Vancouver Rental Market Discussion

[misher]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

BC Government to build 125 affordable rental units in Burnaby

DH Vancouver Staff Apr 23, 2019

The provincial government has announced that 125 affordable units will be built in Burnaby.

In a release, the province says the 14-storey apartment will be located at 6585 Sussex Avenue in the city’s Metrotown area.

The units will accommodate low-and-moderate income families. A total of 23 units will accessible for people with disabilities.


“After years of housing affordability being ignored by the previous government, we have put the focus back on people and building the right types of homes around the province,” said Selina Robinson, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, in a statement.

...

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bc-g...s-burnaby-2019

Enjoyed everything except the bashing of the previous government. Does that really need to be in every announcement? Plus if it was really ignored we wouldn't have BC Housing and all the stuff we have today, which is around 5-10% of our total housing supply.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by misher

Enjoyed everything except the bashing of the previous government. Does that really need to be in every announcement? Plus if it was really ignored we wouldn't have BC Housing and all the stuff we have today, which is around 5-10% of our total housing supply.

That's politics. Party A takes over, blames the last time Party B was in charge; Party B takes over, blames the last time Party A was in charge.

And they have a point - the Liberals did create the housing crisis. Doesn't matter whether or not we have BC Housing (founded in '67, it's not like Campbell or Clark came up with it) if it's just going to be kicked under a rug and abandoned in favour of condo developing and house flipping and low mortgages.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That's politics. Party A takes over, blames the last time Party B was in charge; Party B takes over, blames the last time Party A was in charge.

And they have a point - the Liberals did create the housing crisis. Doesn't matter whether or not we have BC Housing (founded in '67, it's not like Campbell or Clark came up with it) if it's just going to be kicked under a rug and abandoned in favour of condo developing and house flipping and low mortgages.

The Provincial Liberals did not create a housing crisis in a city. It was multiple factors, the biggest ones being a lack of supply and low interest rates. Notice how housing prices haven't dropped the 50% people were pushing for in the past 2 years. If foreign buyers were indeed the main cause, which I disagree with, then the Liberals are the ones that put the FBT in. I'd also say the city is no more "affordable" for the average person than it was 2 years ago. We're not having a sudden surge of first time buyers, infact first time buyers are way down in the past year which is usually seen as a strong indicator of loss of affordability. Prices of luxury housing are down, but the average condo which is what people want to buy hasn't suddenly become affordable.

Condo developing is mostly municipal. Housing flipping is mostly up to individuals. Mortgage rates are federal and are usually dictated by the economy.

I'd say the main group responsible for housing prices in Vancouver is the Vancouver City Government, the ones who determine how much housing gets built, where, what rent is charged, and what types. And the Mayor of Vancouver has been someone who resigned from the NDP to run for mayor for the past 10 years. He has only met half of Vancouver's annual rental targets for the last year which is an indicator of failure. You cite condo developing, but that was mainly Vision Vancouver who are centre-left same as the NDP. Those development fees went to the city not the province.

The Liberals could definitely have instituted measures to help. Hell they should have kicked some sense in the Vancouver city government. But we need to be honest with ourselves in where we assign blame, its spread around not in one big pool

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by misher

The Provincial Liberals did not create a housing crisis in a city. It was multiple factors, the biggest ones being a lack of supply and low interest rates. Notice how housing prices haven't dropped the 50% people were pushing for in the past 2 years. If foreign buyers were indeed the main cause, which I disagree with, then the Liberals are the ones that put the FBT in. I'd also say the city is no more "affordable" for the average person than it was 2 years ago. Condo developing is mostly municipal. Housing flipping is mostly up to individuals. Mortgage rates are federal and are usually dictated by the economy.

I'd say the main group responsible for housing prices in Vancouver is the city Council, the ones who determine how much housing gets built, where, what rent is charged, and what types. And the Mayor of Vancouver has been (recently) NDP for the past 10 years.

The Libs added the FBT in 2016, just before election year, after over seven years of riding on real estate money. They were also the ones responsible for many of those low interest rates to begin with.
Same thing with Christy's throne speech pledging to do all the things the NDP and Greens promised... and the garbage TransLink referendum followed by the sudden promise to fund all our rapid transit. She'd've said and done anything just to cling to power, then gone right back to cozying up to the real estate sector.

It takes time to undo an affordability crisis. The NDP's only been in power for almost two years and Kennedy Stewart for about half a year (not sure where ten came from), and we're already seeing more rental programs instead of condos, condos, condos like Vision (which was hardly NDP - more like socially left plutocrats).

[misher]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The Libs added the FBT in 2016, just before election year, after over seven years of riding on real estate money. They were also the ones responsible for many of those low interest rates to begin with.
Same thing with Christy's throne speech pledging to do all the things the NDP and Greens promised... and the garbage TransLink referendum followed by the sudden promise to fund all our rapid transit. She'd've said and done anything just to cling to power, then gone right back to cozying up to the real estate sector.

