NEED$AND$DEMAND$ ASSESSMENT$UPDATE$ANDSITE$ …€¦ · Contents’ ’ 1. TableofContents ( ( ( ( ( ( (Pages(i 2(ii((2. Executive(Summary( ( ( ( ( ( (Pages(122((3. Introduction(

NEED AND DEMAND NEED AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT UPDATE ANASSESSMENT UPDATE AND SITE D SITE

FEASIBILITY STUDYFEASIBILITY STUDY

Prepared fPrepared for:or:

The Working GroupThe Working Group

of theof the

Creston Valley Community Housing SocietyCreston Valley Community Housing Society

Prepared by:

Bentsen Developments 203-‐1420 St. Paul Street Kelowna, BC V1Y 2E6

Contents

1. Table of Contents Pages i -‐ ii

2. Executive Summary Pages 1-‐2

3. Introduction Page 3

4. The Creston Valley Page 4

5. Need and Demand Assessment Update (Phase 1) Page 5

i. Creston Valley Need and Demand Conclusions Page 6

ii. Dependency Projections Page 6

iii. Population Projections Page 6

iv. ‘Bountiful’ Impact on Need and Demand Page 7

v. Net Shortfall/Surplus of Affordable Housing Page 7

vi. House Value in Comparison to Household Income Page 8

vii. Household Income Table Page 9

viii. Creston Valley – Family to Income table Page 10

ix. Affordability (Housing) Table Page 11

x. Income in 2005 Page 12

6. Potential Housing Site Feasibility Reviews (Phase 2)

i. Technical Evaluations Pages 13-‐55

ii. Financial Feasibility Page 56

7. Municipal Tools & Framework/Affordable Housing Strategy (Phase 3) Pages 57-‐64

8. Conclusion Pages 65-‐66

i

9. Appendix Page 67

A. Town of Creston Support Letter dated August 22, 2011 Page 68-‐70

B. Need and Demand Assessment Update -‐ Casita Consulting Page 71

1. Introduction, with Definitions and Location Maps – Page 3

2. Community Demographics and Economic Profile – Page 6

3. Currently Affordable Housing Need – Page 10

4. Currently Available Affordable Housing Stock – Page 14

5. Emerging or Forecast Housing Need – Page 20

5a. Review of 2008 Housing Survey Report recommendations – Page 21

6. Anticipated Affordable Housing Supply – Page 25

7. Shortfall or Surplus Affordable Housing – Page 28

8. APPENDIX A: Support Letters – Page 31

9. APPENDIX B: P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 Interior Health Population Projections – Page 51

10. APPENDIX C: Transcribed Comments from Surveys – Page 58

11. APPENDIX D: Affordable Housing for Families: Outcomes – Page 62

12. APPENDIX E: Excerpt: NHRC Seniors Housing Conditions 2011 – Page 69

13. APPENDIX F: Selkirk College and Housing Resources Links – Page 71

ii

Executive Summary An update of the 2008 Need and Demand Assessment and a new Site Feasibility Study were requested by the Working Group of the Creston Valley Community Housing Society (CVCHS). Eight sites were initially examined as possible locations for an affordable housing project and it was requested that the number of sites be reduced to two or three with the best overall advantages. Phase 1 of the project was the Need and Demand Assessment Update which included a review of the 2008 Housing Study completed for CVCHS, as well as the updated census data related to the Creston Valley compiled by George Penfold at Selkirk College. The purpose of the update was to determine the current validity of the conclusions from the older reports. The Need and Demand Assessment Update report was subcontracted to Casita Consulting at the start of services in early 2011. The report confirmed that Creston is in desperate need of family housing as there is no affordable or market housing available. It also states an emerging trend for additional seniors housing in the near future following the complete rental of Crestbrook Gardens (a new 24-‐unit seniors modular project).. The report also quotes the Interior Health Mental Health and Addictions Program which has numbers that indicate a need for approximately twenty special needs units. The Need and Demand Update, as well as anecdotal information gathered from the community and surveys collected at an open house, support the creation of additional affordable housing for the Town of Creston and the Creston Valley as follows:

• Family Housing Units: 30-‐100 • Seniors Independent Units: 30-‐40 • Housing for People with Mental Illness: 20

In Phase 2, several sites were examined and the two sites with the best overall advantages for an affordable housing project were selected. They are: 1. 1909 Ash Street – ‘Pioneer Villa’ Pioneer Villa is a vacant intermediate care facility currently owned by the Provincial Rental Housing Corporation (BC Housing’s Land Holding entity). CVCHS spent nearly two years trying to develop a viable business plan with the intent to create supported seniors housing. The following facts are the main findings for this site. • The project was abandoned in June 2010 due to the extent of necessary repairs and

operating costs.

1

• The site location relative to the downtown core is further than desirable for a seniors project.

• The location and form of development is ideal for a family project and would fit well within the neighbourhood.

• A technical review confirmed that the site has all the basic services, such as sewer, water, gas and power, available at or near the site.

• The Town of Creston supports the renovation of Pioneer Villa or a redevelopment of the land to another use.

2. 128 10th Avenue – ‘Trinity United Church’ This site was reviewed for an independent seniors project with the potential to become a supportive seniors project in the future. It is located half a block off Canyon Street in the downtown core with all seniors services within walking distance and the hospital a short drive away. The following facts are the main findings for this site. • It was confirmed that all basic services, such as sewer, water, gas and power, are

available at the site. • The Town of Creston supports the potential redevelopment. The site does not need to

be rezoned and can remain as ‘Community Use P-‐1 Zone’. • The site is ideal for seniors due to both the location and available services. • The zoning for a downtown core site requires that the ground floor be used for

commercial purposes. The group has determined that the ground floor will be used for church operations; therefore it is ineligible for funding from the provincial government. The group will need to secure third party funding prior to a submission to the provincial government.

• The need and demand study indicates support for additional seniors units once the ‘Crestbrook Gardens’ units are fully rented.

• The Trinity United Church group is a dedicated organization with strengths in many areas. The group would be an excellent proponent to operate the project as an extension of the Catalpa Apartments they already operate.

Phase 3 included the creation of a Municipal Tools and Affordable Housing Strategy framework to assist the group and municipality in encouraging the development of affordable housing in the future.

2

Introduction Bentsen Developments was the successful proponent in the request for proposal for a development consultant to examine the Creston Valley and its requirements for affordable housing. The scope of work included updating the 2008 Need and Demand Study and reviewing the development potential of six possible sites. The focus was to analyze each site for an affordable housing project based on financial feasibility and subsequently reduce the number of potential sites to two or three. Part of the scope was to create the framework for a housing strategy and provide a final report on the findings, giving recommendations and steps the group should take to continue their efforts for affordable housing development. There were several visits to the Creston Valley, both in the spring and summer; each potential site was visited during this time and there was a detailed walk-‐through of the Pioneer Villa building. The group received monthly progress reports issued to keep them informed about current progress and planned activities. CVCHS provided direction and comments regarding the sites and groups that could potentially operate the buildings.

3

The Creston Valley The Town of Creston is located in the southwestern portion of the Columbia River basin in the Central Kootenay region of British Columbia, 11 km north of the United States border and 28 km south of Kootenay Lake. Traditionally, Creston’s economy has relied heavily on agriculture and the forest industry. More recently, health care, the Columbia Brewery, and a growing retail sector have become important drivers of the town’s economy.

The Creston Valley stretches from Yahk in the east to Riondel on the east shore of Kootenay Lake to the Canada US border in the south. Politically, it is comprised of Areas A, B and C of the Regional District of Central Kootenay and the Town of Creston. The Town of Creston itself has a population of about 5,000, with an additional 8,000 people living in the outlying areas. The Lower Kootenai Indian Band is located just south of the Town of Creston.

The Creston Valley has a resource-‐based economy. It is a major producer of asparagus and cherries as well as other tree fruits. Value-‐added production is becoming increasingly important, along with agritourism. Skimmerhorn Winery was the first winemaker in the valley and is being joined by others. Forestry is an important contributor to the local economy with Wynndel Box and Lumber and JH Huscroft Mills amongst the largest employers in the area. Columbia Brewery, producer of Kokanee Beer, directly employs 143 people. Other major employers include School District 8 and the Interior Health Authority.

Creston has long been a popular retirement area because of its relatively low cost of living and mild climate. On average, the population is older (42% over the age of 55), poorer (44.5% of households earn under $35,000) and less well-‐educated than the provincial average. The number of households dependent on government transfers such as pension income and income assistance is also higher than the provincial average.

While housing affordability is generally comparable to other areas in the basin, the Creston area is the least affordable area for renters, with nearly half (48%) of renters spending more than 30% of their income on housing. *Source: BCNPHA Consulting RFP #2011-‐03-‐27

4

Need and Demand Assessment Update (Phase 1) The scope of work was to identify any emerging trends facing the Town of Creston and the Creston Valley in regards to accessibility, adequacy and suitability of housing and provide direction for developing recommendations to address those needs. The 2006 census data, the original 2008 Kootenay Employment Services (KES) housing study and the figures compiled by George Penfold at Selkirk College contained statistical information and identified some areas in which the community can focus their housing development efforts. Bentsen Developments was asked to start with this report and confirm the statistics with a focus on determining exactly what the Creston Valley requires to meet their current needs. The report and results of the July 6, 2011 open house are all contained in the Casita Consulting report attached in Appendix B. The report indicates a strong need for family housing and an emerging trend for additional seniors housing in the near future following the complete rental of Crestbrook Gardens, a new 24 unit independent seniors modular project. The report quotes the Interior Health Mental Health and Addictions Program which has numbers that indicate a need for approximately twenty units in 2011. The Need and Demand Update, as well as anecdotal information gathered from the community and surveys collected at an open house, support the creation of additional affordable housing for the Town of Creston and the Creston Valley as follows:

• Family Housing Units: 30-‐100 • Seniors Independent Units: 30-‐40 • Housing for People with Mental Illness: 20

5

Creston Valley Need and Demand Conclusions Notes:

1. The statistics presented are from the 2006 Census which is the most recent information available. Updates from the 2011 Census will be available in 2012.

2. Statistics Canada, BC Stats, the 2008 KES Need and Demand Report, the 2009 Statistical Information from George Penfold, and the Casita Consulting Need and Demand Update 2011 all review the Creston Area and the Town of Creston. The conclusions stated below assume that although the regions are separate areas with separate tables, the Town of Creston and the Creston Valley (Electoral Areas A, B and C) are similar with some minor variations in results. Dependency Projections “The population of this area is expected to grow marginally over the next 30 years adding 4400 people to the area population. As the population continues to age, overall dependency will increase, and by 2036 there will likely be 8 dependents for every 10 people of working age. Many of these dependents will be aged 65 or older.” Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update

Conclusion: This supports the need for additional affordable family housing to attract younger working-‐age families to provide needed services and sustain the local economy. Population Projections Both tables indicate that there are two dominant population groups in the Creston Valley:

• Family: 20-‐44 • Seniors: 65+

Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update (Table 3 and Figure 2) both from the 2008 KES Need and Demand Study and the 2009 Penfold research.

Conclusion: The two strongest population sectors again indicate a need for family housing and seniors housing.

6

‘Bountiful’ Impact on Need and Demand The community of Bountiful, in the southeast corner of the Creston Valley, is home to about 1000 members of the Church of Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints. This polygamist community is comprised mostly of women and children. The BC Supreme Court recently upheld the laws making polygamy illegal, citing the damage that this lifestyle causes women and children. Social service agencies report that women who leave the community do so with few resources, making it a difficult transition. For women from the community who might want to leave, the availability of safe, affordable housing would make it a real possibility rather than a dream. Net Shortfall/Surplus of Affordable Housing “Since 2008, there has been a 6.9% drop in rental households. Since the resale home market has been substantially flat, and the area population is static, it appears that some households are moving away due to the lack of affordable housing” Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update

Under ‘Family Housing’ “Based upon Agency estimates and the Census 2006 data, it can be suggested that there is justification for between 30-‐100 affordable family rental units for the Creston Area” Some estimates from the support letters in Appendix B indicate what local groups feel will address the needs in their own segment of the population: • “Ktunaxa Kinbasket Child and Family Services Society: 25-‐34 Family Units” • “Creston & District Community Resource Centre Society: 76-‐80 Family Units” • “Creston Valley Gleaners: 50 family parcels every month” • “The Therapeutic Action Program for Seniors – 15 units of affordable, physically

accessible one storey housing with accessibility modifications” Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update

7

Under ‘Seniors Rental Housing’ “However, in the longer term, the increasing age of the population demonstrated in the census projections means that there is a case for developing more and/or reconfiguring seniors housing”. Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update. Under ‘Special Needs Categories’ “In 2008 Interior Health – Mental Health and Addictions Program suggested a minimum of 2 supported housing units and 7 long term housing units for people with mental illness. In 2011 they have suggested up to 20 units.” Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update

House Value in Comparison to Household Income The erosion of affordability of home ownership is directly linked to the need for affordable rental housing. The Canadian dream of owning a home may just be a dream when looking at the percentage of house prices compared to the percentage of income increase in the Creston Valley. House prices increased by 80.8% between 2001 and 2006 while income over the same period only increased by 17.3%; this is a difference of 54.1%. These numbers have most likely grown even further apart during the dramatic increase in house prices seen from 2006 to 2009. Even when taking the housing market slump of 2009 to 2011 into consideration, the spread between income and house prices is daunting. Comments by local property managers at the open house suggest that this dramatic increase has had an equally dramatic effect on rental rates. Absentee landlords believe that their houses should command rent commensurate with the price of their house; these rental rates are completely without relationship to local incomes. Reference: Casita Need and Demand Update

8

Household Income

Household income of private households in 2005

All households One-‐person households

BC

BC

Private households

2,360 100.0% 100.0% 905 100.0% 100.0%

Under $10,000

130 5.5% 5.7% 70 7.7% 11.8% $10,000 to $19,999

480 20.3% 10.4% 365 40.3% 25.1%

$20,000 to $29,999

335 14.2% 10.5% 150 16.6% 16.2% $30,000 to $39,999

415 17.6% 10.9% 170 18.8% 14.4%

$40,000 to $49,999

225 9.5% 10.0% 65 7.2% 10.6% $50,000 to $59,999

220 9.3% 8.8% 35 3.9% 7.3%

$60,000 to $69,999

175 7.4% 8.0% 25 2.8% 5.6% $70,000 to $79,999

105 4.4% 6.8% 10 1.1% 3.2%

$80,000 to $89,999

50 2.1% 5.7% -‐ 0.0% 1.8% $90,000 to $99,999

70 3.0% 4.7% -‐ 0.0% 1.1%

$100,000 and over

140 5.9% 18.7% 10 1.1% 2.9%

Median household income $

$37,064 $52,709

$21,636 $27,773

Average household income $

$44,469 $67,675

$27,251 $35,513

Standard error of average household income $

$1,501 $162 $1,286 $145

Household Income Table: The above ‘Household Income’ table compares Creston to BC. The table indicates that Creston has a much higher population of low income earners than the rest of the province (see highlighted areas). This statistic supports the proposal that affordable housing is needed for households with an income of $10,000 to $40,000 per year. * From the 2006 Census by Statistics Canada

9

Creston Valley – Family to Income Table Statistics reveal that the most disadvantaged groups in the Creston Valley are single parent families headed by females and one-‐person households. Because rent has risen much faster than income since the 2006 census, the current situation is even bleaker for these groups. Area Type of

Household (# of) Median Income 30% of Median

Income Median Rent

RDCK A Female single parent family (55)

$15,416 $385 $459

RDCK A Single person household (300)

$17,301 $432 $459

RDCK B Single person household (450)

$18,605 $465 $512

RDCK C Female single parent family (60)

$17,556 $439 $509

Town of Creston Female single parent family (100)

$23,343 $583 $605

Town of Creston Single person household (905)

$21,161 $506 $605

Note: For housing to be considered affordable, rent and utilities need to be less than 30% of income. * From the 2006 Census by Statistics Canada

10

Affordability (Housing) Table: The above ‘Affordability (Housing)’ table compares Creston to BC. The table indicates that Creston has much lower rents than the rest of the province (see highlighted areas). This statistic again indicates that Creston requires rent levels that are much lower than the rest of the province. This has been confirmed by the surveys from the open house that can be found at the end of the Casitas report. Equally disturbing is the information that in RDCK Areas A, B, and C, approximately 14% of dwellings require major repairs which is double the provincial average. * From the 2006 Census by Statistics Canada (Community Profiles)

Affordability (Housing) Non-‐farm, non-‐reserve private dwellings occupied by usual residents

BC

Total number of non-‐farm, non-‐reserve private dwellings occupied by usual residents

2,360 1,606,875

Tenant-‐occupied private non-‐farm, non-‐reserve dwellings

555 488,720 Average gross rent $

$687 $828

Tenant-‐occupied households spending 30% or more of household income on gross rent

310 212,040

Tenant-‐occupied households spending from 30% to 99% of household income on gross rent

235 171,885

Owner-‐occupied private non-‐farm, non-‐reserve dwellings

1,800 1,118,160 Average value of dwelling $

$189,801 $418,703

Average owner major payments $

$574 $1,059 Owner households spending 30% or more of household income on owner's major payments

265 253,820

Owner households spending 30% to 99% of household income on owner's major payments

230 212,880

Tenant one-‐family households without additional persons in non-‐farm, non-‐reserve private dwellings occupied by usual residents 205 213,490

Average gross rent $

$657 $907

Tenant one-‐family households without additional persons spending 30% or more of household income on shelter costs 100 75,130

Owner one-‐family households without additional persons in non-‐farm, non-‐reserve private dwellings occupied by usual residents 1,150 761,015 Average owner major payments $

$615 $1,119

Owner one-‐family households without additional persons spending 30% or more of household income on shelter costs 140 151,215

11

Income in 2005 Creston, Town

British Columbia

Total Male Female Total Male Female Persons 15 years and over with

income (counts) 95 3,935 1,800 2,135

3,230,565 1,580,450 1,650,110

Median income -‐ Persons 15 years and

over ($) 96 20,019 27,901 16,913

24,867 31,598 19,997

Median income after tax -‐ Persons 15

years and over ($) 96 19,098 25,654 16,780

22,785 28,251 18,930

Composition of total income (100%) 97 100 100 100 100 100 100 Earnings -‐ As a % of total income 50.5 52.2 48.5 75.1 78.5 69.8 Government transfers -‐ As a % of total income 25.4 22.7 28.8

10.7 7.9 15.0

Other money -‐ As a % of total income 24.0 25.3 22.6 14.2 13.6 15.2 Income status of all persons in private

households (counts) 98 4,670 2,195 2,470

3,978,215 1,949,320 2,028,895

% in low income before tax -‐ All persons 19.3 16.1 22.0 17.3 16.2 18.2 % in low income after tax -‐ All persons 10.5 10.5 10.5 13.1 12.6 13.6 % in low income before tax -‐ Persons less than 18 years of age 27.1 25.0 28.2

19.6 19.5 19.6

% in low income after tax -‐ Persons less than 18 years of age

16.8 18.1 15.5 14.9 14.8 14.9

Income in 2005 Table: The table indicates that a much higher percentage of Creston residents receive government transfers than the rest of the province, showing a community that is in need of assistance. It also indicates that Creston has a much higher percentage of individuals that are considered ‘low income’ in comparison to the rest of the province. * From the 2006 Census by Statistics Canada (Community Profiles)

12

Potential Housing Site Feasibility Reviews (Phase 2) As requested through the BC Non-‐Profit RFP 2011-‐03-‐27, six sites were evaluated within the Creston Valley catchment area. The expected result of the evaluation was to reduce the number of potential sites from six to two. The reviewed sites are as follows:

1. Banman Site – 519 16th Avenue South, Creston: Client Group: Family

2. Kootenai Community Centre Society – 1504 Cook Street, Creston: Client Group: Women/Family Leaving Abusive Relationships

3. Trinity United Church – 128 10th Avenue, Creston: Client Group: Seniors

4. Endicott Centre – 1849 Erickson Road, Creston: Client Group: Hard to House

5. School District 8 – 404 22nd Avenue, Creston: Client Group: Undefined

6. Pioneer Villa – 1909 Ash Street, Creston: Client Group: Seniors

In the evaluation of any site the first step is to run a title search on the property. The title search names the legal owner and identifies any encumbrances such as mortgages, easements, right of ways, legal notations or liens that may be attached to the title. This information provides a good basis on which to begin the evaluation; depending on what is found, a site may even be eliminated without the need for further due diligence. The sites were first visited on May 30, 2011 to complete the initial review. The physical review of the site involves understanding the client group and what CVCHS first envisions as a form of development. As an example, supportive seniors need access to a hospital as a minimum requirement and families require access to schools. The sites are evaluated for distance or location to transit, basic services such as grocery stores and the distance one must travel to get to those services. Part of the physical review is not only the client type but what form of development is envisioned and its suitability within that neighbourhood. For example, a 10-‐storey tower would not be feasible in a single-‐family residential neighbourhood. The form of development needs to fit within the Town of Creston’s ‘Official Community Plan’ (OCP). As well it must fit within the zoning or maximum zoning allowed through rezoning. These

13

Part of the physical review is not only the client type but what form of development is envisioned and its suitability within that neighbourhood. For example, a 10-‐storey tower would not be feasible in a single-‐family residential neighbourhood. The form of development needs to fit within the Town of Creston’s ‘Official Community Plan’ (OCP). As well it must fit within the zoning or maximum zoning allowed through rezoning. These steps may also eliminate a site depending on what is found during the discussions with the municipality. To determine if the existing zoning was adequate or if the sites required rezoning, the Town of Creston representative Ross Beddos was contacted on June 23, 2011 to review each of the sites. The municipality was able to comment on each site to confirm zoning or rezoning, development cost charges (if applicable or not), engineering costs and service hook-‐up charges. The Town of Creston confirmed their participation in any potential project with cost reductions and potential relief in an August 22, 2011 letter to BC Housing (Appendix A). A key factor in determining feasibility is matching the sites with an acceptable form of development and location based on the client group. To assess transportation opportunities, a check of bus routes and distances to services was performed to ensure successful sites met this basic requirement of being accessible to services. As most sites for potential affordable housing are vacant land, the investigation always includes a physical check of power, water, sewer, storm sewer and required on and off site improvements. These basic checks were completed and then followed up with the Town of Creston to confirm that these services are in fact sized correctly to absorb the additional use from a new development. For example, it is important to check if the sewer line running past a site is large enough to service the site and intended density. As well, each site was physically walked to check for underground storage tanks, old foundations or evidence of contamination that would need to be addressed in the budget. Attached:

1. Town of Creston Official Community Plan Map 2. Town of Creston – Bus Route Map

14

15

16

Banman Site 519 16th Avenue South, Creston Client Group: Family Excerpt from RFP: This site is owned by a local developer interested in family housing that they would manage. Currently they are building a couple of duplexes on the site and want to partner with someone on a family project. This site is located at 519 16th Avenue in Creston, which is approximately half a kilometre from downtown. There is a bus route along 16th Avenue (#2 Line -‐ Kinsmen Park) that runs in front of the site. The site is located close to the library and the RCMP detachment is next door. The site is within walking distance of the high school, Extra Foods and College of the Rockies. It is close enough to the downtown core that one can either walk to the main street or take a bus. The site appears to have access off of 16th Avenue, which is appealing. The site scored poorly because of proximity to the power transfer station, the railway tracks and the Columbia Brewing Company plant. Title Search: A title search was run on the property which indicated:

The site belongs to Peter Banman; There are two Statutory Rights of Way in favour of the Town of Creston; There is one Easement.

Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: ‘Residential (R)’ Current Zoning: ‘R-‐1 – Residential’ Proposed Zoning: ‘R-‐3 – Multi-‐Family Residential’ -‐ Considered large lot site with a panhandle. The Town of Creston supports the rezoning of the site and potential development. Based on an R-‐3 zoning, the 1 acre site will accommodate 25.5 units. The Town of Creston confirmed that all services are readily available at the site including:

✓ Natural Gas ✓ Sanitary Sewer ✓ Electrical Service ✓ Storm Sewer ✓ Telephone and Cable ✓ Water

17

18

19

20

21

22

Conclusion The site has been submitted as a family site and most likely will be developed for that use in the future. The site scored high for services and location but is not favoured due to its proximity to the power transfer plant and high voltage being redirected on the adjacent property. As well, its location near the rail tracks reduces its desirability due to noise, vibration and easy play access for kids. The area is also less desirable due to its proximity to the Columbia Brewing Company which situates the property close to an industrial neighbourhood. The description of the site states that the owner Peter Banman would operate the housing. If the group were attempting to convince the provincial government to fund the project there would need to be a non-‐profit society to operate the project. Private builders/owners developing a for-‐profit operation are not eligible for funding unless a portion of the project is run by a non-‐profit and the builder/owner is a partner with their own units and financing. This site could be a backup site to one of the others if a deal can be reached with the vendor and can be structured to fit the government’s funding requirements; this would involve the vendor agreeing to the conditions attached to the title.

23

Banman Site 519 16th Avenue South, Creston

Site Looking East

Looking across the site

24

Kootenai Community Centre Society Site 1504 Cook Street, Creston Client Group: Family Leaving Abusive Relationships Excerpt from RFP: This site is currently a parking lot the owners are willing to sell to KCCS. Their ‘Stopping the Violence Program’ is interested in housing for families who have left their abusive relationships and would benefit from a secure building close to support services. This site is a vacant parking lot beside the Kootenai Community Centre Society’s (KCCS) offices. This is very positive as KCCS can offer support services without building additional support service areas. It appears from the Creston Valley Transit guide that almost every bus route available in Creston runs past the proposed project. The site is close to Extra Foods, the high school and College of the Rockies. It is a block off the main street, with all amenities within walking distance. Another positive note is that the hospital is only four blocks away. The site scored high for location and services; the only negative is that the site is one block from a pub. Title Search: A title search was run on the property which indicated:

Valley Automotive Farm Equipment owns the site. A ‘Duplicate Indefeasible Title’ #M11726 to ‘Cooper and Lindsay‘ was issued June

19, 1978. Other than that there is nothing of concern on the title. Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: ‘Downtown Core (DC)’ Current Zoning: ‘C-‐1 Zone – General Commercial’ Proposed Zoning: No Rezoning Required The Town of Creston supports potential development. Based on a C-‐1 zoning, the 0.137-‐acre site will accommodate 4 units. The Town of Creston confirmed that all services are readily available at the site including:


25

26

27

28

Conclusion The site has been submitted as a family site for families leaving abusive situations. The site is too small and can only support a maximum density of 4 units above a commercial type ground floor based on the current zoning. City Council cannot vary the density which limits the group’s ability to develop this site. If the administration and council accept a Comprehensive Development Zone (CD Zone) then this site is worthy of investigation. The site is considered a top candidate if the zoning can be amended to allow the maximum development potential possible. Its location would serve the population very well with all amenities close by and support services next door. The site will need to be purchased which is a budgetary negative point in comparison to other sites that are free or can be leased. The site scored high for location and client group and can be considered as a backup to the top two sites with the caveat that a Comprehensive Development Zone must be allowed.

29

Kootenai Community Centre Society Site 1504 Cook Street, Creston

Site Looking East

Looking across site from the lot across the street

30

Trinity United Church Site 128 10th Avenue, Creston Client Group: Seniors Excerpt from RFP: Trustees of the Congregation of Creston Trinity United Church own this land and are interested in redeveloping the church building to provide low cost housing for seniors, the disabled and families. They currently operate a low cost housing complex on the adjacent property. This site is located downtown and is just half a block from the main street with the fire station two doors away and the post office next door. There is a hearing loss clinic across the street within walking distance. The hospital is four to five blocks away and is considered within walking distance or a short drive. The site is in a prime location for seniors and disabled individuals and is within walking distance to all services. Title Search: A title search was run on the property which indicated:

Trustees of the Congregation of Creston Trinity United Church own the site. There is a legal notation on title called ’Heritage Status Notice KR89212’ which

must be understood if it limits development or encumbers the property. There are two Statutory Rights of Way in favour of the Town of Creston.

Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: ‘Downtown Core (DC)’ Current Zoning: ‘P-‐1 – Community Use’ Proposed Zoning: No rezoning required The Town of Creston supports the potential redevelopment of the site. The P-‐1 zoning has no density limits; therefore, site density is calculated based on the setbacks and maximum height permitted. The church use needs to be confirmed and approved by the Town of Creston, as it is not listed as a use in the P-‐1 zoning. The site is approximately 125’ x 209’ or 26,125 sq ft in area. To roughly calculate a density one can first look at the orientation of the building. Subtracting a 10’-‐0” set back for the front, back and side yards will leave a building area of 105’ x 189’ or 19,845 sq ft. The density-‐based orientation can potentially be:

Building oriented across the width: 10 units per floor for 3 floors, for a total of approximately 30 units;

Building oriented across the length: 18 units per floor for 3 floors, for a total of approximately 54 units.

31

The Town of Creston confirmed that all services are readily available at the site including:

Conclusion The site has been submitted as a mixed site intended for seniors, families and the disabled. The site should be considered for seniors and the disabled but the group may want to rethink adding families, as these groups do not mix well. The site is ideal for seniors both in location and available services. The zoning was reviewed and it appears that a potential of 30-‐54 units could be developed depending on the building orientation. The zoning for a downtown core site will have commercial on the ground floor which suits the group’s intended form of development. The church use needs to be confirmed and approved by the Town of Creston, as it is not listed as a use in the P-‐1 zoning. However since this church has existed for such a long time it should be grandfathered or brought in and approved as conforming to one of the other descriptions for use. The need and demand analysis supports additional seniors independent/supportive units in the future therefore this project scored high for development, location and services. The ineligible spaces such as the worship space, offices (over program allowances), sanctuary and kitchen may require additional funding outside any future federal/provincial government funding. The site should be considered as a top candidate due to the client group, location and potential development. Bentsen Developments recommends this site as one of two sites that should be moved forward to schematic design.


32

33

34

Trinity United Church Site 128 10th Avenue, Creston

Site Looking East (Existing Seniors Housing located next door – Catalpa Apartments)

Looking East at the site from 10th Avenue

35

Endicott Centre Site 1849 Erickson Road, Creston Client Group: Hard to House Excerpt from RFP: The Kootenay Regional Association for Community Living owns this 8.7 acre parcel of land and is interested in the hard to house. There are vacant buildings on the site but it is not clear whether renovations are possible or if a new building is necessary. This site is located on Erickson Road just outside the Town of Creston’s border. The site is approximately 2 km away from the downtown core and general services. There is a bus route that is approximately 10 blocks away or at the corner of 16th Avenue and Erickson (#2 Line -‐ Kinsmen Park). The site is outside the boundary of the Town of Creston and falls under the jurisdiction of the Regional District of Central Kootenay. Title Search: the Kootenay Regional Association owns the site for Community Living. There is a CMHC mortgage registered which should be retired or ‘taken out’ with new financing as many financial institutions prefer to be the first mortgagee. There are several legal notations on title that are financial notations regarding different funding arrangements attached to the site. It appears as if there are several easements. As part of any continuance on the due diligence, an understanding of each of these should be completed prior to any development. Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: Not part of the Official Community Plan; the site is located within the Agricultural Land Reserve. Current Zoning: Division 32: Institutional (I) – Note: As per the Regional District of Central Kootenay Proposed Zoning: Division 15: Multi-‐Unit Residential (R6) – Note: As per the Regional District of Central Kootenay The Regional District is the authority with jurisdiction for zoning and land use. Services: If the site is removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve and made part of the Town of Creston there may be a need to extend services such as sanitary and storm sewer to serve this property. Currently the site is serviced with a septic field and the water comes from the Ericson Water System that is controlled by the Regional District of Central Kootenay (Regional District). If the project moves forward in the future, the confirmation of services and who supplies them would be one of the issues to be resolved.

36

37

38

39

40

Conclusion The site has been submitted as a ‘hard to house’ location, which in this case is defined as people with mental illness. The site was previously used to house this client group and the ‘not in my backyard’ concerns do not appear evident. The project is in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), outside the Town of Creston limits, and under the control of the Regional District of Central Kootenay. Bentsen Developments contacted Roger Cheetham (604-‐660-‐7020) of the ALR and he confirmed that there is only a very remote possibility of getting the land out of the ALR. The ALR would not consider grandfathering the site for use as legal non-‐conforming as the land is still considered good for agricultural use. The site would need to be removed from the ALR prior to the Regional District considering a rezoning from (I) Institutional to (R6) Multi-‐Unit Residential. The zoning and potential rezoning was discussed with Bruce Gunn (250-‐352-‐8175) of the Regional District. Although he was supportive in the direction the group seeks, the issues surrounding the ALR stopped further discussions about the process. The process is very long with no predictability of success. If KRACL wants to move forward with a project they may want to consider a family townhouse project which can have units or an area for hard to house individuals. The site scored low due to its inclusion in the ALR, the location outside the boundary of the Town of Creston, lack of services and proximity to transportation and downtown. If KRACL wants to continue with this site, it is suggested that it gain some CMHC seed funding to define the project and assemble a master plan for submission to the Regional District of the Central Kootenay and the ALR. All the other legal notations and charges can be dealt with over a longer period of time. The 8.7 acre site is very large and certainly not all of it is suitable for development. The site is a mix of large trees, orchards, playgrounds, community gardens and several dilapidated structures located on a flat natural plateau. The plateau has several structures of which only one may or should be considered for renovation and salvage if a project moves to the next stage. The other buildings on the site have reached their economic life meaning the structures are not worthy of renovation due to such factors as age, unusable layout, forms that are not functional and physical problems requiring extensive code upgrades. The structures need to be torn down and a master plan created for the plateau. The property does have several large trees that should be saved where possible. If a project is considered for this site, one could imagine six to eight blocks of townhouses dotted within the property with the heritage house for the non-‐profit’s offices and a community room. With all the sites reviewed there is certainly potential for a housing project; however, at this time it is not recommended to move forward due to the issues raised above.

41

Endicott Centre Site 1849 Erickson Road, Creston

Site Looking West

Looking at heritage house on site, recommended for renovation

42

School District 8 Site 404 22nd Avenue, Creston Client Group: Undefined Excerpt from RFP: School District 8 owns this property. A former school is now being used by the Community Resource Centre for programs for seniors and mental health patients. The Creston Valley Soccer Association is in the process of leasing the sports fields. While SD8 cannot under current law sell the remaining portion of the property, there may be the option of a long-‐term lease. This site is located on the corner of 22nd and Birch and there is a bus route close to the site (#2 Line -‐ Kinsmen Park). The site is further than desired from downtown (more than a kilometre) but close enough to downtown that one can walk to the main street or take the bus. The site is located within a residential neighbourhood with single storey houses bordering the site on all four sides. The site is close to the bus route and library, with the RCMP detachment a couple of blocks away. The site is within walking distance of the high school, Extra Foods and the College of the Rockies. The site is large enough for a medium sized family townhouse project with an approach to be designed to fit within the neighbourhood. Title Search: A title search was run on the property which indicated:

The owner is The Board of School Trustees of the School District No. 8. There is a Right of Way in favour of the Town of Creston and the East Creston

Irrigation District. There is a lease registered to the Kinsman Club of Creston Valley. There is a Right of Way that needs to be understood regarding encumbrances on

the site and restrictions on development. Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: ‘Parkland (P)’ -‐ Note: An OCP revision will be required. Current Zoning: ‘P-‐1 – Community Use’ Proposed Zoning: ‘R-‐3 – Multi-‐Family Residential’ The Town of Creston supports the OCP revision and the rezoning of the site for a potential development. Based on an R-‐3 Multi-‐Family Residential zoning, the 0.5 acre site will accommodate 12.75 units. The Town of Creston confirmed that all services are readily available at the site including:

43

Conclusion The site has been submitted with no intended client group. The site may be suitable for families in a townhouse setting as most structures in the area are houses. After a review of the zoning, it was determined that depending on the site size the proposed R-‐3 zoning would allow anywhere from 12 to 41 townhouses. Downtown can be accessed by a short trip in a car or on the bus route running past the site. The site is just outside the desired location of being near to downtown but appears to be within walking distance of the high school, College of the Rockies and the main street. The site scored high for a generally flat large site with all services readily available. The right of way and the potential lease arrangement with the School District both need to be understood by the group. As well, confirmation of the use of the existing building (if retained) and size requirements for the existing group it serves would be a benefit. If the existing building can be demolished as part of the scheme and a deal reached to have the new community room double as that space then the development of this piece of property would become very feasible. The school district under current law cannot sell the land and must consider a long-‐term lease. This has been done before but the process of negotiating the deal and gaining the approval of the school board can be lengthy. This site may be viable in the future; however, the deal needs to be understood and the land should be secured prior to work being completed on a schematic design. The site can be considered as a backup but due to the long timelines in determining its availability, it is not recommended to move forward at this time.


44

45

46

47

School District 8 Site 404 22nd Avenue, Creston

Site Looking South

Looking across the site from the soccer field

48

Pioneer Villa 1909 Ash Street, Creston Client Group: Supportive Seniors Excerpt from RFP: Pioneer Villa is a vacant intermediate care facility currently owned by Provincial Rental Housing Corporation (BC Housing’s Land Holding entity). There are 50 bachelor units with an approximate area of 320 sq ft each. The building is 24,388 sq ft on a 1.81 acre site; the building is spread throughout the site with several wings or wards off a central and quite large administration, dining room and kitchen area. Creston Valley Community Housing Society spent nearly two years trying to develop a viable business plan with the intent to create supported seniors housing. The project was abandoned in June 2010 due to the extent of necessary repairs and operating costs indicated it was not feasible. The citizens of Creston Valley have a vested interest in Pioneer Villa, as it was their initiative that resulted in the building being built in 1981. BC Housing has indicated it would entertain a long-‐term lease for a nominal fee with a viable business plan. This ‘Pioneer Villa’ site is located on Ash Street within a residential neighbourhood with single level and split-‐level homes dotted throughout the neighbourhood. There is a bus route within half a block (#2 Line -‐ Kinsmen Park) that can provide transportation to the city core. The site is near the RCMP station, within walking distance to schools, downtown and all services. It is a short drive to the hospital located 1 kilometre from the site. The site is considered too far outside the downtown core for seniors requiring assistance or transportation. Having seniors housing located near city centres makes sense because it reduces lengthy travel during colder months to essential services such as the hospital. Having seniors housing downtown makes seniors feel they are a part of the community with many services within walking distance. The site is more suitable for families in a townhouse setting than a seniors development. Title Search: A title search was run on the property which indicated:

The owner is The Provincial Rental Housing Corporation. There are some legal notations of easements. The easements need to be

understood regarding encumbrances on the site and restrictions (if any) on development.

Note: See attached Title Search. Official Community Plan: ‘Residential (R)’ Current Zoning: ‘P-‐1 – Community Use’ Proposed Zoning: ‘R-‐3 – Multi-‐Family Residential’

49

The Town of Creston supports the renovation of Pioneer Villa or a redevelopment of the land to another use. If the site is redeveloped, the Town of Creston will require a rezoning of the property from the current ‘P1 – Community Use’ to ‘R-‐3 Multi-‐Family Residential’. Based on the new zoning, the site will support:

• 1.81 acres = .732 hectares x 63 Units/hectare = 46.11 Units. The Town of Creston confirmed that all services are readily available at the site including:


50

51

52

53

Conclusion The Pioneer Villa was originally submitted as a renovation project intended for seniors. The community was the driving force behind the original project and there appears to be a strong desire to develop the project into some form of housing. Even though the structure has been determined to be in good condition, it is not financially viable to renovate due to the layout and function of the space. The building contains too many administrative spaces and internal areas that would not serve a purpose in any type of renovation. Pioneer Villa has had 3 business plans completed for renovation options from supportive seniors to assisted living; however, all have failed as being too expensive for government or private investors to consider. The cost to renovate Pioneer Villa could reach upwards of $3,000,000 or more (based on recent renovation costs at the Whistler Inn in Kamloops). The above renovation amount is based on but not limited to: numerous code upgrade issues; sprinkler system upgrades; asbestos remediation; room and administration area reconfiguration; and numerous pieces of mechanical equipment, roof top make up air units and air conditioning units in need of replacement or refurbishing. A mechanical sub-‐trade professional will need to determine if these are salvageable or not. It should be highlighted that the building is suspected to have asbestos in most of the finishes and products, and a hazardous material report is recommended prior to demolition. On a positive note, BC Housing (the current owner) has mentioned that there may be a watercourse running under one of the wings; this was investigated and remediated in 1996 by the Interior Health Authority. The need and demand for such a facility was also considered, as there is already one seniors project considered to be a top candidate in the supportive seniors Trinity United Church Project. With the delivery of 24 units of seniors housing in Crestbrook Gardens ready for occupancy in November 2011, the support for a third seniors/supportive seniors project is remote. Therefore the site should be considered as a top candidate for a family townhouse site. The Need and Demand report strongly recommends family housing as there is little to no affordable family housing available. The provincial government would most likely look favourably at a proposal for redevelopment of the site with a feasible business plan. The site is recommended as one of two sites that should be moved forward to schematic design.

