Vancouver Rental Market Discussion - Page 27

Changing City · #**521** Posted **Dec 16, 2022, 2:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klazu

I gotta love them still trying to spin those as "temporary". First ones are approaching 10 years of age and once you have one in your neighborhood, it's never going to go away. So, better get comfortable and get used to the new ghet... neighbours.

As well as the first only being assembled in 2017, the 137 E37th buildings have already been taken down and relocated after three years of use. There's a new permanent social housing building proposed to replace them.

So they do go away.

officedweller · #**522** Posted **Dec 16, 2022, 11:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

(And FYI, they were built in the 20s, not post WWII)

Ah, thanks.
When UBC moved from Fairview to Point Grey I guess.

Zepfancouver · #**523** Posted **Feb 23, 2023, 12:01 AM**

This would drastically change the look of Pacific St. on the West end. Maybe the start of a row of high-rises (rentals) with great views along Pacific St.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/106...4d-123.1338938

whatnext · #**524** Posted **Feb 23, 2023, 12:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zepfancouver

This would drastically change the look of Pacific St. on the West end. Maybe the start of a row of high-rises (rentals) with great views along Pacific St.

If I recall correctly at least one of the 70-80s era stratas across the street from this has a land assembly for sale sign out front, so it could change quite a bit on that stretch!

jollyburger · #**525** Posted **Feb 23, 2023, 4:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

If I recall correctly at least one of the 70-80s era stratas across the street from this has a land assembly for sale sign out front, so it could change quite a bit on that stretch!

1080 Pacific on the corner next to Thurlow had the assembly sign

1065 Pacific was on sale for $19 million in 2020

https://goodmanreport.com/app/upload...couver_web.pdf

Changing City · #**526** Posted **Mar 18, 2023, 6:09 AM**

As the first four rezonings for the City of Vancouver's newly developed Secured Rental Policy have been approved, I looked at where the program is at so far.

There are 26 rezoning proposals submitted that will see about 80 single family homes replaced with (at a rough estimate) 1,600 rental apartments in four, five and six storey buildings.

Some of the sites will replace just one house and the largest is an assembly of seven. It looks as if two-thirds are on the west side and a third the east. Not all the developers are identified, but there are some well-known companies like Strand, Intracorp and Alabaster Homes involved, as well as newer developers like Sightline Properties (who are proposing two projects with 20% of the homes renting below market).

whatnext · #**527** Posted **Jun 7, 2023, 7:39 PM**

Well, this is just sad:

Photos: How 'private' is this minuscule Vancouver room rental with glass walls?
You, too, could live in a glass box in Vancouver.
Brendan Kergin
a day ago

After seeing a rented room in downtown Vancouver, some may want to invest in curtain companies.

An ad on Facebook Marketplace is advertising a solarium (although the ad calls it a den) in downtown Vancouver for $1,200 with a great view of downtown Vancouver — and the rest of the apartment.

That's because three of the walls are floor-ceiling windows. The last wall is glass as well, but it's a mirror which, at first glance, makes the room look much larger than it is.

While the room looks long, it appears to be less than 10 feet by 10 feet. And even though the room is tiny, it has two doors; one opens into the kitchen, while the other leads to a dining area.

The rental is described as a private room, but in the photos, only the window to the outside world has blinds.

"In the den, there will be a single mattress and table," states the advertisement. "Also, you can use the living room as a place to study. But as the living room is shared you gotta keep it clean always."....

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/l...-walls-7105462

officedweller · #**528** Posted **Jun 7, 2023, 10:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Well, this is just sad:

Photos: How 'private' is this minuscule Vancouver room rental with glass walls?
You, too, could live in a glass box in Vancouver.
Brendan Kergin
a day ago

After seeing a rented room in downtown Vancouver, some may want to invest in curtain companies.

An ad on Facebook Marketplace is advertising a solarium (although the ad calls it a den) in downtown Vancouver for $1,200 with a great view of downtown Vancouver — and the rest of the apartment.

That's because three of the walls are floor-ceiling windows. The last wall is glass as well, but it's a mirror which, at first glance, makes the room look much larger than it is.

While the room looks long, it appears to be less than 10 feet by 10 feet. And even though the room is tiny, it has two doors; one opens into the kitchen, while the other leads to a dining area.

The rental is described as a private room, but in the photos, only the window to the outside world has blinds.

"In the den, there will be a single mattress and table," states the advertisement. "Also, you can use the living room as a place to study. But as the living room is shared you gotta keep it clean always."....

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/l...-walls-7105462

That's what we did in university in downtown Toronto in the early 1990s.
We rented units with solariums and one guy took the solarium and papered up the sliding glass door.

Changing City · #**529** Posted **Jun 7, 2023, 10:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

That's what we did in university in downtown Toronto in the early 1990s.
We rented units with solariums and one guy took the solarium and papered up the sliding glass door.

... said the person who lives in their office...

SpongeG · #**530** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 12:44 AM**

'You don't listen to renters': Vancouver Tenants Union disrupts housing announcement

June 7, 2023 3:29 p.m. PDT

Rental housing advocates interrupted an announcement by B.C.'s housing minister in Vancouver Wednesday morning to object to the provincial government's response to the affordability crisis.

