax shelter in the 1970s as it was a low-risk investment providing huge tax write-offs. The situation has changed. The historical development of the MURB as a tax shelter portrays a changing level of incentives. First, incentives to invest in existing buildings, then to build new buildings. The introduction of soft-cost deductions created a boom in building. Gradually, the Department of Finance began to feel that capital cost allowances of ten percent were too generous and the National Revenue felt the same about soft-cost deductions. Residential real estate investment as a tax shelter ceased as of the November 12, 1981 federal budget, which completely eliminated MURB programs and required soft costs on buildings to be capitalized until construction was completed. Soft-cost deductions were disallowed except for four circumstances. One clause stated that the project progress without undue delay, but there were loopholes.
Does it ever occur to anyone that this issue can be solved by approaching it from the opposite direction? What if when we realize we are unable to house all these seasonal employees we at least put a hold on building more resorts? What if we take some steps to get the balance back in the local economy and stop enabling an increase in tourism... at the very least until we get the current housing shortage, the water shortage and sewage pollution issues resolved?
One of the biggest obstacles to doing much in the big picture i.e. the future, was local reaction to doing anything that they personally cannot see or understand. on the other end of the scale we now have the opposite. the only folks allowed to plan are educated nincompoops who have no skin in the game of tofino besides getting a fat check and prestigious award somewhere. on a positive note the leighton way/ Peterson Drive was developed by the District as an affordable opportunity for local folks to buy property and build a home. so far, with the exception of one house, it still houses locals. Fred Tibbs was built as an affordable housing opportunity for local people starting at $68,000. it didn't work out that way. South Chestermans was built with the thought in mind that the local folks would like a cheap opportunity to live on the beach. even though the district put a covenant on the property prohibiting transient nightly rentals( walk in off the street) things didn't turn out according to plan. what everybody seems to miss is that you can't have affordable housing rental or otherwise without rigid controls in the first place. the district's current policy of accepting condo units as part of the housing amenity idea has no policy in place, rules, regulations, qualifying criteria, etc. and will probably result in a giant mess like the rest of the housing ideas here. it is certainly folly to expect a developer to do anything in regard to building a rental apartment building. given the costs of land, building, servicing, off-site servicing, DCC's and whatever else the district wants no one in their right mind would do this unless the land was free. one might as well just hand their wallet to the district of tofino who will give it back to them when it's empty. 7:05 explains the rental shituation exactly how it is.
The council should crack down on the illegal campsites . Some of the people steal stuff
Why not create a campsite for seasonal employees only? Communal toilets, showers, kitchen, occupied cabin on-site for oversight. Mess up and you get the boot.
Why should the taxpayer pay for staff housing for private enterprise ?
Post a Comment