54

Pioneer Villa 1909 Ash Street, Creston

Looking at the front sign

Looking at the rear of the project from the roof

55

Financial Feasibility: Capital Cost and Operating Budgets with Financing Options The number of sites offered by the Working Group of the Creston Valley Community Housing Society was reduced from six to two with one backup. The next step for the top two sites is to complete schematic designs to determine any additional concerns for development. Preliminary budgets can then be created based on the design. A review of potential financing and funding of the project was the next step to determine the feasibility of the two top sites. Based on the area of the building and figures from the municipality, a Pro Forma was created that outlined the estimated capital costs for the construction of the project and an operating budget for the ongoing operations. The budgets are preliminary and follow a prescribed format issued by the provincial government. Part of the budget process is to encourage partnerships and contributions to lower the costs and make the project feasible. The Town of Creston does not charge for development in the areas considered for the top two projects. At the prescribed rent levels being contemplated, a funding shortfall was identified that needs to be addressed by a third party. The CVCHA has the option of raising the money through fundraising efforts, or by approaching the Columbia Basin Trust or a philanthropist to cover this gap. As part of confirming all the figures, it is recommended that a contractor be identified and a firm price estimate be obtained for the construction. Once this has been done, the budgets will be closer to completion and closer to a formal submission to the financial institution for consideration of funding. Preliminary Capital Cost and Operating Budgets for both Ash Street Project and the Trinity United Church Project were given to the proponents.

56

Municipal Tools and Framework for Affordable Housing Strategy (Phase 3) This section outlines a Municipal Framework for the Town of Creston and the Regional District. This can be considered in their efforts to make housing a focus and potentially put in place a mechanism to encourage investment within the community from private and public organizations. The framework provides the tools the Town of Creston can consider to make affordable housing an easy process within the Official Community Plan; it also describes the development of zoning bylaws that can encourage affordable housing and increase the partnerships that assist private organizations and are sought by the provincial government. Any relief in the form of cash through a housing fund or trust, the donation or offer of municipal lands, the reductions of DCCs, application fees, engineering fees and work completed by municipal forces should be recognized, quantified and recorded as equity towards a project. Municipal Approval Process: Municipalities can start to assist affordable housing projects by ensuring staff understand that an affordable housing application should be “fast tracked” through the stages of review required by the municipality. This is beneficial to a municipality as it gains a track record of being receptive to affordable housing by establishing aggressive timelines for approval of rezoning, development permits and building permits. Consideration to run these concurrently is also encouraged as part of an aggressive approval process. Fast tracked applications can also be beneficial as they reduce costs in a rising market by getting commitments and firm prices from suppliers and sub-‐trades when trying to meet price points. In the interior of BC it is specifically advantageous as the interior of the province has to deal with cold winters and in some areas deep snow. Having fast approvals gets projects going faster so that housing construction can be avoided during bad weather conditions. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

57

Zoning: The cost of land is a key factor in the ability to achieve affordability. Taking advantage of zoning is an easy method to allow a developer to spread the costs of the land across the number of units, reducing the cost per-‐unit of the land. This advantage assists in keeping the cost down which is passed along in the form of lower rents. As well, rezoning commercial and industrial land provides land for housing that was previously unavailable. Municipalities can view zoning as a powerful tool with which to encourage and support the development of affordable housing. There are several examples throughout the province in which zoning has been the difference in the viability of a project; zoning can make or break a particular project. The use of “CD” Comprehensive Development Zones provides benefits to all stakeholders, as developers can build additional units in an area where the zoning is restrictive. The municipality should embrace an area as a CD Zone where the zoning is difficult or when there is limited ability to develop the mass needed to make the business plan work. All projects in a CD zone should be manipulated to give the best advantage to the site in comparison to other sites in other communities. The municipality gets the benefit and reputation of being forward thinking and easy to deal with and a non-‐profit society is able to offer more units to take advantage of economies of scale without the burden of high per-‐unit land costs. Inclusionary Zoning: This type of policy allows and promotes a wider range of housing options for developers to consider. Typically it would allow higher density within a zone in exchange for units targeted at low to moderate-‐income people and disabled individuals. This type of zoning can come in the form of contributing money to a Housing Trust Fund in lieu of building the affordable housing units if they did not work within the developer’s marketing strategy. The Housing Trust Fund can then be made available to non-‐profit societies who are targeting marginalized sectors and developing purpose-‐built affordable housing. Density Bonus: Similar to inclusionary zoning, the use of density bonuses on existing zoning or zoning required by the OCP has been very successful in communities across BC. Density bonuses require a zoning variance to increase the density; the municipality uses existing legislation in BC to allow high density while meeting all code-‐related requirements for the larger building. The increased units encourage the developer to build affordable units or provide cash to a Housing Trust Fund in lieu of the units. The density bonuses are a proven tool used by municipalities to assist developers in making a marginal business plan become feasible by taking advantage of economies of scale while increasing the housing fund or getting affordable housing units. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

58

Development Cost Charges and Application Fee Concession: Development Cost Charges (DCCs) are an excellent tool for a municipality to address long-‐term in-‐place partnerships and confirm their support for affordable housing. Some municipalities call these ‘hook-‐up charges’ but essentially any fees collected for a project can be considered a burden on the project or development cost. Any reduction or elimination of DCCs, application fees and engineering costs encourages the construction of affordable housing and helps to keep rental rates low. DCCs are typically collected to generate revenue for upgrading municipal services such as storm and sanitary sewer and water. Some municipalities argue that these cannot be reduced through the Municipal Act, which is correct. The development of a municipal bylaw that specifically allows the municipality to reduce or eliminate the DCCs for affordable housing is recommended. The bylaw will require review and approval by the Ministry of Community Services; this is a lengthy process so the municipality should draft and submit the bylaw as early as possible. An example of a recent bylaw from Vernon is referenced. This type of reduction is typically only available for affordable housing and non-‐profit housing societies as it does not set a precedent for profit-‐driven developers to use public funds to make a profit unless there is an affordable component. A DCC reduction in this case would only apply to the affordable housing units. Any reduction in DCCs is welcomed in submissions to the government and becomes part of the partnership and contribution of the municipality. Many municipalities will tie their reduction to meeting some basic affordability criteria established by the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). Some municipalities may also attempt to protect this contribution by suggesting a housing agreement is required; this agreement encumbers the land and essentially states that the land cannot be sold off and must be affordable housing in perpetuity. This type of agreement is not recommended as it stifles development and is redundant. If funding is provided through the provincial government, they will attach a Covenant 219 as part of their financing which essentially protects both levels of government contributions. Alternative Development Standards: A municipality can consider altering development standards that come in two forms: planning and engineering. Planning alternatives are flexible requirements to increase density by allowing reduced setbacks on narrow lot sizes which is advantageous in unusual site configurations where conventional standards are difficult to apply. Some examples of engineering alternatives are reduced road allowances and on-‐street parking. These alternatives reduce overall construction costs that directly impact the cost per unit. The caveat is that these reductions do not guarantee that the savings will be passed on in the form of lower rental rates. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

59

Tax Grants: The reduction of property taxes is another method used to assist a project in the long term when sustaining affordable rent. Municipalities in BC have the legislative ability to provide tax grants for a renewal period of up to 10 years. However, typically a yearly application needs to be submitted by a non-‐profit agency to be considered for the reduction/elimination. Municipal councils and regional districts should be supportive of this reduction or elimination of taxes as it directly contributes to the success and long-‐term viability of affordable housing. These types of reductions over the life of the building are enormous; many business plans fail without this consideration. Height Restrictions: The height of buildings according to zoning can restrict development and hamper density. It is suggested that height restriction mechanisms be used flexibly by city councils as another tool to allow additional units to be built and increase land density. Fire departments tend to be opposed to this measure as they want lower buildings so their equipment will be sufficient for the building height. This can be offset by the use of sprinkler systems and additional fire separations in key areas, larger areas of refuge and extraction areas for residents. The reality is that higher buildings will be the future as the ALR maintains their position of not allowing land to be removed from the ALR and as city boundaries remain the same. Redevelopment of under-‐used land or infill sites should be encouraged, as the use of cars should be reduced as fuel becomes more expensive. Municipal Lands and Land Trusts: A municipality can also participate in providing land for a project. Land in rural areas may not be as valuable as land in larger urban centers and the impact on the budget may be minimal; however, it is a contribution and forms the basis of a partnership. The provincial government encourages this type of partnership, as it is an easy contribution if the municipality has surplus lands. Typically the land will need to go through a public process open to non-‐profit societies; this is done to avoid challenges of favouritism and due process. A municipality can also contribute their surplus land towards a land trust or land bank as long as they follow the Community Charter chapter 26 for disposal of public lands. Land trusts or land banks are typically held by non-‐profit organizations that have more flexibility in targeting the land for housing societies. Land within the trust can come from many sources such as philanthropists, donated municipal lands, surplus land from companies/organizations, or government-‐owned land. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

60

Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR): Land within the Agricultural Land Reserve is occasionally made available for affordable housing once the land is considered “non-‐agriculturally viable”. The process to reach this designation seems to be fairly subjective with no predictability of outcome. For Creston and the Regional District, it may be worthwhile to visit with the ALR to establish a reasonable mechanism to remove land from the ALR for affordable housing. The ALR serves an important purpose and in Richmond, for example, a very good case can be made for keeping land reserved and protected from urban sprawl. These concerns and rules need to be revisited by all the stakeholders in the Creston Valley and some reasonable consideration should be in place when determining the requests. In a rural area like Creston where a majority of the land is agricultural and the supply is abundant, consideration to remove land bordering the community of Creston should be encouraged. This is not to say that a precedent should be set for an enormous expansion of Creston’s boundaries but where the land can be used for affordable housing and can be easily serviced by the municipality, there should be some mechanism by which the ALR will consider these lands for affordable housing. Secondary Suites: A secondary suite has advantages and disadvantages when a municipality approves a suite. A guide to secondary suites in Vernon is referenced as an example of a process that may be used. A secondary suite has many benefits for a community but can also be subject to many pitfalls; municipalities use increased densification to relieve pressure on the development of long-‐term housing and the time required to deliver the housing. Advantages:

o The homeowner received revenue from a renter; o The city can within their bylaws increase the amount of housing in their

community by supporting secondary suites; Disadvantages:

o There is a burden on municipal systems such as sewer, storm and water as additional capacity is added to already sized systems;

o A municipality can increase the cost for garbage collection which reduces the rental profit;

o The neighbourhood in which a secondary suite is approved may experience an increase in traffic. Parking is always a concern as onsite parking was provided for the house without planning for more cars;

o The homeowner may need to go through a lengthy rezoning process. The cost of the rezoning sometimes defeats the homeowner’s desire to have a secondary suite or the owner may opt to run an illegal suite rather than pay for the conversion;

Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

61

o Secondary suites sometimes push the envelope of the building code with some

municipalities going as far as to refer to the single family dwelling as a small apartment requiring sprinkler systems and rated ceilings between ‘units’.

Municipalities have tried to overcome these concerns by increasing garbage and water rates which can defeat the advantages as the homeowner passes these costs onto the renter in the form of increased rental rates. Good Neighbours Bylaw: Many municipalities struggle with unsightly and slum land lords, as well as noisy and problematic tenants. The properties can become ‘junk yards’ and can damage a municipality’s reputation. The City of Vernon introduced a ‘Good Neighbours bylaw -‐ #4980’ (referenced below) that provides some framework for bylaw officers to deal with noise, junk and other annoying habits. An unfortunate reaction to this is to relate these run-‐down properties with affordable housing, making future approvals uncertain. Mobile Home Parks: Municipalities in all communities are under pressure to provide and encourage affordable housing. As land values increase, mobile home parks that offer a source of affordable housing are under extreme pressure. A mobile home park provides affordable housing on typically larger sites as the provision for a mobile home is inefficient and takes up a lot of land per unit. As land becomes more expensive, landlords or owners of mobile home parks can evict tenants of these parks without penalty for little or no reason with typically three months’ notice. For many residents of mobile home parks this means either moving away from their community or seeking more expensive housing. A municipality is powerless to stop this conversion particularly if the owner is following the OCP and is within the existing zoning. A municipality can renegotiate with the owner and offer items such as density bonuses in exchange for affordable units; however, this can be undefined as there are no set rules for the exchange. The owner can request enormous concessions and bonuses in exchange for a minimal amount of what he deems affordable units. As well, many of the displaced tenants will never return even if units are available. The erosion of mobile home parks is evident in every community and is a serious issue, with municipalities attempting to encourage affordable housing using any means necessary. Many municipalities will face similar pressures as land values increase. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

62

Conversion of Existing Buildings: Conversion of existing buildings is sometimes an option for housing. It is really done on a case-‐by-‐case basis, as a set of rules is hard to apply to certain structures. Conversion should be encouraged if a municipality has more commercial office space than needed and can use rezoning to encourage replacement with residential units. Many issues arise when converting buildings such as fire protection, building codes, asbestos and costs. Buildings over twenty years old will be difficult to renovate due to the issues of building codes, replacement of systems and remediation costs. As land becomes more valuable, conversion can be less attractive as the cost to renovate does not maximize the development potential. Heritage buildings that are protected can also limit development as these have strict facade retention rules. Interior infill with structural upgrades can assist in keeping the older look while maximizing the zoning. Infill Development: Infill development is another tool used by a municipality to encourage development of land that has been vacant or has the appearance of a ’missing tooth’ in city boundaries. By leveraging various tools, a municipality can adjust lot lines, allow additional units on the same site, divide land for multiple units and rezone to a favourable zoning that will encourage development. With increased land costs, static city boundaries and the cost of transportation, the infill movement is gaining more acceptance without the burden of expanded services such as sanitary, storm sewer and water. Form and Character / Massing: Form and character massing is a way to control the look and feel of a building. It is sometimes tied to development themes designed to retain a certain heritage look and feel in the majority of structures within a community, giving it a unique appearance that is different from other communities. Form and character can be expensive if burdened with expensive facades and frivolous design pieces that can add cost to the building and be passed on to the consumer or renter. Massing reviews and strict rules are a reaction to the “Vancouver Special” which took advantage of older rules to build to the envelope of the zoning, resulting in cookie cutter boxes. These buildings can detract from the municipality’s overall community plan and can create neighbourhoods full of unsightly structures. A municipality can address this by controlling the height and massing of a building; despite these restrictions, the municipality should be open to submissions that may push the boundaries while retaining the overall approach to massing. Flexibility along with savvy architectural design needs to be encouraged. Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

63

Some Links to helpful resources are as follows:

1. A Guide to Operating a Secondary Suite in the City of Vernon: http://www.vernon.ca/services/pde/documents/Secondary_Suite_Brochure.pdf

2. Secondary Suite Requirements (In a single family Dwelling) – City of Kelowna:

http://www.kelowna.ca/CityPage/Docs/PDFs//Inspection%20Services/Bulletins/Secondary%20Suite%20Requirements%20(In%20a%20Single%20Family%20Dwelling).pdf

3. Development Cost Charges Bylaw #3769 -‐ City of Vernon:

http://www.vernon.ca/images/uploads/council/bylaws/Development_Cost_Charges_Bylaw_5233.pdf

Source: Assistance from: “Municipal Framework Policy Recommendations” – Summerland Affordable Housing Committee

64

Conclusion Need and Demand Assessment Update (Phase 1) The Phase 1 scope of work for the Need and Demand Assessment Update was to identify any emerging trends facing the Town of Creston and Creston Valley in regards to accessibility, adequacy and suitability and provide direction for developing recommendations to address those needs. The Need and Demand Assessment Update report was subcontracted to Casita Consulting at the start of services in early 2011. The report confirmed that Creston is in desperate need of family housing as there is no affordable or market housing available. It also states an emerging trend for additional seniors housing in the near future following the complete rental of Crestbrook Gardens (a new 24-‐unit seniors modular project). The report quotes the Interior Health Mental Health and Addictions Program which has numbers that indicate a need for approximately twenty units in 2011. The Need and Demand Update, as well as anecdotal information gathered from the community and surveys collected at an open house, support the creation of additional affordable housing for the Town of Creston and the Creston Valley as follows:

• Family Housing Units: 30-‐100 • Seniors Independent Units: 30-‐40 • Special Needs Units: 20

Potential Housing Site Feasibility Reviews (Phase 2) The Phase 2 scope of work was to evaluate eight sites within the Creston Valley catchment area. The expected result of the evaluation was to reduce the number of potential sites from eight to two with one backup site. The remaining sites could be developed but it was determined that the recommended sites had advantages over the remaining sites when it came to ease of development, location of services and cost to build.

65

The three sites recommended (two to move forward and one as backup) are as follows:

1. Trinity United Church Site 128 10th Avenue, Creston Client Group: Independent seniors (with flexibility to offer support services at a later date)

2. Pioneer Villa Site

1909 Ash Street, Creston Client Group: Family (Market and affordable unit with some special needs housing)

3. Backup Site: Kootenai Community Centre Society Site 1504 Cook Street, Creston Client Group: Women and children leaving abusive relationships

Financial Feasibility: Capital Cost and Operating Budgets with Financing Options The financial feasibility of the projects was studied and a review of potential financing and funding for the project was completed. Based on the area of the building and figures from the municipality, a Pro Forma was created that outlines the estimated capital costs for each project construction and an operating budget for the ongoing operations. The preliminary Capital Cost and Operating Budgets are attached to this report and follow a format prescribed by the provincial government. Municipal Tools and Framework for Affordable Housing Strategy (Phase 3) Phase 3 of the scope of work offers a Municipal Framework for the Town of Creston and the Regional District to consider in their efforts to make housing a focus and potentially put in place a mechanism to encourage investment within the community from private and public organizations. The framework provides tools the Town of Creston could consider to make building affordable housing an easy process within the Official Community Plan, as well as zoning bylaws that can encourage affordable housing and increase the partnerships that assist private organizations and are sought by the provincial government.

66

Appendix:

A. Town of Creston Support Letter dated August 22, 2011 B. Need and Demand Assessment Update Study by Casita Consulting

67

Appendix A

Town of Creston Support Letter dated August 22, 2011

68

TOWN OF CRESTON PO Box 1339, 238-10ih Avenue North, Creston, Be VOS 1GO

Phone: 250-428-2214 ., Fax: 250-428-9164 email: [email protected]

OFFICE OF THE MA VOR

File: 0410.40.B6, 04 I O.20.H3, 5040.01

August 22,201 I

• Be Housing Suite 1701- 4555 Kingsway Burnaby, Be V5H 4V8

Attention: Ms. Danna Locke, Director, Regional Development

Dear Ms. Locke:

Re: Town of Creston - Affordable Housing

We understand that the Working Group of/he Creston Valley Community Housing Society is an organization luade up of several cOnlll1unity members with a comnlon interest in creating local affordable housing. Currently, this group is actively working on two possible housing initiatives within the Town's boundaries.

The first initiative is recognized as the Trinity United Church redevelopment, located at 128) Oth

A venue N011h, for the provision of seniors housing. The second initiative involves redevelopnlent of the Pioneer Villa facility, located at 1909 Ash 8t., as a Inulti-family townhouse project. It is Illy understanding that Be Housing has not yet received a formal proposal for either of these projects at this tiJne. However, the Town of Creston would like to take this opportunity to affirm its ongoing support for the creation of affordable housing options for both seniors and fal11ilies.

OUf cOlnnlunity has a high percentage of seniors, conlpared to the provincial average; and as sllch is largely considered a retirenlent community. Additionally, the Town of Creston recognizes the need for affordable housing for families to ensure a diverse and dynamic demographic.

In order to make the creation of more affordable housing a reality within our community, the Town of Creston is prepared to cooperatively work with developers (whether they be private: non-profit or provincial), within applicable legislative parameters.

. .... 2

69

2

If BC Housing chooses to proceed with either of the initiatives outlined above, the Town of Creston will work with the Province and the Working Group to assist in the development of these initiatives within the local and provincial regulatory framework. The following table details a number of municipal requirements specific to these sites:

Trinity Pioneer

DP Required no no

Development Cost Charges no no

Rezoning Required no yes

OCP Amendnlent required no no

Building Pennit and Fees yes 'yes Required

Additionally, as was the case with the Creslbrook Gardens project (the 24 unit seniors rental housing project currently under construction in Creston), the Town would welcome discussions as to what other possibilities/opportunities may exist for furthering the development of affordable housing opportunities within the Town of Creston.

If you require any additional inforlllation or would like to discuss the above please call ll1e at (250) 428- 4 Extension 227.

c: Council Membe ~wnManag

C.V. Comm nity Housing Society Working Group Trinity United Church

70

kanebentsen

Highlight

Appendix B

Need and Demand Assessment Update Study by Casita Consulting 1. Introduction, with Definitions and Location Maps – Page 3

2. Community Demographics and Economic Profile – Page 6

3. Currently Affordable Housing Need – Page 10

4. Currently Available Affordable Housing Stock – Page 14

5. Emerging or Forecast Housing Need – Page 20

5a. Review of 2008 Housing Survey Report recommendations – Page 21

6. Anticipated Affordable Housing Supply – Page 25

7. Shortfall or Surplus Affordable Housing – Page 28

8. APPENDIX A: Support Letters – Page 31

9. APPENDIX B: P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 Interior Health Population Projections – Page 51

10. APPENDIX C: Transcribed Comments from Surveys – Page 58

11. APPENDIX D: Affordable Housing for Families: Outcomes – Page 62

12. APPENDIX E: Excerpt: NHRC Seniors Housing Conditions 2011 – Page 69

13. APPENDIX F: Selkirk College and Housing Resources Links – Page 71

71

CRESTON VALLEY AFFORDABLE HOUSING

NEEDS UPDATE 2011

Alan B. Campbell

Casita Consulting Ltd.

