PRINCE RUPERT HOUSING ACTION PLAN · 5851111WestHastingsStreet VancouverBCV6E2J3 6046872281 5thFloor,844CourtneyStreet VictoriaBCV8W1C4 2503830304 Suite208,811ManningRoadNE CalgaryABCanadaT2E7L4

585 -‐ 1111 West Hastings StreetVancouver BC V6E 2J3

604 687 2281

5th Floor, 844 Courtney StreetVictoria BC V8W 1C4

250 383 0304

Suite 208, 811 Manning Road NECalgary AB Canada T2E 7L4

403 454 2468

www.cityspaces.ca

PRINCE RUPERTHOUSING ACTION PLANNorthern Development Initiative TrustFebruary 2015

http://www.cityspaces.ca


TABLE OF CONTENTS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

................................................................................INTRODUCTION 1

............................................................................................Regional Economy 1

...........................................................................................Origins of the Plan 1

........................................................................................Contents of the Plan 1

...................................................................................Framework for the Plan 2

..................................................................................BACKGROUND 7

................................................................Evidence-‐Based Review Highlights 7

............................................................................................Demographic Context 7

...................................................................................................Economic Context 7

.......................................................................................Market Housing Context 8

...............................................................................Non-‐Market Housing Context 8

...........................................................City of Prince Rupert Housing Initiatives 8

.............................................................Stakeholder Consultation Highlights 9

.........................................NEEDS, GAPS & RECOMMENDATIONS 11

..................................................................Shelters & Transitional Housing 12

.............................................................................................Homeless Residents 12

.........................................................................Non-‐Market Rental Housing 13

.......................................................................Low & Fixed Income Households 13

................................................................................................Rent Supplements 14

.................................................................................Market Rental Housing 15

.............................................................................................Quality & Condition 15

..................................................................Residents with Physical Disabilities 16

.................................................................................................................Students 17

Prince Rupert Housing AcVon Plan | February 2015 i

..................................................................Other Housing-‐Related Matters 18

..................................................................................................Labour Shortages 18

..................................................................................Land Development & Infill 18

.............................................................................Advisory Housing Committee 19

.........................................................................Prince Rupert Housing STrategy 20

..........................................................................................Temporary Workforce 20

.......................................................................................................Key Indicators 21

..........................................................................Update to Housing Action Plan 21

.....................................................................GLOSSARY OF TERMS 23

................................................................................................Geographic Terms 23

...............................................................Housing Terms Along the Continuum 23

...............................................Housing Terms Related to Core Housing Need 25

.......................................................Housing Terms Related to Structural Type 25

...........................................................................................Other Housing Terms 26

...............................................................................Municipality-‐Related Terms 27

.....................................................................................Economy-‐Related Terms 27

...............................................................................Government-‐Related Terms 28

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Sequence of Activities

Figure 2: Housing Continuum

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Evidence Based Research Report

Appendix B: Stakeholder Consultation Report

February 2015 | Prince Rupert Housing AcVon Plan

INTRODUCTION

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

REGIONAL ECONOMYThe economic situaVon in Northwestern BC has improved considerably over the past four years as new major industrial projects have been proposed or are under construcVon – hydro transmission lines, pipelines, LNG faciliVes, mines, and container ports. While some projects are underway, others await environmental approvals and final decisions by their investors. These iniVaVves have been a major driver of new development acVvity in the region.

ORIGINS OF THE PLANThis Housing AcVon Plan was iniVated in June 2014 by the Northern Development IniVaVve Trust (NDIT) with the formal support of the City of Prince Rupert. Concurrently, Housing AcVon Plans were prepared for Terrace, KiVmat, and Port Edward. The development of these plans was guided by a Steering Commifee composed of senior staff of the municipaliVes, BC Housing, and the Housing Policy Branch.

• NDIT iniVated this work in response to increasing local concerns about the impact of the booming economy on Prince Rupert’s current and anVcipated housing market, parVcularly for low-‐ and fixed-‐income renters, and people with special needs.

CONTENTS OF THE PLANThis Housing Action Plan includes a short summary of the research, consultation findings and the housing-‐related measures undertaken to date by the City of Prince Rupert. Importantly, it sets out recommendations in relation to the housing needs and gaps that are specific to Prince Rupert within the context of “low growth”, “moderate growth”, and “high growth” scenarios. These recommendations will be reviewed and considered by public authorities who are able to advance their implementation, including the City of Prince Rupert, BC Housing, other Provincial ministries, and, potentially, Northern Health.

Prince Rupert Housing AcVon Plan | February 2015 1

• This plan was informed by a three-‐day visit to Prince Rupert by three members of the consulVng team, followed by an in-‐depth data analysis and more than 20 telephone interviews with a range of stakeholders. Refer to Appendices A and B for details of the evidence-‐based research and stakeholder consultaVons.

• The plan was also informed by the City’s recent housing research (October 2014), and a City-‐hosted stakeholder “world café” on September 10, 2014. Related reports have been posted on the City’s website – hfp://www.princerupert.ca/projects

FRAMEWORK FOR THE PLAN• The maps on the following page provide a geographical framework to aid

in the discussion of Prince Rupert within northwestern BC.

• Figure 1 shows the sequence of the acVviVes leading to the plan. The Steering Commifee teleconferenced weekly throughout the planning period, providing input and review for all acVviVes and reports.

• Figure 2 depicts the range of housing across a “conVnuum”, from emergency shelter to homeownership. The consultants have used the conVnuum as the supporVng structure for idenVfying and discussing Prince Rupert’s current and potenVal future housing needs and gaps.

• There is a recap from the data analysis and the stakeholder consultaVons.

• There are 17 recommendaVons for consideraVon by public authoriVes, and community-‐based organizaVons. The recommendaVons are preceded by a short raVonale.

• Figure 3 summarizes the implementaVon of the recommendaVons of the Housing AcVon Plan.

• A Glossary of terms concludes the Housing AcVon Plan.

• Appendix A – Evidence Based Report.

• Appendix B – Stakeholder ConsultaVon Report.

2 February 2015 | Prince Rupert Housing AcVon Plan

http://livepage.apple.com/

http://livepage.apple.com/


Map 1: City of Prince Rupert

Map 2: Prince Rupert Census Agglomeration

City of Prince Rupert

Prince Rupert CA


Map 3: Prince Rupert Local Health Area (LHA)

Figure 1: Sequence of Activities

FINAL HOUSING ACTION PLAN

REVIEW OF PRINCE RUPERT

HOUSING DOCUMENTS

ASSEMBLE & ANALYZE DATA

EVIDENCE-BASED BRIEFING PAPER

INTERVIEWS STAKEHOLDER BRIEFING REPORT

IDENTIFY GAPS & ISSUES IN HOUSING

CONTINUUM

DRAFT HOUSING ACTION PLAN

GAPS & ISSUES REPORT

Housing Action Plan Project Timeline | Prince Rupert

Prince RupertLocal Health Area


Figure 2: Housing Continuum

Fee

sim

ple,

stra

ta

owne

rshi

p, sh

ared

eq

uity

ow

ners

hip

(e.g

. mob

ile h

ome

on la

nd).

Priv

ate

hous

ing

mak

e up

mos

t re

ntal

hou

sing

.

Maj

ority

of

purp

ose-

desi

gned

bu

ildin

gs d

ate

prio

r to

1990

.

Incl

udes

se

cond

ary

suite

s.

Rent

al A

ssist

ance

Pr

ogra

m (R

AP)

Shel

ter A

id fo

r El

derly

Ren

ters

(S

AFER

)

NO

NE

EŽŶ

ͲƉƌŽĮƚ�

hous

ing

prov

ider

s Žī

Ğƌ�ƉĞƌŵĂŶ

ĞŶƚ�

hous

ing

in

purp

ose-

desi

gned

bu

ildin

gs, o

r in

ƐĐĂƩ

ĞƌĞĚ

�ƐŝƚĞƐ�

with

ong

oing

su

ppor

ts fo

r pe

ople

who

are

no

t abl

e to

live

in

depe

nden

tly.

Incl

udes

seni

ors

assi

sted

livi

ng.

EŽŶ

ͲƉƌŽĮƚ�

hous

ing

prov

ider

s Žī

Ğƌ�ƐƚĂď

ůĞ�

hous

ing

as a

step

be

twee

n sh

elte

rs

& p

erm

anen

t ho

usin

g.

Perio

d of

2-3

ye

ars,

with

su

ppor

t ser

vice

s pr

ovid

ed o

n or

Žī

ͲƐŝƚĞ

Gove

rnm

ent

fund

s mat

s for

ov

erni

ght s

tays

in

chur

ches

& o

ther

ůŽĐĂƟŽ

ŶƐ

Nov

embe

r to

Mar

ch

EŽŶ

ͲƉƌŽĮƚ�

hous

ing

prov

ider

s &

faith

-bas

ed

ŐƌŽƵ

ƉƐ�ŽīĞ

ƌ�te

mpo

rary

shel

ter,

food

& o

ther

se

rvic

es.

Mos

t she

lters

ar

e op

en 2

4/7,

pr

ovid

e 3

mea

ls/

day

& su

ppor

t se

rvic

es.

Sho

rt st

ay o

f 30

days

or l

ess.

Soci

al o

r Su

bsid

ized

hous

ing

requ

ires o

ngoi

ng

gove

rnm

ent

subs

idie

s to

redu

ce re

nts

for l

ow in

com

e ho

useh

olds

.

Ope

rate

d by

no

n-m

arke

t ho

usin

g pr

ovid

ers,

BC

Hou

sing

&

ĐŽŽƉ

ĞƌĂƟ

ǀĞƐ

LEV

EL O

F G

OV

ERN

MEN

T FI

NA

NCI

AL

ASS

ISTA

NCE

HIG

H

YEAR

-RO

UN

D EM

ERGE

NCY

SH

ELTE

RS

TRAN

SITI

ON

AL

HOU

SIN

GSU

PPO

RTIV

E HO

USI

NG

SEAS

ON

ALSH

ELTE

RSSO

CIAL

HO

USI

NG

MAR

KET

RE

NTA

L

HOU

SIN

G

HOM

E O

WN

ERSH

IP

REN

TAL

ASSI

STAN

CE

PRO

VIDE

D

IN P

RIVA

TE

MAR

KET

NO

N-M

AR

KET

MA

RK

ET

TYPES FORMSH

ousi

ng C

onti

nuum

BACKGROUND

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

EVIDENCE-‐BASED REVIEW HIGHLIGHTSThis secVon summarizes the key findings from the evidence-‐based research, drawn from (Appendix A).

DEMOGRAPHIC CONTEXT

PopulaVon projecVons show a gradual increase in the permanent populaVon from 2015 through 2025. The low growth rate scenario shows an increase of 703 new permanent residents over a ten-‐year period, whereas, the moderate growth scenario shows an increase of 1,417 new residents.

Using a persons per household rate of 2.151, the number of new households in the growth scenarios equates to:

• 330 new permanent households in the low growth scenario; and

• 660 new permanent households in the moderate growth scenario.

As one household usually occupies one dwelling unit, the demand for addiVonal new housing units by 2025 in the Prince Rupert LHA could be in the range of 330 to 660. In both the low and moderate growth scenarios, the surge in new permanent residency is not forecast unVl 2020 and beyond.

ECONOMIC CONTEXT

There have been a number of significant transportaVon and terminal investments in Prince Rupert during the last few years. AddiVonal mulV-‐billion dollar investments are in the final planning stages, while proponents await a Final Investment Decision (e.g., PNW LNG and BG LNG). From a housing perspecVve, unlike Terrace and KiVmat, these exisVng and proposed investments have not yet translated into demand for significant new residenVal development.


1 Household size has been declining throughout BC communiVes. In 1986, there was an average 2.9 persons per household ; by 2011 it had dropped to 2.5. In Prince Rupert, by 2011, it had declined to 2.14.

MARKET HOUSING CONTEXT

Prince Rupert’s higher paying jobs in the transportaVon, health, and public administraVon sectors allow many couple households to afford a home without paying more than 30% of their gross annual income.

• Lone-‐parent families and single person households have fewer choices in finding suitable, adequate and affordable housing. Both of the lafer groups have median incomes lower than the provincial median, and most would not be able to buy a house.

• While there has been some acVvity in the ownership and rental markets in recent years, the average price of a detached home has remained relaVvely constant. Rental rates have also remained stable for bachelor and three-‐bedroom units, while there have been rent increases in one-‐ and two-‐bedroom units.

NON-‐MARKET HOUSING CONTEXT

There is a range of non-‐market housing in Prince Rupert, providing permanent housing for families and seniors, and temporary housing for people who are homeless, or in a transiVonal situaVon. There are also rent supplements for families and seniors. Waitlist data from BC Housing indicates:

• As of mid-‐2014, the Housing Registry shows 55 households on its waitlist, with the majority being families.

CITY OF PRINCE RUPERT HOUSING INITIATIVES

In mid-‐2014, the City undertook an inventory of housing by condiVon, age and type. This recent data is helpful in developing the Housing AcVon Plan.

• In 2007, the City updated its Official Community Plan, adding a number of housing-‐related policies.

• The 2009 Zoning Bylaw included the addiVon of smaller lots for single detached homes, but did not make provisions for secondary suites.


STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION HIGHLIGHTSAppendix B contains observaVons and suggesVons raised by stakeholders2 consulted in the summer of 2014. Highlights include:

• Condition of Market Housing. The quality and condition of older housing (both rental and ownership) is regarded as poor to fair3. Renovations are taking place, primarily catering to newcomers who will fill construction and trades positions associated with major industrial projects. As a result, rental rates are likely to rise beyond the resources of many lower income households.

• Development Constraints. New housing development has been limited in Prince Rupert due to the high cost of blasVng rock for servicing and residenVal construcVon. Community stakeholders idenVfied this constraint as an opportunity to encourage infill development of vacant parcels, or redevelopment of sites with old or unoccupied buildings.

• Homeless Men: The SalvaVon Army has experienced a 25% increase in stays at their men’s shelter, and has prepared a feasibility study to build a mens transiVonal house. Lack of funding has stalled the project.

• Women & Children: The North Coast TransiVon Society has been increasingly challenged to find affordable and suitable housing for families leaving the Society’s two-‐year second stage transiVon house. Affordable rental housing for women and children, as well as couple families with children, was idenVfied as a need by this group, and further supported by observaVons from other stakeholders.


2 Appendix B contains a list of stakeholders who were interviewed.3 In the City’s 2014 housing survey, almost half of all homes were considered to be poorly maintained, in poor condiVon, or a “tear down”.


NEEDS, GAPS & RECOMMENDATIONS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

This secVon sets out needs, gaps, and recommendaVons using the Housing ConVnuum (Figure 2) as a framework for review. For analyVcal purposes in this Plan, “a gap” indicates a certain type of housing is not available in Prince Rupert, and “a need” refers to an unresolved issue idenVfied by local stakeholders and the quanVtaVve indicators analyzed.

From a market housing perspecVve, compared to Terrace and KiVmat, Prince Rupert has yet to experience a significant increase in housing demand, either in rental or home owner accommodaVon.

• However, if one or more of the planned major LNG projects goes ahead, it is possible that the same type of market destabilizaVon taking place in Terrace and KiVmat could happen in Prince Rupert. This could lead to higher home prices and rents, the lafer potenVally resulVng in “renovicVons”, or redevelopment of older residenVal premises.

For this reason, it is important to idenVfy what acVons can be taken by the City, the Province, and community stakeholders to help maintain a balance between market supply and demand. Equally important is the idenVficaVon of acVons to address the housing needs of residents with special needs, and those whose low incomes preclude them from finding affordable, adequate, and suitable market housing.


SHELTERS & TRANSITIONAL HOUSINGFrom discussions with stakeholders and a review of available informaVon, the greatest needs are for residents without shelter, and those that need a safe and supporVve environment to transiVon to independent living.

HOMELESS RESIDENTS

While no organized homelessness count has been undertaken in Prince Rupert, the two shelter providers – North Coast TransiVon Society and the SalvaVon Army – report a growing need for shelter accommodaVons. NCTS’s shelter was full most nights over the past three years, with bed nights increasing in 2013-‐14. Occupancy rates have fluctuated, with higher occupancy and nights full in 2013-‐14.


NEED: MORE SHELTER BEDS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN

The North Coast Transition Society (NCTS) provides a 24 /7 shelter (co-‐located with Eagles Landing Transition House) for women and children fleeing violence. NCTS sees clients returning to its shelter in cycles, and has identified a “shelter shuffle” taking place in northwest BC. When a client’s length of stay expires, she relocates to either Kitimat or Terrace to stay at in a shelter for the maximum length of stay. These are vulnerable women, rotating through the communities, in unstable housing situations. NCTS identified a need for at least 5 more shelter beds.

RECOMMENDATION #1

That NCTS be funded for a minimum of five addiVonal shelter beds in the short term, with the potenVal for more beds if major industrial projects go ahead in the medium term.

NEED: MORE SHELTER BEDS FOR MEN

The SalvaVon Army provides an 8-‐bed shelter for men in an older downtown motel. Occupancy has increased, and addiVonal beds are needed. While there is a business plan to add more beds, to date there has been no funding to support for a new or expanded facility.

RECOMMENDATION #2

That the City, BC Housing, and other potenVal funders work with the SalvaVon Army to add up to 20 addiVonal shelter beds.

NON-‐MARKET RENTAL HOUSINGAs of July 2014, BC Housing reported that 439 households lived in subsidized housing in Prince Rupert, received a rent supplement, or were otherwise financially assisted.

• The majority of social housing in the city is managed by the M’Akola Housing Society.

• There conVnues to be an unmet need for family housing, as evidenced by BC Housing’s wait list – 55 households, with most being families.

LOW & FIXED INCOME HOUSEHOLDS

Residents with low and fixed incomes are among those most challenged when looking for suitable, adequate, and affordable housing. A number of consulted stakeholders believe that if the large projects proceed, rents will increase, and low and fixed income households will be unable to afford adequate and suitable housing, with the task being parVcularly difficult for large and intergeneraVonal families.

NEED: HOUSING FOR LARGE FAMILIES

Affordable dwellings that can accommodate families of five or more people are in parVcularly scarce supply.


RECOMMENDATION #3

That the City, BC Housing, and potenVal other funders work with the the M’Akola Housing Society to increase the number of units with 3+ bedrooms to befer accommodate larger families. This may be achieved through renovaVon of exisVng social housing units, or the acquisiVon and renovaVon of older buildings in the private market.

RENT SUPPLEMENTS

The Provincial government has two programs that provide eligible low and moderate income households with a rent supplement – SAFER (Shelter Assistance for Elderly Renters), and RAP (Rental Assistance Program) for families. Rent supplements have certain advantages to building new housing:

• They can assist in finding market rental housing relaVvely quickly in contrast to the 2-‐3 years needed to plan, secure municipal approvals, and build a new project;

• The units are not visibly different from other units in the same building; and

• The subsidy remains with the individual or family when the household decides to move – the household receives the supplement, not the housing unit.


NEED: ADDITIONAL RENT SUPPLEMENTS/FLEXIBILITY

There is a need for an increase in the quanVty and flexibility of rent supplements administered by BC Housing.

RECOMMENDATION #4

BC Housing should increase the number of Rent Supplements available in Prince Rupert, or make modificaVons to the provincial rent supplement programs to befer assist families, women and children, and seniors to afford suitable and adequate housing in the private rental market.

RECOMMENDATION #5

The RAP and SAFER rent supplement program should be promoted widely by community-‐based agencies, outreach workers, and the City of Prince Rupert. AddiVonally, offering assistance with program applicaVons should be provided, parVcularly by outreach workers.

MARKET RENTAL HOUSINGQUALITY & CONDITION

The most frequent concern raised by stakeholders was the poor condiVon and quality of market rental housing in Prince Rupert. RenovaVons are being made by some property owners anVcipaVng higher rents when the planned industrial projects go ahead. However, higher rents may lead to “renovicVons” for those with low or fixed incomes.

Of parVcular note:

• In Prince Rupert, many seniors on fixed incomes live in rental buildings that are in poor condiVon, and do not have elevators, impacVng health and limiVng mobility.

• The number of disputes between tenants and landlords handled by the ResidenVal Tenancy Branch ranged between 62 and 83 in the past six years. A number of these involved housing condiVons.


The need and Fming for a SOM bylaw is not

conFngent on growth associated with major projects. Having such a bylaw in place before growth occurs sends a

signal to landlords that the City is commiLed to

ensuring that health and life safety standards are met.

RECOMMENDATION #6

The City of Prince Rupert should give consideraVon to adopVng and enforcing a Standards of Maintenance (SOM) bylaw. Such a bylaw would set out the duVes and obligaVons of owners, including provision of minimum standards for water, heat, light, and venVlaVon. SOM bylaws are being increasingly adopted by municipaliVes of all sizes, e.g., Terrace adopted a SoM bylaw for ResidenVal Rental Premises in 2013. These bylaws are enforced by the City’s Building Inspector, who has technical knowledge of building standards.

While it is recognized that some lower income tenants could be displaced if a landlord were to raise rents as a result of remedial work, if there is a serious concern about health and life safety standards for tenants, remedial acVons are warranted.

RESIDENTS WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES

Some older rental buildings do not have elevators, reducing the number of opVons for people with mobility challenges, parVcularly seniors. The majority of ground-‐oriented housing has exterior stairs, making access parVcularly difficult during rainy and icy condiVons.

• In 2012, almost 27% of BC’s Home Owner Grant recipients in Prince Rupert were 65+, a percentage that has steadily increased since 2006 (<23), and is now approaching the provincial comparable of 31%. This trend suggests a growing need for housing adaptaVons and in-‐home support services in coming years.

While the BC Building Code’s adaptable housing provisions apply to new homes, retrofivng is required for older buildings. Fortunately, there are programs and tax credits available for homeowners and landlords to assist with adaptaVons that make it easier for residents with mobility and other physical challenges to remain in their homes.


NEED: IMPROVE COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT PROGRAMS

There should be an improved understanding of programs and tax credits available to assist seniors and people with physical disabiliVes to make modest changes to their homes, enabling them to conVnue living independently.

RECOMMENDATION #7

Increased promotion of the Province’s financial and housing programs that are oriented toward older adults could benefit many seniors. Such promotion could be coordinated by one or more community-‐based organizations on an annual basis. Existing programs include the Seniors Home Owner Grant, Property Tax Deferral, the Seniors Home Renovation Tax Credit, and Housing Adaptation for Independence (HAFI).

RECOMMENDATION #8

As HAFI has only recently been added to BC Housing’s programs2 , Prince Rupert’s property managers and landlords may not be fully aware of this opportunity for partial funding. Direct promotion of this element of HAFI should be undertaken, possibly through the Residential Tenancy Branch, the Northern Real Estate Board, or BC Housing.

2 This program was formerly delivered by CMHC as the Home AdaptaVons for Seniors Independence program, and Rental RehabilitaVon Assistance Program [Landlords].

STUDENTS

Prince Rupert afracts youth and young adults hoping to finish their high school diplomas, afend Northwest Community College, or parVcipate in temporary pracVcum terms with Northern Health. Increasing rental prices, however, have limited the opVons for suitable student housing making it difficult for students from rural and small communiVes to relocate to Prince Rupert to finish their studies.


GAP: DEDICATED STUDENT HOUSING

There is no dedicated NWCC or Northern Health housing that is affordable, suitable, and adequate for students who must relocate to further their studies.

RECOMMENDATION #9

NWCC, Northern Health, the Province, and the City of Prince Rupert should consider collaboraVng to find and acquire publicly-‐owned land suitable for a student residence. This process would include a needs assessment and a business case.

RECOMMENDATION #10

NWCC/Northern Health should consider establishing a “housing registry” to connect learners looking for housing with Prince Rupert homeowners who are willing to rent a room or suite. The suitability of the host home should be vefed by NWCC/Northern Health.

OTHER HOUSING-‐RELATED MATTERS

LABOUR SHORTAGES

If major projects are iniVated, a labour shortage (trades, construcVon workers) is likely to occur, as those in the residenVal sector move to higher paying jobs in the industrial sector. If this happens, there may be consequences for new construcVon and renovaVons of market homeownership housing (fee simple and condominium), including the need to pay higher wages. This, in turn, would lead to higher housing costs, and, potenVally, delays in compleVng residenVal projects.

Note: The Housing AcVon Plan does not address the issue of potenVal labour shortages. However, as this issue was raised by several of the stakeholders interviewed, it is flagged here for further consideraVon by the Provincial and municipal governments.

LAND DEVELOPMENT & INFILL

If major projects are iniVated, a labour shortage (trades, construcVon workers) is likely to occur, as those in the residenVal sector move to higher paying jobs in the industrial sector. If this happens, there may be consequences for new construcVon and renovaVons of market homeownership housing (fee simple and condominium), including the need to pay higher wages. This, in turn, would lead to higher housing costs, and, potenVally, delays in compleVng residenVal projects.

Note: The Housing AcVon Plan does not address the issue of potenVal labour shortages. However, as this issue was raised by several of the stakeholders interviewed, it is flagged here for further consideraVon by the Provincial and municipal governments.


NEED: HOUSING CHOICES & INFILL DEVELOPMENT

Prince Rupert’s predominant housing form is single detached (73% as of 2014). Newcomers will be interested in a broader range of housing opVons. Infill development and redevelopment are preferred to costly new development outside already established areas.

RECOMMENDATION #11

A broad range of housing choices is needed to accommodate changing lifestyles of newcomers and exisVng residents. The Zoning Bylaw should be amended to be consistent with the OCP in relaVon to secondary suites.

ADVISORY HOUSING COMMITTEE

Many BC municipaliVes have established Advisory Housing Commifees, oyen drawing on local, knowledgeable stakeholders – non-‐market housing providers, social service providers, realtors and property managers, developers – plus one or more Councillors for membership. These commifees bring mulVple perspecVves together to idenVfy and discuss housing issues, and are sounding boards for municipal administraVons and Councils. Presently, the City of Prince Rupert does not have an Advisory Housing Commifee.


RECOMMENDATION #12

Land owners and developers are encouraged to examine infill and redevelopment opportuniVes, parVcularly in the City Centre.

GAP: NO ADVISORY HOUSING COMMITTEE

Many BC municipalities have advisory housing committees, including Terrace and Kitimat. At present, the City does not have such a committee.

