Vancouver Rental Market Discussion

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Everything I've read suggests that Manitoba's rent control is in most ways much more limited than BC's. BC's is by no means limited, when you have sub-inflationary rent increases, you have enforced rent reductions. BC thankfully does not have vacancy control, but we do have strong rent control

Everything I've read says Manitoba's rent controls are stronger for the majority of rental tenancies. Not only did they have 0% rent increase in 2022, but it's also 0% in 2023. And they have no rent increase between tenancies, while we clearly don't. Maybe that's an incentive for landlords to evict tenants? That could explain the higher rate of evictions. Obviously the solution would be to introduce 'vacancy control'. I believe New Westminster has already introduced it, and Vancouver is attempting to apply it to SRO units.

As for getting rid of rent control, no political party at provincial level that's likely to form government agrees, (including Kevin Falcon as BC Liberal leader). Not long ago they proposed tightening the rules to prevent landlords circumventing them through renovictions. So it look like you're own your own there.

[WhipperSnapper]

Rent control of any kind and NIMBYism is preventing investment funds/ developer to build a surplus of rental units driving down rental property values and perhaps rental rates is just a little naive and a little biase towards the pro development side.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Everything I've read says Manitoba's rent controls are stronger for the majority of rental tenancies. Not only did they have 0% rent increase in 2022, but it's also 0% in 2023. And they have no rent increase between tenancies, while we clearly don't. Maybe that's an incentive for landlords to evict tenants? That could explain the higher rate of evictions. Obviously the solution would be to introduce 'vacancy control'. I believe New Westminster has already introduced it, and Vancouver is attempting to apply it to SRO units.

Can I kindly request you please read my messages before responding? The fact of the matter is that vacancy control in Manitoba is only in one particular situation (and you're right, it would disincentivize eviction for new tenants, but it would not disincentivize selling for new owners). A bit of research also seems to show that the Manitoba Residential Tenancy Branch basically always sides with landlords whenever above guideline rent increases are needed. That's unimaginable in British Columbia.

Of the 310 requests to boost rent higher than the 2.4 per cent ceiling in the 2019-20 fiscal year, the branch approved every one — which impacted more than 20,000 units.

The document, obtained by the Opposition NDP last year through a freedom of information request, show some renters saw increases of between 30 and 50 per cent.

NDP Leader Wab Kinew said the RTB too often favours the property owners who call for rent increases.

As stated in my previous message, units above a certain price and younger than 20 years are also completely exempt from rent control.

Originally Posted by Changing City

As for getting rid of rent control, no political party at provincial level that's likely to form government agrees, (including Kevin Falcon as BC Liberal leader). Not long ago they proposed tightening the rules to prevent landlords circumventing them through renovictions. So it look like you're own your own there.

Populist ideas are hard to ween people off of, especially ones that only improve society at the expense of the established electorate. It's just like PST in Alberta, they'd rather burn through their nonrenewable money pool than save a teensy little bit for the future. Schools across the US are still funded by local property taxes rather than statewide because it's political suicide to take money from rich school districts to give to poor districts. Just saying something is hard to implement doesn't make it wrong.

Please don't force us to subsidize "Fuck you, I got mine" renters through the suffering and exclusion of future immigrants, youth, future families and people wanting to move for work. Please don't destroy our city.

[GenWhy?]

If we got rid of rent caps tomorrow my Clients would charge whatever they want / can, as they currently do.

If we evicted a whole 1972 building and did no work on it, we'd charge the same maximum market rents as if it were 50% full of people living there over 20+ years paying below-market rents. The only difference between these two scenarios is the extra money my Client would make.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

If we got rid of rent caps tomorrow my Clients would charge whatever they want / can, as they currently do.

If we evicted a whole 1972 building and did no work on it, we'd charge the same maximum market rents as if it were 50% full of people living there over 20+ years paying below-market rents. The only difference between these two scenarios is the extra money my Client would make.

That building doesn't exist in a vacuum though.

You'd be competing with every other landlord, and developers who would see the potential to build nice new apartments and steal your tenants (forcing you to reduce rents).

[chowhou]

The problem with policies like these is that individuals do not feel the harm done to society, they only feel the harm done to themselves. The rest of society is shouldering the deadweight cost of rent control.

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

If we evicted a whole 1972 building and did no work on it, we'd charge the same maximum market rents as if it were 50% full of people living there over 20+ years paying below-market rents. The only difference between these two scenarios is the extra money my Client would make.

The difference being that the existing tenants will have to rebalance their housing wants and needs to what they can afford and provide the opportunity for others who have a greater housing need to buy in. It doesn't sound like a lot on the small scale, but some level of turnover should be considered healthy. Zero turnover is absolutely unhealthy.

