Northern Housing Study: Housing Stock Too Old
Prince George, B.C. – A new Northern B.C. housing study has found population growth will continue to be dependent on the state of the resource sector and that the region’s housing stock needs to be updated.
The study was released today by UNBC’s Community Development Institute (CDI) at the Northern B.C. Housing Conference held at the university.
Funded by BC Housing, the study found many communities in the region are subject to “boom and bust cycles” that last as little as five years and that the seniors population in northern B.C. will increase significantly over the next 20 years.
CDI co-director Marleen Morris authored the study and noted a key finding is that housing built in the 1960s and 1970s is no longer suited to the needs of the current population and that many communities lack the kind of housing necessary to recruit skilled professionals to the region.
“We found that regarding the age of the housing stock, the majority of it is 35 years or older,” she said. “That presents a number of problems – they’re not energy efficient, it affects mobility issues.”
Morris said affordability is also an issue.
“We have to look at what creates housing affordability in a broader context. We have to look at things like energy efficiency, we have to look at transportation costs, taxes and the cost of taxes,” she said.
“We have to factor that all in so we not only create housing that is affordable for people but that we’re creating communities that are affordable.”
The study looked at key trends and challenges facing 10 communities in the region: 100 Mile House, Dawson Creek, Fort St. John, Kitimat, Prince George, Prince Rupert, Quesnel, Smithers, Terrace and Williams Lake.
“Our hope is that this study will act as a catalyst to bring the housing sector together to develop innovative and collaborative approaches that will build resilience, flexibility and affordability.”
You can view the study by clicking here.
Comments
“CDI co-director Marleen Morris authored the study and noted a key finding is that housing built in the 1960s and 1970s is no longer suited to the needs of the current population”
=========================
I think it should actually read:
“CDI co-director Marleen Morris authored the study and noted a key finding is that housing built in the 1960s and 1970s is no longer suited to the PREFERENCES of MANY IN the current population”
I think that’s more accurate :)
Our young people are much more savvy and they do their homework before buying . Some of us old folks also do our homework . For example pre60s to 1984 houses a full of asbestos and lead based paint . When renovating the drywall has to be treated as a bio Hazard . Then there is the lead soldered pipes and there’s much more . Like nine by nine asbestos tiles for the little ones to play on . I wouldn’t touch one with a barge pole and my hat is off to all the young that care about their environment . They deserve our respect .
Give me your Money (Government) and I will replace my 1979 built House!
I’d have no problem buying an older home. They really knew how to build them back then. The crap they’re building nowadays I wouldn’t trust in a strong wind….
To old say what, sounds more like a sales pitch. Older homes can be upgraded for efficiency and mobility issues far more cheaply than buying the big monstrosities being built today. How do these big multilevel homes being built today solve mobility issues?
Some friends moved into town a few years back, bought one of those older homes in a nice established neighbourhood, renovated and updated it to their liking and saved much money over new.
You got that right. We modernized a home built for veterans after World War II. It was a great project. I did all the work except the dry wall. So if there is a will there is a way.
Cheers
Did it have perilite insulation in the attic ? Lathe and plaster ? Do you know what’s in the plaster ? Yikes . It’s a little like a really old watch that has a glow in the dark dial . You need a lead lined drawer for those .
I would have to say that they haven’t got a clue as to what they are talking about.
Most houses built in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s are much better than the claptraps they are putting up to-day.
I agree that this is a sales pitch. I do not agree that younger people are as picky as some would have you believe. In fact many young people cannot afford a home and live in apartments, basement suites, etc;
Seems to me the real estate industry has been saying for years that homes with a value of $180,000 to $250,000 are sold off as fast as they come on the market. Who do they think are buying these houses. Seniors??? Not bloody likely, seniors are selling them.
Time to quit the BS. Older houses are diamonds in the rough. Lots of yard space for gardens, patios, etc. Large lawns. Basement (and basement suites) etc; etc; etc;.
If you have one hang on to it, and if you don’t, keep your eyes open and you might be able to pick one up.
I agree. What a sick society we’ve become where we can’t any longer afford to put up a house on a decent sized lot, and despite all the modern advances in many materials, we actually build it way more crappy than many older homes were ever built. Many new places I’ve seen will be lucky to last out the New Home Warranty period, let alone the length of the mortgage before there’ll have to be major work done on them.
Comments for this article are closed.