RECOMMENDATION #13

It is recommended that the City of Prince Rupert give consideraVon to establishing an advisory housing commifee with members represenVng a range of stakeholders.

PRINCE RUPERT HOUSING STRATEGY

As Prince Rupert is now facing growth if major industrial projects go ahead, the City has undertaken its own housing plan4, and the first two steps in this initiative are complete – a detailed Housing Inventory and a Multi-‐Stakeholder Workshop.

TEMPORARY WORKFORCE


RECOMMENDATION #14

Complete a Municipal Housing Strategy that idenVfies what the City is able to accomplish through policy, regulaVons (e.g., Zoning Bylaw, Housing Agreements), financing (e.g. Reserve Fund, land bank), partnerships, communicaVons, advocacy, and monitoring.

NEED: COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING STRATEGY

The City’s background work in 2014 provides a strong basis for developing a comprehensive municipal strategy. The next steps are likely to be confirming housing issues (market and non-‐market), developing opVons, prioriVzing objecVves, idenVfying implementaVon acVons, and adopVng the strategy.

4 The City undertook a housing needs assessment and acVon plan in 1995, but it not known whether this was updated to reflect changing economic circumstances in the 2000s.

RECOMMENDATION #15

Living Out Allowances should not be acceptable for short-‐term workers as they quickly and artificially inflate rental rates in the community. If short-‐stay workers must be accommodated in town, block booking of hotels is preferred to block leasing of existing rental buildings.

NEED: EMPLOYERS TO PROVIDE HOUSING

Industrial employers with large workforces need to be responsible for providing short-‐stay and temporary housing, ideally in temporary lodgings (“camps”) on or near their sites. If large projects do proceed, there will be a surge in demand for accommodaVon by employers and their contractors. Only a small proporVon of this demand can be accommodated in Prince Rupert.

KEY INDICATORS

UPDATE TO HOUSING ACTION PLAN

This iniVaVve marks the first Vme the City of Prince Rupert and the Province have collaborated to prepare a Housing AcVon Plan. In the coming 12 to 30 months, it will likely be know which proposed major resource projects will move forward, and when construcVon will begin.


RECOMMENDATION #16

It is recommended that the City of Prince Rupert monitor two key indicators on a semi-‐annual basis – sales acVvity (average sale price and days on the market) from the Northern Real Estate Board, and rental acVvity (vacancy rate, rental rates) from CMHC.

NEED: SEMI-‐ANNUAL KEY INDICATORS

Key indicators in Appendix A – rental vacancies and rates, and real estate average sale prices and days on market – change rapidly, and need to be monitored regularly. This data, analyzed over time, provides valuable insights into changing rental and homeownership markets.

RECOMMENDATION #17

It is recommended that the Province, together with the City of Prince Rupert and, if established, an Advisory Housing Commifee, update this Housing AcVon Plan in three years (2017). This update will involve an assessment of the accomplishments to date, as well as reporVng on then-‐current quanVtaVve indicators and local stakeholder research.

NEED: UPDATE THIS PLAN IN 2017

The growth of the major exporVng industries, both in scale and pace, will confirm whether a low or moderate scenario is indicated. An update to the Housing AcVon Plan may be warranted.


GLOSSARY OF TERMS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

GEOGRAPHIC TERMS

CENSUS AGGLOMERATION (CA)

An area consisVng of one or more neighbouring local governments situated around a core. A CA must have a core populaVon of at least 10,000.

LOCAL HEALTH AREA (LHA)

An area identified by the Ministry of Health for administrative and data collection purposes. These are the third tier of a nested hierarchy consisting of Health Authorities (e.g., Northern Health), Health Service Delivery Areas (e.g., Northwest).

HOUSING TERMS ALONG THE CONTINUUM

HOUSING CONTINUUM

A concept, often depicted graphically, to assist with research, planning and program development. There are two main categories – non-‐market and market. Non-‐market housing includes shelters, transitional housing and social housing; market housing rental and homeownership housing. Typically, individuals and families receiving rent supplements live in market rental housing.

EMERGENCY SHELTER

Short-‐stay housing of 30 days or less. Emergency shelters provide single or shared bedrooms or dorm-‐type sleeping arrangements, with varying levels of support to individuals.

COLD WET WEATHER SERVICES

Shelter faciliVes and services that operate and funded on a seasonal basis. Shelters add cold wet weather beds (seasonal beds and mats) to provide the opVon of a warm, dry place to sleep for people who are homeless as winter weather sets in. Also, there are emergency shelter faciliVes that are open only during winter months.


TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

Housing that is Vme-‐limited, and provides people with a range of training, pracVcal help with daily living, and counseling. Examples of transiVon housing include housing for women who have fled abusive situaVons, or people leaving addicVon treatment.

SECOND STAGE HOUSING

Short-‐term, safe, affordable and independent housing and some services similar to those provided in transiVon houses. Typical stays at a Second Stage House last for 12 to 24 months.

SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

Subsidized housing that provides ongoing supports and services to residents who cannot live independently and who are not expected to become fully self-‐sufficient. This form of housing may be located in a purpose-‐designed building or scafered site apartments, and does not have a limited length of stay.

ASSISTED LIVING

Housing with supported services that is regulated under BC’s Community Care and Assisted Living Act. Assisted living units are self-‐contained apartments for seniors or people with disabiliVes who need support services to conVnue living independently, but do not need 24-‐hour facility care. They may be operated by a non-‐profit society or by a private, for-‐profit business.

SOCIAL HOUSING

Housing that is delivered and managed by an organizaVon (municipality, society) on a non-‐profit basis, and where the rent (or housing charge) is subsidized, oyen on a “rent geared to income” system.

MARKET RENTAL HOUSING

Purpose-‐built rental housing as well as housing supplied through the secondary rental market (e.g., basement suites or rented condo apartments). The private rental market provides the majority of rental housing affordable to households with low-‐ and low-‐to-‐moderate incomes.

MARKET OWNERSHIP HOUSING

Housing whereby the owner receives no subsidies. It may be in fee-‐simple or condominium form.


HOUSING TERMS RELATED TO CORE HOUSING NEED

CORE HOUSING NEED

A household living in housing that falls below at least one of the adequacy, affordability or suitability standards and would have to spend 30% or more of its total before-‐tax income to pay the median rent of alternative local housing, which meets all three standards – adequate, affordable, suitable.

ADEQUATE HOUSING

Housing that does not require major repairs.

MAJOR REPAIRS NEEDED

This category includes dwellings needing major repairs such as dwellings with defecVve plumbing or electrical wiring and dwellings needing structural repairs to walls, floors or ceilings.

SUITABLE HOUSING

Refers to whether a private household is living in suitable accommodaVons according to the NaVonal Occupancy Standard (NOS); that is, whether the dwelling has enough bedrooms for the size and composiVon of the household.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Housing that costs no greater than 30% of gross household income. Housing costs for renters include rent and uVliVes, and for homeowners include mortgage payments, property taxes, strata fees (if any) and uVliVes.

HOUSING TERMS RELATED TO STRUCTURAL TYPE

SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING

A single-‐detached house has open space on all sides, and, depending on the local government’s zoning, may include a secondary suite either above or below it.

SECONDARY SUITE

An accessory dwelling unit contained within or afached to a single detached residenVal dwelling.

SEMI-‐DETACHED DWELLING

One of two dwellings afached side by side (or back to back) to each other, but not afached to any other dwelling or structure (except its own garage or shed). A semi-‐detached dwelling has no dwellings either above it or below it and the two units, together, have open space on all sides.

DUPLEX

A building which contains two principal dwelling units afached to each other, above and below, and the two units together have open space on all sides.


DWELLING MULTIPLE

A building or part of a building designed for residenVal occupancy and consisVng of more than two units. MulVple dwellings include triplex, row and group houses, stacked townhouses, and apartment buildings.

ROWHOUSE

One of three or more dwellings joined side-‐by-‐side, side-‐to-‐back, or possibly stacked one on top of the other, but with direct exterior access from ground level to the dwelling. Also known as a townhouse.

APARTMENT

A residenVal use contained in a building for three or more dwelling units, the majority of which share ground-‐level access. Typically, apartments are classified as one of two: (i) apartments in a building that has fewer than five storeys; and, (ii) apartments in a building that has five or more storeys.

OTHER HOUSING TERMS

HOMELESSNESS

The situaVon of an individual or family without stable, permanent, appropriate housing, or the immediate prospect, means, and ability of acquiring it.

RENOVICTION

This recently coined colloquial term, refers to the unwanted and/or unplanned terminaVon of a tenancy to allow the landlord to have vacant possession in order to undertake renovaVons. Some tenants consider this to be an unnecessary pretense for landlords to raise rents to take advantage of a Vght rental market, and a hardship for tenants, parVcularly seniors and people with disabiliVes, who may have lived in their suite for a number of years.

Note: The ResidenFal Tenancy Act has a provision allowing landlords to end a tenancy for repairs or renovaVons that require the rental unit to be vacant while giving them the ability to correct their rents to market rates once the work is complete. The Act does not specify exactly what types of repairs or renovaVons fall within this provision, nor how long vacant possession is required before a landlord can lawfully end the tenancy.

ACCESSIBLE HOUSING

Dwellings that include features, ameniVes or products to befer meet the needs of people with disabiliVes and thereby maximizing the number of people who can readily use them.

ADAPTABLE HOUSING

Housing that meets the minimal accessibility requirements and incorporates features that make it easy for people to “remain at home” as their mobility declines with age, or if they experience limitaVons due to illness or injury.


MANUFACTURED HOME PARK

Contains structures, whether or not ordinarily equipped with wheels, that are designed, constructed or manufactured to be moved from one place to another by being towed or carried, and used or intended to be used as living accommodaVon (Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act, 2014).

MUNICIPALITY-‐RELATED TERMS

ZONING

The division of whole or part of the municipality or regional district into zones and regulate the use and density of land, buildings and other structures, siVng, locaVon, size and dimensions of buildings and other structures.

AMENITY ZONING

A rezoning that provides a density bonus (floorspace or units), or other incenVve, in exchange for a developer contribuVon towards a community amenity, such as affordable housing, child care facility, and public art. The municipality has the authority to determine which ameniVes are eligible for a density bonus and the value of a density bonus.

HOUSING RESERVE FUND

means a fund established and managed by the finance arm of a local government. The revenue for this fund may come directly from a local government’s direct revenues or via an amenity contribuVon from developers. These reserves provide a source of capital funding for housing developments that benefit the community.

ECONOMY-‐RELATED TERMS

MEDIAN INCOME

The halfway point of a populaVon’s income, meaning half the populaVon are making more than the median income, and half the populaVon are making below the median income.

EMPLOYMENT RATE

The number of employed persons as a percentage of the populaVon 15 years of age and over. The rate for a parVcular group (for example, youths aged 15 to 24) is the number employed in that group as a percentage of the populaVon for that group.

PARTICIPATION RATE

means the number of employed and unemployed as a percentage of the populaVon 15 years of age and older.

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE

The number of unemployed people in the labour force as a percentage of the total labour force.


GOVERNMENT-‐RELATED TERMS

BC HOUSING

The provincial government agency responsible for subsidized housing in BriVsh Columbia, with approximately 100,000 units under administraVon. BC Housing directly owns and manages about 7,800 units of older affordable housing for families, seniors, and people with disabiliVes, and provides rent subsidies for affordable non-‐profit and co-‐op housing developments and some private market units.

THE HOUSING REGISTRY

The centralized database of applicants' informaVon and housing providers co-‐ordinated by BC Housing. It allows individuals to apply for housing with mulVple service providers using one applicaVon form.

CANADA MORTGAGE AND HOUSING CORPORATION (CMHC)

The naVonal housing agency of the federal government that:

• Insures residenVal mortgage loans.

• Provides subsidies under federal housing programs.

• Administers co-‐op operaVng agreements funded under federal programs.

• Conducts and publishes housing research.


