"WHEREAS it is probable that some of these units are being rented in violation of bylaws" South Chesterman,EcoLodge and Shore.Nothing will be done.
11:07AM..... looks like you got your "hate list" all figured out. All you know is what you've read on the earlier comments on this issue. What are you going to do about the couple hundred other places that are operating in violation? Where are the thousands of tourists going to stay next summer? The reason that this problem exists is because of simple supply and demand, people want to visit Tofino and they want a place to stay and there isn't enough tourist accomodation available to meet the demand. So what do we do? Let's shut down Tourism Tofino! All these visitors they're attracting is causing a lack of affordable housing for young families....... Or maybe we can all just scream about South Chesterman's, Shore and Ecolodge, and blame them for the decades of poor development planning that's happened in Tofino. Remember the expansion that Pacific Sands tried to have approved to meet this demand, and they gave up and sold because of stonewalling and hassle from the District. Or the proposed expansion of Marina West, again abandoned because of District beauracracy. If some of those units had been built, perhaps it would have filled some of the demand and the "illegal" suites wouldn't be so lucrative. The couple units at Shore and Chestermans isn't the problem...... The problem is in the District office and Council chambers.
Your dreaming 11:07. Council is committing themselves to a course of action. They know if they don't take action soon none of them will get re-elected. They will act in self preservation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Council direct staff to investigate the impact of allowing short-term rentals in principle residences only.This is a great idea !!
If short term rentals were only allowed at principle residences it would be a game changer.Fuck those guys buying up houses that don't want to live here.
The enemy isn't vacation rentals, or short term rentals, or non resident owners, or non compliant units........ The enemy is the staff and council of The District of Tofino. There isn't enough developed real estate to provide either short term or long term rental accomodations, due to two decades of "anti-development" policy from local government, while demand continued to increase constantly. The property at the corner of Hellesen and PRH took FIVE YEARS to finally acheive zoning and development go ahead. Finally construction is proceeding. Many other potential delelopers have given up and left town. There is a lack of housing, on all levels, in Tofino. There is a corresponding lack of action in the offices of our Municipal government. This, and previous, councils caused this mess.... now they want to lay the blame for their own shortcomings upon "short term rentals", when the actual culprit is "lack of municipal planning". Housing shortage? DUH, MAYBE BUILD SOME HOUSES!
There already is housing, plenty of it in Tofino that is rented out as vacation rental. If that was put back into monthly rental, then there would be some normalcy to the local housing market. I know of at least 4 houses in my area of Tofino being rented short term and that were previously rented out monthly. Shut them down to only monthly rentals and the housing shortage will solve itself.Council has to act or the town will be finished as a livable place.
16 vacation rentals that could to be monthly rentals around me.
Both the Shore and South Chesterman's were built as long term rentals. Neither are legal for short term rentals.Not just a couple of units.....
If there were adequate Hotel and resort accomodations available to meet the demand from visitors, then there wouldn't be any need for these "illegal" short term rentals, and they would fade away. But, since the District of Tofino hamstrings any development of commercial units, while demand increases constantly, "there isn't any room at the inn". Thus, "illegal" short term rentals. The municipal government has caused this dilemma. The reason that these short term rentals exist is because there's no other place for the tourists to stay. Do you want to kick out all the tourists? (When they leave, they'll be taking their money and your jobs with them). Or do you just want to tell the tourists to not come here in the first place because there are no accomodations available for them?
Ralph, There are 36 units at South Chestermans....... 11 of them are used for vacation rentals, the rest (25) are owner occupied, or often vacant. (Yes, only a couple units) . (And NONE of them are available for monthly rental. The owners are too smart to get involved with The Residential Tenancy Act). Perhaps someone supposed that these beachfront condos would be available to the monthly rental market when they were built, but that's not how things are today. I don't know the story on the Shore, I expect that the ratio is about the same. The Shore and South Chesterman's are not the villans here, nor the cause of the problems. It makes as much sense to blame the District's poor development performance on Tourism Tofino, who invite all these tourists here to cause these problems.
The District did approve a large development on McKenzie Beach many years ago but the owners decided not to follow through.Perhaps following a record year for tourism something will be built.
Interesting...... "a record year for tourism". Any guess how many of these guests stayed in an "illegal" short term rental? Quite a few, eh? If there were no "illegal" rentals, would there still have been a "record year"? "Perhaps something will be built", sounds like a press release from the District Office. LOL
The point I was making is that they were built as long term housing units , either by owner or rentals. South Chesterman's was given increased density because of this.All of the short term rentals at the Shore or South Chesterman's are illegal.The District has chosen to ignore these and many other illegal operations. I agree that the District has a dismal record of approving development.