Penticton, B.C.

1

____________________________________________________________ Casita Consulting Ltd. 2011 - Creston Valley Area Housing Need Update V.5

user

Rectangle

Creston Valley Affordable Housing Needs Update 2011-V.4 - Casita Consulting Ltd.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER:

PAGE

1. Introduction, with Definitions and Location Maps 3

2. Community Demographics and Economic Profile 6

3. Currently Affordable Housing Need 10

4. Currently Available Affordable Housing Stock 14

5. Emerging or Forecast Housing Need5B: Review of 2008 Housing Survey Report Recommendations

2021

6. Anticipated Affordable Housing Supply 25

7. Shortfall or Surplus of Affordable Housing 28

8. APPENDIX A: Support Letters 31

9. APPENDIX B: P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 Interior Health Population Projections 51

10. APPENDIX C: Transcribed Comments from Surveys 58

11. APPENDIX D: Affordable Housing for Families: Outcomes 62

12. APPENDIX E: Excerpt: NHRC Seniors Housing Conditions 2011 69

13. APPENDIX F: Selkirk College and Housing Resources links 71

2


user

Rectangle

INTRODUCTION

A) Background

The Town of Creston and surrounding area has long been considered a desirable place to live, with its good amenities, fine soils and relatively benign climate. Over the past several years there have been studies about the housing and services profiles of the area. In June, 2011, the Working Group of the Creston Valley Community Housing Society [CVCHS] received funding from the Creston Valley Gleaners and the Columbia Basin Trust [CBT] to work with the BC Non Profit Housing Association [BCNPHA] to engage a Development Consultant for an update to the affordable housing profile in greater Creston, and to study several potential sites in Creston regarding their affordable housing development potential.

Casita Consulting Ltd. of Penticton was engaged to research and produce the Housing Need and Demand update portion.

The writer, Alan B. Campbell, principal of Casita Consulting Ltd, has been engaged in the affordable housing picture in Creston since 1988 when, as a Development Officer with BC Housing Management Commission, he participated in the development of Glaser Terrace and Erickson Golden Manor in Creston, and the administration of housing shelter subsidies to other social housing developments and special needs housing in the area. Since 2000, he has continued his involvement in the housing sector as a private consultant in the affordable housing field.

B) Scope

The intent of the update was to look for any significant changes or trends in the affordable housing stock and supply in the Creston area. Significant is the operative word. Census 2006 was the last large scale comprehensive collection of socio-economic data, and has already resulted in several excellent and large scale studies. Census 2011 will not start to produce public results until the first quarter of 2012. However we are able to gain insight into the current situation by looking at interim updates from BC Stats, CMHC and the Interior Health Authority. The writer either personally visited or contacted representatives of some of the existing affordable housing operations in Creston, and researched newer data being issued by CMHC, BC Stats and Interior Health in particular. In addition he researched the program files regarding mortgages and operating agreements.

To the extent possible, the writer uses the framework of the BCNPHA Template for Need and Demand, as the outline requested by BC Non Profit and the Working Group of CVCHS.

The writer attended the Community Open House held July 6th 2011 at Trinity United Church in Creston, and distributed a Survey of perceived affordable housing need at that Open House. The Survey led to several meaningful discussions about the current state of housing in Creston. And there are directions to be proposed based upon those inputs. We thank the Working Group of the CVCHS for all their work in setting up this venue for the Open House, and for their efforts to collect and send the support letters received. These are included in Appendix A, Page 31 at the end of this Update.

3


C) Key Assumptions

Because this Update is prepared for the CVCHS, associated parties, and collaterally for BC Housing to review, we expect that the reader will be familiar with, or have ready access to, several key documents that this report is related to. We refer to these reports and reproduce portions where helpful. They are referenced By Permission:

# TITLE AUTHOR/GROUP

1 HOUSING SURVEY REPORT 2008 for: Creston Valley Community Housing Society

Kootenay Employment Services Society Heidi Bjarnson et al. http://www.kes.bc.ca/housing/finalreport.pdf

2 2008 State of the Basin Report Columbia Basin Trust http://www.cbt.org

3 Affordable Housing Assessment and Strategic Planning: The Columbia Basin and Boundary Regions, B.C. March 2009

George Penfold M.S. MCIP Regional Innovation Chair [ret.] Selkirk College http://selkirk.ca/research/ric/housing-resources/

D) Brief Definitions of Main Recurring Terminology

Acceptability: Acceptable housing refers to housing that is adequate in condition, suitable in size, and affordable. Affordability: means that a household in independent living can pay for rent and utilities without being required to spend more than 30% of their before-tax monthly income. If people voluntarily pay more as a lifestyle decision, they are not considered in Core Housing Need. For communities across Canada, CMHC does regular market rent surveys and from those market rents derives extensive tables of average market rents, from which the 30% baselines are derived. In BC, the Ministry Responsible for Housing derives tables called Housing Income Limits [HILs] which list bedroom count and maximum incomes permitted across the various zones of BC. See Chapter 6 for the HILs for the Creston area. Family: means one head of household over the age of majority plus at one dependent child. Canada’s National Occupancy Standard [NOS] stipulates a bedroom each for:

• each cohabiting adult couple; • each unattached household member 18 years of age and over; • any same-sex pair of children under age 18; • and an additional boy or girl in the family, unless there are two opposite sex children under 5 years

of age, in which case they are expected to share a bedroom.

4


http://www.kes.bc.ca/housing/finalreport.pdf

http://www.cbt.org/

http://selkirk.ca/research/ric/housing-resources/

• A household of one individual can occupy a bachelor unit (i.e. a unit with no bedroom). Single: means an individual over the age of majority but under 55 years of age. Senior: means a person aged 55 or better, or 45 in major urban centres. In rural situations, operators of affordable housing projects are increasingly being permitted to house compatible non-seniors for the purposes of maintaining rental income stream in the newer projects without monthly subsidy agreements. Adequacy: Means providing the reasonably expected suite of utilities and services in good repair, and not requiring major repairs that are currently affecting the quality of life in the living unit. The utilities should work dependably, there should be no mold or accumulation of stale air, and fire safety should be demonstrated. It also relates to the National Occupancy Standard for bedroom count, listed above. Suitability: Suitability is a real issue depending upon the needs of the household. For example an apartment may be warm and dry and affordable, but if it is on three levels and the head of household cannot climb stairs, then the unit is unsuitable. Similarly if a household member requires wheelchair accessibility, but the unit is up a steep incline with a three step entry threshold, then the unit is also unsuitable. If a home is affordable but a long way out of town and not on a transport route, it is unsuitable. Other requirements involve light – people with mood disorders or requiring heavy medications may not be able to adapt to a north exposure with the weak ambient light much of the year. Conversely some people need the coolness of a north exposure because the heat of summer into a south or southwest facing unit is excessive. This can be a real issue in Boundary country. Suitability is a combination of physical and subjective assessments but is nevertheless very real for the property manager and tenant population to deal with. Funded: In a development that provides both housing, support services and health care, the term “funded” normally is used to describe those units in the development that are under contract with the Health Authority or other public agency, for the provision of personal support or care services. This term distinguishes between “private pay” units and those units that receive public contract dollars.

5


2. COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC PROFILE

We reproduce here some updated community socio-economic data. We are pleased to credit Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation [CMHC], Statistics British Columbia [BC STATS] and the Interior Health Authority [IH] for continuing to monitor economic and social indicators in this hiatus between major federal Census outputs. We comment as we feel appropriate for discussion on the affordable housing need in Creston.

It is worth noting that across Canada, Census 2006 revealed the overall population is nowadays concentrated 80% urban and only 20% rural. In British Columbia, this is further exacerbated by the population being 85% urban and only 15% rural. A concentration of services is occurring to the major urban centres. In the case of Creston, that is the City of Cranbrook, 107 km [66 miles] to the east. The consequence is that many smaller communities like Creston are struggling to retain a full range of civic services such as hospitals, schools, churches, public agency offices, as well as private industry to fuel the economic engine of the area. Housing for lower income working age people is a critical need.

Here is the population summary for the Town of Creston, reproduced from The Community Facts of BC Stats. The full report is available at www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca :

Note the small population total of 2,250 males and 2,575 females compared to Cranbrook, a mere 107 km away, which has a total population of more than 18,000. This engenders urban centralisation of services.

Part of the problem in assessing the Creston area and other non-urban areas is the small size of the available samples. For example, in the CMHC Market Rent Statistics, Creston is lumped in “Kootenay” and together with North Central BC becomes listed as “Rest of BC”, making local inferences from such a large sample area without significance. Even the average market rents and vacancy rate tables only list the City of Cranbrook in the “immediate” area, which is not immediate to Creston at all.

Here are some extracts from the Second Quarter of 2011 “Quarterly Regional Statistics” [QRS] issued by BC STATS for Central Kootenay Regional District:

6


http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/

“13. DEMOGRAPHICS:

LIKE MANY RESOURCE DEPENDENT REGIONS IN THE PROVINCE, CENTRAL KOOTENAY HAD MORE PEOPLE MOVING OUT

THAN MOVING IN DURING THE MID-EIGHTIES AND AGAIN IN 1998. HOWEVER THE NEW MIGRATION TO THIS REGION

THROUGH THE NINETIES WAS VERY HIGH, LEADING TO STRING GROWTH IN THESE YEARS. THE POPULATION HAS AGED, ADDING OVER 9.5 YEARS TO THE MEDIAN AGE SINCE THE MID 1980’S, COMPARED TO A PROVINCIAL GAIN OF 7.2 YEARS. BY 2007, THE MEDIAN AGE OF THE POPULATION IN THIS REGION WAS ALMOST FIVE YEARS OLDER THAN THE PROVINCIAL

MEDIAN. TOTAL FERTILITY RATES HAVE DECREASED OVER THE LAST TWENTY YEARS, BUT REMAIN HIGHER THAN

PROVINCIAL RATES. ALONG WITH FERTILITY, THE RATIO OF CHILDREN AGED 17 AND UNDER TO THOSE OF WORKING AGES

[ 18 TO 64] HAS BEEN ON THE DECLINE. NONETHELESS, THE PROPORTION OF CHILDREN IN THE POPULATION IS STILL

HIGHER THAN CORRESPONDING PROVINCIAL RATIOS. ALREADY MUCH HIGHER IN THE MID 1980’S, ELDERLY

DEPENDENCY RATIOS HAVE INCREASED. THE NUMBER OF MALES AND FEMALES IS ALMOST EQUAL, IN CONTRAST TO THE

PROVINCE AS A WHOLE, WHERE THERE ARE MORE FEMALES THAN MALES. NATURAL INCREASE HAS BEEN DECLINING

RAPIDLY, AND BIRTHS OUTNUMBERED DEATHS UNTIL VERY RECENTLY. POPULATION CHANGE IS NOW MOST STRONGLY

INFLUENCED BY MOVEMENTS OF PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF THE REGION. DECREASING NATURAL INCREASE AND MAINLY

NEGATIVE NET MIGRATION HAS RESULTED IN A NET LOSS OF POPULATION IN THIS REGION OVER MUCH OF THE PAST

DECADE. HOWEVER POSITIVE NET MIGRATION IN RECENT YEARS HAS RESULTED IN A GAIN OF POPULATION, PARTICULARLY IN 2007.”

Continuing with our excerpt from the BC STATS Second Quarterly 2011 Regional Statistics, we review the QRS demographic projection :

“14. PROJECTION

NET MIGRATION SHOULD BECOME MORE STRONGLY POSITIVE AS THE AS THE ECONOMY DIVERSIFIES, MORE THAN

OFFSETTING LOSSES DUE TO NEGATIVE NATURAL INCREASE IN THE LATER PORTION OF THE PROJECTION PERIOD. HOWEVER, DEATHS WILL CONTINUE TO OUTNUMBER BIRTHS BY AN INCREASING MARGIN, LOWERING THE POPULATION

GROWTH RATE. THE POPULATION OF THIS AREA IS EXPECTED TO GROW MARGINALLY OVER THE NEXT 30 YEARS, ADDING

4,400 PEOPLE TO THE AREA POPULATION. AS THE POPULATION CONTINUES TO AGE, OVERALL DEPENDENCY WILL

INCREASE, AND BY 2036, THERE WILL LIKELY BE OVER 8 DEPENDENTS FOR EVERY 10 PEOPLE OF WORKING AGE. MANY

OF THESE DEPENDENTS WILL BE AGED 65 AND OLDER.”

This last sentence above is particularly important in support of creating affordable family housing so that working age families will be attracted to the area to sustain the local economy.

To assist with the forward projection of population and age groups, Interior Health Authority, Information Support and Research Branch on Kirschner Road in Kelowna, has kindly approved our including their recently released [September 2010] PEOPLE 35 Population Projections [2011-2026] for the Creston Local Health Area 005. The full report is included as Appendix B, Page 51 and is very pertinent. Following is an

7


excerpt from PEOPLE 35. Note the highlights showing seniors and younger adults being the two more relatively-significant growing cohorts:

Population Projections for the Creston LHA for 2011 to 2026

In Table 3, we see that the 20 to 44 age group, among which would be most of the family housing potential applicants, grows only slightly from 24% of total in 2011 to 25.8% of total in 2026. Yet the 45 to 64 age group drops significantly from 29.4% to 21.2%. This means there will be a period where applicants to seniors housing in the future will go through a period of relatively weaker demand before picking up again as the younger seniors grow into the 65+ group. Then the Senior group 65+ grows 4% up from 24.8% in 2011 to 29.6% in 2026.

In Figure 2 above, bar graphs illustrate the population growth percentage increases. Both family and seniors’ housing need continue to be supported in 2011, as first presented in the 2008 KES study and the 2009 Penfold study. In-migration will occur but actual number of people is relatively few.

8


Bountiful and Mormon Hills

A demographic that was not mentioned in the 2008 or 2009 Needs Reports is the fundamentalist population in the area.

There is a significant population of women and children in the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints’ communities in the Creston area. Bountiful and Mormon Hills have been in the news repeatedly as pressure is applied upon the community leadership to abandon the tightly controlled practices of the past. It is suggested that there is increasing incentive for women and children to act to change what they experience as oppressive lifestyle.

As they leave the closed communities, they can be expected to create more pressure for affordable family housing and sheltered housing for women and children in the Creston area. Already Creston area agencies report that some women and children have left the communities, with little or no financial or other resources. Since these households are immediately in need for housing and services, the Creston area agencies are front and center in responding to the need.

9


3. CURRENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEED

As we have seen, there is already a large statistical foundation for the discussion of affordable housing in the Regional District of Central Kootenay, and particularly in Creston. The consultants asked the Creston area community what their perception is today of housing need. We undertook a series of contacts with Providers of market and non-market housing in Creston. In addition with the help of the Creston Valley Community Housing Society, we conducted a Community Open House at Trinity United Church on July 6th, 2011. This Open House solicited and received input from over 60 participants, and featured the distribution of a 2-page Survey to Creston area residents regarding their housing situation and their perceptions of the Creston area housing need.

The surveys reveal that in the Creston Valley there still are in 2011 many households that both know of people in need and are themselves in need or concerned about falling into need as they grow older.

With the flat or falling housing resale market, there are likely to be seniors who want to make the move to more appropriate housing, but are prevented from cashing in their equity until they find a buyer.

Families who might like to move to Creston, or live there already, are often prevented from securing housing for themselves because they cannot find safe and secure housing that is affordable at basic employment income levels.

A current attractive development in Creston, intending to provide rental rowhouses is required to charge around $1,000 per month rent, which is not affordable to lower income households with an annual income below $35,000. [30% of that income is at or less than $875.00 per month which does not cover the required rent and utilities for that development]. And only families who have been in BC for 12 months and working [not in receipt of income assistance] can apply for provincial family rent supplement.

Any discussion of affordable rents should refer to the Housing Income Limits [HILs], which are a provincial derivation of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation affordability and income analyses. The 30% of income values shown highlighted below are the maximum amounts that households following the National Occupancy Standards ought to be required to pay, being related to the CMHC average market rents in Creston.

BC HOUSING INCOME LIMITS to qualify for subsidized housing: CRESTON Bach 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed 4+ bed p/annum $19,000 $22,500 $26,400 $29,700 $32,450 p/month $1583/mo $1875/mo $2200/mo $2475/mo $2407/mo

30% $475 $563 $660 $743 $722

On the following two pages is the Survey we provided. Following the blank Survey Template are charts of the response characteristics.

In Appendix C, Page 58, we include three pages of transcribed responses taken from the surveys.

10


HOUSING NEEDS SURVEY

Dear Creston area resident: Casita Consulting Ltd. asks for your feedback on what the need for affordable housing in Creston looks like to you. Please give us a few moments of your time and answer some or all of the following questions. There is space for you to add “your own words” . Then please hand the questionnaire to us, or mail it to: Casita Consulting Ltd, 425 Ridge Road, Penticton BC V2A 8N7 by July 15th so we can be sure to reflect your views in our report. Thank you!

1. You are over 19 years of age and

19-35 36-50 51-64 65+

2. What affordable housing does Creston need MOST?

Family

Seniors

Seniors Supportive

Other

In your words?

3. Do you have satisfactory housing or do you, or someone you know, need better housing?

4. Do you or people you know have annual incomes below the upper qualifying amounts?

Studio $19,000

1-bed $22,500

2-bed $26,400

3-bed $32,000

4+ bed $32,450

5. How important is affordability? What does that mean to you? Is your home affordable right now?

6. How important is accessibility? Is your home accessible now?

7. Is your housing safe? What elements make for a feeling of safety and security in your home?

8. Is your housing adequate? Do you have a proper kitchen and bathroom, and enough bedrooms so parent/s do not have to share with children?

9. Are you employed, and what trends do you see developing for jobs and employment in Creston in the

future?

10. What trends do you see developing for schools and education in Creston in the future?

11. Would you prefer monthly rental or home ownership?

12. What could the Town of Creston do to encourage the provision of affordable housing?

13. What could the Regional District of Central Kootenay do to encourage the provision of affordable housing?

14. What could the Provincial Government do to encourage the provision of affordable housing?

15. What other comments would like to make to guide us in determining the most appropriate affordable

housing for Creston?

See Appendix C, Page 58 for transcribed comments.

11


Creston Valley Affordable Housing Needs Update 2011-V.2- Casita Consulting Ltd.

Here is a brief representation of the ages of the survey respondents and their housing need perception:

‐350 51‐64 65+

The dominant age group responding were seniors, followed by the over 50’s. This is probably influenced by

the age curve of the attendees at the Open House, whose responses were the bulk of the surveys

returned. However there were also letters and emails received that spoke to the younger population.

SURVEY TABLE 1. Ages of Respondents

SURVEY TABLE 2. Perceived most in need

12


user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Rectangle

The survey respondents’ dominant recommendation was for seniors housing, with family housing next. It is interesting that the Creston Area already has several subsidized seniors housing developments, as well as market seniors housing, and the large Swan Valley Lodge licensed public residential care. None of the responses listed supportive housing as a priority need, although that has been separately expressed in the community regarding the future of the vacant Pioneer Villa. The private operator of supportive housing in Creston1 reports a “saturated” market for their supportive component. But Creston has no affordable safe and secure family housing.

In a recent Research Highlight Spring 2011 [See Appendix E, Page 69] excerpted from the Canadian Housing Research Committee report NHRC 8/Spring 20112, it is discussed that “in small cities and rural areas, seniors were over-represented in the population. Edited by Ms. Hoda Shawki, the report shows that for the first time since 2006 housing conditions have improved more for senior households that for non-senior households...but...population aging will cause housing challenges that are more complex than just household incomes and that extend to issues not captured by the core housing need indicator. The key factor is affordability, as opposed to suitability or accessibility. Seniors living alone were much more likely to be in core housing need in 2006 that those living with a spouse or other family members.”

Note that in November, 2011, the 24 new Seniors Rental Housing Initiative units, Creston Gardens, will open at lower end of market rents. The annual income cap for eligibility for the Gardens is $33,700. How the take-up proceeds for those apartments when the units open for rentals in November 2011, will be noteworthy for the planning of additional seniors housing stock in Creston.

