Waterloo Region Connected

(11-08-2019, 10:27 AM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]Need 80% owner approval to amend the declaration (to modify the licensing provisions), so about 190 of 236 units. That's a very high bar.

Ahh, I was thinking it could be something below 75%.    They think of everything!   Something like this would certainly be enough to put me off considering buying a unit in the development.  Seems like endless problems just waiting to happen.

The short-term rent discussion definitely continues to be raging debate. I don't have an answer, but I know people don't look fondly upon new persons coming and going daily - if I was living next door, yes, I too would probably be annoyed. Ultimately, this is something difficult to control/curb. It's a free market economy. Of course with a baseline of rules/laws, but so long as it is, things like this will continue to flourish. It's kind of like when Uber came to compete with Taxis...well, hotels should adapt...and it's extra hard if a town/city has a hotel shortage, especially those with a kitchen and at least one separate 'room'

(11-08-2019, 10:31 AM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-08-2019, 10:27 AM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]Need 80% owner approval to amend the declaration (to modify the licensing provisions), so about 190 of 236 units. That's a very high bar.

Ahh, I was thinking it could be something below 75%.    They think of everything!   Something like this would certainly be enough to put me off considering buying a unit in the development.  Seems like endless problems just waiting to happen.

Just to be clear, the 80% requirement for amending the declaration is in the Condominium Act. For a certain few changes it is a 90% requirement; I think changing the allocation of fees to the different units is one of the changes.

Another interesting provision: to sell the entire condominium requires the written approval of owners of 80% of the units. And if the owners opposed don’t like it, they can get a valuation done. If it comes in higher than the sale price, those who voted in favour are on the hook to make whole those who voted against.

(11-07-2019, 02:53 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2019, 01:03 PM)Lordelsinore Wrote: [ -> ]Just curious what the demographic is of the larger Arrow lofts is and what you think M's will be?

I would hazard a guess that two-thirds of Arrow residents are over 50. Maybe only 10% have children (of any age) living with them, many more than that have pets. Given the ages, many of the over-50s are retired. There is a contingent of younger residents, 20s/30s, many working in tech. Rentals at Arrow are only about 25%, I do expect that number to be higher at Avenue M, especially the small 1BR units are more likely to be rentals. Avenue M's minimum lease period is three months (less than a university term) as compared to Arrow's six months.

An additional twist is that Avenue M is offering up to 25 "short-term rental licences", allowing the owner of such a licence to do either "executive (furnished) rentals" or AirBNB-style rentals. It may be attractive to an investor wanting to do that business. But as a potential buyer/resident, this was a big factor for us to not proceed with Avenue M, as attractive as some aspects of it are.

Thanks for sharing this...it's nice to hear what 'buyers on the ground level' think/consider when looking at purchasing/investing. The brokerage says it's almost entirely 'local buyers' and most 'end users' which they said they found amazing. I guess even they too prefer this for stability and on-going care of a building they put their name behind.

Just seen latest sales per the unit plans. Wow, looks to be 80%+ sold/booked already. That's insane.

(11-08-2019, 12:14 PM)Momo26 Wrote: [ -> ]Just seen latest sales per the unit plans. Wow, looks to be 80%+ sold/booked already. That's insane.

I am not surprised,   going to be a beautiful building in an amazing location..

The prices are reasonable, too: $500-550 per sqft, with parking included. Projected condo fees are at $0.53/sqft, which is reasonable for a concierge-equipped building.

I do expect this to be one of the nicest buildings in Kitchener.

(11-08-2019, 01:32 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]The prices are reasonable, too: $500-550 per sqft, with parking included. Projected condo fees are at $0.53/sqft, which is reasonable for a concierge-equipped building.

I do expect this to be one of the nicest buildings in Kitchener.

I have to agreed. I am trying to convince my parents to downsize into one of these units from a house. The AirBNB policy is definitely a turn off though. It is hard to tell how this will effect the value of these projects, but I know my parents will not want to live in a building not knowing if their neighbour is just a revolving door of short term rentals. But if they have sold 80% already i guess this is not an issue for as many as i would think.

(11-08-2019, 03:14 PM)westwardloo Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-08-2019, 01:32 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]The prices are reasonable, too: $500-550 per sqft, with parking included. Projected condo fees are at $0.53/sqft, which is reasonable for a concierge-equipped building.

I do expect this to be one of the nicest buildings in Kitchener.

I have to agreed. I am trying to convince my parents to downsize into one of these units from a house. The AirBNB policy is definitely a turn off though. It is hard to tell how this will effect the value of these projects, but I know my parents will not want to live in a building not knowing if their
neighbour is just a revolving door of short term rentals. But if they have sold 80% already i guess this is not an issue for as many as i would think.

Guess it's a moot point. Station Park, same thing. Few short term lease licenses. I asked about this as a concern and they said developer is 'very cautious' about this point.

In the renderings, I agree the building looks solid. It's all bring and concrete inside apparently, so 'strong'.

Are the trees actually that tall in the area?

Of course those tall street side ones are probably non-existent yet and will take 15-20 years to get to that size :\. Gotta love when developers include these right

(11-08-2019, 03:14 PM)westwardloo Wrote: [ -> ]I have to agreed. I am trying to convince my parents to downsize into one of these units from a house. The AirBNB policy is definitely a turn off though. It is hard to tell how this will effect the value of these projects, but I know my parents will not want to live in a building not knowing if their neighbour is just a revolving door of short term rentals. But if they have sold 80% already i guess this is not an issue for as many as i would think.

If you want to avoid short-term rentals, you really need to check the condo declaration, very few buildings will tell you this up front. I don't know of any reference site for this info, either.

Our building doesn't allow those so that helped us make the decision to stay.

(11-08-2019, 04:03 PM)Momo26 Wrote: [ -> ]Are the trees actually that tall in the area?

Of course those tall street side ones are probably non-existent yet and will take 15-20 years to get to that size :\. Gotta love when developers include these right

There are half a dozen very tall street side trees on the property but, given their setback from the sidwalk, I don't think any of them will be saved.

(11-08-2019, 05:24 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-08-2019, 03:14 PM)westwardloo Wrote: [ -> ]I have to agreed. I am trying to convince my parents to downsize into one of these units from a house. The AirBNB policy is definitely a turn off though. It is hard to tell how this will effect the value of these projects, but I know my parents will not want to live in a building not knowing if their neighbour is just a revolving door of short term rentals. But if they have sold 80% already i guess this is not an issue for as many as i would think.

If you want to avoid short-term rentals, you really need to check the condo declaration, very few buildings will tell you this up front. I don't know of any reference site for this info, either.

Our building doesn't allow those so that helped us make the decision to stay.

Your building has a proviso against using any apartment for commercial purposes, no?  Hence the office space on the main floor.

In a 2016 Spectator article the avg airbnb host earned $3900/yr....that's a little more than 30 days of the year that a unit would be occupied. I'd be OK with not having any neighbors above, below, or beside me for the majority of the year. And considering KW has a shortage of rentals available wouldn't you be a fool for not securing a long term tenant and guaranteeing income?

(11-08-2019, 06:51 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-08-2019, 05:24 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]If you want to avoid short-term rentals, you really need to check the condo declaration, very few buildings will tell you this up front. I don't know of any reference site for this info, either.

Our building doesn't allow those so that helped us make the decision to stay.

Your building has a proviso against using any apartment for commercial purposes, no?  Hence the office space on the main floor.

"Commercial use" likely would not cover short-term rentals, but we have a six-month minimum lease. (We do have people working from home, but at least to date that has been considered acceptable. And I suspect case law would support that as well.)