It takes time to undo an affordability crisis. The NDP's only been in power for almost two years and Kennedy Stewart for about half a year (not sure where ten came from), and we're already seeing more rental programs instead of condos, condos, condos like Vision (which was hardly NDP - more like socially left plutocrats).

Do you really think less than 40k is a huge factor in the housing market? Also housing prices only started really going up in 2015-2017. There were large rises before then but that was just the market catching up as it had been going down steadily over 7 years. Prices in 2012-2015 were generally in line for a major North American coastal city with good weather and a good economy.

And Gregor Roberston was the NDP representative for Vancouver Fairview from 2005 until he stepped down in 2008 to run for mayor. Very similar to Stewart.


If anything I'd say Vision Vancouver is more than 50% responsible for the current state of Vancouver. And they were generally strong critics of the BC Liberals and strong supporters of the BC NDP. In 2009 when the Liberals got elected Robertson gave a welcoming speech and his party went nuts with one resigning. The BC NDP and Vision Vancouver have always been strongly connected https://www.thestar.com/vancouver/20...-ndp-ties.html

But critics are questioning whether their connections to the B.C. NDP-connected Vision Vancouver — ousted en masse by voters in October’s civic elections — and past NDP donors could have also helped a few of the 14 appointees.

https://www.straight.com/news/942461...-liberal-brand

Premier John Horgan's most significant political move since the election was appointing Geoff Meggs as his chief of staff. It's not only because Meggs, a former Vision Vancouver councillor, has authority to ensure his trusted confidants will fill key political posts.

It's also because Meggs played a key role in destroying the brand of a municipal party that held power in Vancouver for decades.

Expect him to do the same to the B.C. Liberals.

The Vancouver Non-Partisan Association, a.k.a. the NPA, was formed in 1937 and elected 11 mayors. The last was B.C. Liberal MLA Sam Sullivan, who left civic office in 2008.

The NPA is one of the most successful political organizations in Canadian history.

Yet since 2008, Vision Vancouver has retained control over council and the mayor's chair.

So how did Meggs and Co. demolish the NPA brand after it had won so often in the past?

The beginning of the end occurred when a civic and library workers' labour dispute was branded as "Sam's strike".

It laid the blame for the lack of municipal services squarely on the NPA mayor, Sullivan.

From that point on, Vision politicians repeatedly reinforced a message that the NPA was backward-thinking, not in tune with the times, and, most importantly, a rotten manager of public finances.

The overarching strategy was to convince voters that NPA politicians were too stupid to be trusted with control over the civic government.

To a large extent, it worked.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by misher

Do you really think less than 40k is a huge factor in the housing market? Also housing prices only started really going up in 2015-2017. There were large rises before then but that was just the market catching up as it had been going down steadily over 7 years.

And Gregor Roberston was a the NDP representative for Vancouver Fairview from 2005 until he stepped down in 2008 to run for mayor. Very similar to Stewart.

That's supposed to be AN example rather than THE example. If you'd like to wade through years of articles to find the one where Christy literally says that she won't implement a foreign buyers' tax because "moving foreign owners out of the market means that housing prices will drop," be my guest.

One ex-MLA ain't the whole party. At any rate, crony capitalism and calling people racist and/or "f**kin' NPA hacks" for opposing it, that really goes against the NDP's stance over the years on housing and affordability. He was much more in line with the Libs on this one.

[Jalapeño Chips]

It looks like the tide is turning:

""For the first time in six years, it's a tenant's market," said Moe Mousavi, a property manager at Macdonald Realty and the founder of DeluxeProperties.ca.

He says landlords are now being forced to offer incentives because there's more supply in the market than demand."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ters-1.5128773

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Jalapeño Chips

It looks like the tide is turning:

""For the first time in six years, it's a tenant's market," said Moe Mousavi, a property manager at Macdonald Realty and the founder of DeluxeProperties.ca.

He says landlords are now being forced to offer incentives because there's more supply in the market than demand."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ters-1.5128773

I experienced a glimpse of this yesterday when signing the lease for a suite in a new rental building here in Kelowna. it wasn't a free month like some properties are apparently offering in Metro Vancouver, but I got a discount on a storage locker and will save $20 a month. As they say, "twenty bucks is twenty bucks". I'll take it.

Incidentally, can I just say what an amazing experience it was for there to be a brand new rental building with multiple suites from which to choose, and at reasonable-ish prices, too? It's a wholly new experience in my life to have a genuine choice of suites, all brand new and complete with condo-grade in-suite amenities, central air, etc., and not feel the choking pressure of finding anything suitable at something vaguely resembling an affordable price.