APPENDIX A

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––EVIDENCE BASED RESEARCH REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

INTRODUCTION 1

..............................................................................................Context of This Appendix 1

DEMOGRAPHIC CONTEXT 3

.................................................................................................Population & Dwellings 3

..............................................................................................Population by Age Group 4

.....................................................................................................Projected Population 5

............................................................................................Household Characteristics 7

...............................................................................................................Mobility Status 8

....................................................................Summary: Demographic Characteristics 9

ECONOMIC CONTEXT 11

............................................................................................................Assessed Values 12

......................................................................................Labour Force Characteristics 13

............................................................................................Labour Force Projections 14

........................................................................................................Largest Employers 15

.......................................................................................Incomes by Household Type 16

........................................................................................Homeowner Grant: Seniors 18

......................................................................................................Core Housing Need 19

........................................................................................Condition & Age of Housing 21

............................................................................................Housing Structural Types 22

.............................................................................................................Housing Tenure 23

............................................................................Housing Starts & Intended Market 24

..........................................Land for Infill or Greenfield Residential development 24

......................................................................................Summary: Economic Context 24

OWNERSHIP & MARKET RENTAL HOUSING 25

......................................................................................................Ownership Housing 25

................................................................................................Market Rental Housing 27

..........................................................................................Summary: Market Housing 30

Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan | February 2015

NON-‐MARKET HOUSING 31

.........................................................................Existing Non-‐MArket rental Housing 31

........................................................Non-‐Profit Societies & Faith-‐Based Initiatives 32

.................................................................................Summary: Non-‐Market Housing 33

CITY OF PRINCE RUPERT HOUSING INITIATIVES 35

.......................................................Quality of Life Official Community Plan (2007) 35

February 2015 | Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Population & Occupied Dwellings, 1986-‐2012, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 2 Population by Age Group, 2006 and 2011, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 3 Projected Population, Prince Rupert Local Health Area

Figure 4 Moderate Growth Scenario, Prince Rupert LHAPermanent, New Permanent and Non-‐Permanent Residents

Figure 5 Households by Type, by Census Year, Prince Rupert CA

Figure 6 Mobility Status, Previous 5 Years, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 7 Selected Major Projects – Prince Rupert & Port Edward Areas

Figure 8 Assessed by Type, City of Prince Rupert, 2013

Figure 9 Labour Force Characteristics, Prince Rupert CA

Figure 10 City Prince Rupert, Largest Employers, 2014

Figure 11 % of Employed Labour Force by Industry, Prince Rupert CA

Figure 12 Median Income by Household Type, 2011, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 13 % of Homeowners 65+ Receiving Homeowner Grants

Figure 14 Core Need Statistics, Prince Rupert (CA)

Figure 15 Number of Core Need Households, Prince Rupert (CA)

Figure 16 Condition of Housing, Prince Rupert (C), 2014

Figure 17 Age of Housing, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 18 Types of Housing, Prince Rupert (C), 2014

Figure 19 Housing Tenure, Prince Rupert (CA)

Figure 20 Number of Housing Starts, 2001-‐2014 YTD, Prince Rupert (C)

Figure 21 Sales Indicators, Single-‐Detached, 2007-‐2014 YTD

Figure 22 Apartment Vacancy Rate, # of Bedrooms, Prince Rupert (CA)

Figure 23 Average Apartment Rents, # of Bedrooms, Prince Rupert (CA)

Figure 24 # of Disputes, Residential Tenancy Branch, Prince Rupert

Figure 25 BC Housing Expenditures by Types, 2013/14

Figure 26 Number of Stays by Gender, Prince Rupert Shelter

Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan | February 2015

February 2015 | Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan

INTRODUCTION

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

CONTEXT OF THIS APPENDIXIn June 2014, the Northern Development IniYaYve Trust engaged CitySpaces ConsulYng to collaborate with the municipaliYes of Prince Rupert, Port Edward, Terrace and KiYmat in developing Housing AcYon Plans. The work was coordinated by a Steering Commicee of municipal and provincial staff.

Appendix A was one of several deliverables for review by the Steering Commicee. It groups together staYsYcal indicators that, individually and collecYvely, helped inform the Housing AcYon Plan. These include various indicators relaYng to:

• Demography• Economy• Ownership Housing• Market Rental Housing• Non-‐Market Housing

Although some data is specific to the City of Prince Rupert, other data is reported on a Census AgglomeraYon (CA) basis, which includes Prince Rupert and Port Edward. SYll, other data is only available at the level of the Prince Rupert Local Health Area (LHA). The geography of these areas is shown on the three maps on the following page.

It is Ymely that the City of Prince Rupert undertook a housing inventory1 in June/July 2014. The informaYon collected relates to age, condiYons and types of housing. CitySpaces appreciates the materials that have been shared, and has incorporated the data in this Appendix.

Note: Where data limitaYons occur, these are noted in associaYon with the specific indicator.

Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan | February 2015 1

1 The City undertook this project because it was felt much had changed in Prince Rupert’s housing stock since the 2011 Census.

Reliable sta*s*cs help inform the development of Prince Rupert’s

Housing Ac*on Plan

2 February 2015 | Appendix A – Prince Rupert Housing AcYon Plan

Map 1: City of Prince Rupert

City of Prince Rupert

Map 2: Prince Rupert Census Agglomeration

Prince Rupert CA

Map 3: Prince Rupert Local Health Area

Prince Rupert

DEMOGRAPHIC CONTEXT

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The changing demographic characterisYcs of a community or region are very important in understanding current and future demand for housing. The more up-‐to-‐date the staYsYcs, the more reliable they are for understanding the current situaYon, and for projecYng future demand.

This demographic context of this Appendix provides published data from the Census of Canada, the NaYonal Household Survey, BC Stats and the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training.

POPULATION & DWELLINGSFigure 1 shows the relaYonship of populaYon to occupied private dwellings since 1986. Of parYcular note:

• As the trend lines indicate, the number of occupied private dwellings has been fairly stable (low = 5,280, high = 5,875)

• In 1996, when the populaYon peaked at 16,714, the number of persons per occupied dwelling was 2.8; in 2011, the comparable number had dropped to 2.14.

• Significance of this Indicator: In theory, the current number of dwellings could house a resident populaYon of 16,000. However, as Figure 1 shows, the convergence of populaYon and dwellings is an indicaYon that households are becoming smaller – fewer children, more couples without children, and more single people. This suggests that these households are likely to have different housing preferences today than they would have had in 1986.


Figure 1: Population & Occupied Dwellings, 1986-‐2012, Prince Rupert (C)

POPULATION BY AGE GROUPThe consultant has organized Prince Rupert’s populaYon by age group to relate to changing lifecycles and lifestyles. This, in turn, is helpful when anYcipaYng housing demand by type, size, and features. Figure 2 shows the pacern of change between 2006 and 2011 by selected age groups. Of parYcular note:

• The number of residents of prime working age (30-‐44 years) dropped between 2006 and 2011. There was also a decline in the populaYon under age 19.

• The number of residents over age 45 grew slightly between 2006 and 2011 – up by 3%.

• Significance of this Indicator: Knowing the age profile of a community is significant when planning for housing development. The drop in the populaYon aged 30-‐44 between 2006 and 2011 is likely due to greater employment and educaYonal opportuniYes in other BC and Alberta communiYes. Assuming some of the local, large scale projects go ahead by 2016, there is likely to be growth in the working age populaYon, some of whom are returning from other communiYes.


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 2012

Total PopulaYonOccupied Private Dwellings

Sources: Census of Canada, 1986-‐2011; BC Stats esJmate, 2012

Figure 2: Population by Age Group, 2006 & 2011, City of Prince Rupert

PROJECTED POPULATIONThe Government of BC undertook populaYon projecYons for the Prince Rupert, Terrace, and KiYmat Local Health Areas (LHAs) in Spring 2014. When this Appendix was prepared, these were considered “pilot projecYons”, which may be refined as a result of municipal and industry reviews. The projecYons were modeled using two scenarios:

• “Low Growth” – Advanced projects are expected to go-‐ahead; and

• “Moderate Growth” – Advanced and Intermediate projects are expected to proceed.

Note: No “High Growth” was projected as there are no projects currently categorized as “preliminary”.

The Prince Rupert LHA projecYons were further broken down by “permanent residents”, “new permanent residents”, and “non-‐permanent residents”.

Figure 3 charts the total projected populaYon for the low and moderate scenarios. Figure 4 shows a detailed annual breakdown by resident type for the moderate growth scenario.


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

0-‐19 20-‐29 30-‐44 45-‐64 65-‐79 80+

20062011

Source: StaJsJcs Canada, Census of Canada

Figure 3: Prince Rupert LHA Population Projections – 2 Scenarios

Figure 4: Moderate Growth Scenario, Prince Rupert LHAPermanent, New Permanent & Non-‐Permanent Residents


0

4,800

9,600

14,400

19,200

24,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Low GrowthModerate Growth

Source: BC Ministry of Jobs, Tourism, and Skills Training, Spring 2014.

Source: BC Ministry of Jobs, Tourism, and Skills Training, Spring 2014

0

4,200

8,400

12,600

16,800

21,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Permanent (Base) New Permanent Non-‐Permanent

• Significance of these Indicators: The Government’s low and moderate projecYons indicate an increase in populaYon, mainly as construcYon workers, most of whom will be housed in camps. This is followed by a gradual decline, then a stabilized populaYon by 2023. Using the moderate growth scenario, the number of new permanent residents will be small unYl 2020, capping out at 1,417 in 2015. Using 2.15 as a persons per household esYmate would result in about 660 new permanent households in the moderate growth scenario.

HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICSFigure 5 illustrates households by type for three census years. Of particular note:

• The number of couples with children declined 30% over the 2001-‐2011 period, while the number of single people increased by 31%.

• The total number of households dropped from 5,140 in 2001 to 4,415 in 2011.

• Significance of this Indicator: The drop in the number of couples with children between 2001 and 2006 may be indicaYve of families relocaYng to other communiYes where jobs were more plenYful. If the proposed LNG projects proceed, this pacern may be reversed.


Source: StaJsJcs Canada, Census of Canada

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

2,000

2001 2006 2011

Figure 5: Households by Type, by Census Year, Prince Rupert CA

Couple households with childrenCouple households without childrenLone parent householdOne-‐person household

MOBILITY STATUSFigure 6 shows the mobility status (previous 5 years) of the City’s residents between 2001 and 2011.

• In all three Census years, the figures show the vast majority of residents did not move, or moved within Prince Rupert. The number of intraprovincial and interprovincial migrants has remained between 1,700 and 2,000, while the number of migrants from other countries was low.

• Significance of this Indicator: If the proposed major projects proceed, there is likely to be a change in mobility status, as Prince Rupert will become acracYve to job seekers from elsewhere in BC, the rest of Canada, and, potenYally, internaYonal migrants. That being said, if these are temporary workers, typically, they complete the Census forms using their permanent addresses.


0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

2001 2006 2011

Figure 6: Mobiliity Status, Previous 5 Years, Prince Rupert (C)

Non-‐movers Moved within the CityIntraprovincial Migrants Interprovincial MigrantsExternal Migrants

Source: StaJsJcs Canada, Census of Canada & NaJonal Household Survey

SUMMARY: DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICSProjecYons show a gradual increase in the permanent populaYon from 2015 through 2025. The low growth rate scenario shows an increase of 703 new permanent residents over a ten-‐year period, whereas, the moderate growth scenario shows an increase of 1,417 new residents.

• Using a persons per household rate of 2.152, the number of new households in the growth scenarios equates to.

• 330 new permanent households in the low growth scenario; and

• 660 new permanent households in the moderate growth scenario.

As one household usually occupies one dwelling unit, the demand for addiYonal new housing units by 2025 in the Prince Rupert LHA will be in the range of 330 to 660. In both the low and moderate growth scenarios the surge in new permanent residency is not forecast unYl 2020 and beyond.


2 Household size has been declining throughout BC communiJes. In 1986, there was an average 2.9 persons per household, but by 2011 that number had dropped to 2.5. For Prince Rupert in 2011, the number had dropped to 2.14.


ECONOMIC CONTEXT

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Household formaYon, which is based on populaYon growth (net natural increase and net migraYon), generates the demand for addiYonal housing. Typically, in larger ciYes and towns, this demand is expressed and absorbed gradually. In smaller communiYes, a sudden change in economic condiYons creates a much quicker change in demand, resulYng in rapid swings in prices and rents.

Resource communiYes in northwestern BC have had more than 20 major industrial projects announced – port and terminal expansions, LNG faciliYes, oil refineries, mining, windfarms, and major business parks. Figure 7 provides a list of major projects for the Prince Rupert/Port Edward area. While considerable advance design and engineering has occurred for some projects, addiYonal approvals are required, and no Final Investment Decisions have been made by the proponents of the LNG projects.

Figure 7: Selected Major Projects – Prince Rupert & Port Edward Area


PRINCE RUPERT & PORT EDWARD

Ridley Rail & UTlity Corridor. The $90M project, now under construcYon, will include an access road, rail loop, uYliYes, onshore terminal infrastructure, and marine components. This project will be a catalyst for further development at Ridley Island Industrial Park. Proponent: Prince Rupert Port Authority.

BriTsh Gas (BG) LNG Terminal. The BG Group has been approved by the NaYonal Energy Board to export 21 million tons of LNG annually from a marine terminal on Ridley Island. Proponents: BC Group, Prince Rupert Port Authority, Spectra Energy.

Canpotex Terminals Limited. Canpotex, the world’s largest exporter of potash, is proposing to construct an $400M Potash Export Terminal at Ridley Island. Proponents: Canpotex & Prince Rupert Port Authority.

Pacific Northwest LNG. Petronas has proposed a $9-‐11 billion LNG facility to facilitate BC Natural Gas exports to global markets. The final design and capacity of the facility is being developed, but could include two to three LNG trains, and an export terminal and jecy to accommodate ocean-‐going LNG carriers.

Westview Terminal. Pinnacle Energy Group, the longest established pellet producer in Western Canada, is constructing a $42 million export facility at the Westview Terminal.

PRINCE RUPERT & PORT EDWARD

Fairview Terminal, Phase 2. This project represents an esYmated $650M capital expansion to increase capacity from 500,000 TEUs to more than 2,000,000.

Ridley Terminal Expansion. This project, now under construcYon, will cost about $200 million, and double total terminal capacity. Proponent: Ridley Terminals Inc.

Sources: Prince Rupert & Port Edward Economic Development Corporation, & proponent websites.

ASSESSED VALUESFigure 8 shows percentages of the total 2013 assessment in Prince Rupert by classificaYon. Among the four northwestern municipaliYes, only Terrace is more reliant on residenYal taxes (81%).

