New accommodations facility at CFB Esquimalt and plan to build more homes on military bases

[Brad Sallows]

A homeowner has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, and taxes/fees.

A renter has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, taxes/fees, and the owner's "profit".

A couple of things that keep rentals affordable are firstly that rental properties tend to be smaller than full-sized homes on lots, and secondly that many landlords have a capital stock that allows them to pay more up front and thus have lower financing costs. The latter is a benefit that is at least partly passed on to renters.

"Profit" isn't just money in the owner's pocket. There are at least two risk premiums profits have to cover. One is mitigation of the costs of bad tenants. Another is investment risk. It probably doesn't occur to most renters, but part of what they are renting is the owner's capital stock - without risk to themselves.

Potential landlords with only one premise to let are highly vulnerable to bad tenants and to costs imposed in jurisdictions that tend to favour tenants' interests. Consequently they are reluctant to rent in the first place.

 

[Good2Golf]

Dnd would not have to build to provincial or municipal codes. Just to federal code with consideration to those other codes if they make sense.

No. The various federal codes (building, plumbing, electrical, etc.) are not binding by themselves, they are used as the basis for Provincial (and municipal) codes, and may (are) amended/modified by all of those jurisdictions to each region’s needs, so there is no single set of Coast-to-Coast-to-Coast codes. It remains a federate of Provincial/municiapality legally binding codes that collectively span the extend of Canada’s territory.

The National Building Code actually can be far more onerous than Provincial and Municipal codes when it comes to housing. Where no standard is applicable in the National building code, it defers to the provincial.

No.

The NBC is not a binding code. The NBC is a ‘model code’ suggestion, which the Provinces and municipalities may use as a basis for creating their own binding codes.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

Same with CE Code (electrical), etc. The only legally binding electrical codes, are those legislated by the provinces (and under those provincial laws, municipalities to further amend (but not supersede)).

 

[Quirky]

And you can't force good financial decision making - look at the trucks, trailers, boats and toys parked around the PMQ patches

Everyone and every posting location is different, don't assume that people buy toys and nice vehicles in lieu of a house. Some people are in heavy debt with toys in a house or a PMQ. Some people just don't want to buy property because they'll be posted again in 2-3 years and it's easier to move from a PMQ. Some got a massive VAC payment, or their parents died and left them a big inheritance, or they have good investments etc. Others don't care for home ownership and don't want to be house poor and prefer the toys and being able to travel. I've stopped making assumptions on people's finances a long time ago and frankly I don't care, let them make their own decisions.

 

[suffolkowner]

No. The various federal codes (building, plumbing, electrical, etc.) are not binding by themselves, they are used as the basis for Provincial (and municipal) codes, and may (are) amended/modified by all of those jurisdictions to each region’s needs, so there is no single set of Coast-to-Coast-to-Coast codes. It remains a federate of Provincial/municiapality legally binding codes that collectively span the extend of Canada’s territory.


No.

The NBC is not a binding code. The NBC is a ‘model code’ suggestion, which the Provinces and municipalities may use as a basis for creating their own binding codes.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

View attachment 87363

Same with CE Code (electrical), etc. The only legally binding electrical codes, are those legislated by the provinces (and under those provincial laws, municipalities to further amend (but not supersede)).
View attachment 87365

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

Anyone who has read the CFHA Occupancy Handbook knows that they don't.

Many things that would not pass civi side for builds, renos, or repairs are A-Ok for CAF/DND buildings.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A homeowner has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, and taxes/fees.

A renter has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, taxes/fees, and the owner's "profit".

A couple of things that keep rentals affordable are firstly that rental properties tend to be smaller than full-sized homes on lots, and secondly that many landlords have a capital stock that allows them to pay more up front and thus have lower financing costs. The latter is a benefit that is at least partly passed on to renters.

"Profit" isn't just money in the owner's pocket. There are at least two risk premiums profits have to cover. One is mitigation of the costs of bad tenants. Another is investment risk. It probably doesn't occur to most renters, but part of what they are renting is the owner's capital stock - without risk to themselves.

Potential landlords with only one premise to let are highly vulnerable to bad tenants and to costs imposed in jurisdictions that tend to favour tenants' interests. Consequently they are reluctant to rent in the first place.

Not to mention that if renting a portion of your house, you also lose a portion of the enjoyment of the property, such as part of the yard, patio, driveway, access to that part of the house, etc. After my dad went into a home, we did Airbnb for a few years, the first two we actually made decent money, the 3rd year, not so much and it was not worth the level of work involved to keep a 5 star rating. My wife looked at the Residency Tenet Act and said "We are never renting fulltime" Basically as a Landlord here, your screwed. We may rent out to students in the future.

 

[Good2Golf]

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

They should, as there is no Defence-specific building code legislate (whether on the basis of the NBC amended as the provinces TDI, or not). I don’t know what DND does for itself (or the rest of the GoC, for that matter).

 

[Blackadder1916]

They should, as there is no Defence-specific building code legislate (whether on the basis of the NBC amended as the provinces TDI, or not). I don’t know what DND does for itself (or the rest of the GoC, for that matter).

While this wasn't specifically one of the references I used back in the 1980s when I played around with facility planning, there were similar guidelines on my office bookshelf that I regularly referenced when reviewing construction or renovation plans.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

TECHNICAL REFERENCE FOR OFFICE BUILDING DESIGN

2.1.1 Code and Standard Versions
The design solutions must comply with all applicable federal laws, regulations and the codes referenced therein. Consultants in all disciplines are expected to follow all regulatory and code requirements in force, at the place of the work. This document references the latest codes and standards in force at the time of issue / or revision of this document. The latest version of each enacted code shall be used. For all Standards referenced by the codes, the latest version (date) of the Standard shall be used unless the code references a specific version (date) of the Standard to be used. For a list of codes and standards referenced in this document, refer to section 14. This is not an exhaustive list of all applicable codes and standards.

2.1.2 Provincial Requirements
When provincially mandated inspections are required in order to facilitate a utility connection or ensure safety of a system through a provincial inspection, the provincially adopted version of a code or standard may be applied to the project.

 

[Blackadder1916]

While this wasn't specifically one of the references I used back in the 1980s when I played around with facility planning, there were similar guidelines on my office bookshelf that I regularly referenced when reviewing construction or renovation plans.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

TECHNICAL REFERENCE FOR OFFICE BUILDING DESIGN

Further to above

How GoC standards apply to defense specific spaces was always a challenge back in the day, sometimes frustrating (usually because we - the military "we" - had difficulty, or pig-headedness, in accepting that an office is an office is an office) or sometimes humourous (as in the renovation of the Berger Building, where the Surg Gen branch was housed, in fitting our existing furniture into the cubicles or enclosed offices that the designers assigned when we went from 3 floors to 2).

I came across this, a more recent look at how GoC fit-up standards worked for a HQ organization.

An analysis of GC workplace fit-up standards for military operational headquarters design

https://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc383/p814494_A1b.pdf