Here I got to view multiple suites, come back the following day to measure(!) them, and make an informed choice without a figurative or literal line of people waiting to view the same place. None of this would have been possible without Kelowna's recent purpose-built rental boom. And despite the article's thesis that there's now an oversupply in some markets, this building is apparently on track to be fully leased within 6 months of going to market and the head office in Toronto couldn't be happier with its first foray into the Kelowna market.

I've seen the future and it is good.

[Jalapeño Chips]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I experienced a glimpse of this yesterday when signing the lease for a suite in a new rental building here in Kelowna. it wasn't a free month like some properties are apparently offering in Metro Vancouver, but I got a discount on a storage locker and saving $20 a month. As they say, "twenty bucks is twenty bucks". I'll take it.

Incidentally, can I just say what an amazing experience it was for there to be a brand new rental building with multiple suites from which to choose, and at reasonable-ish prices, too? It's a wholly new experience in my life to have a genuine choice of suites, all brand new and complete with condo-grade in-suite amenities, central air, etc., and not feel the choking pressure of finding anything suitable at something vaguely resembling an affordable price.

Here I got to view multiple suites, come back the following day to measure(!) them, and make an informed choice without a figurative or literal line of people waiting to view the same place. None of this would have been possible without Kelowna's recent purpose-built rental boom. And despite the article's thesis that there's now an oversupply in some markets, this building is apparently on track to be fully leased within 6 months of going to market and the head office in Toronto couldn't be happier with its first foray into the Kelowna market.

I've seen the future and it is good.

Congratulations on the new place. Must be a good feeling to have choice. I agree, the future is good. A hostile renters market is not good for people, or the economy. The choices and incentives will only increase as more rentals come to market. Looks like the housing market cooling off policies, and rental building construction incentives are working, as they should. A full reset was badly needed.

[whatnext]

From today's Sun:

Vancouver’s experiment to create truly modest-priced rental housing will be full up with 20 proposals in the works for 20 opportunities municipal officials will consider, assuming some of the bold ideas can get past zoning hurdles.

With a July 1 closing date, the City’s Moderate Income Rental Housing Pilot Program has seen applications come forward for 14-storey high-rises on East Hastings St. and five-storey low-rise blocks in Kitsilano and at Renfrew and Broadway among the proposals.

In total, seven of the 20 proposals have begun the rezoning process, with at least 115 of 570 apartments in those seven to be rented out at MIRHPP’s designated below-market rates that range from $950 per month for studios to $2,000 for family-friendly three-bedroom suites...

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...tal-experiment

[GenWhy?]

I wish there was a middle ground with her. The program is for those above $30k... an identified group that needs more and better housing... otherwise we are already building lots of social housing. She just needs to propose a new program. Simple. She's just a lame duck activist councilor that could do so much good for her supporters.

"“The thing that worries me about (MIRHPP) is (that) there is nothing for those under $30,000, which are the people who really need (housing),” said Swanson, a COPE councillor and housing advocate.

Then the city's giving up a lot of density to “get a measly 20 per cent” of affordable units, Swanson said.

“And of course when you have a really high building, you can rent the top floors for a lot of money,” she said. “So the gentrification effect is huge,” on surrounding neighbourhoods."

We can actually proforma for 30% MIRHPP rents in some buildings and with a little big of extra density off the C-2 sites, we could do 20% MIRHPP in most multi-family areas or C-1 areas and could maybe easily go way higher on single family areas (40%?).

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I wish there was a middle ground with her. The program is for those above $30k... an identified group that needs more and better housing... otherwise we are already building lots of social housing. She just needs to propose a new program. Simple. She's just a lame duck activist councilor that could do so much good for her supporters.

"“The thing that worries me about (MIRHPP) is (that) there is nothing for those under $30,000, which are the people who really need (housing),” said Swanson, a COPE councillor and housing advocate.

Then the city's giving up a lot of density to “get a measly 20 per cent” of affordable units, Swanson said.

“And of course when you have a really high building, you can rent the top floors for a lot of money,” she said. “So the gentrification effect is huge,” on surrounding neighbourhoods."

We can actually proforma for 30% MIRHPP rents in some buildings and with a little big of extra density off the C-2 sites, we could do 20% MIRHPP in most multi-family areas or C-1 areas and could maybe easily go way higher on single family areas (40%?).

To be fair, she represents a constituency that hasn't had a voice on council for a very long time (Jenny Kwan days?). If we had wards they would have had a rep. Hopefully as they settle into their roles Swanson will learn to "horse trade", lending her vote to NPA ideas to get their votes for hers etc.

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

To be fair, she represents a constituency that hasn't had a voice on council for a very long time (Jenny Kwan days?). If we had wards they would have had a rep. Hopefully as they settle into their roles Swanson will learn to "horse trade", lending her vote to NPA ideas to get their votes for hers etc.