• In 2013, the Total Residen*al Property Tax and Charges for a Representa*ve House in Prince Rupert was $3,543. In comparison, it was $2,642 in Terrace, and in KiYmat, it was $1,951. (Source: Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development)..

• Significance of this Indicator: The City of Prince Rupert depends heavily on residenYal property taxes, and, for this reason, taxes and charges on a representaYve house are higher than other northern communiYes with greater industrial and uYliYes assessments. This higher tax adds to the overall cost of home ownership and rental housing. When major projects (under construcYon or proposed) begin to pay property taxes, the City’s reliance on residenYal property taxes may shit.


Source: Local Government StaJsJcs, Ministry of Community, Sport & Cultural Development from BC Assessment Authority data.

18.7%

8.4%

72.9%

Figure 8: Assessment by Type, City of Prince Rupert, 2013

ResidenYal Major Industry All Other

LABOUR FORCE CHARACTERISTICSFigure 9 provides an illustraYon of selected characterisYcs of the Prince Rupert Census Area labour force for the census years 2001, 2006 and 2011. Of parYcular note:

• Prince Rupert’s labour force contracted by 1,280 people between 2001 and 2011 (15.7%%) and the parYcipaYon rate declined from 73% to 66%.

• The unemployment rate remains above 10% of the labour force.

Figure 9: Labour Force Characteristics, Prince Rupert CA

Source: Census of Canada

• Significance of this Indicator: The staYsYcs are from 2011, and it is likely that the parYcipaYon and employment rates will have increased in the past three years due to an increase in local economic acYvity.


CharacterisTcs 2001 2006 2011

Aged 15 years & over 11,095 10,175 10,410

In the labour force• Employed• Unemployed

8,1406,8901,255

6,9506,055895

6,8605,8651,000

Not in the labour force 2,960 3,220 3,550

ParYcipaYon rate (%) 73 68 66

Employment rate (%) 62 60 56

Unemployment rate (%) 15 13 15

LABOUR FORCE PROJECTIONSAt the Yme this Appendix was prepared (mid-‐August 2014), no labour force projecYons were available for the Prince Rupert LHA.

There are, however, projections to 2020 for the North Coast & Nechako Development Region. While this vast region stretches north to the BC border, and includes Haida Gwaii, the three major urban areas are Prince Rupert, Kitimat, and Terrace. The source for the data shown below is the British Columbia Labour Market Outlook, 2010-‐2020. This document was prepared by the BC Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Innovation, in partnership with BC Stats, and the BC Ministry of Finance, and is based on the BC Labour Market Scenario Model.

• Demand Outlook in 2020 = 50,290. This refers to the expected number of workers employed, as well as the expected unemployed who are transitioning between jobs, responding to seasonal fluctuations, or whose skills do not match employers’ requirements.

• Supply Outlook in 2020 = 49,970. The expected labour force, including those who are employed and those who are acYvely looking for a job.

• Supply Less Demand in 2020 = –320.

• Total Openings Outlook = 19,890.

• Expansion = 5,960. New jobs from economic growth between 2010 and 2020

• Replacement = 13,930. Jobs generated by reYrement and deaths between 2010 and 2020.


LARGEST EMPLOYERSFigure 10 idenYfies all Prince Rupert employers with 100 or more employees. The city’s economy has long been directly Yed to exporYng resources through its deep water port.

• Seafood processing and exporYng conYnues to be a dominant sector of the economy – Prince Rupert’s largest employer is the Canadian Fishing Company with 650 employees.

• Projects that are underway, or are in the planning stages, will bring thousands of workers during the construcYon phase – thereater, the actual number of employees needed to operate the terminals, LNG faciliYes, and transportaYon networks will be much smaller.

Figure 10: City Prince Rupert, Largest Employers, 2014

Employer Product/Service # of Employees

Canadian Fishing Company Seafood Processor 650

School District #52 EducaYon 450

Northern Health Authority Health Care 420

City of Prince Rupert Local Government 232

JS McMillan Seafood Processor 120

International Longshoremen & Warehousemen’s Union Local 505

Container Port 110

Prince Rupert Grain Ltd. Grain Terminal 105

Source: Prince Rupert & Port Edward Economic Development CorporaJon


INCOMES BY HOUSEHOLD TYPEFigure 11 shows Prince Rupert’s 2011 median income by household type. The data was provided by StaYsYcs Canada, derived from the Canada Revenue Agency, with geospaYal informaYon provided by Canada Post. BC, as-‐a-‐whole, is provided for comparison purposes. Of parYcular note:

• Couple families in Prince Rupert median income = $81,140, approximately 7% higher than the BC median.

• Lone-‐parent families median income = $29,400, about 20% lower than the province overall.

• Single person households median income = $22,790, approximately 14% lower than the provincial median.

• Significance of this Indicator: Examining income data by household type reveals the substanYal differences among couples, lone-‐parent families, and single people. Although the city’s labour force parYcipaYon rate is 66%, of those, 50% of couple households earn considerably more than the provincial median income. This provides them with more “purchasing power” (rental and homeownership) than many other BC communiYes.


$0

$15,000

$30,000

$45,000

$60,000

$75,000

$90,000

Couple

Families

Lone-‐pa

rent Fam

ilies

Non-‐fam

ily hous

eholds

Figure 11: Median Income by Household Type, 2011, Prince Rupert (C)

Prince Rupert (C)BC

Sources: StaJsJcs Canada, Canada Revenue Agency & Canada Post

FUTURE HOUSEHOLD INCOMES

Future incomes are Yed closely to the proposed major industrial projects. If one or more of these projects proceeds, it will likely have an upward effect on future incomes. Drawing from the experiences of other northern Canadian resource communiYes:

• Managers and highly skilled workers (technical, scienYfic, engineering, biological) are likely to have incomes in the range of $125,000-‐$200,000+.

• Non-‐local construcYon workers, who will be primarily accommodated in workforce modular lodges, are likely to have incomes in the range of $70,000 to $90,000+, depending on the amount of overYme. The same income range would apply to construcYon workers who live in Prince Rupert and Port Edward.

• The income from indirect and induced jobs will range considerably, depending on the skill levels required. If there are labour shortages due to several projects beginning concurrently or overlapping, wages and salaries are likely to increase across-‐the-‐board.

For couple households in the medium term (to 2019), the median income in 2011 dollars could increase by 5% (to $85,200), and in the longer term (2020-‐2025) by an addiYonal 2% (to $86,900). Note: These figures assume no major inflaYon or deflaYon in the Canadian economy as a whole.


HOMEOWNER GRANT: SENIORSIn the City of Prince Rupert, the percentage of homeowners over 65 years of age receiving BC’s Homeowner Grant increased steadily from 2006 to 2012. Oten thought of as a city where, once reYred, older adults moved to warmer, sunnier climates or closer to family, the recent pacern suggests otherwise.

• Significance of this Indicator: This indicator is a good proxy of the change in the populaYon of older adults, and is current to 2012.


15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Figure 12: % of Homeowners 65+ receiving Homeowner Grants, City of Prince Rupert

Prince RupertBC

Source: BC Ministry of Community, Sport, & Cultural Development, Local Government Department

CORE HOUSING NEEDAn examination of “core housing need” is a useful measure of a community’s ability of afford suitable and adequate market rental and ownership housing. The measure was defined by CMHC and is updated following each Census of Canada.

As of early October 2014, CMHC updated its “core housing need” data base. Figure 13 is a custom tabulaYon of core need in Prince Rupert (CA) by the following variables.

• Household Type;• Age of Household Maintainer; and• Tenure.

Figure 13: Core Need Statistics, Prince Rupert CA

Source: CMHC, HiCO database

Source: CMHC, HiCO database


CORE HOUSING NEED

A household living in housing that falls below at least one of the adequacy, affordability, or suitability standards, and would have to spend 30% or more of its total before-‐tax income to pay the median rent of alternative local housing, which meets all three standards – adequate, affordable, and suitable.

CharacterisTcs All Households

2011 Households in Core Need

% of All Households in Core Need

Couple familiesLone parent familiesSingle peopleTotal households

2,625700

1,4554,780

170205325700

6.529.322.314.6

OwnersRenters

3,0201,920

195545

6.528.4

15-‐29 years30-‐44 years45-‐64 years> 65 years

4501,2752,1951,020

170165315140

37.812.914.513.7

Couple families Lone parent families Single people

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

1991 1996 2001 2006 2011

Figure 14: Number of Core Need Households, By Type, 1991-‐2011Prince Rupert CA

SHELTER TO INCOME RATIO

Another source of informaYon on shelter costs in the Prince Rupert is the 2011 NaYonal Housing Survey. These costs were then analyzed in relaYon to incomes. Of significant note:

• 75.8% of households spend less than 30% of their income on housing; 24.3% spend 30% or more;

• 16.1% of homeowners spend 30% or more of their income on housing compared to 36.6% of tenants;

• 15.5% of tenant households were living in subsidized housing; and

• 5.8% of households were not suitably housed.

• Significance of Core Need & Shelter to Income RaTo Indicators: From an affordability perspecYve, homeowners were far less likely to be in housing need than renters in 2011. Overall, however, in comparison with Terrace and KiYmat, Prince Rupert had the lowest percentage of tenants with affordability challenges. As staYsYcs are from 2011, and much has changed in terms of economic prospects as discussed elsewhere in this Appendix, the percentage of tenants in housing need is likely to be higher.

• Monitoring these indicators over time shows trends in affordability for homeowners and renters. The next comprehensive data will be collected in 2016 and reported in 2017.


CONDITION & AGE OF HOUSINGDrawing from the 2011 NaYonal Household Survey, 88.7% of occupied private dwellings only required maintenance or minor repairs. The City of Prince Rupert’s 2014 Housing Inventory examined the quality of dwellings using a more detailed categorizaYon, as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15: Condition of Housing, Prince Rupert (C), 2014

Because the 2014 Prince Rupert Housing Inventor more recent than the 2011 NaYonal Housing Survey, it is used to illustrate the age of housing. From Figure 16, of parYcular note:

• 37% of homes were built before 1940, and almost 60% of dwellings were built in the 1950 to 1990 period. Together these groups make up three-‐quarters of the city’s housing. As this stock ages, maintenance and repair issues are likely to become more prevalent.

• Significance of this Indicator: Many older homes and apartment buildings are energy inefficient, which, in turn, means occupants are likely paying a substanYal amount for heaYng.

Figure 16: Age of Housing, Prince Rupert (C)


Quality Number Percentage

Excellent/Newly Built 33 0.7

Well maintained 2,319 50.6

Poor maintenance 1,863 40.6

Poor condiYon 343 7.5

“Tear down” 26 0.6

Source: City of Prince Rupert Housing Inventory Factsheet, July 2014Source: City of Prince Rupert Housing Inventory Factsheet, July 2014Source: City of Prince Rupert Housing Inventory Factsheet, July 2014

1907 -‐ 19401940 -‐ 19501950 -‐ 19701970 -‐ 19901990 -‐ 20102010 -‐

1%3%

29%30%

14%

23%

Source: City of Prince Rupert Housing Inventory Factsheet – July 2014

HOUSING STRUCTURAL TYPESThe 2014 Prince Rupert Housing Inventory also surveyed housing by type. An expanded categorizaYon was used from that reported in the Census, including idenYfying triplexes, fourplexes and secondary suites. Notably,

• 73% of housing was idenYfied as single detached homes, slightly higher than the 2011 NaYonal Household Survey at 71%.

• A Secondary Suite category makes up 5% of all dwelling units. This was based on fieldwork, rather than a registraYon system.

Figure 17: Types of Housing, Prince Rupert (C), 2014


Single Detached Sem-‐Detached/Duplex Row Triplex Fourplex MoveableApt <5 storeys Apt >5 storeys Secondary Suite

Source: City of Prince Rupert

HOUSING TENUREThe number of owned dwellings has remained about 60%, with rented dwellings about 40% – considerably higher than either Terrace or KiYmat. Figure 18 provides a visual snapshot for the period 1996 to 2011

• Significance of this Indicator. The relaYonship between rented and owned dwellings remained steady over the 1996-‐2011 period. This suggests there is a clear preference for homeownership, and an ability to afford homeownership.

Figure 18: Housing Tenure, Prince Rupert (CA)


Source: Census of Canada & NaJonal Household Survey

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1996 2001 2006 2011

Owned Rented

HOUSING STARTS & INTENDED MARKETFigure 19 illustrates the pacern of housing construcYon in Prince Rupert from 2001 through 2014. Of parYcular note:

• There was very licle residenYal building acYvity, with no rowhouse or apartment starts over 13 years, and only 38 detached homes.

• Significance of this Indicator: In comparison with Terrace, where residenYal construcYon has accelerated since 2009, to date, there has been licle evidence of this in Prince Rupert.

Figure 19: # of Housing Starts, 2001-‐2014 YTD, Prince Rupert (C)

LAND FOR INFILL OR GREENFIELD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTIn 2007, when Prince Rupert updated its Official Community Plan, City staff idenYfied 152 hectares available for greenfield development in three areas – Oilfield, Seal Cove and Fairfield. (Note: Refer to the City of Prince Rupert IniYaYves later in this Appendix).

SUMMARY: ECONOMIC CONTEXTThere have been a number of significant transportation and terminal investments in Prince Rupert during the last few years. Additional multi-‐billion dollar investments are in the final planning stages, while the proponents await a Final Investment Decision (e.g., PNW LNG and BG LNG). From a housing perspective, compared with Terrace and Kitimat, these existing and proposed investments have not yet translated into demand for new residential development.