"I'm sorry to be doing this," said Mazdak Gharibnavaz, a volunteer with the Vancouver Tenants Union, as he stepped in front of Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon's podium.

"You and your staff – no offence to you – you do not know what renters need. We do."

...

Kahlon was speaking at the site of a future 28-storey rental tower, which is under construction at 2538 Birch St. in Vancouver.

The project is slated to include 258 rental units, with 58 of them designated as "below market" units and 200 designed to be affordable to households with middle incomes, according to the province.

Gharibnavaz described the project – and the redevelopment of the Broadway Corridor more broadly – as an effort to replace aging, affordable rental buildings with new towers that are significantly more expensive, even when they're supposed to be affordable.

"These are luxury homes that you want to replace their buildings with," he said. "Your plan is for your developer friends to drive us out of our neighbourhoods and out of our cities. Tenants understand that this provincial government will not protect us or stand up for our human right to housing."

...

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/you-don-t-list...ment-1.6431817

SpongeG · #**531** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 12:46 AM**

Back in the 90's, when my friends and I were in our 20s, most people I knew would rent out their dining rooms or their bedrooms and live in their dining rooms to make a place more affordable when living in the West End.

Today people doing that makes headlines but its always been pretty normal, no?

giallo · #**532** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 1:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

[B]'
Gharibnavaz described the project – and the redevelopment of the Broadway Corridor more broadly – as an effort to replace aging, affordable rental buildings with new towers that are significantly more expensive, even when they're supposed to be affordable.

"These are luxury homes that you want to replace their buildings with," he said. "Your plan is for your developer friends to drive us out of our neighbourhoods and out of our cities. Tenants understand that this provincial government will not protect us or stand up for our human right to housing.

So build nothing then? The continued lack of supply will eventually make these rentals more expensive. Like, where is everyone else supposed to live that moves here? Where are their rentals?

I really don't understand these people.

Migrant_Coconut · #**533** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 1:45 AM**

MIRHPP by definition includes below-market units. $1,750 for two beds (or even $3k at market rate) is a "luxury home?" Boy, do I have news for that guy...

FarmerHaight · #**534** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 3:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by giallo

So build nothing then?

This is the problem with some people who take renter protection to the extreme. I know there are plenty of scumbag landlords out there who don't maintain their properties or who would love to evict someone out of spite or who would jack up rents any chance they get. Having protections against those sorts of behavior is good.

But for the people who complain about wood frame condos on Broadway or in Metrotown getting demolished for more housing units, they are almost as bad as NIMBYs. Sure, the guy who's been living in the same 30 years-old condo for a decade pays dirt cheap rent, but what about the thousands of additional renters moving to the region every year? Where are they supposed to live, if not in newly built rental units?

I understand the desire to bulldoze SFHs before existing condos, but it's not like the net gain of units is miniscule on these projects. I, as much as anyone, wish Nanaimo and Rupert and 29th would densify concurrent with the Broadway redevelopments. But blocking redevelopment because you don't want to lose your cheap apartments (when you'll get first right of refusal at the same rent anyways?) is selfish IMO.

WarrenC12 · #**535** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 3:34 PM**

Today's luxury condos are 2043's cheap rentals. Amazing how morons can't comprehend this.

bluefox · #**536** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 3:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by giallo

So build nothing then? The continued lack of supply will eventually make these rentals more expensive. Like, where is everyone else supposed to live that moves here? Where are their rentals?

I really don't understand these people.

Once you understand that the Vancouver Tenants' Union claims to speak for all renters, yet is really only advocating on behalf of its actual membership (which is 2,500 people), it starts to make more sense. It's essentially an interest group for the people who are part of it. If they were actually interested in supporting renters writ large, they would be in favour of increasing supply.

This is a subset of folks that essentially believes that existing rental stock can remain in place in perpetuity without being touched, and it magically won't deteriorate or eventually need repairs or replacement. There is no reasoning with much of that crowd. In this case, the announcement they disrupted to argue against displacement was at a site that contained a Denny's (i.e. it's not a demoviction). They have an unhealthy fixation on "luxury condos", of which their definition is already quite loose. Not sure anyone will ever change their hearts and minds... and not sure it's worth it to try.

GenWhy? · #**537** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 5:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluefox

Not sure anyone will ever change their hearts and minds... and not sure it's worth it to try.

Definitely not a group to reason with in their current form. They have also routinely misinformed the folks they are claiming to help in at least 3-4 redevelopments I'm aware of where a few folks ended up with worse deals, having less time to move out, incorrect information that the City had to issue clarifications to all tenants. Just a mess.

chowhou · #**538** Posted **Jun 8, 2023, 6:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

they are almost as bad as NIMBYs.

No, they're exactly the same.

The "Nothing around me can change, fuck everyone who comes after me, you cannot take away what I have" mentality doesn't change whether you own property or rent.

Pace of change, rent control, ROFR at below market, and all the rhetoric around "demoviction luxury replacement" are fundamentally no different from SFH zoning, globally low property tax rates + property tax deferral, character retention, and the rhetoric around "megatowers crippling infrastructure and parking".

"Fuck everyone who comes after me, I got mine."

It's ladder pulling up behaviour, all of it. The sooner all of those toxic policies go the better.