The tourists in these vacation rentals are there because they are cheaper, not because they can't find places to stay and when they come here spend minimal amounts of money. They use our precious summer water supplies and dump their vacation rental garbage in the town garbage cans because they have to leave the VR clean. We pay for that in our taxes. These VRs never put out street garbage cansThe money collected by these VR's leaves town, they don't spend much money in the town, so what is their benefit to us? Are we all supposed to bow down, kiss the asses of these illegal vacation rental owners while they dump their garbage on our backs?Supposedly there is economic benefit but in reality there isn't much for all we are left with is some chicken feed, their garbage and other environmental impacts.
So just because it suits you , the district should ignore its own bylaws ? Anyone doing their due diligence knew if they were doing something illegal. Should the district also suspend the building code, fire code and electrical code ? No parking tickets when the neighbours vr guests block your driveway or party all night ?
I like my job scrubbing toilets.Sometimes the nice people leave me some empties and a roach
The benefit is that they raise your property value.
How many "illegal" short term rentals got free water from the District Office ? None ! Just the resorts ! Coincidence ? Just sayin
Big problem, big problem folks. Some on council and some on staff are up to their eyeballs in vacation rental business. Only one solution. "DRAIN THE SWAMP"
So this is what is referred to as a 'sharing economy', just one more example of trying to put polish on a turd. 'The reason short term rentals exist is to line the pockets of the owners, they make a lot more money doing short term rentals than monthly ones. Greed rules!This town was a gong show in the summer, way to many people for its' size, we are killing the goose that laid the golden egg.Don't kid yourselves that you are performing a public service by renting to tourists, you are in it for money
How many short term rentals pay commercial taxes like all other tourist accommodations, operating on commercially zoned land. Just one more way the residents of Tofino are getting screwed bigly. No housing and other property owners pick up their tab.
If it's the will of the people to do vacation rentals then they will do vacation rentals and there's not much you can do about it. It's a democracy and majority rules. If there was no tourism then there would be no vacation rentals, no jobs and no need for monthly rental housing.....or housing at all for that matter. It's never a perfect world where ever you are . Speaking of which the world saved Clayoquot sound and now wants to come here and there's not much you can do to stop that either.
Saved from raw sewage, fish farming and hipsters ?
5:31PM..... Nice "hate list". Anything else you want to bitch about, and not offer any alternatives or solutions?
The tourism rush has only begun!! Wait until the world realizes that there's no Zika Virus in Tofino, in addition to safe drinking water. Then you'll really see traffic. (probably need to upgrade Highway 4 to three lanes both ways).
In answer to 5:02. You are right if it is the will of the people. But so far the will of the people has been expressed in their bylaws which put limits and restrictions on VR's. Many of these provisions have not been seriously enforced. but it remains the law. If the VR lobby wants to change the law to have no such restrictions and limits let them go ahead and propose such changes. I do not think they will get very far. The problem for VR business' is that council is cautiously crawling back into enforcement of it's bylaws. That is because there is more interest in the loss of housing that has occurred than the easy profits being made by those who would disregard the bylaws. That may surprise you, but it is democracy and as you say "majority rules". Councillors, who found it convenient to ignore the bylaws are being dragged back to reality. Isn't it interesting that people want respect for the "rule of law"......What are your alternatives apart from self interest.
5:02 re "the world saved Clayoquot Sound". You obviously were not there. Nothing would have changed in Clayoquot Sound without the dedication, work and vision of the people of Clayoquot Sound themselves, to make a better future. The potential for a population to do the right thing in a given situation is a powerful option. Your views outlining the inevitability of your reality will come up against it. Unfettered VR activity will not prevail.
This developer got fed up with being screwed around by District of Tofino staff and council and moved his operations to Ucluelet. There won't be anything like this built in Tofino as a result, not by this guy. The result: 24 to 40 fewer affordable homes available on the market. This isn't the only development that has walked away from Tofino. There are lots more. No commercial development, no residential development, just delay and expense and endless hoops to jump through in the district office for anyone who tries to do anything to help the housing shortage. The problem isn't vacation rentals, and the solution isn't to attack people in the vacation rental business. (Hey! Tofino is in the business of selling vacations!) The problem is, as Ralph agrees, "[council's] dismal record of approving any development" This Ucluelet story does show a delay happening in the process there, it'll probably take a couple weeks longer..... In Tofino, that would be stretched to a couple years! Ucluelet mayor and council will show some balls and approve or reject the developers proposal, and they'll do it promptly so people can either proceed or re-plan. Tofino mayor and council are holding an "open house" to "discuss" what "might" be done regarding the issue, and then, as we all know, it'll be "referred to staff" to delay council needing to make any decision or take any responsibility. Instead of actually solving the accomodation shortage by BUILDING SOME ACCOMODATIONS, mayor and council will continue to disguise the results of their lack of inititive by blaming it all on a couple people in the vacation rental industry. There's not enough long term housing, there's not enough short term housing, Tourism Tofino is doing their job too effeciently so there's too many visitors....... and there's too many people wallowing at the trough in the district office and council chambers. People are speaking out against those operating short term rentals. They're fustrated and angry. Because they cannot find an affordable place to live. I don't blame them for being angry. Mayor and council, however, are lying to them. The people are being told that they're homeless because of these vacation rental properties. That's not true. These unfortunate people are homeless because their elected officials are not doing what they were elected to do. And District staff, instead of being instructed to do some work toward solving these endless delays in the development process, are told to spend their working days investigating "the vacation rental problem". It's a smokescreen. A lie. A distraction. An excuse. Westerly News story link http://www.westerlynews.ca/news/400143611.html
Why not grant some development permits for affordable long term housing and, at the same time, grant licences to these operating vacation rental properties--at $4,000?-$6,000? per year? That would provide the funds we require to expand the water infrastructure and pay for a good chunk of the sewage treatment facility, balance the scales for the fixed roof operators (who are getting a raw deal as things now stand), and insure that those "filling their pockets and leaving town with the cash" are paying their fair share.