Or open an economics textbook so she can learn how more supply helps long term no matter where its located. We could build 100 mega mansions and it would still help a tad.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I wish there was a middle ground with her. The program is for those above $30k... an identified group that needs more and better housing... otherwise we are already building lots of social housing. She just needs to propose a new program. Simple. She's just a lame duck activist councilor that could do so much good for her supporters.

The problem with electing activists is that they're too used to being on the outside fighting the government, and have absolutely no idea how to be on the inside running it... so they end up just fighting it from the inside, which is just dumb.

[misher]

https://www.straight.com/news/124473...couver-project

Higher rents sought: Developer no longer wants city subsidy for East Vancouver project

A developer of an East Vancouver rental project is no longer interested in getting a subsidy from the city.


Instead of receiving a development cost levy (DCL) waiver, Hua Long International Technical Investment wants higher starting rents for its property at 2153-2199 Kingsway.

A city staff report to council explains: “The applicant has indicated that the restricted valuation on the project has reduced the amount of financing available and thus does not make the project feasible if the units are to meet the definition of ‘for-profit affordable rental housing’ set out in the DCL By-law.”

The report does not contain information on what kind of market rents will make the project viable.

By way of background, city council in 2017 approved the rezoning application for the project under the Rental 100 program.

One of the conditions included a DCL waiver or exemption for the residential component of the six-storey project.

The waiver was sought by the developer in exchange for setting starting rents at or below amounts set by the city to meet its definition of ‘for-profit affordable rental housing’

As of the day of the public hearing for rezoning on May 16, 2017 and guided by the city’s DCL bylaw as of 2016, the starting monthly rents set for the Kingsway project were the following: $1,256 for a studio; $1,674, one bedroom; $2,079, two bedrooms; and $2,603, three bedrooms.

These rates were to start on the day of the public hearing, and the developer was allowed to increase rents yearly based on rates allowed by the province.

Also, the project’s starting rents were higher than average market rates in newer buildings in East Vancouver as of 2016. These other rates were $1,226, studio; $1,592, one bedroom; and $1,980, two bedrooms.

“The applicant has chosen not to seek the optional DCL waiver incentive for 2153-2199 Kingsway and as such, has requested that the rezoning enactment condition for the Housing Agreement be amended to remove the conditions related to the DCL waiver,” according to the staff report to council.

This means that the developer will be paying a DCL of $1.8 million, based on rates as of September 30, 2018.

“Should this change be approved, the conditions that would allow for a DCL waiver, being the maximum unit sizes, requirement for provision of rent rolls and maximum average rental rates, will not be included in the Housing Agreement for this project,” according to the staff report.

The report indicated city staff support for the developer’s request to remove the DCL waiver.

“As the DCL waiver is an incentive taken at the applicant’s discretion, staff have concluded that this rezoning application remains consistent with the Secured Market Rental Housing Policy,” according to the report.

Its not good when developers back out of city programs at the same time as groups are criticizing said programs for giving them too much.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by misher

https://www.straight.com/news/124473...couver-project



Its not good when developers back out of city programs at the same time as groups are criticizing said programs for giving them too much.

I think you missed the points being made in the article.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by misher

Its not good when developers back out of city programs at the same time as groups are criticizing said programs for giving them too much.

As GenWhy said - they're not backing out of the Rental 100 Program. They can opt to provide lower rents in exchange for not paying a DCL, or not. They changed their mind, and gone with 'not'. So they'll pay $1.8m more to the City, and hope to find renters who will pay more than the earlier agreed rents.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Changing City

As GenWhy said - they're not backing out of the Rental 100 Program. They can opt to provide lower rents in exchange for not paying a DCL, or not. They changed their mind, and gone with 'not'. So they'll pay $1.8m more to the City, and hope to find renters who will pay more than the earlier agreed rents.

Yes I understand that I meant there backing out of the DCL Waiver. And the point stands that its a bad sign. It means market rents are much higher than the rents the city is requiring which means more developers may back out and likely implies that rents in Vancouver are rising faster than planned.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by misher

Yes I understand that I meant there backing out of the DCL Waiver. And the point stands that its a bad sign. It means market rents are much higher than the rents the city is requiring which means more developers may back out and likely implies that rents in Vancouver are rising faster than planned.

It doesn't tell me anything about market rents, except that this developer hopes they'll be higher in a couple of years when the building is finished. It also tells me this developer is having trouble raising finances (or at least, the Straight article tells me that). They don't appear to have ever developed anything here before - perhaps they've been a bit over ambitious.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by misher

Yes I understand that I meant there backing out of the DCL Waiver. And the point stands that its a bad sign. It means market rents are much higher than the rents the city is requiring which means more developers may back out and likely implies that rents in Vancouver are rising faster than planned.

All this article tells me is someone didn't do their homework.