As WarrenC12 explained, the incentive should be to provide the lowest price to attract tenants, not to lock in tenants at prices.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That building doesn't exist in a vacuum though.

You'd be competing with every other landlord, and developers who would see the potential to build nice new apartments and steal your tenants (forcing you to reduce rents).

The problem is there is no competition. We don't lower our rents, even in old buildings. We rent them out based on what the market can digest.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

The problem is there is no competition. We don't lower our rents, even in old buildings. We rent them out based on what the market can digest.

This is kind of a contradiction . There wouldn't be a market if there wasn't competition.

I don't fully disagree though, demand is outstripping supply, but that's the core issue, not the fact that price is adjusting to reality.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

The problem is there is no competition. We don't lower our rents, even in old buildings. We rent them out based on what the market can digest.

Of course, everybody does for all products. The lack of supply, mostly due to restrictive zoning rules, is the problem.

Rent controls are a bandaid. Unfortunately the patient was stabbed and needs surgery to control the internal bleeding.

[GenWhy?]

If there is one thing I completely disagree with it's the rent cap staying with the unit. That is a recipe for disaster. We don't run a charity.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

If there is one thing I completely disagree with it's the rent cap staying with the unit. That is a recipe for disaster. We don't run a charity.

Yeah that makes no sense. But, isn't a very long term tenant almost like the same thing?

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Rent controls are a bandaid. Unfortunately the patient was stabbed and needs surgery to control the internal bleeding.

Rent controls are a dirty band aid. Maybe good to temporarily stop bleeding, but leave it on too long and you'll have to fight off disease instead.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Yeah that makes no sense. But, isn't a very long term tenant almost like the same thing?

Rental turn-over is quite high so very few stay very long, in our stuff anyway.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Of course, everybody does for all products. The lack of supply, mostly due to restrictive zoning rules, is the problem.

Rent controls are a bandaid. Unfortunately the patient was stabbed and needs surgery to control the internal bleeding.

The province gave the city the power to rezone whole neighburhoods to rental only. Have they used it to any large degree?

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The province gave the city the power to rezone whole neighburhoods to rental only. Have they used it to any large degree?

Broadway Plan.

Streamlined Rental Policy. May not be big by our standards but with the make-up of council I was suppressed it passed in its current form at all!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The province gave the city the power to rezone whole neighburhoods to rental only. Have they used it to any large degree?

It has to come with big density uplifts too. I'm not sure they've done too much.

I am more in favor of free market zoning... build whatever the market wants, within reason.

The city has had to give up big CACs and other concessions to try and convince developers to build rental.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I am more in favor of free market zoning... build whatever the market wants, within reason.

Two other big evils in Vancouver/Canada are Euclidian zoning and the "Grand Bargain".

I would love to see the Japanese zoning system in Canada. Contrary to popular belief, there are zoning laws in Japan, but they're inclusive zoning laws rather than exclusive zoning laws. Instead of saying "only SFH are allowed to be built in this zone", the zone would look more like "Heavy industry and businesses larger than 3000 sqm are not allowed". Importantly, there's no zone which excludes every single type of building use besides single family homes. Once again, this is another populist policy that came about because people focused more on the effects on themselves than on society. "Would you want a busy business next to where you live? By the way, you will need to drive 20 minutes to find any business whatsover and we banned all the poors from living here in little homes ."

[Klazu]

Interesting read and it sounds like many existing residents are trying to have their cake and eat it too. I hope they didn't think city buying the building would mean they can keep their ridiculously under the market rates completely as-is. The option to pin all the extra charges on new residents and create a two-tier system is also an yikes.

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/bu...erned-rates-will-rise-after-sale-5946597

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Interesting read and it sounds like many existing residents are trying to have their cake and eat it too. I hope they didn't think city buying the building would mean they can keep their ridiculously under the market rates completely as-is. The option to pin all the extra charges on new residents and create a two-tier system is also an yikes.

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/bu...erned-rates-will-rise-after-sale-5946597

Charging a market rate for a fully renovated and vacant suite seems reasonable while un-renovated occupied suites get a 14% increase as opposed to their annual 3% seems reasonable as long as they collect enough for their lease payments.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Charging a market rate for a fully renovated and vacant suite seems reasonable while un-renovated occupied suites get a 14% increase as opposed to their annual 3% seems reasonable as long as they collect enough for their lease payments.

Sure would be reasonable but as per the article even that is seeing conflicting views with some people looking only for an option where they can retain their $900/month rates, which are criminally low in 2022. The city spent an awfully lot of money to purchase the tower to protect it from being converted to private market rental and cannot be asked to do more, which I am sure is what some are hoping to see.