In the matter of Family housing, the lack of dedicated and affordable family housing in the Creston area should be the highest concern for the community. In a recent CMHC Research Highlight in the Socio-Economic series 10-007, the Outcomes for Affordable Housing for Families are discussed.3 In this paper the clear shelter and non-shelter benefits to families are presented, as well as the implications for the community of insecure and inadequate family housing. The Research Highlight is in included in Appendix D, Page 62.

58 25Surveys 1 5 18 25 36-50 51-64 65+

1 Interview with Celeste Mullin, VP Business Development, Golden Life Management. 2 http://nhrc-cnrl.ca/sites/default/files/Article_06.pdf, ed. Shawki, Ms. Hoda. 3 http://www.cmhc.ca/odpub/pdf/67033.pdf

13


http://nhrc-cnrl.ca/sites/default/files/Article_06.pdf

http://www.cmhc.ca/odpub/pdf/67033.pdf

4. CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK

We present here an update to the main inventory list of affordable housing projects in Creston, both non profit and for profit. It was pointed out in the Open House by a Realtor in the area, who manages a portfolio of over 40 rental properties, that many of these properties, while “affordable”, did not necessarily meet standards of suitability or adequacy. Many are on rural properties where lack of transportation creates isolation. Possible impact on the public/private balance of the introduction of publicly financed affordable housing projects is a factor the community should bear in mind. Nevertheless communities are built by ensuring that everyone in the area gets a chance to be considered for affordable, safe, and secure housing.

SENIORS RENTAL Project Name Operator/Owner Bach 1-

bed 2-

bed 3-

bed+ Yr

Catalpa Apartments 136 – 10th Avenue North

Creston Trinity Housing Society 12 7 - - 1977

Rebekah Manor 1628 Hillside Street

Creston and District Society for Community Living Founder: East Kootenay Branch of the Rebekah Housing Society

- 11 15 - 1980

Erickson Golden Manor 915 Vancouver Street

Erickson Golden Agers Association - 12 - - 1988

Creston Gardens 200 – 11th Avenue South

Owner: Provincial Rental Housing Corporation Operator: Canadian Mental Health Assoc’n for the East Kootenay; opening November 2011;

- 24 - - 2011

SENIORS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

Project Name Operator/Owner Bach 1-bed

2-bed

3-bed+

Yr

Crest View Village “Independent Living” 800 Cavell Street

Golden Life Management Ltd. - 38 13 - 2005

Nikkyl Place 606 Cook St RR 3

Private 20 - - - -

14


SENIORS ASSISTED LIVING

Project Name Operator/Owner

Bach 1-bed

2-bed

3-bed+

Yr

Crest View Village 800 Cavell Street

Golden Life Management Ltd.

16 ‘studio’

7 - - 2005

SENIORS RESIDENTIAL CARE Project Name

Operator/Owner Bach 1-bed

2-bed

3-bed+

Yr

Crest View Village 800 Cavell Street

Golden Life Management Ltd.

30 funded private studios and 2 private pay studios

Swan Valley Lodge 818 Vancouver Street

Interior Health Authority Community Residential Care NB: includes 3 convalescent and 2 respite beds.

90 - - - 1968

Pioneer Villa 1909 Ash Street

Vacant facility owned by Provincial Rental Housing Corporation

40 - - - 1981

FAMILY HOUSING


Bach 1-bed

2-bed

3-bed+

Yr

There is no affordable and dedicated Family affordable or subsidized housing in the Creston Area, although the area population exceeds 13,000.

SPECIAL NEEDS


Bach 1-bed

2-bed

3-bed+

Yr

Glaser Terrace 1140 Scott Street

Creston Handy Capable Housing Society 12 units for physically disabled plus guest suite.

- 4 HC

6 HC

2 HC

1991

15


GROUP/SHELTER CAPACITY

SCL Group Homes - own Capacity of 14 Severely disabled or developmentally challenged adults

SCL Group Homes - rental Capacity of 13 as above Short Term Shelter – Women Fleeing Violence

Capacity of 3

NOTE: this section adapted from: Real Estate Foundation of BC, Social Housing Data Base, December 2008 as referenced in Penfold: 2009 In 2011 the need being voiced in the community would support an increase in the above capacity.

NB: There are also the private apartments, rental homes, mobile homes and informal secondary suites, as well as the seasonal rental of tourism accommodation.

On the following three pages we reproduce Appendix B-3 of the Housing Survey Report 2008 KES for an excellent compendium of the variety of market accommodations and pricing in the Creston area.[We have removed the social housing part as it is discussed above]. There are no significant changes to these data to report, except that a Creston developer is at the present time finishing four rental houses in the proximity of the new seniors’ rental housing. These houses will rent in range of $1,000 a month. This is understandable given the cost of land and construction, but is not affordable below the second quintile of the CMHC affordability criteria.

In addition, BC Housing and the Canadian Mental Health Association for the East Kootenay, as Operator, are opening Creston Gardens in November 2011. The Gardens is a low end of market independent seniors rental housing project, where the rents are geared to 30% of income, but the Operator is required to mix low income with moderate income tenants in order to meet the monthly operating expenses. There is no ongoing monthly operating subsidy for the Gardens.

Note that much of the following housing does not meet the requirement for year-round housing that is adequate in terms of structure and/or services and utilities.

16


Accommodations Hotel/Motel/Trailer/Small Apartments

Accommodation Units Cost Notes Starlight Motel Units: 5 Kitchen: Y

Occupancy: 100% $500 1 bdr $600 2 bdr

Creston needs more low cost housing. Raise in taxes makes it difficult to offer lower rates.

Creston Valley Motel Units: 13 (2 monthly) Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 100%

$750

Units available Nov-April only. Not enough rental units in town.

City Centre Motel Units:8 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 1

$700 studio $800 I-bdr

No comment

Bluebird Motel Units: 7 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 100%

$520 Enquiries all the time

Antique Trailer Park Units: 30 pads Kitchen: N/A Occupancy: 100%

$210 We need low cost rental housing

Gal bar Apts Units: 2 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 100%

$400 studio $350 1 bdr

Tough to get a decent place at a reasonable rate

Hacienda Inn Units: 28 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 2 rented

$750 - need at least two month's rent up front

Employee has moved for third time this year, poor quality housing.

Kozy Trailer Park Units: 8 pads Kitchen: N/A Occupancy: 100%

$230 Lots of inquiries

Kozy Units Units: 2 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 100%

$500 loft $750 ground

Sites and suites constant. 7 serviced sites for summer RVs. Handibus is excellent. At least four families inquired this month.

Mountain View Inn Units: 5 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 60%

$900 studio/l-bdr $1200 2 bdr

Rent by month only for winter. Need supervised housing for some tenants. Housing prices too high.

Hi-Way Cabins Units: 4 Kitchen: Y Occupancy: 100%

$400 Always rented

Sunset Motel Units: 24 Kitchen: N/A Occupancy: N/A

No monthly rental

The following data tables are reproduced from the 2008 Housing Survey Report, showing the variety and long-term insecure nature of much of the market rental housing in the Creston. There are no substantial differences to report.

17


Bavarian Orchard Motel Units: 6 suites Kitchen: Y

No Monthly rental No comment

Skimmerhorn Inn

Units: 25 Kitchen: 6 units Occupancy: N/A

Can live in 2-bdr but have to pay $86/night

Tradespeople (RCMP, PowerCorp) stay for a Iong time but rent by the night.

Downtowner Motel Units: 45 Kitchen: N Occupancy: N/A

No quote Have housed on a weekly basis mostly for trades people; Need more mid-level rentals.

Creston Hotel Units: 19 monthly Kitchen: N/A rentals Occupancy: N/A

No monthly rentals Need lots of affordable housing

Group Homes Siesta Villa Larry Wittig 6 suite, group home for young teens

and persons with developmental disabilities.

Rents/supervision supported Community Living and Ministry of Children and Families.

32ndSt Group Home and 7th Ave - Maggie Zsoltaros

3 bedroom double-wide trailer on % acre. 24-hour supervision prepares meals. Residents help to their ability to help maintain their independence.

Contract with Community Living; Last residential licensed care facility. These clients need support as they age.

Realtors Re/MAX Ingrid Voight 3, 3-bdr houses $900-$1000/mth Market is opening up. Has had some

folks have trashed houses. Need to be professionals.

Century 21 Katherine Bell 1 3bdr (old) $850 1 2bdr $900 1 bdr bsmt suite $675

Market is opening up as people are unable to sell but rents are high. Provides some tenant/landlord education.

Property Managers Karen Montgomery System does not work well, so landlords are hesitant. Tenants do not realize that if they paint the kitchen a fluorescent yellow that they will not get their deposit back, as it has to be repainted. Deposits of half the rent rarely cover damages. For example, persons smoking in a non-smoking unit can cause up to $2000 worth of cleaning damage. Pets urinating on a rug can cause up to $4000 replacement costs. Tenants have left garbage, used Condoms, and drug paraphernalia for cleanup. Most tenant problems do not come from persons on social assistance. Many come from seniors who don't think they have to clean carpets or hire a housekeeper if they are unable to fulfill the rental agreement, or from persons who don't recognize the need to keep to the rental agreement. Has rentals for doctors and brewery workers.

Alcrest 8 I-bdr 2bdr

$450-$550 $625-$650

Family-owned, older building plus house. Usually younger tenants who share accommodation.

Parkview 23 I -b dr 2bdr

$430-$575 $650-$725

Newer building owned by Edmonton Quality Homes.

Kathy Bell (Ken Wolverton) Insurance affects the rental rates for spec homes - $200 per month minimum. She has had some rental clients "trash" houses. She charges finder's fees to match rental properties. Does not think property management pays well, most landlords are not aware of the costs and expect that tenants will pay. She does matching, follow-up and inspection reports and tries to educate both landlords and tenants about the Residential Tenancy Act. Ken is involved in turning the Cook Street Apartments into a strata property.

18


Various houses Most new rentals are at least $800 per mo

Finds matches for many professionals and new families to Creston.

Pine Manor (Cook St. Apts)

changing No info yet New owners - going to strata title which means fewer units. Not sure of costs but will be affordable for medium income families. Definitely a need for or low-income housing.

Property Developers

Details Comments Lawrence Colonel Mobile homes have been an

affordable alternative for some Contemplating affordable 30-unit building

Robert Shatzko Many older houses not worth renovating

Considering 10-unit complex for seniors

Town of Creston Ross Beddoes, Building Inspector and Approving Officer Ross is the first point of contact for developers for zoning or building. In the past two months, he has had inquiries from two developers who will mostly likely produce 2 small 8-12 unit dwellings.

2011 Update Comment: In our review of the Creston area for 2011, interviews and newspaper ads etc., there was no significant information to change the information reproduced above.

19


5. EMERGING HOUSING NEED

Seniors and Families:

For Creston, the two segments of the population that are mostly increasing are the younger people 25 to 45, and the seniors over 65. These groups should be the priority non-market shelter focus.

Marginalised and disadvantaged populations:

Need has been documented in the support letters for marginalised residents, those with a variety of requirements that are not met in the low end of market housing stock in the Valley. Those include women and children fleeing violence, young single mothers, homeless men and homeless women gravitating to the community amenities of Creston, people with severe and persistent mental illness.

Lack of promised take-up in regional centres:

The lack of take-up in the larger centres where services are supposed to be concentrated, means that clients who might qualify there, are having to “stay back” in their smaller communities, in trailers, secondary buildings, poorly maintained suites, and other unsatisfactory housing options. The support letters4 document lack of sanitation, potable water, heat in winter, mold, and unsafe services.

Stiff competition for coordinated funding for housing with services:

Having been involved in a major Needs Assessment and Proposal for housing and services in Cranbrook in 2010, we have observed stiff competition for provincial and federal operating and support funding. It will be a challenge to secure the multi-agency funding for dedicated special needs developments in Creston. We note that the Homeless Outreach Program from Cranbrook already extends into Creston, as an example of the trend to centralisation of social services.

Aging physical plants consuming more social housing dollars:

As aging social housing physical plants demand major renovation and renewal, it becomes a dilemma for the housing operators because their funding formulas depend on subsidy to keep the housing stock well maintained. Long term subsidized mortgages and 35-year subsidized Operating Agreements are now on the horizon for expiry,5 meaning modernization and improvement will have to be self-financed.

Non Profit sponsors are being encouraged to find development partners that are innovative and creative, and to propose viable affordable housing projects that can sustain themselves on the rental income alone. The problem is, those most in need of affordable housing, with low-end employment prospects, are among the least able to pay low end of market rents, and those seniors who would like to cash in their existing housing and reinvest in more appropriate housing, are prevented from moving by the stagnant or falling market. It is a challenging time for affordable housing planning and development.

4 See Appendix A, Page 31 5 Review with BC Housing Program staff in Burnaby who are planning options.

20


5B. REVIEW OF 2008 HOUSING SURVEY REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS:

For the reader’s ease of reference to the key recommendations of the 2008 Housing Survey Report, we reproduce here a summary of those recommendations and add our commentary based upon the data reviewed elsewhere in this report.

1. Emergency Shelter [2008]

Establish an emergency shelter system as part of crisis transition rather than stand-alone

Shelters serve as a stop-gap to address immediate issues, but can become unsafe for the homeless they are designed to help. For example, one respondent described seeing his brother stabbed to death by another shelter resident. A fully-supported system may be more appropriate for homeless persons.

a. According to mental health personnel, persons in transition, who are often experiencing temporary mental or emotional instability, may need to have a supervised temporary environment for assessment, feedback and/or treatment prior to being placed in a long-term housing situation. Establishing a 4-unit temporary housing system in proximity to support agencies will allow persons in crisis, temporarily or chronically homeless, to remain in a safe environment until appropriate housing is found. This is based on RCMP/Mental Health/Ministerial Society placements of 20 persons per year.

b. For some clients with persistent mental illness, particularly psychosis, this unit could include permanent housing units close to services. This recommendation is from Mental Health Cranbrook Early Intervention Psychosis worker).

* * *

2. Transition Housing [2008]

Establish transition housing for a minimum of 10 families and 10 individuals.

a. For families and individuals who need support services on an ongoing basis for a temporary period (most likely less than 2 years), this housing would be a limited access situation and open to caregivers and professionals assisting women and children leaving abusive situations to make the transition to affordable rental housing. This recommendation is based on information from Kootenai Community Centre Society and from focus group interviews.

b. For families in transition, moving to the community, moving from the community, requiring temporary housing after a fire, establish temporary housing that does not necessarily need restricted access but could be built with a separate entrance.

1. 2011 Update: Both the Creston social agencies and Interior Health report continued need for an emergency shelter. BC Housing offers a “cold and wet weather strategy” that can assist communities to plan for winter periods in community facilities. At the present time there is not a multi-agency housing and support service program to receive a proposal for an integrated shelter in Creston.

21


3. Social/subsidized housing [2008]

Establish affordable Intermediate housing for aging persons and persons with moderate disabilities.

a. Explore the feasibility of reopening Pioneer Villa as affordable supported housing.

b. Explore the feasibility of renovating Endicott property.

c. Work with housing developers to ensure needs of seniors, persons with disabilities, and people needing ongoing housing subsidies are met.

4. Formal/Informal Rental [2008]

a. Explore the feasibility of creating a tenant-landlord education and matching system. An ethical system of matching, mediation and follow-up may open up 30 or more available informal in-home housing opportunities for 1 to 3-person families. (Derived from comments and numbers from Homeowner Survey).

b. Establish affordable rental housing for a minimum of 20 families and 10 individuals. This number is based on the survey results - those families and individuals who prefer to rent and who need affordable rental units.

2. 2011 Update: Still valid. The pressure for transitional housing may be heightened if the situation in Bountiful and Mormon Hills results in more women and children seeking outside housing and services. Housing for up to two years can also be integrated into a larger family project to help make the project viable, where it might not be able to be created as a stand-alone project.

3. 2011 Update: The Creston Valley Community Housing Society has received funding to explore 6 possible housing sites in the Creston area. This review is underway as regards existing buildings and sites. Elsewhere in this 2011 Needs update we discuss the current and proposed affordable housing stock.

4. 2011 Update: These are really two topics: a. The BC Non Profit Housing Association provides a range of services and resources to assist local communities to obtain advice and workshops in landlord-tenant relations. www.bcnpha.ca In addition, the Housing Registry is a province-wide clearing house for subsidized housing projects and applications to be matched to available housing. http://www.bchousing.org/Partners/H_S_Op/Tenant/Housing_Registry The Residential Tenancy Office is the official dispute resolution mechanism. http://www.rto.gov.bc.ca/ b. As discussed in this update there is need demonstrated by the social agencies in Creston for family housing and it can indeed include compatible singles’ households who would be most appropriately housed adjacent to family housing – older single women, people with long term disability who can live independently in affordable accessible housing, and others.

22


http://www.bcnpha.ca/

http://www.bchousing.org/Partners/H_S_Op/Tenant/Housing_Registry

http://www.rto.gov.bc.ca/

5. Establish affordable housing complexes or single detached homes. [2008] Some environments suggested by agencies and focus group attendees:

a. A multi-age, high-density building with a variety of bedroom suites, central courtyard where activities can take place in a safe environment, a common activity room and laundry area would meet the needs of most individuals. Rents based on income/need. Include green space/gardens.

b. A series of row houses or condominiums for larger families.

c. Filling vacant downtown lots with smaller starter and retirement houses.

d. In all cases, use rent-to-own, co-op housing, lot draws or other processes that will create permanency for residents.

e. Establish housing units for persons with psychiatric disabilities

Study results indicate that persons with psychiatric illnesses prefer privacy and autonomy. This should reflect long-term, stable housing for a minimum of 5 families and 10 individuals. Citizens in this target group preferred a more rural (e.g. Erickson) setting with a yard for growing vegetables. Units need to be accessible to support workers. All persons in this group stated that they would be happy with a mobile park situation. (Affordable, owned housing). This recommendation based on interview with mental health agencies and focus group representatives.

6. Recommendations from survey and organization/agency respondents [2008]

a. Engage a consumer advisory group: Many respondents and citizens offered to help "in any way that they can". Consumer advisors are essential to creating the housing environment that works for them. Involvement will also ensure acceptance of the outcomes.

5. 2011 Update: a. A purpose-built multi-use building is very difficult to develop and sustain on a rent-geared-to-income basis. Nonetheless there is need for such a subsidized development if it can be accomplished.

b. Row houses or townhouses would be suitable for families, with protected play areas.

c. Urban infill and new homes would be difficult to justify in the flat housing market in BC and the Kootenays in current circumstances.

d. It has frequently been proposed to use rent-to-own and other schemes, but the legal complexities of the land title restrictions, and the policies against using public money for private benefit, have negated these schemes.

e. More options for people with severe and persistent mental illness are justified.

23


Creston Valley Affordable Housing Needs Update 2011-V.4 - Casita Consulting Ltd.

b. Work with local developers already addressing housing issues ‐ at least two

developers have tracts of land set aside for housing projects intended to address

low‐income families.

c. Commit to promotion of environmentally, socially and economically positive

projects: Many respondents and citizens spoke of the desire for alternate sources

of heating/lighting.

d. Use high‐density housing close to amenities whenever possible to alleviate

environmental concerns (Smart Growth BC)

e. Explore the feasibility of renovating existing structures in the community.

6. 2011 Update: The 2011 Need and Demand Update and Site Feasibility Study was a direct

result of the 2008 and 2009 recommendations from the Creston groups, Selkirk College and

the funder, Columbia Basin Trust. The momentum generated by the Update is clearly

demonstrated in the Support Letters [See Appendix A, Page 31] which clearly show the

potential for affordable housing expansion in Creston supported by the Community.

ECONOMICS: The reader is referred to APPENDIX F, Page 71, with a sample listing of the

excellent and detailed data that are available through the Housing‐Resources links assembled

by the former Regional Innovation Chair, George Penfold [Ret.], and assistants. The contact

information for the current Regional Innovation Chair, Ms. Terri MacDonald, is provided.

The bodies of data are extremely comprehensive and in relation to the Creston area, show

that Creston is experiencing medium to high housing needs for supply and affordability.

This is especially true for lower income single and dual parent families because there is no

purpose‐built family housing on Creston at the present time.

24


6. ANTICIPATED AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY

A) FAMILY HOUSING

The greater Creston area, population over 14,000, has no family housing that is subsidized or affordable, safe and secure for lower income families. It is therefore recommended that Creston seek additional affordable family housing in the near future. The prospect of there soon being more than 8 dependents for every 10 people of working wage is daunting. The Town needs to secure an affordable housing base for those people of working age in order to sustain the Creston community, and to encourage younger people of working age to move to Creston to staff the suppliers and service providers without whom the Town and area will not prosper.