It is true that clamping down on Vr's will not solve all of Tofino's housing woes. It is but one piece to the puzzle. More housing development needs to be approved and council has squandered many opportunities on that front. Clearly. But what is also true. If council does not require VR's to play by certain rules and enforce the bylaws, no amount of housing development can be counted on to alleviate the housing shortfall. The opportunity to make easy money from this enterprise will overwhelm and skew the market as it has begun to do. Enforcing the bylaws will be an important part of any effect housing strategy, moving forward.
to answer your question 1:41 i was simply trying to point out the reality of the situation. The bylaw you refer to was adopted in 2005 when there were just a hand full of Vr's in Tofino. That was 11 years ago and trying to shut down Vr's operating before the bylaw proved difficult if not impossible even at that time. How many more people in Tofino are operating VR's now with Air B&B/VRBO etc.. available....Challenge is even greater to enforce this bylaw. In perfect world every Vr would comply and have a bus. license with on onsite monthly tenant in a suite and a 3brdm VR. It's not perfect world as we know and some people are complying and others are not. That's the reality. As far as the shortage of monthly housing Tofino should have never expected the owners of single family homes to be the one's taking care of that market anyway.No home owner "has" to build a secondary suite and even if they did they can run it as legal VR anyway if they want to. The District of Tofino and the people complaining about not enough rental housing in Tofino should focus their efforts in having some proper traditional "entry level" monthly rental housing units constructed. 40 - 1 and 2bedroom apts to start would go along way.
If Vancouver and Nanaimo can deal with pot dispensaries then Tofino should be able to deal with illegal VRs.
7:08PM. You are a fucking asshole. One subject in your post has sweet fuck all to do with the other. Shut the fuck up up until you got something of value to say.
Many hotels have vacancies today but many airbnbs are full.The District should just issue permits for the summer months.It is not a level playing field as the hotels have to pay commercial property tax. I also like the idea of permits only granted to owner occupied homes.
There were more than a handful of VR's in 2005, that is why council decided to vote through some rules on how they operate. I did not agree with the changes made in 2005 to the bylaws but the current problem arises because those rules have not been effectively enforced and the number of Vr,s operating illegally has mushroomed as a result. True no one is required to build a secondary suite, and the bylaws say they can rent it as tourist accom if they want but only if there is a resident occupying one of the two spaces. Moving forward council may want to approve some not for VR zoned development' to serve as housing. but without enforcement of the rules what do you think will happen.....This argument that the rules can not be enforced so why bother is a self serving one. No housing solution exist without enforcement of appropriate rules as regards use.
7:35PM.... Simple solution, allow the vacation rentals to operate, but tax the shit out of them. That'll level the field, as well as being a great source of infrastructure revenue. I like the idea above of a $5,000 business license fee. There are many visitors who don't want a motel room, they want a beach house, and they're willing to pay $$$ for it. Give 'em what they want.
The bottom line is we have no enforcement of any of our written bylaws and never have!The status quo has been set, no bylaws are enforced so who gives a xxxx!Everyone will do as they please and continue to do so, as we are all above the law and entitled to do so.Some follow the bylaws and some do not, the ones that do are the ones who end up paying in the end, the ones that do not are slapped on the wrist and life goes on...No enforcement = No compliance Until the district finally steps up and regulates and enforces ALL their current bylaws and covenant's NOTHING WILL CHANGE!Get used it...... This is the way it is here... Just get on with your life and be the rule follower or not, it really does not matter either way!
Golly Ralph. Some of the comments on here sure do use some harsh language. Bad words, exclamation points, capital letters. Couldn't you moderate things and lower the tone a bit? Sensitive persons might be reluctant to express themselves in such an atmosphere. There could even be hurt feelings or even worse, emotional stress. Perhaps mayor Josie might give you a few pointers on how to lower the confrontational nature of what should be calm and polite discourse.
Yes, it is a spirited debate !
Law and Order, LAW and ORDER, that's what I'm talking about. Everyone must leave their guns at the edge of town. Violations will be dealt with severely. We need to clean this place up so it is safe for women and children. Ps Unbranded cattle roaming at large will be shot. YEE HAA!!!!!Go to it Boys.
Post a Comment