2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013

2014 YTD

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Single Semi-‐detached Row Apartment

Source: CMHC

OWNERSHIP & MARKET RENTAL HOUSING

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

OWNERSHIP HOUSINGAs described earlier, single-‐detached houses are the predominant form of housing in Prince Rupert and, as of 2011, 60% of private occupied dwellings were owned.

The housing market for single detached homes in Prince Rupert has been quite stable since 2009. Specifically:

• While the number of days on the market declined from 141 in 2011 to about 100 days in 2014, this drop has not resulted in an appreciable increase in average sale prices; and

• In comparison with Terrace, Prince Rupert’s housing market has remained stable. Terrace has experienced an increase in average sales prices and a reducYon on days on the market.

Figure 20: Sales Indicators, Single-‐Detached, 2007-‐2014, Prince Rupert & Area


$0

$40,000

$80,000

$120,000

$160,000

$200,000

$240,000

$280,000

$320,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20140

15

30

45

60

75

90

105

120

135

150

Average Sale Price Days on Market

Source: Northern Real Estate Board

• For all other housing types, the pacern was more erraYc in the period 2007 through 2014 YTD, likely due to the smaller number of lisYngs available. Using 2013 figures, the average median sale price for the following housing types was:

• House on more than one acre – $65,000 (10 lisYngs)

• Duplex – $156,666 (12 lisYngs)

• Manufactured home on land – $58,400 (8 lisYngs)

• Significance of this Indicator – Sales of detached homes is a good gauge of stability/instability in the residenYal resale sector. From 2009 through 2014, the resale market in Prince Rupert has been stable, in contrast to Terrace and KiYmat, where prices have gone up and days on the market have come down.

AFFORDABILITY FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP

The ability to buy a home in any community is derived from the relaYonship of income to market selling prices, coupled with mortgage rates. Using convenYonal lending pracYces:

• In 2011, the average selling price of a single-‐detached home in Prince Rupert was $280,000;

• Couple households have the most purchasing power in Prince Rupert. The median income of couple families (2011) was $81,140, which, with a 10% downpayment, would quality for a house purchase of about $348,000;

• Lone parent households have much less purchasing power. With a 10% downpayment, a lone parent household making the median income would qualify for a house priced at $50,500; and

• Single person households have the least buying power. Very few single person households would be able to purchase a home in Prince Rupert.

• Significance of this Indicator: This indicator shows the discrepancy in purchasing power by three household types. While the amounts are different in Terrace and KiYmat, the pacern is the same.


MARKET RENTAL HOUSINGCMHC collects and publishes semi-‐annual data for the Prince Rupert Census Area related to private market rentals. While these staYsYcs are someYmes criYcized as lagging behind the market, CMHC’s methodology and reporYng have been consistent over many years

AVERAGE RENTAL VACANCIES & RATES

Figures 21 and 22 illustrate changes in the apartment vacancy rate and average rents from 2007 to 2013. Of parYcular note:

• It is difficult to idenYfy a vacancy rate pacern by bedroom type, as there were considerable swings during this period. The Fall 2014 Rental Market Report will not be released unYl December 2014, and, for comparison purposes, the Spring Rental Market Reports are less complete, since fewer units are surveyed.

• During the 2007-‐2013 period, the vacancy rate suggests a “renters market”, with vacancy rates generally hovering between 5% and 15%.

• Rental rates have been stable for bachelor units and three-‐bedroom apartments, while rents for two-‐bedroom units have increased. Typically, rents lag behind vacancies due to exisYng rental leases. As units turnover, it is expected that rental rates will increase.

Figure 21: Apartment Vacancy Rate, # of Bedrooms, Prince Rupert (CA)


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Bachelor One-‐Bedroom Two-‐Bedroom

Source: CMHC Market Rental Reports (Fall)

Figure 22: Average Apartment Rents, # of Bedrooms, Prince Rupert (CA)

RESIDENTIAL TENANCY BRANCH

Among other things, the BC ResidenYal Tenancy Branch (RTB) deals with disputes between landlords and tenants. Figure 23 shows the number of disputes handled by the RTB in Prince Rupert between April 1, 2008 and July 31, 2014. Of parYcular note:

• The number of disputes remained within the range of 62 to 83 from 2008 to 2014; and

• The year-‐to-‐date figures, if annualized per number of disputes monthly over five months (April -‐ July), may exceed previous highs.

Figure 23: Number of Disputes, RTB, Prince Rupert (C)


$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Bachelor 1-‐Bedroom 2-‐Bedroom 3-‐Bedroom

Source: CMHC Rental Market Reports (Fall)

0

18

36

54

72

90

2008-‐2009

2009-‐2010

2010-‐2011

2011-‐2012

2012-‐2013

2013-‐2014

Year-‐to

-‐Date

Source: BC ResidenJal Tenancy Branch

PRIVATE MARKET ASSISTED LIVING

CMHC undertakes an annual survey of all private market assisted living and heavy care units, although it does not publish data specifically for the northwest. Through a request to CMHC’s Vancouver office, it was confirmed that there are no private market units in Prince Rupert as of mid-‐2014, and only 216 units in the enYre North Coast Development Region.

AFFORDABILITY FOR MARKET RENTAL HOUSING

Rental affordability is the relaYonship between income and rental rates. The following points are derived from 2011 income data for households making the median income in the City of Prince Rupert.

• The average 2-‐bedroom rental rate in Prince Rupert in 2013 was $745, and $621 for a 1-‐bedroom.

• At 30% of their incomes, couple households were able to afford $2,029 per month in rent without compromising the ability to purchase other necessiYes. This provided them with ample choice in the rental market.

• Lone-‐parent households were able to afford a rental rate of $735. About 60% of lone-‐parent households would be unable to afford the average rental rate for a two-‐bedroom apartment.

• Single person households were able to afford a rental rate of $570. The majority of single person households would not be able to afford a one-‐bedroom apartment at the average rental rate.

• Significance of this Indicator: The relaYonship of income to shelter costs is an ideal measure of the ability of renters to afford rental housing in their communiYes. At the Yme of this research, Prince Rupert was more affordable than either Terrace or KiYmat, but this affordability pacern could change if LNG projects get the go-‐ahead in Prince Rupert and Port Edward, and those in KiYmat are delayed.


TEMPORARY WORKER ACCOMMODATION

At the Yme of wriYng, there was a commitment that all construcYon workers would be housed in temporary (camp) lodgings. Leading contenders for an early final investment decision – PNW Northwest and the BG Group – have made tentaYve arrangements with third-‐party lodging providers close to their construcYon sites.

• If both major proponents go-‐ahead, full-‐Yme senior employees of PNW and the BG Group, and their principal contractors will live in either Prince Rupert or Port Edward. Each proponent anYcipates that 100 permanent senior staff will be needed once operaYons begin, some of whom may already live locally. It is the expectaYon of senior employees relocaYng to the area that they will be able to buy a new/recently-‐built, well-‐equipped home that needs few upgrades. At the Yme of wriYng, there were few homes on the market that would meet this expectaYon. Knowing this, it appears that there could be more demand than supply, resulYng either in escalaYng prices for newer detached homes, or addiYonal subdivisions being developed.

SUMMARY: MARKET HOUSING Because of Prince Rupert’s role within northwestern BC as a major transportaYon centre (port, rail)) with ocean-‐going exporYng capabiliYes, combined with its number of health and public administraYon employees, incomes for many couple households have supported the purchase of homes without spending more than 30% of their incomes. Lone-‐parent families and single person households have fewer choices in finding suitable, adequate and affordable housing. Both of the lacer groups have median incomes lower than the provincial median, and most would not be able to buy a house.

While there has been some acYvity in the ownership and rental markets in recent years, the average price of a detached home has remained relaYvely constant. Rental rates have also remained stable for bachelor and three-‐bedroom units, while there have been rent increases in one-‐ and two-‐bedroom units.

In comparison with Terrace and KiYmat, Prince Rupert has yet to experience a significant increase in market housing demand. If one or more of the planned major LNG projects are green-‐lighted by their investors, it is possible that the same type of market destabilizaYon occurring in Terrace, and parYcularly in KiYmat, may occur in Prince Rupert.


NON-MARKET HOUSING

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

EXISTING NON-‐MARKET RENTAL HOUSINGAs of March 2014, BC Housing reported that 439 households lived in subsidized housing, received a rent supplement, or were otherwise financially assisted in Prince Rupert3. This number includes:

• Emergency Shelter – Homeless Housed – 10

• Social Housing Families – 265

• Independent Social Housing Seniors – 47

• Rental Assistance Program for families – 8

• Shelter Assistance for Elderly Renters (SAFER) – 24

• Homeless Rent Supplements – 11

• Supported and Assisted Housing, Frail Seniors – 51

Figure 24 shows BC Housing expenditures by type of assistance in its fiscal year 2013/14, ending in March 2014. Expenditures during this period totaled $5,094,000.

• Approximately 33% of total expenditures were contributed by the BC Government, 39% from the Government of Canada, and 28% from other sources, including rents from households in social housing.


3 There may be other shelters and subsidized housing in the community where BC Housing does not provide funding and, therefore, does not report.

Figure 24: BC Housing Expenditures by Type, 2013/14, Prince Rupert

NON-‐PROFIT SOCIETIES & FAITH-‐BASED INITIATIVES• M’Akola Housing is a non-‐profit housing provider to Aboriginal households

in communiYes across BC. The Society manages 340 housing units in Prince Rupert, and is working with First NaYons and industry leaders to invesYgate partnerships for addiYonal affordable housing.

• The SalvaYon Army offers an eight bed shelter and meals from a downtown hotel (Raffles Inn). Figure 26 shows the number of stays by gender. In the most recent fiscal year (2013/14), all beds were occupied 27% of nights for the year with total occupancy at 75%.

• Prince Rupert’s chapter of the Knights of Columbus offers services to low-‐income seniors, and is interested in providing housing for seniors, possibly through the renovaYon of exisYng housing stock near the hospital.

• The North Coast TransiYon Society (NCTS) is a non-‐profit provider that offers services, programs, and housing for women and children fleeing domesYc violence. Along with a 30-‐day shelter, the NCTS operates Eagles Landing, a co-‐located 23-‐unit transiYon house.


2%

68%

20%

10%

Emergency Shelter and Housing for the HomelessTransiYonal SupporYve and Assisted LivingIndependent Social HousingRent Assistance in the Private Market

Source: BC Housing, Research and Corporate Planning

Figure 26: # of Bednights by Gender, Salvation Army Shelter, City of Prince Rupert

WAITLIST INFORMATION

As of March 2014, BC Housing indicated that 55 households (mostly families) in Prince Rupert were waitlisted on the Housing Registry.

HOUSING RESOURCE WORKERS (OUTREACH WORKERS)

Currently, BC Housing’s Homelessness Outreach Program Fund supports one full-‐Yme outreach worker whose job is, among other things, to assist women-‐led families challenged to secure suitable, affordable housing following their stays at Eagles Landing. The NCTS administers this program.

SUMMARY: NON-‐MARKET HOUSINGThere is a range of non-‐market housing in Prince Rupert, providing permanent housing for families and seniors, and temporary housing for people who are homeless, or in a transiYonal situaYon. There are also rent supplements for families, seniors, and those at-‐risk of homelessness.


2008-‐09

2009-‐10

2010-‐11

2011-‐12

2012-‐13

2013-‐14

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

Adult Male Adult Female Other


CITY OF PRINCE RUPERTHOUSING INITIATIVES

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The following material was obtained through a review of the City’s main planning documents. Knowing what the City has already undertaken helps provide a municipal framework for the Housing AcYon Plan.

QUALITY OF LIFE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN (2007) The Prince Rupert Quality of Life Official Community Plan seeks to idenYfy community elements essenYal to quality of life, and the associated desired outcomes, along with policy direcYons. The Plan also presents a number of implementaYon strategies, idenYfying appropriate issues, tools, and acYons for the community to undertake.

ISSUES NEEDING TO BE ADDRESSED (SELECTED)

At the outset, the Plan identifies a number of issues, or attributes, with the largest gap between ratings on importance and performance. Seen as detractors from quality of life and requiring policy attention, key issue areas include:• Poverty; and • Assisted-‐living housing and affordable housing for those with low incomes.

LIVING IN PRINCE RUPERT (SELECTED)

RelaYng to affordable housing, the Plan sets out the following vision statements and key quality of life indicators:

• Providing a Variety of Housing: People now have more housing opYons appropriate to various ages and stages of their lives. As a result, young adults, families, and seniors are able to choose to stay in Prince Rupert, and no longer have to move away to find suitable housing.

• Addressing Housing Costs: Quality and subsidized housing to meet the needs of those with low and modest incomes has also been provided for primarily through the market, and a collaboraYve effort between the City and the Province.


RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES (SELECTED)

ResidenTal Development Policy #2: Most housing will be market-‐based. The City will, however, in its regulatory and planning environment, be acYve in promoYng special needs housing, assisted living accommodaYon, and similar housing programs (e.g., transiYon homes, shelter for the homeless, etc.). MulY-‐family housing appropriate for older adults is also highly underserved. In providing support for such housing iniYaYves, consideraYon will be given to:

• LocaYons that are in proximity to support services, such as medical care, transit, and shopping.