It is hoped that the Site Feasibility Study underway in the summer/fall of 2011 will locate one or more suitable family housing proposals. See ahead to Section 7 for suggestions of unit counts. As mentioned previously, see Appendix D, Page 62, for assessing Family housing outcomes.6

B) SENIORS HOUSING

Creston is relatively better off regarding the stock of seniors’ social housing. Catalpa Apartments [1977-] has an Operating Agreement due for renewal in 2012,7, and the Society has the ability to pursue redevelopment options subject to market viability.

The Rebekah Manor [1980-] is due for Operating Agreement maturity in 20158, and should soon be beginning the planning process for the expiry of provincial and federal monthly subsidy.

Erickson Golden Manor [1988-] has 12 years left on its Operating Agreement and subsidy9, so has relatively longer to plan for its regeneration.

The private Crest View Village, owned by Golden Life Management, was opened in 2005 and characterizes its seniors’ housing market as “saturated”10. This seven year old project will over time benefit from the growing cohort of seniors able to contribute market rents and service fees. Crest View Village should have a longer term role in serving area seniors, especially as and when the resale market picks up again.

The 90 bed Interior Health Swan Valley Lodge, built in 1968, is now 43 years old11. The development is well maintained and managed, but dates from an earlier era. It is uncertain in the writer’s opinion whether Interior Health will be able to make the case, when the time comes, for a large multi-million dollar redevelopment of the 90 Care Beds in Swan Valley Lodge.

6 http://www.cmhc.ca/odpub/pdf/67033.pdf 7 Confirmed with from the BC Housing Operating Agreement 8 Confirmed with Sheilah Findlay, BC Housing Property Manager 9 Confirmed with Sheilah Damery, Property Administrator, and Sheilah Findlay, BCH. 10 Interview with Celeste Mullin, VP Business Development 11 In conversation with Corinne Lemaire, Site Administrator.

25


The new 24 units of provincial seniors’ rental housing, Creston Gardens, will open in November 2011. These units do not receive monthly subsidy, because the units having been paid for up-front by the province, the operating costs are intended to be covered by the rents. The rents are on the 30% of income rent-geared-to-income scale, but the Operator will be required to house some seniors with higher incomes within the Housing Income Limit of $33,700 per year, in order to derive sufficient operating income.

See Appendix E, Page 69, for a brief seniors housing update.

C) SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

As noted previously, the market for supportive housing appears saturated12. It is likely negatively affected by the inability of many seniors to sell their current homes in order to fund their transition to independent or supportive housing even though they might likely wish to. It is interesting that no response to our Survey indicated supportive housing as a priority. Perhaps that would change if the resale market strengthens.

It has been suggested by some community advocates that the currently vacant Pioneer Villa [1981-] be redeveloped for some form of seniors housing and support services. The responses to the July 6th Housing Survey, and the currently “saturated” supportive housing market, make a difficult case. In the writer’s experience with similar expensive redevelopments, the actual costs of bringing such out of date buildings, grounds and utilities up to current day Building Code standards are probably not able to be carried by low rents. At present, the facility remains on the inventory of sites.

The site itself, however, once environmentally remediated, would be excellent for other higher need affordable housing options.

D) SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING

Because of the unpublicized locations of special needs homes, and privacy concerns related to the residents and workers, it is difficult to discuss the special needs inventory in Creston. However special needs’ housing provides an essential component of the affordable housing picture. There is a growing need for creative solutions to special needs housing, because many people with disabilities have been living at home, cared for by their aging parents. These parents are reaching the age when they cannot continue the caregiving role, and must look to finding other residential options for their adult child/ren. There is an opportunity to incorporate dedicated units within larger developments for some special needs’ clients. These units can be purely rental, or with an equity investment from the parents. With a sheltered environment, the adult disabled can live quite successfully in independent living projects.

In addition, there are many adults with physical disability, acquired brain injury, and other challenges who seek a non-institutional housing environment with supports. Indeed, that was the motivation in 1988 for the creation of Glaser Terrace, targeted to people needing self-directed physically accessible housing.

12 See footnote above regarding Crest View Village, and lack of interest in supportive housing at Open House.

26


As documented in the Support Letters, there is clear need for sheltered housing for people with mental illness who can live independently with support. Creston would be an attractive location for such a regional residence, given the many service agencies already in the community to provide the supports.

It has been debated many times whether or not it is preferable to create small, regional sheltered housing projects for people with mental illness to live with supports coming to them, or whether the people should be able to find their own private rental units in the open market, and have their rents subsidized. We can not offer a definitive opinion here – a choice between both rent supplements and also purpose built units might be ideal.

27


7. NET SHORTFALL/SURPLUS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

An investment in affordable housing is an investment in the social foundation of the Community. Affordable, Suitable and Adequate housing halts the downward spiral of desperation that befalls citizens who for a variety of valid reasons are not holding their own in today’s highly competitive Society.

The strength of a Community is measured in its self-awareness including how it creates an inclusive attitude towards those in housing need. The greater Creston area, with its population in the 13,000 range, and the Town itself, in the 6000 population range, has challenges to sustain its existing resources, and to develop its future capacity.

We therefore suggest the following opportunities for Creston, based upon the updated examination of the housing inventory and projected housing and population needs.

HOUSING CATEGORY

OUTLOOK

FAMILY HOUSING

Neither the Creston Valley, with its population over 13,000, nor the Town of Creston itself, with 6,000 residents, has any purpose-built affordable or subsidized family housing. Since 2008, there has been a 6.9% decline in rental households. Since the resale home market has been substantially flat, and the area population is static, it appears that some households are moving away due to the lack of affordable family housing. The challenge will be to develop family housing and still make it affordable to people whose incomes are within the Housing Income Limits [see above]. Among the Support Letters included in this Update are Agency estimates for affordable family housing as follows: Ktunaxa Kinbasket Child & Family Services Society: 25-34 families Creston & District Community Resource Centre Society: 76-80 families Creston Valley Gleaners: 50 family parcels every month In Census 2006, there were 5530 households recorded for the Creston Area. 21% of these households, approximately 1161, reported spending over 30% of income on housing13. There were about 1,238 couples with no children, who therefore would not qualify for family housing. Of the 1,161 paying over 30% on housing, about 556, 48%, were rental. There were 619 lone parent families with at least one child, and there were

13 Stats Can, 2006, as discussed in Penfold: 2009, Tables 15 and 16.

28


835 couples with children. In previous Federal Provincial program Proposal Calls, there was a rule of thumb that one in three to one in four would be a reasonable ratio to propose unit numbers. However, there is no hard and fast formula to calculate the number of new affordable family units to “prescribe”. Based upon Agency estimates and the Census 2006 data, it can be suggested that there is justification for between 30 up to 120 affordable family rental units for the Creston area. It would be appropriate that these be distributed around the community. The fewer the number proposed, the stronger and more timely the case to build them.

SENIORS RENTAL HOUSING

24 units of publicly-funded affordable seniors housing are being added to the Creston housing stock effective November 2011. This project, Creston Gardens, is intended for seniors who will pay 30% of before-tax income, within the special one-bedroom Housing Income Limit of $33,700 for Creston, plus utilities [phone, cable, electricity]. How strongly those new units are rented up will influence the timeline for more seniors affordable housing in Creston. The Therapeutic Action Program for Seniors has 15 seniors needing affordable, physically accessible one storey housing with accessibility modifications; It is recommended to await the Census 2011 data and the rent-up of Creston Gardens, before making specific unit development suggestions for seniors housing. See again the mention of this in the Seniors Update in Appendix E, Page 69. However, in the longer term, the increasing age of the population demonstrated in the census projections means that there is a case for developing more and/or reconfigured seniors housing.

SENIORS HOUSING

WITH SUPPORT SERVICES

This segment of the market is relatively well provided for in Creston at the present time. Both “funded” [monthly subsidized] and “unfunded” [market] units are available. The provincial Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters [SAFER] program offers some assistance to lower income seniors in market supportive housing, but the SAFER assistance does not reduce the market charges all the way down to 30% of income.

29


SPECIAL NEEDS CATEGORIES

In 2008 Interior Health Mental Health and Addictions Program suggested a minimum of 2 supported housing units and 7 long term housing units for people with a mental illness. In 2011 they suggest up to 20 units.

Acknowledgements

The writer wishes to thank the community of Creston, the members of the Working Group of the Creston Valley Community Housing Society, Creston Valley Gleaners, staff of the provincial Ministries, and Bentsen Developments for their support and assistance in the research and writing of this update.

In addition, representatives of several public and private housing and care providers gave freely of their time and perspective to help guide the preparation of this report.

We hope that the information provide here will help guide successful next steps in the selection of suitable housing proposals to strengthen the community of the Creston Valley.

Alan B. Campbell Casita Consulting Ltd. Penticton, B.C.

APPENDICES: PAGE:

APPENDIX A

Agency and Individual Support Letters 31

APPENDIX B

PEOPLE 35 Population Projections 2011-2026 51

APPENDIX C

Transcribed comments from Support Letters 58

APPENDIX D Affordable Housing for Families: Assessing the Outcomes

62

APPENDIX E Nat’l Housing Research Committee Excerpt: Seniors Housing Conditions Improve: Spring 2011

69

30


APPENDIX A

SUPPORT LETTERS

31


Ktunaxa Kinbasket Child & Family Services Society

Ktunaxa-Kinbasket Child & Family Services 100 7A SIMON ROAD CRESTON, BC VOB 1G2 Phone: 250-428-7414 Fax: --

July 13, 2011

Creston Valley COmmmunity Housing Society 824 Regina Street Creston, BC VOB 1G4

To Whom It May Concern,

We wanted to let you know that we have reviewed our client list and in doing that have recognized 25-34 families who would benefit from having affordable housing in the Creston area.

We wish you good luck in your efforts to achieve affordable housing for our community!

32


CRESTON & DISTRICT COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER SOCIETY

July 13, 2011

Box 187, Creston, B.C. VOB lGO Phone(250)428-5547 Fax(250)428-5175 email [email protected]

Creston Valley Community Housing Society 824 Regina Street Creston, BC VoB1G4

Dear Sir/Madam:

We wish to advise you that a survey of our direct service providers has indicated that approximately 76-80 families are in need of affordable housing in the Creston area. We wish you success in your efforts to achieve affordable housing in the community of Creston.

Justine Keirn Acting CEO

33


KOOTENAY EMPLOYMENT SERVICES SOCIETY • 119 - 11th Avenue North, Box 548, Creston, BC VOB 1 GO

"Unlimited Possibilities" • Phone (250) 428-5655 • Fax (250) 428-5336 • E-mail [email protected]

Creston Valley Community Housing Society Box 1729 Creston BC VOB 1GO

Dear Alexandra Ewashen;

It is my understanding that a housing needs assessment is currently underway in the Creston Valley. This is a matter of mutual concern as housing needs are commonly a barrier to our clients as they try to find and maintain employment. The cost of housing has increased significantly in comparison with the median average income. The Stats Canada 2006 census data for Creston shows average rent at $687 per month which is an increase of 28% over the 2001 data. The increase in BC was considerably less at 1 0.4%. The median family income in the Creston area rose by 7.8% in comparison with the BC average of 20%. These statistics show the cost of housing is increasing far beyond income levels and is confirmed by the clients we work with.

Since many of our clients are low income, a large portion of their finances are allocated to rent. This leaves only a small portion for other needs or causes them to live in less than ideal locations. In the past few years we have had a number of clients come in expressing a need for lower income housing and transitional housing. For example, a client was living in town but due to rent being almost as much as her income assistance cheque, could not afford to buy food. She was forced to move out of town, which prevented her from coming to town to find work. One single mom was forced to pay the only house rental she could find which was $900 per month. Her provincial income assistance did not cover that amount. Others have come in who are transient for mental health or addiction reasons and have been kicked out of former residences. Another gentleman with a mental illness found a log cabin to stay in temporarily through the summer. On a sporadic basis we have had newcomers come in our office with no money to their name and in need of immediate shelter. The cases noted are just a few examples of local client housing needs. The financial resources of the Ministerial Association and Ministry of Social Development for emergency shelter assistance are inadequate to meet the needs of many citizens. Without affordable housing, low income clients are trapped in a needless cycle. To sum it up, housing resources in the Creston Valley are severely limited for low income individuals and families .

We applaud your organizations efforts to overcome the housing needs of unemployed and the working poor in our broad community.

-s~ Hugh Grant Executive Director

34


• Stopping the Violence Programs - Outreach and Support, Older Women, Safe Home - Irvine House

• • Senior Programs- Advocacy, Shelter from Abuse

• Advocacy

• Youth Program~ - BQyond Wild, PARTY

• Child Care Programs - Teddy Bear Day Care and Grizzly Bear Out of School Care

1508 Cook Street, P.O. Box 237, Creston, B.C. VOB 1GO Phone(250)402~ Fax(250)402~7

Email: kcc:[email protected] PLtic E<ilcation and Awareness of aft facets of Abuse Website: www.crestonbc.comlkccs/

July 18, 2011

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is to express our support for the Creston Valley Housing Society's efforts to develop housing for families in the Creston Valley. Our agency is a registered charitable non-profit society that provides a number of social programs to the valley. We deliver an Advocacy program that is frequently asked to assist with housing issues and Stopping the Violence Programs that support women and children leaving abusive situations. It is our understanding that the Creston Valley is the only community of its size in the Kootenays that does not have a family housing complex. With a very old demographic profile, it is understandable that the social housing focus has been on senior housing. The housing market for families is virtually non-existent and often families find themselves at the mercy of unethical landlords or paying high rents for very inferior and sometimes unsafe or unhealthy homes or apartments.

We have assisted many people to find improved housing and some of note are as follows. A young intellectually challenged woman who was living in an illegal basement suite and discovered that the landlord had a "peep" hole into the bathroom that he was observing her through. Another woman had to move a dresser in front of the access door to the main floor home to prevent her landlord from entering her suite when uninvited. A young couple both receiving disability income chose to live in a tent in a campground because they could not find accommodation that was affordable to their income. Often the women and children that receive service from our Stopping the Violence Programs return to abusive situations because the first stable need to living without abuse is housing. We have seen a woman with two children under 5 take her two large suitcases and her children by the hand and leave our shelter on foot. We do not know where they went and only hop it was safe. Another mother with 2 young children and a teenager arrived at our shelter and had been living in their car for weeks. They hoped to find accommodation but could not and left the community. Living in vehicles in the summer months is a frequent choice families make. There are many other examples but these cover the diversity of issue .

35


It is most common that we assist women with children to leave the community to find safe affordable housing. This requires the children to be taken from their schools and the family to loose the support of friends and family. Most property owners are hesitant to rent to families and any accommodations that may consider this have rents that are at the high end of the rental market and unless the family has a professional income or it is a dual parent family and they both work, it is simply unaffordable. We have seen families living in properties with mold that causes health issues, with appliances that do not work and landlords that do not repair or replace them. There are families that live without running water and it is hard to imagine some of the properties would pass an electrical inspection. Homes are not insulated properly and in the winter either cost a fortune in utilities or the family suffers the cold.

Families with low incomes often have to take housing from landlords who are tolerant of and sometimes contributing to abuse; landlords who tolerate tenants with links to or involvement with the drug trade and organized crime. Families and single people frequently have to oblige themselves to family members in a room and board scenario in order to afford housing. These well intended family members may not afford the dignity and respect that is a basic human right at least and often the dysfunction and issues within the family dynamic may be a factor in creating a risky or unhealthy living environment.

Women have had to relinquish custody of children because they could not find adequate housing while their abusive partners with ability to earn higher wages as labourers are able to afford better accommodations for the children. Children have had to give up loved family pets and mothers have to access help from others and food banks in order to make income cover both a roof and food.

In a country, province and community with such wealth and privilege no children should have to be raised without safe and affordable housing as a basic right. Our community has fallen behind with this resource and it is long overdue for a correction. Our agency strongly supports the efforts of the Creston Valley Housing Society to create a family housing complex as soon as possible. Any assistance we could be in this endeavour will be readily supplied.

n·ely,

.~---~_o----":--~7 /) Lendina Bambrick ~ Executive Director

36


Gmail - housing https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=d807c0af35&view=pt&sea ...

1 of 1

G d I

housing 2 messages

Lorraine Smith <[email protected]> To: [email protected]

July 19, 2011

Dear Heather,

Heather More <[email protected]>

Tue, Jul19, 2011 at 7:47AM

I am writing this in view of the housing situation in Creston for young people.

Since moving back to Creston in the spring, my son and his girlfriend, (ages 23 and 21) have been living with me. This arrangement is the most affordable for them at present, due to lack of low-cost rentals in town.

Sincerely, Lorraine Smith

Heather More <[email protected]> To: Lorraine Smith <[email protected]>

Thanks, Lorraine (Quoted text hidden)

Tue, Jul19, 2011 at 8:34AM

711 9/2011 8:34AM

37


user

Rectangle

user

Rectangle

user

Rectangle

user

Rectangle

user

Rectangle

Transcript of support letter Aug 4 t h 2011 accompanying two page graphic from applicant:

{(I am a landlord. I asked one of my tenants to comment on affordable housing for

families. She chose to answer this way because of some learning disabilities. She's

a single mother of two who struggles to make ends meet. [As landlord] I

generally get $400 or $500 I month when the stated rent is $650 and market rent

is $800.

She's lived in houses in Creston that were full of mold, had inadequate+

sometimes unsafe electricity,+ no insulation. She's lived in former grow ops.

She works several jobs at low wages despite being talented+ hardworking. It isn't

enough to rent a decent home with my help.

This precarious life is stressful+ doesn't allow her to plan for the future .

Affordable housing would change that. Her story is not unusual."

{(Landlord HM 250-428-0196"

/ott color graphic

38


user

Rectangle

(

Survey Letter in the form of two graphics

received from person in need in Creston

( ® ( ~-·r,!N/r 'bca .. ~ DA.. {>"'~ p,.._ A-~

~ 6~u.y fJ..~}+ tt6LS!.

39


Mr. A. Campbell Casita Consulting Ltd., 425 Ridge Rd,. Penticton, BC V2A8N7 July 18,2011

Dear Sir, I am writing in regard to the low income housing situation in the Creston Valley. I have worked as a Community Mental Health Nurse for 18years in the area. Many of my clients were forced on to disability because of the severity of their illness and therefore only able to look for housing in the low income range. Generally this meant they were living in very unsatisfactory housing. Here are some examples.

A gentleman living 15km outside of Creston in a single wide trailer in which both the heating and water systems broke down regularily. He was out of water and had minimal heating during the winters and had to get water from his ladylady who lived on the property but did nothing to remedy the situation.

A family of four, including a teenage boy and girl, who frequently had to accept a two bed roomed house as three bed roomed homes were financially out of reach. The conditions of the houses very often included mould, poor insulation and windows and constant dampness. In one such home, they battled spiders, which may seem humorous but spider bites are a health risk and quite serious at times.

Families have particular difficulties as they need so many bedrooms which increase the rental costs but also the utilities. Very often someone ends up sleeping in the living room or unfinished basement if there is one. If they have a family pet like a dog or cat the selection becomes very tight as landlords often do not want children and/or pets.

The cheaper - not better, though - places are often out of town. This means that on top of high utilities because of the run-down nature of the homes, they also have to have transportation to shop for essentials. One client had a fear of driving on winter roads so bad that they were almost housebound all winter long.

When people reach 65 yrs., they are often better off by up to $300 a month and can then afford a better place as well as better food etc .. But families are in poverty for the whole time they are together. When you add a severe and persistent mental illness in a parent, one can see that the effects on the children will be wide ranged and difficult.

I have over the years, seen so many places that were dark, dingy, mouldy, and difficult to heat or cool in the summer. There were also some with mice, rats, cockroaches, bedbugs and other insect problems. It is difficult for them to complain as they have little choice in accommodation and some landlords/ladies know it. I hope this is helpful to you assessment. Yours sincerely,

40


Dear Creston Housing Society,

It was with some amazement, that I learned that the need for low income family housing in the Creston Valley was being questioned. While I strongly support adding to our senior housing. I find it interesting that anyone who has spent anytime in this Valley would labour under the misapprehension there is no need for similar services for our non-senior families - especially families with younger children.

As some of you will already know, I am a clinical social worker at the Community Resource Center. In my many roles there, I have the good fortune to meet families from all walks of life. While I am consistently struck by the resourcefulness of our lower income families, the fact is that many of them simply are not making ends meet and housing is a huge part of this. To illustrate, some of the families on the CRC caseload who have moved in with questionable family members because of desperate housing circumstances, we have single parents who are forced to leave their children in less than ideal circumstances to keep working at cobbled together jobs specifically to keep their housing. we have single mums living with violence rather than lose their housing. we have parents who are forced to chose between food and rent or school supplies and rent, we have had whole families reduced to living in campers, not by choice but as a result of having no access to affordable housing. For anyone to say there isn't a crisis of affordable- and especially low income - housing for families simply has missed understanding the realities of our housing situation.

Please feel free to contact me if I can offer any further assistance on this ve:ry timely matter.

