Update: City Council votes YES on affordable housing!
And some listener mail.
Two newsletters in two days? What an unwelcome affront to your inbox.
I wanted to write a very short update in case you’re not someone who doesn’t actively follow these things and specifically because yesterday’s newsletter reached a bit of a wider audience than it usually does (thanks for everyone that shared it)!
The rezoning motion passed and City Council voted with a fairly emphatic level of support from each councillor who spoke on it.
Last night’s City Council meeting is posted online here in case you want to listen for yourself - the topic of yesterday’s newsletter is raised around 2:19 and goes to about 2:54.
The motion happens fast so I don’t have the exact tally on who voted what but based on what I could see, nearly every Councillor reversed their 2023 position on this proposal - with exception to Cori Ramsay who voted in favour of it in 2023 (yay Cori).
Noteworthy, and potentially worth watching if you’re a bit of a nut about these things, most counsellors offered their insight on the proposal and said their views were shifting on the rapid need for affordable and dense housing and in reversing their decision, also seemed to indicate some degree of support for more of this kind of development - BIG WIN.
I think it’s important to give a big shout out to L&M and WestCan on their revised proposal and the sheer amount of work and advocacy they’ve done in the community to get folks on board with this proposal - nearly every Councillor cited that work as part of their revised opinion on this development.
In a world where every developer is bringing $850K McMansion subdivisions to our city, I really think this should be seen as a big ol’ win.
Listener Reader Mail Time
Things got a little bit spicy in the comment section and in my DMs. There’s a fairly robust discussion between myself, an anonymous commenter and
that is worth pulling focus toward if you care.
The summary of which is the commenter A) accuses me of being a paid propagandist on behalf of The Citizen, and/or the developers of this project (which is hilarious because I spent a good portion of last year dumping on the Citizen but anyways) B) highlights that WestCan has been involved in controversial ownership decisions related to one of their trailer parks in Saskatchewan - background reading can be done here. The whole exchange is worth reading if you’re interested in the comments of yesterday but I think this part is worth drawing attention to:
Friend of the newsletter brought some insight in this comment:
The summary of it all is that the person who called me a paid propaganda machine is rightfully bringing up that WestCan’s record of property maintenance is not spot-free.
I think the issue, as detailed by the CBC above and with other publicly available information, it’s fair to say that the issue is not a cut-and-dry “this guy is a scumbag” and the fact that L&M has produced a very serious amount of documentation on the septic and water systems (which Colin recaps in The Citizen here) is really encouraging that they have learned their lesson. Council reviewed those documents scrupulously last night, which was also encouraging.A few folks reached out to tell me I got my pricing wrong - that the proposed prices for these modular homes is going to be $350K-$400K with someone saying they would be as high as $500K.
I asked all of these people for sources on this but no one was able to provide anything firm so I’m not sure which number(s) to take seriously.
I struggle with the viability of a $500K modular home and from the research I’ve done, I cannot find any listings of even high-end luxury modular homes that exceed the $400K ballpark so I guess we’ll be keeping an eye on those listings when they eventually do arrive.
Looking at the market, these modular homes would be competing with new builds like these stratas in Creekside if they come in at that pricing which I’m curious how the “market” will treat - will folks pay that price for modular homes or will it force downward pressure? Again, I’m not sure how viable that would be.
If these homes do enter the market on the lower end of these numbers ($350-400K), I still have a hard time not seeing this as a win for affordable housing relative to the market average of ~$500K, even factoring in pad rent prices - this is a win.
A few other people reached out and told me that the marketing for these is not geared toward young first-time home buyers but rather toward empty nesters or retirees looking to downsize.
This one is sort of verifiable and was a part of the presentation package submitted last night for Council - it focused on the demographics they’re hoping to serve “includes” retirees.
I’m not exactly sure what this point is arguing because in either case, those empty nesters free up a standard family home into the market, increasing supply (this is also a good thing).
Anyways. That’s it. Sorry for bombarding your inboxes two days in a row, but updates and discourse are good! Grateful for all the discussion.