• Avoiding concentraYon of social or support housing in one specific area of the community.

• Encouraging redevelopment of lands within the downtown for seniors housing, and other mulY-‐family housing that aids in revitalizaYon of the city centre, and provides residents with direct access to a wide variety of ameniYes and services.

ResidenTal Development Policy #4: In the longer term, the City has three potenYal areas that could accommodate future new urban residenYal development – refer to Figure 24. They are Fairview, Oldfield Slopes, and some undeveloped porYons of Seal Cove. To advance planning for these areas, it is recommended that the City undertake a neighbourhood planning process, with priority given to the lands surrounding the proposed Oldfield Slopes/Royop Shopping Centre site, given its access, servicing, and transit-‐supporYng potenYal, and to Seal Cove.

Figure 27: Potential Development Areas

Area Approximate Area

PotenTal Housing Units

PotenTal PopulaTon

Oldfield Slopes 60 ha 1,700 3,000

Seal Cove Area 62 ha 1,440 2,600

Fairview 30 ha 500 1,000

Source: SCHEDULE A of the Quality of Life, Official Community Plan Bylaw 3236, 2007


All three areas have historically established subdivision pacerns, and their validity with contemporary standards and requirements should be reviewed. PotenYal development opportuniYes for these areas vary, based largely on accessibility, and slope stability, as well as sun exposure. Proposed neighbourhood plans for these areas are to include consideraYon of:

• CreaYon of a suitable mix of housing densiYes and affordability; in parYcular, mulY-‐family housing that takes advantage of proposed commercial development along Highway 16, and offers the ability to support transit service.

ResidenTal Development Policy #7: As a means of opYmizing residenYal use on current land parcels, taking advantage of established infrastructure, and creaYng opportuniYes for affordable housing choices, the City will favourably consider the inclusion of smaller secondary dwellings or ‘granny suites’ within its zoning regulaYons.

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES (SELECTED)

Social Planning & Improvements:

• Process Indicators & AcTons: City Council acYvely advocates for key medical and health services (including those to address early childhood development delays and special needs), seniors housing, and support services. These issues are addressed by task force(s) facilitated by the City.

• Community Based Indicators & AcTons: The public sees poverty as less of a community issue as measured by the reducYon in the gap between importance and performance from the 2007 baseline of 5.87. There is improvement in support services for people with mental health problems (baseline 5.19), as well as for those with drug and alcohol abuse problems (baseline 4.98).

Future Housing OpTons & Neighbourhood Development:

• Process Indicators & AcTons: The City will facilitate a strategy to encourage social housing, affordable housing, and seniors housing.

• Community Based Indicators & AcTons: There is improvement in the housing situaYon for those with low incomes (baseline 4.04), for seniors, and for those with a disability (baseline 5.42).


ZONING BYLAW (2009) (SELECTED)

Along with the usual detached and acached housing forms commonly found in the region, the City’s Zoning Bylaw does permit the accommodaYon of Boarders or Lodgers, so long as they do not exceed the maximum of two.

It is also noted that while the City does not idenYfy small lot housing as a permiced use, its minimum lot size regulaYons are reflecYve of its historic seclement and subdivision pacern, accommodaYng lot sizes as small as 230 m2 in its base R1 zone.

• No secondary suites provisions are currently permiced.


APPENDIX B

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION 1

....................................................................................Consultation Summary 1...............................................................................................Challenges & Issues 1

...............................................................................Suggestions & Opportunities 3

CONSULTATION BY SECTOR 5

................................................................................Industry Representatives 5.............Prince Rupert & Port Edward Economic Development Corporation 5

................................................................................Prince Rupert Port Authority 6..............................................................................Pacific Northwest (PNW) LNG 7

.........................................................................................................BG LNG Group 8..............................................................................Northern Real Estate Leaders 8

...............................................Community Service Providers & Institutions 9.....................................................................................................M’Akola Housing 9

........................................................................................................Salvation Army 9............................................................................Street Spirit Friendship House 10..........................................................................North Coast Transition Society 10

............................................................................................Knights of Columbus 12...................................................................................................Northern Health 13

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 15

Appendix B – Prince Rupert Housing Ac[on Plan | February 2015

2 February 2015 | Appendix B – Prince Rupert Housing Ac[on Plan

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

From late June to mid-‐August 2014, CitySpaces personnel spoke with a number of representa[ves from health service providers, economic development organiza[ons, industry proponents, the real estate industry, and social service providers in Prince Rupert1.

One reason for these in-‐person mee[ngs, telephone discussions, and email exchanges was to learn more about the current, near-‐future, and longer-‐term housing situa[on in Prince Rupert. An equally important reason was to invite opinions and sugges[ons that best address the issues raised. [Ed. note: While the comments are from people who were interviewed, minor editorial changes have been made for clarity and context.)

Many individuals and groups were very helpful in sharing their experiences and perspec[ves with the consul[ng team. Please refer to the end of this Appendix for a list of those consulted.

CONSULTATION SUMMARYDrawing on the comments and sugges[ons of the interviewees, CitySpaces prepared this summary. Stakeholder comments have been grouped by “challenges and issues”, and “sugges[ons and opportuni[es”.

CHALLENGES & ISSUES

Although Prince Rupert has not experienced the same level of pressure on its real estate market as Ki[mat and Terrace, it has experienced increasing rents and no[ceable improvements to the housing stock. These changes reflect the major investment poten[al in the community and surrounding area.

Appendix B – Prince Rupert Housing Ac[on Plan | February 2015 1

1 At the 'me this report was prepared, the consul'ng group had not interviewed municipal staff or elected officials. Prince Rupert has undertaken its own field research, and held a stakeholder session on September 10, 2014.

Townhomes in Prince Rupert.

• Labour Shortages: Community stakeholders have indicated that there will be a labour shortage in Prince Rupert should any investment decisions be approved. As a result, they an[cipate newcomers to the community for both the peak construc[on period, and for long term opera[ons.

• PNW LNG intends to house construc[on workers in camps outside of the community.

• The BG Group LNG intends to provide worker camps (on Ridley Island); however, they are considering Living Out Allowances as part of their housing strategy.

• Long term workers in the opera[ons phase are expected to live in the community. Both industry and social service stakeholders expect the greatest housing challenges to occur in the short term (construc[on phase), and an[cipate increasing rents and renovic[ons. Low income households were iden[fied as being the most vulnerable.

• CondiEon of Market Rental Housing: Regardless of any Final Investment Decision, community stakeholders are concerned about the quality and condi[on of rental housing in Prince Rupert. While low income households are living in poor condi[ons in need of major repair, major renova[ons have been occurring in response to poten[al major investments. These “improvements” are causing significant volumes of household waste material to be discarded into the landfill, which is now over capacity, as well as tenant evic[ons.

• Community stakeholders iden[fied the need to upgrade rental housing to good condi[on, while maintaining affordability of the units. The condi[on of rental housing was iden[fied as par[cularly inadequate for seniors and families.

• Development Constraints: New housing development has been limited in Prince Rupert due to land constraints, and the cost of blas[ng rock. The area is also constrained geographically, with limited room to grow outwards. While recognizing the higher costs of building housing in Prince Rupert, compared to Terrace and Ki[mat, community stakeholders iden[fied opportuni[es to encourage infill development of vacant parcels, or redevelopment of exis[ng sites with old and unoccupied buildings.

• Women & Children: The North Coast Transi[on Society has experienced increasing challenges finding affordable and suitable housing for families leaving their 2-‐year second stage transi[on house. Affordable rental housing for women and children, and for couple families with children, was iden[fied as a need by this group, and further supported by observa[ons from other stakeholders.

• Men: The Salva[on Army has experienced a 25% increase in use of its men’s shelter. Although the organiza[on has prepared a feasibility study to build a men’s transi[on house, there are insufficient funds to con[nue the project.


• Student Housing: Prince Rupert amracts youth and young adults hoping to finish their high school diplomas, amend Northwest Community College, or par[cipate in temporary prac[cum terms with Northern Health. Increasing rental prices, however, have limited the op[ons for suitable student housing in Prince Rupert. Community stakeholders have experienced difficulty finding affordable housing for students, and are increasingly observing students declining learning and prac[cum educa[on opportuni[es due to housing costs.

SUGGESTIONS & OPPORTUNITIES• Prepare a Standards of Maintenance Bylaw to improve the inspec[on

process, and enforce adequate living standards for rental housing.

• Employers should stop using the Living Out Allowance; ensure the large majority of construc[on workers are accommodated in temporary lodgings (camps).

• Research innova[ve and cost-‐saving solu[ons for developing housing on land constrained areas.

• Modify the Provincial Rental Assistance Program to help families, women and children, and seniors to afford housing in the private rental market (e.g., increase rent supplements, change eligibility for a temporary period).

• Form partnerships and invest in developing a men’s transi[on house.



CONSULTATION BY SECTOR

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES

PRINCE RUPERT & PORT EDWARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

The Prince Rupert and Port Edward Economic Development Corpora[on has been monitoring interest in resource development in both communi[es and surrounding region. It is an[cipated that the Final Investment Decision for the Pacific Northwest (PNW) LNG will be made at the end of 2014. Other projects are farther from investment decisions, including Grassy Point LNG, potash export facili[es on Ridley Island, and a coal facility. The Corpora[on is an[cipa[ng that should investments be approved, they will have a fair degree of implica[ons on housing:

• The potash terminal project on Ridley Island has brought temporary workers to Prince Rupert, who are staying at low-‐end motels. The current economy does not show demand pressures on the hotel supply, so the influx of workers has not affected the hotel supply at this [me. There are no hotels slated for development, and exis[ng hotels are planning for renova[ons (Pacific Inn, Inn of the Harbour, and Prince Rupert Hotel).

• The costs of rental and housing prices have increased as a result of speculator interest. Increasingly, homes are sold above the listed price within a few days of being on the market.

• There has been a significant increase in home sales and renova[ons in Prince Rupert. The landfill is over capacity as a result of discarded home materials and furnishings. Further, renovic[ons have been observed; the subject has been raised at several industry mee[ngs.

• PTI (Civeo) has planned worker camps in Port Edward. Atco is considering building temporary worker housing on airport land (Digby Island). There are no other camps planned for the two communi[es, although Black Diamond has expressed informal interest.


• The local trades and construc[on industry is currently experiencing a shortage of workers. This is partly amributed to workers leaving Prince Rupert when industries closed. Although efforts are being made to provide trades programs at the high school level and at Northwest Community College, a shortage is s[ll an[cipated.

• Youth and students are ren[ng low-‐cost housing, but could be driven away from Prince Rupert due to escala[ng rental prices.

• Commercial and retail businesses have shown interest in opening in Prince Rupert. However, land availability is limited, and they are concerned that minimum wage employees will not be able to find affordable rental housing.

• It is more profitable to renovate existing housing stock than build new housing, primarily because of the development costs associated with land constraints.

PRINCE RUPERT PORT AUTHORITY• Prince Rupert has not experienced the same impact on housing as Terrace

and Ki[mat.

• Housing demand in Prince Rupert began to rise in December 2013/January 2014, with single-‐detached homes increasing in price by nearly a third.

• The workforce is expected to double should an[cipated projects proceed, such as the container terminal expansion. Workers could be locally sourced, but there would also likely be a need to amract workers from outside Prince Rupert. The city is slowly amrac[ng skilled workers, such as welding and plumbing contractors, truck drivers, and terminal workers. At this [me, skilled workers are earning large salaries, and incen[ve packages are offered to amract and retain workers in Prince Rupert.

• There are no an[cipated concerns about PNW LNG’s impact on housing in the short term. Should the LNG project proceed, it will be challenging to find skilled workers, such as plumbers. Bringing skilled workers into Prince Rupert will place pressure on the rental market and, as a result, there will be a need for developing new rental housing, and renova[ng exis[ng rental stock in the long term.

• Amrac[ng workers may lead to renovic[ons, and could impact the most vulnerable residents in Prince Rupert.


PACIFIC NORTHWEST (PNW) LNG

PNW LNG is a proposed LNG facility on Lelu Island. The site is within the District of Port Edward, and the land is administered by the Prince Rupert Port Authority. The proposed facility will be the first in BC to receive a final investment decision, likely in December 2014. It is an[cipated that the facility will create up to 4,500 jobs at peak construc[on, and an es[mated 330 long-‐term posi[ons, as well as hundreds of spinoff industries and employment opportuni[es. Should the project be approved, PNW LNG an[cipates opera[ons to commence in 2019.

• PNW an[cipates the opera[ons jobs to be 1/3 shiq workers, 1/3 technical workers, and 1/3 managerial/administra[on.

• It is expected that shiq workers will be hired locally, assuming local workers have already secured long-‐term housing. It is an[cipated that approximately a third of the opera[ons workforce is already living and employed in Prince Rupert, and may be drawn to work for PNW when opera[ons start. A survey was conducted to test this assump[on, and only a por[on of respondents said they would change jobs to work for PNW.

• Contractor work will likely draw its labour from outside the local area, and may need worker camps to accommodate them. PNW sees land capacity in Prince Rupert to accommodate these work camps; however, they do not want to occupy City land that has poten[al to be developed for other projects, such as residen[al and commercial uses.