Colleen Deatherage MSW RSW

41


CREST 0 N VALLEY FOOD BANK

To whom it may concern;

GLfANEJ<S

I understand that Casita Consulting Ltd. is seeking feedback and information on affordable housing in Creston. I am a volunteer at Creston Valley Gleaners and I have been managing the food bank for nearly ten years. In this capacity I meet all new clients and have them fill out a brief questionnaire regarding their needs and track them on a monthly basis. My staff and I order all food stuffs and determine the amounts needed for each client.

We average 250 parcels a month and that includes 50 families. All too often high rent is the cause for their struggle. Some find housing some distance from town (ie. West Creston) but then of course, vehicle expenses are prohibitive. They then must depend on neighbors to provide transportation. Many of our seniors who are in need are often too proud and independent to seek our help. Friends or neighbors come in on their behalf to pick up food parcels for them. It would be wonderful if some could be organized in one area so that we might better help them.

We hope for the best--

JJ~ ~~ - ~.v. CLL~JttJFR's Fo6p 13R-tJI< MntJ!tctFR.

42


Therapeutic Activation Program for Seniors (TAPS)

404 - 22 Ave S RR 5, Creston, BC VOB 1 G5 \-\cx6"'\ NGr . (250) 428-5585

The Therapeutic Activation Program for Seniors in Creston serves 65 seniors with the average age of 86 years. · Our clients are active seniors but need a little bit ofhelp to participate in their community. Only one of our clients is able to access the community bus, and very few are able to attend community functions without support. Almost all of our clients are sociaiyisolated from their community. Among our clients we have 5 who are actively looking for housing 3 of which need permanent low income housing. 15 of our clients are in physically inappropriate housing, housing that does not fit their physical needs, i.e. stairs or difficult access for cars and buses.

43


'V Interior Health

July 13, 2011

AI Campbell Casita Consulting

Dear Mr. Campbell:

It is our pleasure to provide a letter of support for the development of affordable housing in the Creston Valley.

Creston Mental Health and Substance Use Programs service clientele age 19 and up. Our mandate is to provide assessment, treatment and follow up services to adults with a severe and/or persistent mental illness and adults with substance dependency issues. Our clients include people with Schizophrenia, Bipolar Mood Disorder, severe Depression and Anxiety Disorders and clients with Dementia. These illnesses are often complicated by Substance Use. Some of our clients also have a developmental, neurological and/or specific learning disability as well. For many of our clients affordable and safe housing is a primary concern and as such it becomes a primary concern for us as clinicians. We know that those who are adequately housed are much more able to engage in treatment. We also know that these same folks are less likely to be hospitalized. The literature has over and over again indicated that housing is a key determinant of health.

Like everyone else, housing options are heavily determined by what one can afford. Most people with severe and persistent mental illness are poor, relying on Income Assistance, with the highest level of support for those designated Persons with a Disability, approximately $906.42 for a single person. In Creston there is no affordable housing for families or most individuals under the age of 55. Some buildings are open to people with disabilities under the age of 55, but many of our clients are not viewed as desirable tenants. BC Stats indicate that 79% of housing in Creston is single detached as opposed to the BC average of 49%. We have very little rental housing and the housing that does exist is market rent which means that a person on PWD must spend 60-70% of their income on housing.

Mental Health and Substance Use Programs

Substance Use Site: Creston Valley Alcohol & Drug 136-101

h Ave N, in Fire Hall parking lot Phone: (250) 428-3553 Fax: (250) 428-3052 Mailing Address: Bag 3000 Creston BC VOB 1 GO

Mental Health Site: 243-16th Ave N, next to Hospital parking lot Phone: (250) 428-8734 Fax: (250) 428-8956 Mailing Address: Bag 3000 Creston BC VOB 1GO

44


In small rural communities like Creston homelessness is rarely visible but it does exist. Last year an older man with Schizophrenia was literally sleeping on our back doorstep; this is atypical. What is more typical are clients living in tents in the bush or in campgrounds, or couch surfing while others share accommodation temporarily in very crowded conditions. Some of our clientele are able to live in motel accommodation in the winter but in May are asked to leave until the fall. These individuals typically camp for the summer months.

We know of one person with Depression who has a teenager and is camping on Crown land, moving every 2 weeks when the Conservation Officer comes by and tells them they have to leave. There is also a person with Schizophrenia who was living up in the mountains. When it got too cold a concerned resident offered shelter and then spent 2 months trying to get this person to leave.

Other clients are living in unsafe conditions but do not speak up for fear they will loose the shelter they have. One client with severe depression and 2 children lived in a small trailer with no heat and used two small fan heaters to stay warm. Mould ruined their mattresses. Eventually they moved to another trailer on the outskirts of town and although the rent was affordable they had to deal with a septic tank that could not handle toilet paper. The family slept on the floor and was frequently without water and had to struggle to keep warm.

The Creston Valley Community Housing Society 2008 Needs Assessment recommended a minimum of two supervised housing units and 7 long term housing units for people with mental illness. We believe that up to 20 housing units are needed. We also strongly support the need for family housing. We have many single mothers on Income Assistance or who earn minimum wage and are forced to live in crowded conditions or become trapped in unhealthy relationships for support which results in a further deterioration of their mental heath.

Thank you for examining the need for affordable housing in our community. Please contact us should further information be required.

Sincerely:

~l·te\ Alexandra Ewashen, MSW RSW Team Leader

Creston Mental Health and Substance Use

Dr. Randy Grahn GP Psychiatric Consultant

45


Transcript of Email July 18th 2011

To whom it may concern,

I am writing this letter to express my concern for the lack of affordable family housing in the town of Creston B.C. This issue was dramatically highlighted for me during my employment as the Nurse Coordinator for the Baby Steps Pregnancy Outreach Program (2007-2010). I would like to share my experience of working with young families in this community to bring forward their struggles securing housing.

The Baby Steps Pregnancy Outreach Program offers support and health counseling to women during pregnancy, as well as continued parenting support in the first year post partum. Many of the women participating in the program had health or social challenges; nearly all of the women came from low-income households. The goal of the program was to support young women during their pregnancy, to improve the chances of a healthy newborn, and to support a new family in the community. The following scenarios exemplify how the lack of secure housing can greatly affect a family's health:

Family of four:

I met this family after their second baby was born. The father worked for minimum wage, and they hoped the mother's Maternal Employment Insurance pay would be enough to cover their expenses. The home they rented had mold and mildew and over time the older child and the mother became ill with allergies and asthma symptoms. They looked unsuccessfully for an affordable rental home for months. Their older child became very ill due to the allergens in the home and was sent to live with grandparents in another community. Eventually, the whole family moved away from Creston. The mother was devastated from the separation with her child, fearful her newborn would also become ill, and saddened for leaving the life and friends she had in Creston.

Young pregnant mother:

I met this woman early in her pregnancy. She had many health challenges acting as a barrier to a healthy pregnancy and in turn a healthy baby. She received an eviction notice from her apartment as the building had changed ownership, and not only was the rent increasing but also it would not accommodate children. She searched for new housing for months, but her fixed income assistance budget limited her options. During my visits with her, she was so preoccupied with her unstable living arrangements, that she had great difficulty addressing the multiple health challenges in her pregnancy. Unable to find housing, she eventually moved in to a friend's 5'x6' travel trailer. When the weather became too cold, she found it necessary to move into the local women's shelter. At this point her health was poor and her pregnancy riddled with

46


complications. She had a small premature baby, who now has developmental delays. This woman eventually found permanent housing after her baby was born. I feel the stress of her homelessness prevented her from addressing important health issues in her pregnancy; our community's lack of affordable family housing contributes to generational cycles of poverty and its associated negative health outcomes.

2

Young mother: I met this young woman near the end of her pregnancy. She was moving out of her family home as her relationship with her parents became tense and unsafe. She struggled to find affordable, appropriate housing. She experienced prejudice from potential landlords as she was young and pregnant. Eventually she moved in with her boyfriend and his room-mates. She described the new house as a "party-house" and was not comfortable living there. She was very anxious about bringing a newborn into the home as well, but she did not feel there were any other options in the community. After the baby was born, she decided to move away from Creston, and find safe, affordable housing in another community.

I am aware of many other scenarios where families in the community are living with mold, leaky roofs, living with unsafe house-mates, and using grocery money to afford rent. These families are living in undesirable circumstances not by choice, but by the limited housing options in Creston. These circumstances affect the health and self esteem of both parents and children.

The need for safe, affordable and clean housing became an overwhelming theme during my time with the Pregnancy Outreach Program; and I know by anecdotal and professional experiences, it continues to be a critical issue in our community. I would be pleased to be a part of any future focus groups or solution-based meetings to assist the advocacy of the Creston Valley Housing Society in addressing our community's need for family housing.

Alexis King, RN, BsN

60612'h Ave N Creston, B.C. VOB 1G4 250-428-2583

47


user

Rectangle

[Transcript of S.M. emails]

July 7th 2011

r2"d email]

Hi again:

Further to my previous comments I would like to inform you that we will not be attending the meeting tonight.

Our daughter and grandson are returning to Edmonton due to the inability to acquire an apt and job over the past 2 months of searching. This is a very sad circumstance that I bet many people who come here, go through.

Also, Mr. Ross Beddoes informed me that R1 zoning DOES allow for rentable suites, contained within the main dwelling and/or garage if they conform to building and safety standards. As a new bylaw comes into force in regard to separate apts in zone R 1 , choices will be available for many more people and perhaps, that competition will provide a wake-up call to current "slum landlords" to clean up their act and their accommodation.

I can only see the situation getting better with the town's help (bylaw) and hopefully visits by the health inspectors to current rentals that are in need of major clean up and maintenance/repairs.

Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns. Creston is OUTWARDLY a beautiful little town that just needs a few improvements to make it a welcoming and healthy place to live.

Sincerely

SM

[1 5t email]:

June 3oth 2011

In response to the Open House topic for July 6/11 in Creston, I would like to pose a few questions and make a few very relevant comments.

My daughter and 10 month old grandson are visiting us and "actively" looking for a 2 bedroom apt. The criteria: it must be obviously clean, well maintained, newer appliances, windows with screens, doors that lock properly, bathrooms that do not have lifting, lino, etc. mold free (not covered up mold) closet doors that are actually there, and not falling off. In general, a place to live with confidence, that it is physically safe

48


and emotionally supportive for her and a baby. (she wants to feel comfortable {not worry about the general poor upkeep) living in it. She is currently living with her dad and me.

We have looked at 6 or 7 apts (available to non seniors) and none were acceptable. We are not looking for a 5 star but it has to be a minimum 3.5 star.

One of the apts had hallway carpet that I am sure had never been cleaned since it was installed (1950's) It is disgusting to enter places that are for rent and look like that.

2

THERE SEEMS TO BE NOTHING SUITABLE/CLEAN/SAFE TO RENT IN CRESTON unless you are a SENIOR. Almost all of the rentals are for seniors.

49


50


APPENDIX B

P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 -- IHA

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

2011-2026

51


user

Typewritten Text

*

user

Typewritten Text

* used by Permission

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

. . . . . . . . . .

..........

Creston Local Health Area 005

P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 Population Projections (2011-2026)

September 2010

52


user

Text Box

Used by Permission

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Information Support

and Research Information Support and Research #104 – 1815 Kirschner Road Kelowna, BC V1Y 4N7 Prepared by: Verna Mullins, Administrative Assistant Christine Hill, Strategic Information Analyst Prepared on: September 15, 2010 Contact: Anne-Marie Broemeling, Director, Information Management and Research Telephone: (250) 870-4649 E-mail: [email protected]

Information Management and Research

53


CRESTON LHA - P.E.O.P.L.E.35 Population Projections Page 3

INTRODUCTION Each year, BC Stats projects the population of the province and its regions, based on demographic and economic trends, modified to take into consideration possible future changes. This cycle, just published, is known as P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 (Population Extrapolation for Organizational Planning with Less Error) and was finalized in September 2010. Estimates and projections are based on Statistics Canada census figures provided every 5 years. British Columbia small area population projections result from the application of a "Component/Cohort Survival" population model to area-specific assumptions dealing with fertility, mortality and migration. For more information on this model, please visit the BC STATS web site at: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/pop/method.asp Projections include assumptions that are based on past conditions, modified to take into consideration possible future changes. Consequently, the projections should be regarded as only one possible future scenario of the future size and age-sex structure of the population. The following charts and tables provide some demographic highlights from P.E.O.P.L.E. 35 for the Creston Local Health Area (LHA). For more information on the Creston LHA such as health status, non-medical determinants of health and health system performance, see the LHA profiles at: http://www.interiorhealth.ca/information.aspx?id=696

POPULATION PROJECTIONS AND ESTIMATES FIGURE 1 Population by 5-year Age Group and Gender, Creston LHA (2011)

54


user

Line

Creston LHA - P.E.O.P.L.E.35 Population Projections Page 4

TABLE 1 Creston LHA Population Projections (2011, 2016, 2021 & 2026)

Year Creston LHA East Kootenay HSA (EKHSA)

Interior Health (IH)

LHA Population as % of EKHSA

LHA Population as % of IH

2011 13,012 82,192 749,600 15.8% 1.7% 2016 13,523 85,710 788,417 15.8% 1.7% 2021 13,691 87,667 825,838 15.6% 1.7% 2026 13,811 89,014 860,524 15.5% 1.6%

TABLE 2 Creston LHA Birth and Death Rates (2011, 2016, 2021 & 2026) Variable 2011 2016 2021 2026

Fertility Rate 2,502 2,356 2,229 2,203 Births 155 162 158 156 Deaths 141 161 174 188 Crude Death Rate 11 12 13 14 Median Age 49 48 47 46 Median Age at Death 83 83 82 84

Notes: Total Fertility Rate - Lifetime births per 1,000 women (15-49), calculated on calendar year estimates Crude Death Rate - Calendar year death estimates per 1,000 population

TABLE 3 Population Distribution by Age Group (2011, 2016, 2021 & 2026)

Age Group 2011 2016 2021 2026

% Change (2011-2016)

% Change (2011-2021)

% Change (2011-2026)

2011 % of Total

2016 % of Total

2021 % of Total

2026 % of Total

< 20 2,838 3,000 3,089 3,241 5.7% 8.8% 14.2% 21.8% 22.2% 22.6% 23.5% 20-44 3,120 3,310 3,471 3,564 6.1% 11.3% 14.2% 24.0% 24.5% 25.4% 25.8% 45-64 3,828 3,479 3,176 2,923 -9.1% -17.0% -23.6% 29.4% 25.7% 23.2% 21.2% 65+ 3,226 3,734 3,955 4,083 15.7% 22.6% 26.6% 24.8% 27.6% 28.9% 29.6% Total 13,012 13,523 13,691 13,811 3.9% 5.2% 6.1% -- -- -- -- *75+ 1,550 1,737 1,937 2,239 12.1% 25.0% 44.5% 11.9% 12.8% 14.1% 16.2% **85+ 447 523 609 673 17.0% 36.2% 50.6% 3.4% 3.9% 4.4% 4.9% EKHSA 82,192 85,710 87,667 89,014 4.3% 6.7% 8.3% -- -- -- -- IHA 749,600 788,417 825,838 860,524 5.2% 10.2% 14.8% -- -- -- --

Notes: * Figures in the 75+ row overlap with those shown in the 65+ row **Figures in the 85+ row overlap with those shown in the 65+ row and the 75+ row

FIGURE 2 Population Growth (%) by Age Group, Creston LHA (2011 to 2016)

Notes: Growth in the 75+ age group overlaps growth in the 65+ age group Growth in the 85+ age group overlaps growth in the 65+ and 75+ age groups

55


user

Typewritten Text

Note slight increase only.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Median age at death about the same.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Rectangle

user

Rectangle

user

Line

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

Seniors dominate

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

Family need will continue

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text


FIGURE 3 Distribution of Age Groups by Geography (2011)

TABLE 3-A Population Distribution by 5-Year Age Group (2011, 2016, 2021 & 2026)

Age Group 2011 2016 2021 2026

% Change (2011-2016)

% Change (2011-2021)

% Change (2011-2026)

2011 % of Total

2016 % of Total

2021 % of Total

2026 % of Total

0 - 4 701 828 815 800 18.1% 16.3% 14.1% 5.4% 6.1% 6.0% 5.8%

5-9 655 740 844 834 13.0% 28.9% 27.3% 5.0% 5.5% 6.2% 6.0%

10-14 741 686 754 862 -7.4% 1.8% 16.3% 5.7% 5.1% 5.5% 6.2%

15-19 741 746 676 745 0.7% -8.8% 0.5% 5.7% 5.5% 4.9% 5.4%

20-24 852 706 705 632 -17.1% -17.3% -25.8% 6.5% 5.2% 5.1% 4.6%

25-29 505 842 702 698 66.7% 39.0% 38.2% 3.9% 6.2% 5.1% 5.1%

30-34 535 541 861 723 1.1% 60.9% 35.1% 4.1% 4.0% 6.3% 5.2%

35-39 572 594 572 899 3.8% 0.0% 57.2% 4.4% 4.4% 4.2% 6.5%

40-44 656 627 631 612 -4.4% -3.8% -6.7% 5.0% 4.6% 4.6% 4.4%

45-49 790 702 665 670 -11.1% -15.8% -15.2% 6.1% 5.2% 4.9% 4.9%

50-54 932 823 714 680 -11.7% -23.4% -27.0% 7.2% 6.1% 5.2% 4.9%

55-59 977 960 831 733 -1.7% -14.9% -25.0% 7.5% 7.1% 6.1% 5.3%

60-64 1,129 994 966 840 -12.0% -14.4% -25.6% 8.7% 7.4% 7.1% 6.1%

65-69 918 1,125 971 941 22.5% 5.8% 2.5% 7.1% 8.3% 7.1% 6.8%

70-74 758 872 1,047 903 15.0% 38.1% 19.1% 5.8% 6.4% 7.6% 6.5%

75-79 647 682 777 937 5.4% 20.1% 44.8% 5.0% 5.0% 5.7% 6.8%

80-84 456 532 551 629 16.7% 20.8% 37.9% 3.5% 3.9% 4.0% 4.6%

85+ 447 523 609 673 17.0% 36.2% 50.6% 3.4% 3.9% 4.4% 4.9%

Total 13,012 13,523 13,691 13,811 3.9% 5.2% 6.1% -- -- -- --

56


user

Oval

user

Polygon

user

Polygon

user

Polygon


Comparing the age distributions of the Creston LHA and Interior Health shows Creston LHA has a higher proportion of residents between the ages of newborn – 14 and over the age of 60 compared to Interior Health and a lower proportion of residents between the ages of 15-19 and 25-59. FIGURE 4 Comparison of Age Distribution, Creston LHA and Interior Health (2011)

Table 4 shows the most populated places within the Creston LHA. Data are provided for 2001 and 2006 as population estimates for unincorporated places are only available for census years. TABLE 4 Population Breakdown by Community (2001, 2006)

Community Type 2001 2006 % Change

Creston T 4,795 4,826 0.6%

Wynndel part A UNP 571 575 0.7%

Kitchener UNP 264 241 -8.7%

Yahk UNP 168 127 -24.4%

Creston 1 IRI 122 124 1.6%

Total LHA LHA 12,235* 11,917* -2.6%

Total HSA HSA 76,560* 75,037* -2.0%

Total IHA IHA 673,486* 690,394* 2.5%

Total BC BC 4,076,264* 4,243,580* 4.1% CY= City; DM = District Municipality; T = Town; VL = Village; UNP = Unincorporated Place; IRI = Indian Reserve Includes the 5 communities with the highest populations in the Creston LHA Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census; Population Estimates by BC Stats, BC Ministry of Labour and Citizens Services. * BC Stats Population Estimates adjusted for 2006 census undercount Note: Some census boundaries have changed between the 2001 and 2006 census, possibly changing previous reported populations counts for

certain communities

57


user

Polygon

user

Line

APPENDIX C

SELECTED TRANSCRIBED COMMENTS

FROM JULY 6th 2011 -- SURVEYS

58


Creston Valley Community Housing Society

Selected comments from the July 6th 2011 Housing Forum Survey

1. Women and children leaving abusive relationships and youth unable to live @ home

2. Many people are not earning a living wage

3. Home ownership for those able and/or willing is always preferable

4. Single mothers with small children and in abusive relationships need help

5. Town should provide expertise and resources to organisations willing to create affordable housing

6. The Government should take the lead and provide funding for construction and maintenance of affordable housing.

7. Families and children should be provided with good, secure and lasting housing and not be subjected to constant relocation

8. Single parent families I know have a hard time finding low rental units in suitable locations. In future seniors housing will be more needed than ever.

