City staff have approved the renovation of a Victoria Road apartment building that will nearly double the number of units, while potentially displacing existing tenants.
Residents now feel duped and defeated, and are stressed about what will happen next.
The building at 493 Victoria Rd. N. is around 45 years old and has 15 three-bedroom units and one two-bedroom unit. The owner intends to make those units smaller, turning them into 29 bachelor and two-bedroom units.
When the application first came to the city's committee of adjustment in December, the proposal was for 31 units, 39 parking spaces, no long-term bicycle parking spots and reductions to buffer strips, common amenity areas and landscaped open space.
The application was deferred, and presented again on Feb. 13 with recommendations from city staff, including lowering the number to 29 units, which reduced the required parking space and allowed for more open landscape space. The revised plan also included 14 long-term bike parking spaces.
The variances were approved by the committee, effectively giving them the go-ahead to begin construction.
Land registry records show JDGS Investments Inc. sold the property to 493 Victoria Road Apartments GP Inc. on Jan. 24, 2024 for $3.4-million. The purchase price included $1.3 million in cash and $2.1 million in a vendor take back mortgage.
493 Victoria Road Apartments GP Inc. is affiliated with Robert Luongo of Daniko Management, a property management company based in Erin.
In a cover letter submitted to the committee, the intention is to address the housing crisis by creating additional units, but tenants disagree.
“Thousands of dollars will be spent to take away more green space, cause more pollutants, and for what? To make more unaffordable housing while displacing and possibly making men, women, children, seniors and families homeless,” said resident Wendy Carmichael during the meeting.
This was seconded by three of her neighbours who showed up to delegate.
Planning consultant Rob Russell responded by saying they’re in discussions to apply for the Community Improvement Plan (CIP) “to provide affordable housing that actually meets the definition of affordable housing in the City of Guelph.”
The CIP provides grants for owners, builders and non-profits turning vacant units into affordable purpose-built rentals.
However, city staff noted the project wouldn’t be eligible for the grant if the units aren’t currently vacant and rents would be higher than they are currently.
“If the owner, and this is a hypothetical scenario, was able to legally evict tenants, then those units would be vacant and we would qualify for the program, but that doesn’t seem fair,” Russell said. “The owner is willing to work with the tenants to bring them back in after and work with them in that interim period to provide housing.”
Staff said they would not qualify for the grant, either, if tenants were evicted.
Russell said the price won’t change regardless of whether they qualify for the program.
“We are fully intending to make as many of these units as possible affordable in some way and hopefully they will meet the City of Guelph’s criteria to be deemed affordable,” he said.
“(The owners) believe that they are actually going to be providing a better product in terms of these units at a better price that meets the current needs of the city,” he said. “This building was built decades ago, and at that point, people’s lifestyles were different. Time progresses, the housing needs of people change, and having a variety of housing at a variety of prices is good for the city.”
The renovations won’t fit the needs of the current tenants, though, many having lived there for 10 to 20 years, paying around $1,200 a month all inclusive. Many of the tenants are also elderly or care for small children.
Luongo, Daniko Management, Russell nor their lawyers responded to requests for comment.
In an interview, Carmichael said she assumed the application was just a formality and it would be pushed through either way.
“Still, it’s heartbreaking,” she said. “You have that little, tiny glimmer that maybe the city will do something to help you, and it got crushed.”
Tenants haven’t received an N13 or any other related forms yet, nor have they been given a timeline for when construction will begin or end.
Under the CIP, a three-bedroom would be considered affordable if it was $1,695 or under – a price Carmichael said would be reasonable, though it's more than her current rent. Still, her concerns remain.
“When we talked to Robert Luongo, he said he was going to keep us up to date monthly; he would have monthly meetings with us, and that he was only going to change four units,” she said.
That wasn’t the case. Now, they feel as though nothing has been done to indicate the work will be carried out in good faith, and is unsure if they’ll be able to return, though Russell said they fully intend on working with tenants and allowing them to return if they choose.
Either way, it means most of the tenants are out: the vast majority of residents would need to move to remain in a three-bedroom unit anyway due to large family sizes – a two-bedroom or bachelor won’t cut it.
“There won’t be any three-bedrooms left,” she said. “I feel like they just said that they’re going to (make the units affordable) so that the city would go along with it and improve everything. I don’t trust these guys at all.
“Even if we do manage to move, we’ll be evicted in no time because we won’t be able to keep up (the rent),” she said.
It’s also not just about the money or space for them: residents of the building feel like, and in many cases literally are, family.
“We’re all comfortable, we all trust each other. We know who lives in what apartment. We help each other,” she said.
Russell also applied for a deferral fee refund, citing "unfairness and some issues with how the owner was treated."
His examples included being misled by city staff about what they would approve, and that their submission would have looked different otherwise. For instance, he said they were aware of the need for bicycle parking and would have included it initially but were told they didn't need to.
“Really what it seemed like was that staff did not want the 31 units we had proposed,” he said.
The refund request was refused.