• PNW has no inten[on of implemen[ng “Fly-‐in, Fly-‐Out” (FIFO). However, “Boat-‐in, Boat-‐out” (BIBO) may be considered.

• PNW is exploring the op[on of repurposing its temporary modular buildings for housing.

• Senior management members are expected to move to Prince Rupert, and establish a permanent residency in the community. There may be instances where senior management fly-‐in and fly-‐out (most likely senior executives).

• PNW is aware of the challenges that Ki[mat has experienced with rising rents, and recognizes that resource development projects can exacerbate housing issues. The company is concerned about poten[al displacement of residents, and those who would be most impacted by increasing rent prices. PNW welcomes partnership opportuni[es with the Government of BC and municipali[es to alleviate housing challenges.


BG LNG GROUP

BG Group is a natural gas company proposing to develop the Prince Rupert LNG facility on Ridley Island. It is an[cipated that there will be 3,700 workers during peak construc[on, with between 400 to 600 long-‐term direct and indirect jobs for this development. Should the Final Investment Decision be approved, peak construc[on is expected in two years (2016), with opera[ons in five years (2019).

• The BG Group intends to amract and recruit local workers as much as possible, but recognizes it will fall short on the labour supply, likely needing to recruit workers from outside of Prince Rupert. BG Group supports gerng the local workforce “employment ready”, and is working with local (Northwest Community College) and provincial (UVic) post-‐secondary ins[tu[ons to provide training programs.

• The BG Group an[cipates the 3,700 workers at peak construc[on will be housed in worker camps, most likely located on Ridley Island Road, close to the construc[on site in order to reduce traffic. There will be approximately 100 managers during this [me, who are expected to live in the community.

• The BG Group has not decided if its project will have Living Out Allowances (LOAs) – its contractor will make the LOA decision. The company has discussed LOAs with the City, and understands that the Mayor supports LOAs in order to boost the local economy.

• The long term opera[on workers are expected to live in the community. The BG Group is unsure if workers will be local, but believe repurposing exis[ng buildings in Prince Rupert could be a strategy to accommodate these permanent workers.

NORTHERN REAL ESTATE LEADERS• Renters and landlords are unaware of their respec[ve rights and

obliga[ons under the ResidenBal Tenancy Act.

• Housing prices in Prince Rupert are driven-‐up by limited land availability and land constraints – up to $475/acre for land costs. This makes building new, single-‐detached housing in Prince Rupert expensive. It is also expensive to construct purpose-‐built rental housing and, as a result, the costs trickle-‐down to renters, making rent less affordable.

• Economic development has amracted people to Prince Rupert, which is posi[ve for the community. However, newcomers are looking for different housing forms, such as townhomes, mul[-‐unit buildings, and purpose-‐built rental housing, all of which are limited in Prince Rupert.


COMMUNITY SERVICE PROVIDERS & INSTITUTIONS

M’AKOLA HOUSING

M’Akola Housing is a non-‐profit society that provides affordable housing to Aboriginal households in communi[es across BC. M’Akola has 340 affordable housing units in Prince Rupert, and 165 units in Terrace. It has been engaging with First Na[ons and industry leaders to inves[gate poten[al partnerships for developing affordable housing in Prince Rupert.

• M’Akola is experiencing an increased number of people on its housing waitlist. M’Akola suggests that the workers moving into Terrace and Prince Rupert are placing stress on the en[re housing con[nuum, with low income households being the most affected.

• M’Akola an[cipates that there will be a significant impact on the housing supply as a result of major investments, such as the proposed LNG projects. The Society an[cipates that demand will be greatest in the short term (next 8 years), and slow down thereaqer.

• Moderate renova[ons or replacement of exis[ng rental supply would benefit the community, as well as building new market/non-‐market mixed projects. Making Provincial grants available to the non-‐profit sector would assist in developing affordable housing, or help to purchase units for upgrade/conversion to dedicated affordable housing.

SALVATION ARMY

The Salvation Army in Prince Rupert offers an 8-‐bed shelter and daily meals for persons in need. The shelter has operated out of a hotel (Raffles Inn) since 2003.

• In Prince Rupert, the Salva[on Army provides ~40,000 people with meals each year, and has not observed any recent changes to those numbers. Food bank users have discussed the challenges of affordable housing in Prince Rupert, and increasingly no[ce incidences of landlords evic[ng tenants in order to charge higher rents to a new tenant. Low income households oqen live in substandard housing.

• Client types have remained constant at the shelter, although shelter usage has increased by approximately 25% this year over previous years, which enough to occupy two addi[onal shelter beds. The op[mal number of shelter beds would be 20.

• The Salva[on Army has been inves[ga[ng the opportunity to offer transi[onal housing. A feasibility study has been prepared, but there have been funding issues. BC Housing has been iden[fied as a being a poten[al partner for the transi[on house project.


M’Akola Housing project in Prince Rupert

Salvation Army Men’s Shelter in Prince Rupert, operated from Raffles Inn hotel.

• Proposed resource development projects will probably not have an change the services provided by the Salva[on Army, but will likely have an impact on the general community – work camps are expected to create social issues, including an increase in sex work and substance use. A doubling of rental prices is also expected.

• The healthcare system is already under pressure in Prince Rupert, with a shortage of emergency services and doctors.

• Addi[onal tax revenues from resource development investment will likely be used towards upgrading municipal infrastructure, and not be made available to support affordable housing projects.

STREET SPIRIT FRIENDSHIP HOUSE

The Street Spirit Friendship House Associa[on of Prince Rupert engages youth (ages 13 to 18) through workshops, and training programs to assist in their development and employability skills.

• The demand for Street Spirit’s services varies, although the Association has observed an increase in 13-‐year-‐olds entering the program, who are looking for housing support. There are also occurrences of street youth homelessness.

• Street Spirit is oqen the first interac[on youth have in Prince Rupert where they can find informa[on on where and how to find housing. Housing for youth is limited to placement with the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

• Housing suitable for families is limited in Prince Rupert.

• Subsidized housing is needed in Prince Rupert, as well as upgrades to the exis[ng housing stock.

NORTH COAST TRANSITION SOCIETY

The North Coast Transi[on Society is a non-‐profit housing provider that offers services, programs, and housing for women and children fleeing domes[c violence. It operates a 30-‐day transi[on home, as well as a 2-‐year second stage transi[on house. The second stage house was a redeveloped from the old Moresby Townhomes,and includes self-‐contained suites and wheelchair modified units.

• The second stage transi[on house has exceeded capacity, and frequently turns away women and children in need of housing. Theses women are referred to other housing programs, or helped with finding affordable rental housing in the private market. A need for more funding and more shelter beds (at least 5) was iden[fied.

• The money spent on food each month is increasing (~$8,000), and this is becoming difficult to manage.


Self-‐contained unit in North Coast Transition Society’s second stage transition housing.

• Finding housing for women and children turned away from the transi[on house was easy to accomplish a year or two ago. Today, rental availability is limited, and prices have increased. Finding adequate, affordable family-‐friendly housing, with three bedrooms or more, is challenging.

• North Coast Transi[on Society sees clients returning to the shelter in cycles, and has iden[fied a “shelter shuffle” occurring in Northwest BC communi[es. When a client’s length of stay expires, she relocates to either Ki[mat or Terrace to stay at in a shelter for the maximum length of stay. These are vulnerable women, rota[ng through the communi[es, in unstable housing situa[ons.

• North Coast Transi[on House offers a rent supplement program to assist its clients with ‘gerng on their feet’ aqer they leave the transi[on house, or to help turnaway clients find affordable housing. The rent supplements are typically used to help with a damage deposit, first month’s rent, household supplies, and first u[lity bills. The Housing Support worker stated that it is challenging to find housing within a client’s budget. These women become dependent on the ini[al rent supplement, and find themselves unable to afford the cost of living aqerwards (housing, plus groceries, transporta[on, and childcare).

• Mental health and addic[ons issues have increased in Prince Rupert, and are directly related to poverty. Staff iden[fied a need for detox beds.

• The other shelter (Raffles Inn – Salva[on Army) is dedicated to men, but there are occurrences where single fathers and their children are staying there. Bed bugs, bar/restaurant noise, and traffic do not make it a safe or healthy place for children to stay. NCTS iden[fied the need for addi[onal men’s shelter beds in Prince Rupert.

• Urban Aboriginal households are experiencing challenges finding affordable housing, and some are moving back to their reserves.

• There is a need for more subsidized housing in Prince Rupert for low income families (including large families, up to 5 or 7 children). There is also a need for accessible housing with wheelchair modified units, and rental apartments with elevators.


KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS

The Knights of Columbus has a chapter located in Prince Rupert, and offers services to low income seniors. The chapter interested in providing adequate and affordable housing for seniors in Prince Rupert, possibly through renova[ng old, exis[ng housing stock.

• In Prince Rupert, seniors on fixed incomes live in rental buildings that are in poor condi[on and without elevators. Observa[ons indicate enough units to accommodate seniors, but that those units are in poor condi[on, and impact residents’ health. There is a need to renovate exis[ng housing stock to improve the living condi[ons of seniors.

• The seniors popula[on is growing in Prince Rupert, and in northern BC. There is an opportunity to renovate the rental stock to be senior-‐friendly and accessible.

• There are seniors living in their own large homes, which they have difficulty maintaining. The United Way is exploring the “Bemer At Home” program in Prince Rupert to support seniors wan[ng to age-‐in-‐place.

• BC Housing has two unoccupied complexes near the hospital in Prince Rupert. These buildings have potential to be converted into affordable housing units. They may be ideal for seniors because of the proximity to medical services, or as housing for hospital staff or nursing practicum students.

• Land is limited for residen[al development due to terrain constraints and muskeg. The land has to be blasted, which is expensive, and increases the overall costs of developing housing.

• There are opportuni[es to develop infill housing on small lots in Prince Rupert. Infrastructure is already in place.

• Prince Rupert has a number of “boomerang young adults”. When youth finish high school, they oqen leave Prince Rupert to amend university and to experience living in a different community. They are especially amracted to urban centres, such as Prince George and Vancouver. Prince Rupert experiences an influx of these young people returning to the community when they are in their early thir[es. They are looking to start a family, and see Prince Rupert as a good community to raise children. They also return because housing prices are more affordable compared to larger urban centres. However, the rising cost of housing prices is making Prince Rupert less amrac[ve to these young adults.

• Prince Rupert amracts students from outside the community to finish high school or amend Northwest Community College. Students come from Haida Gwaii, Kincolith, and rural areas. Some[mes they stay with rela[ves or family friends. Other [mes they are matched with room and board situa[ons, or basement suites. The increases in rental prices make it difficult for students from rural and small communi[es to relocate to Prince Rupert to finish their studies.


NORTHERN HEALTH• There has been an increase in demand for health services in Prince

Rupert. Pa[ents are becoming more vulnerable when they are discharged because of rising housing costs.

• The hospital in Prince Rupert has been used as a shelter because it is open for 24 hours. There is a need to improve the service delivery of housing and outreach support so residents in need can access the right resources to find housing.

• There is a shortage of accessible housing.

• Housing is not a mandate of Northern Health, but the Authority would consider a community partnership role to support affordable housing in the community.

• Northern Health staff members are buying homes rather than ren[ng, primarily because rental housing is of poor quality in Prince Rupert.

• Older housing stock requires renova[on and, once renovated, could be used to house low income households and vulnerable residents. This popula[on is challenged to access safe housing at an affordable cost.

• Industry development specula[on is amrac[ng people to Prince Rupert and to find work. However, there is a fragmented process for finding housing for these newcomers.



LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––


PARTICIPANTS & THEIR AFFILIATIONSPARTICIPANTS & THEIR AFFILIATIONS

Paul VendimelliEconomic Development Officer, Prince Rupert & Port Edward Economic Development Corpora[on

Captain Gary Shields Salva[on Army

Kevin Albers Executive Director, M’Akola Group of Societies

Sheila Gordon-‐Payne Health Service Administrator, Northern Health

Angela ZaboManager of Homecare, Cancer Services & Chronic Disease Management,Northern Health

Angenita Gerbracht Occupa[onal Therapist/Rehab Manager, Northern Health

Alayna Brown Street Spirit Friendship House Associa[on of Prince Rupert

Ed Hausner Knights of Columbus

Keith Lambourne Royal Lepage

Victor Prystay Royal Lepage & Past President of BC Northern Real Estate Board

Mike Morse Remax

Chris[ne White Executive Director, North Coast Transition Society

Cheri Davis Outreach Worker, North Coast Transition Society

Tessa Gill Pacific Northwest (PNW) LNG

Herb Pond BG LNG Group

Suite 585, 1111 West HasOngs Street, Vancouver BC V6E 2J3 | 604.687.2281

5th Floor, 844 Courtney Street, Victoria BC V8W 1C4 | 250.383.0304

Suite 300, 160 Quarry Park Boulevard SE, Calgary AB T2C 3G3 | 403.336.2468

www.cityspaces.ca

Suite 208, 811 Manning Road NE, Calgary, AB Canada T2E 7L4 | 403.454.2468









Documents

PRINCE RUPERT HOUSING ACTION PLAN · 5851111WestHastingsStreet VancouverBCV6E2J3 6046872281 5thFloor,844CourtneyStreet VictoriaBCV8W1C4 2503830304 Suite208,811ManningRoadNE CalgaryABCanadaT2E7L4