9. The Town should allow granny suites and stipulate quotas for low rentals in any given project.

10. Regarding jobs I do not see the Town Fathers developing light industrial jobs in our area....

11. My home is affordable right now but I am looking at retirement on a VERY fixed income.

12. I would prefer to own a condo but I can’t afford to.

13. There are less students and more seniors retiring to area; support more flexible rules regarding development charges...

14. Please help low income families...

15. When you have to choose between food and utilities you have a problem!

59


16. My housing has a leaky roof with electrical work required. I am not employed but I keep looking – it is a tough market.

17. The Town should donate one of each year’s tax sale homes for needy people. And some of the proceeds from tax sales should be turned over to affordable housing group.

18. Give people what they want, not what you decide is good for them.

19. Creston needs low-cost housing for seniors, single mothers and handicapped.

20. Affordable should mean housing that doesn’t cost more than 25% of income.

21. Accessibility is important for those who live more than a few blocks from stores etc.

22. I am retired and I do not see much improvement in the housing situation. But if more low cost housing was available then more people could find jobs here.

23. Home ownership is the most desirable situation but for most of those in need, rental is the only option.

24. Provide better rental subsidies and more aid for those building low cost housing.

25. If the current trends continue some schools will close...

26. I live in Kitchener [historic community to the east] and would like to see affordable housing for seniors, not strata. Seniors on government pension alone need affordable housing on “rent according to income”.

27. Accessibility is essential. In you are building, build for all eventualities.

28. Creston has always had a problem with enough jobs of “Liveable” wage categories.

29. Many people on disability pensions that allow $325 for rent [$550 for family]...With GAIN, people on OAS can get $1100 so rent of $700 - $800 is way too much...

30. Monthly rentals are the only way for most low income families and seniors

31. Apartments/condos for $1000 or more a month are not low cost designed for low income or seniors. Even $700 - $1000 is too much for many.

32. Encourage BC Housing to return Pioneer Villa to the community for affordable housing

60


33. Put a limit on pad rentals for trailers; do not let mobile home parks be disbanded – it’s a great affordable rent.

34. I know a senior looking for affordable housing who pays over half of his monthly income for his apartment.

35. Affordability is critical – it means that you should have enough money for basic needs after paying rent – you should not have to make a choice between dinner and a roof over your head.

36. As a community, Creston hasn’t been very successful in improving job prospects or attracting business. The town did manage to attract doctors...

37. There is a great need for seniors. But this needs to be backed up by affordable home support.

38. I have a family member spending over 50% of income on housing. Too much!

39. Help us recycle Pioneer Villa where there is a secure area built for [Alzheimer’s] couples. Maintain a dining room and call system for help when needed.

40. Protect existing affordable housing and preserve mobile home parks...

41. Keeping the younger generation in the area will be a problem unless employment picks up

42. Affordability! Rent and utilities is $700 and my cheque is $886. My home is out of town but I can’t afford to drive...

43. $750 a month rent plus hydro is too expensive!

44. Single parent families really need affordable housing! I have a 2 bedroom apartment for 1 adult and two teenagers. We live without privacy in the living room.

45. Single parents need affordable low income housing – got me through university as the parent of a special needs child.

46. I have renters who have trouble paying the rent so sometimes I take less.

We thank all those who contributed their survey responses to this Update.

61


APPENDIX D

AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES:

ASSESSING THE OUTCOMES

62


A number of research studies1 have demonstrated that there are positive impacts for families who move into social housing, including increased affordability2, suitability and adequacy of housing. However, there have been fewer studies on non-shelter impacts of a move into social housing, although a small number examine impacts on health, educational performance and community involvement. There is a particular dearth of studies which compare families’ situations “before and after” the move into social housing, and a lack of studies which explore the causal relationships or factors that contribute to post-move improvements in social and economic outcomes.

The Affordable Housing for Families study helps to address this gap by interviewing 85 household heads with children under 19 who have moved into social housing within the previous two years, and identifies changes that these families have experienced as a result of their move into social housing. This study explores the changes in shelter and non-shelter outcomes of low income families as a result of moving into social housing in Metro Vancouver and the Okanagan, along with the factors that contributed to these outcomes.

The objectives of this research were to:

1. Create a profile of families currently receiving placements in social housing in Greater Vancouver and the Okanagan.

2. Assess the appropriateness and affordability of social housing for the families.

3. Determine to what extent families view social housing as transitional or permanent housing.

4. Assess the social and economic outcomes for the families as a result of having moved into social housing.

The three-part research strategy consisted of a literature review, interviews with housing providers and key informants, and interviews with families with children under 19, where the family had moved into social housing between July 2004 and June 2006.

Socio-economic Series 10-007July 2010

Affordable Housing for Families: Assessing the Outcomes

1 Blunden, Hazel with Craig Johnston (2005). Public Housing and Nonhousing Outcomes. Shelter New South Whales; Phibbs, Peter with Peter Young (2005), Housing Assistance and Non-Shelter Outcomes. Final Report. Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Sydney Research Centre.

2 Tenants pay rent based on total household income (generally no more than 30% of total household income).

63


user

Text Box

http://www.cmhc.ca/odpub/pdf/67033.pdf

Research Highlight


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation2

Literature review

The literature review examined previous research on shelter and non-shelter outcomes for families moving into social housing in order to identify key outcomes and contributing factors which were explored in later phases of the study. It included Canadian and Australian publications and some coverage of United States and United Kingdom material. Attention focused on identifying non-shelter outcomes, and factors contributing to these outcomes.

Interviews with Housing Providers and Key Informants

Housing providers and other key stakeholders were interviewed in order to provide a broader context to the study. In particular, they were asked about how vacancies are filled, length of waiting lists, and causes of evictions, as well as their perspective of the benefits to families of social housing. They were also asked how social housing and its tenants have changed over the years. Interviews were conducted with 14 housing providers, two service providers and one academic whose research has focused on low-income families. These interviews were conducted to supplement information found during the literature review and contributed to the conceptual framework for the study and findings.

Interviews with heads of households in social housing

Interviews were completed with a total of 85 household heads, including 65 in Greater Vancouver and 20 in the Okanagan. Families eligible for the study needed to meet two criteria: they needed to have children under 19, and to have moved into social housing within the previous two years. In other respects, the household heads interviewed3 represented a diversity of household composition, income, workforce participation, level of education and cultural

background. The vast majority of interviewees never lived in social housing before. All interviews were conducted in person with the exception of two in the Okanagan which were completed by telephone. This time frame was selected so that participants could draw on their recent memories of their previous housing situation as a point of comparison for their experience of living in social housing4. Families with children were selected so that the impact of social housing on children could be explored.

The study questionnaires were developed to gather evidence to either support or refute the hypothesis that these outcomes (noted below) resulted from families moving into social housing. The questionnaires were pre-tested and revised prior to finalization.

Results of the Literature Review

The following outcomes were selected for this study because previous research had either identified them as resulting from, or positively correlated with, a move into social housing, or, in the case of changes in employment and experience of crime and safety, previous study results had been mixed.

Shelter Outcomes after moving into social housing:

Lower housing costs / shelter affordability

Better quality housing

Adequate size of dwelling / reduction in crowding

Increased security of tenure

Better quality of maintenance

Increased sense of control (e.g. not having to share accommodation)

3 Ninety-one percent of the interviewees were women. The age of household heads, averaging 36 years, ranged from 21 to 57 years of age. Approximately two-thirds of the household heads were born in Canada. Thirteen percent of the household heads identified as First Nations or other Aboriginal people, and one-fifth of the household heads identified as members of a visible minority. The majority of households (three quarters) were led by a single adult, in most cases a woman.

4 While many families had moved from market housing, four had previously been in transition housing, and two had been staying with friends at the time of their move. More than a third of household heads reported that they had been homeless at some point in their lives.

64


Research Highlight


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation 3

Non-Shelter Outcomes after moving into social housing:

Improvement in physical health

Improvement in mental health

Reduction in stress/better mood

Better diet

More exercise

Increased sense of belonging

Increased involvement in the community

Changes in employment

Better school performance of children

Children more motivated at school

Improved access to services

Better able to maintain or improve ties with family and friends

Increased sense of safety and security / less neighbourhood crime

The literature also identified a number of factors contributing to these outcomes, including for example:

Fewer changes in schools

Less noise

More privacy

Better air quality, temperature control systems

Less dampness or mould

Better role models

More social connections with neighbours

Results of Interviews with housing providers

Housing providers reported a significant shift in the types of tenants living in social housing in comparison to the tenants they were serving 20 years ago. In particular, they noticed more immigrant families and fewer single parent families, as well as more working families and families with relatively higher incomes but who are still in housing need due to high housing costs. Some housing providers are seeing larger families, and more tenants with behavioural challenges and mental health issues.

Housing providers also noted that households tended to stay longer in social housing, because of the lack of affordable market housing. The average family stay is about five years. Previous tenants had seen social housing as an interim solution, as a “step” towards market housing. Today, families are split on whether social housing would be their home for the long term or provide a transitional housing solution. Providers expressed the view that it is much harder for current social housing tenants to enter the housing market at the same pace as those in the past.

Results of Interviews with household heads

The majority of respondents identified significant positive improvements to their quality of life since moving into social housing, and most attributed the changes to their new housing circumstances. Although the sample size was relatively small, and not all households experienced positive outcomes from the move, the results of this study are consistent with previous research on this topic. Most households interviewed reported that a move into social housing meant positive housing outcomes for the family: the housing was more suitable, better maintained, and of better quality. The families experienced less financial stress, more privacy, less crowding, and more secure tenancy. A significant improvement for many families was that they finally had an adequate number of bedrooms, better kitchen facilities and more space.

65


Research Highlight


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation4

The families also experienced positive non-shelter outcomes. They generally reported improved physical and mental health (e.g. due to reduced stress), improved education performance by the children, increased access (e.g. walkability) to services and amenities, and increased community involvement. Furthermore, households reported that many of the positive changes were directly linked to the change in housing circumstances.

Households also identified a range of other improvements to their lives which occurred after entering social housing. Most respondents were financially better off as a result of the reduced housing cost, and a few reported that they were able to pay down debt, and save for emergencies or retirement. As a result of improved finances and living conditions, respondents identified they were healthier, noting a more nutritious diet, increased exercise, reduced stress and better moods.

Additionally, a majority of respondents identified improved educational outcomes for their children, attributing the change to happier children, less stressed parents and the children having their own bedrooms. Several of the respondents were able to access educational or training opportunities as a result of their changed circumstances.

Most respondents identified a stronger sense of community in their new homes.

The most important change in the families’ lives since their move was, for roughly a quarter of those interviewed, their better financial situation, the better quality housing for the family, and increased safety and security.

Consistent with previous studies, crime and employment outcomes were mixed. Some families experienced a reduction in crime, while others found higher levels of crime in their new neighbourhoods. While just under three-quarters reported that their new neighbourhood was an improvement over the old one, almost half said that crime levels and lack of safety were what they least liked about their new neighbourhood. While the level of employment remained relatively the same, some household heads took the opportunity of their improved financial situation to leave full-time or part-time employment to care for family or pursue their education.

Not all of the respondents identified a positive change in their lives since entering social housing. Additionally, external variables could affect the non-shelter outcomes of the respondents regardless of housing outcome. However, a strong majority of respondents identified significant positive improvements to their quality of life5, and most attributed the changes to their new housing circumstances.

5 For example, close to 90% of households reported that they were somewhat or very satisfied with their housing unit, about 80% were satisfied with the size, layout and location, and 70% were satisfied with the management, maintenance and safety. In addition, 61% reported a reduction in stress, 82% indicated they were “better able to cope”, 46% reported improved diets because they could afford better food, and 48% reported improved school performance for their children.

66


Research Highlight


Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation 5

This study confirmed previous research on housing and non-shelter impacts of affordable housing on families. Not only are most low-income families who have moved into social housing better off financially, the housing is more suitable, better maintained, and of better quality. The families experienced less financial stress, more privacy, less crowding, and more secure tenancy. Moreover, families reported additional non-shelter benefits, such as better nutrition and physical and mental health, and better access to services. The key findings include:

Social housing provides several positive outcomes for tenant families over and above improvements in the household financial situation. For a majority of families in housing need, a move into social housing can have a positive impact on health, education and social well-being outcomes.

Social housing units that are located in neighbourhoods with easy access to community amenities such as recreation, shopping and transit, facilitate more community involvement and more physical exercise for the families in these units, with resulting health benefits.

The strength of neighbourhood influences on family outcomes indicates that the location of social housing is as crucial as the design and operation of the facility itself. Neighbourhoods that are more likely to produce positive outcomes for families have amenities close by, good transportation, and would generally be considered ‘good’ or ‘safe’ neighbourhoods.

The benefits of suitable housing (adequate number of bedrooms) and increased privacy include a reduction in self-reported stress for families and improved reported school performance for children.

A private bedroom not only provided the children with a quiet study area, but was also associated with a greater degree of independence on the child’s part, better sleep at night, and a better mood in the family overall. As well, the adults had fewer financial worries and more time was available for parents to spend with their children (e.g. playing and/or supervising homework).

This study focused on families who had been in social housing for less than two years, and so could not explore longer-term impacts. Improvements in employment and incomes, in particular, might become evident over the longer term as stable housing, increased social connections, and completion of education results in better employment. This is an area that is worthy of further research. A longitudinal study that followed families entering social housing and monitored outcomes over time might identify more positive results for employment, and crime and safety.

The characteristics of the neighbourhood in which the social housing unit was located appeared to have significant impacts on the families interviewed for this study. Additional research designed to look specifically at neighbourhood factors might provide further evidence for the link between neighbourhood characteristics and positive outcomes for families.

67


Research Highlight


Although this information product reflects housing experts’ current knowledge, it is provided for general information purposes only. Any reliance or action taken based on the information, materials and techniques described are the responsibility of the user. Readers are advised to consult appropriate professional resources to determine what is safe and suitable in their particular case. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation assumes no responsibility for any consequence arising from use of the information, materials and techniques described.67

033

©2010, Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationPrinted in CanadaProduced by CMHC 23-06-10

CMHC Project Manager: Ed Nera

Consultant: Robyn Newton, Margaret Condon, SPARC BC

To find more Research Highlights plus a wide variety of information products, visit our website at

www.cmhc.ca

or contact:

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation

700 Montreal Road

Ottawa, Ontario

K1A 0P7

Phone: 1-800-668-2642

Fax: 1-800-245-9274

This study was funded (or partially funded) by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) under the terms of its External Research Program. However, the views expressed are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of CMHC. CMHC’s financial contribution to this study does not constitute an endorsement of its contents. For more information on the ERP, please visit the CMHC website at www.cmhc.ca or contact the Project Officer, Responsive Programs by e-mail at [email protected], or by regular mail: Project Officer, Responsive Programs, External Research Program, Policy and Research Division, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 700 Montreal Road, Ottawa ON K1A 0P7.

68


APPENDIX E

”SENIORS HOUSING CONDITIONS IMPROVE”

Excerpt from:

Canadian Housing Research Committee Spring 2011

69


Recent CMHC analysis of 2006 Census data sheds light on the housing conditions of seniors in Canada and compares them to conditions in 2001.

From 2001 to 2006, the proportion of seniors in Canada’s population grew from 13 to 13.7 per cent—and though most seniors lived in private households, they made up 61 per cent of the population living in collective dwellings. Seniors were overrepresented in small cities and rural areas, and households headed by seniors were more likely to own a home than households headed by non-seniors (72 per cent, versus 67 per cent). The average size of senior-headed households was smaller than that of households headed by non-seniors (1.7 people, against 2.8 people).

Though many of the trends in seniors’ housing conditions confirm expectations, the data show that, for the first time since 1996, housing conditions have improved more for senior households than for non-senior households. As CMHC Senior Researcher Hoda Shawki explains, “This is likely because of policy changes that have increased transfer payments to low- and moderate-income seniors—but population aging will cause housing challenges that are more complex than just household incomes and that extend to issues not captured by the core housing need indicator.” She adds that it’s also not clear whether future data will continue to show an accelerated decline in core housing need.

Despite the general improvement, the analysis reveals that some senior households still lived in core housing need in 2006: 14.4 per cent, above the rate of 12.2 per cent for non-senior households. The key factor in this rate was the affordability, as opposed to the suitability or acceptability, of their homes. “Though it’s true that senior householders are more likely to own their houses mortgage-free, that still leaves them with utilities, property taxes and maintenance to pay for,” says Shawki. Furthermore, the data underlying this analysis do not provide any insight into the accessibility of the homes and whether the housing situation allows residents to access needed services.

Seniors living alone were much more likely to be in core housing need in 2006 than those living with a spouse or other family members. Though this tendency has been borne out in previous research, says Shawki, “What we didn’t expect is that this is true whether the seniors living alone are male or female. Conventional wisdom suggests that core housing need among senior households headed by females would be much higher than among senior households headed by males, and indeed it is much higher. It turns out that household type accounts for a large share of the gender-based difference in core need.”

Shawki observes that several lines of research could build on the findings. “For example, we know that housing conditions of seniors are improving as defined by core housing need—but are there local models that are successfully providing services to seniors who are aging in those homes and not moving? What are communities doing to accommodate aging seniors and to become more age-friendly? Who are the seniors who live in collective dwellings, what kinds of collective dwellings do they live in, and what prompts the move to such dwellings?” She also expects that data collected in 2011 will be a good opportunity to compare housing conditions post-recession to current findings. “The analysis used data that were collected before the recession’s effect started to be felt. The upcoming 2011 Census and National Household Survey will be the first since the financial crisis, and it will be interesting to see what the data show.”

A Research Highlight, available on the CMHC website (product #67201) provides further analysis and breakdown of the Census data. For more information, contact Hoda Shawki at 613-748-2429 or [email protected].

Seniors’ Housing Conditions Improve

Source: CMHC (Census-based housing indicators and data)

Below affordabilitystandard

Below suitabilitystandard

Below adequacystandard

11.4%

13.2%

10.9%

1.9%0.5%

2.3% 1.9%1.9%1.9%

Total HouseholdsSenior HouseholdsNon-senior Households

Distinct Needs

NHRC 8 | Spring 2011

For both seniors and non-seniors, affordability was the greatest factor in core housing need in 2006.

70


user

Text Box

http://nhrc-cnrl.ca/sites/default/files/Article_06.pdf

71


user

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX F

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

Further data samples regarding housing and income

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

72


user

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX F

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Selkirk College, Castlegar, B.C., through its Regional Innovation Chair in Rural Economic Development [see link at end] has assembled a large and comprehensive database emanating from the Census2001 and 2006 data bodies. We are including here a sampling of the information pertaining to Creston, illustrating the medium to high need in Castlegar for more affordable options for housing. It will soon be possible starting in March 2012 to start accessing the Census 2011 data.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Introduction to further databank sources

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

FROM: 2008 STATE OF THE BASIN REPORT:

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

In addition, the Columbia Basin Trust continues to provide valuable leadership and assistance in compiling data sources to assist affordable housing planning:

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

www.cbt.org/stateofthebasin

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Average Dwelling Value 2001 and 2006, and Average Household Income 2000 and 2006, Municipalities and Regional Districts

73


user

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX F cont'd.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

74


user

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX F cont'd

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Average dwelling values/incomes/year over year: Creston area in yellow Read left to right, table presented in three parts to fit this report format:

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

PART ONE [LEFT]

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

PART TWO [MIDDLE]

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

75


user

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX F cont'd.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

SOURCE: http://selkirk.ca/research/ric/housing-resources/ CBT-and-BoundaryArea-Av...Income-2001---2006.xlsx

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Text Box

Information sources 1 BC Stats 2006 Census Profiles HYPERLINK http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/cen06/profiles/detailed/ch_alpha.asp www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/cen06/profiles/detailed/ch_alpha.asp 2 C Stats Socio-Economic Profiles HYPERLINK http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/sep/index.asp www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/sep/index.asp

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

PART THREE [RIGHT]

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Line

76


user

Text Box

APPENDIX F cont'd.

user

Line

user

Typewritten Text

In conclusion, the reader is encouraged to become familiar with the data compilations from which the previous samples were drawn. We thank the retired Regional Innovation Chair at Selkirk College, George Penfold, for having inaugurated the resources.

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

We are pleased to provide here the contact information for Mr. Penfold's successor in the Chair, Ms. Terri MacDonald:

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Terri MacDonald, PhD Regional Innovation Chair in Rural Economic Development Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute Selkirk College, Office A-20 301 Frank Beinder Way Castlegar, BC V1N 4L3 Tel: 250-365-1434 Fax: 250-365-1260 email: [email protected]

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

- END -

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

user

Typewritten Text

Documents

NEED$AND$DEMAND$ ASSESSMENT$UPDATE$ANDSITE$ …€¦ · Contents’ ’ 1. TableofContents ( ( ( ( ( ( (Pages(i 2(ii((2. Executive(Summary( ( ( ( ( ( (Pages(122((3. Introduction(