Unless the Provincial Government is going to include such restrictions in the Strata Act, this may only possible through registration of a Housing Agreement at the time of rezoning. For some reason, the City of Vancouver doesn’t seem to be doing this.

Ban the prohibition of rentals by strata councils and at the same time change the rental act so evictions in condo buildings are much easier.

(Most stratas ban rentals and many strata owners who might be willing to rent have reasonable fears of dealing with the eviction process if a rental arrangement goes sour or they want the place back because of a change in plans.)

Westender heads up: “to encourage the construction of some new purpose built, long term rental buildings through density bonuses, . . .” You are merely reinforcing an, already familiar, status quo:

The recent development surge provided a few ephemeral jobs: now disappeared, unlikely to return.

However the real damage to the community caused by the financing of such development is, essentially, interest accruing debt that immediately leaves town: a burden developers, renters and mortgagees, alike, must endure.

If local working capital has survived and remains in town there is an urgency to put it to good use immediately!

We still have a strong, albeit ignored, resources base: it is in need of serious attention. May I suggest some possibilities?

i. Value-added lumber and mineral manufacturing.

ii. Resuscitate wild fish stocks.

iii. Protected the movie industry from a capricious dollar.

iv. Digital industry (i.e. Reboot) ditto.

v. Marine industries ditto.

And much more value added endeavors beyond the limits of my imagination.

I am aware, Michael, of your long valuable contribution, albeit of another ethos: of dubious durability and detrimental to the long-term interests of this funny little town.

Hopefully, though, a wise electorate, should you choose to run again, will ensure your happy retirement.

Wishing you a long and insightful life . . . Ojala . . .

Most one bedroom apartments range between 475 and 600 square feet and you can do the corresponding calculations. CMHC estimates that the average one bedroom rent in the West End is around $1050.

Most two bedroom apartments range from 725 to 850 square feet. The average two bedroom rent is about $1600, or again, around $2 a foot.

New high quality condominiums in good locations can rent for up to $2.50 a square foot.

While $2 a foot seems quite high (even to me…I paid under $1 a foot when I last rented in the West End!) this rent is generally not enough to cover the cost of the ‘economic rent’ in a purpose built rental apartment building. Some previous posts have questioned this, but it is the reality. Right now, it costs about $225 to $250 a square foot to build a concrete building. All of the ‘soft costs’…architectural and engineering, permits, fees, levies, insurance and interest and financing fees can add 20% or more. And remember, you can’t rent every square foot you build…the ratio of leaseable area to built area is in the order of 86%.

You then have to add in the maintenance, repair and operating expenses and taxes. Again, they vary but are often in the order of 25% to 33% of the rent charged.

And so far, I haven’t mentioned land. Land values for condos in the West End are currently in the order of $130 per square foot. Yes, per square foot of building area. However, even if you don’t pay for the land…that is to say you get a density bonus….you cannot build a new building and charge $2 a foot and make any money when the building is finished. You will over time, but not in the first couple of years.

And as a result, the banks do not want to lend you the money unless you pay them even higher placement fees and offer personal guarantees.

Today’s lower interest rates are closing the gap between market rents and economic rents, but who can guarantee that they will remain. And when you look at 10 year rates, they are much higher than the rates you could get on a 1 year open mortgage.

Now before someone writes to say that this is nonsense since people are buying condos for $400,000 and renting them out, remember these people are not covering their costs. They are buying these units because they are gambling that the value will increase before closing, or in the coming years. And they might. But these units don’t have a covenant on title guaranteeing that they must remain rental for 20 years, or forever. That makes a big difference.

Finally, it is worth commenting on the vacancy rate. I have previously written that the vacancy rate is higher than the 0.5% which is often quoted by CMHC. That is because the CMHC statistics do not include condos that are rented out, or basement suites. Some have suggested that the vacancy rate in some areas may be approaching 5%. A ‘normal’ vacancy rate is considered to be around 3%. But even though the vacancy rate may be increasing, I think it is in the public interest to encourage the construction of some new purpose built, long term rental buildings through density bonuses, as long as the buildings fit in with their setting, and the bonus is not too generous.

I hope this is helpful.

In the “real world” Tessa “housing is IDEOLOGY, not policy.

I think rental is hugely important, especially considering it’s not getting built at reasonable rates at all right now, and that pushes up the prices of other rental units in the city as it becomes more scarce, hurting the entire city population. But it’s hard to see how effective this particular effort will be given the story.

If you could answer my questions I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.

Evidently for good citizens, that is becoming a distant dream.

“Affordability” was temporarily addressed, first during the ’40′s with “Liberty ship building” then with Federal programs that gave us FCS in the ’70′s.

And prior to 1970, Ricardo’s theory of “comparative advantage”, BC, Vancouver’s was a burgeoning resource based economy.

Early ’70′s mayor Art Phillips declared Vancouver an “executive” city with no policies to replace our comparative advantage with a sustainable job rich economy.

Mayor Phillip Owen recognized this and proposed the FC flats to be a “hi-tech” zone . . . that never got off the ground.

So as of today, Timber West on the Island is busily converting the productive tree farm licenses into subdivisions . . . the theory being, I suppose, if you cannot afford the big city go live in the bush: an economy based in desperation that cannot be sustained.

In other word our traditional, labour-intensive, comparative advantage, resource base, has disappeared, willingly, evidently, to be replaced by expensive pent-houses, expensive views, affordable to an itinerant, off-shore contingent, we may never meet, never know or have as neighbours: distant sprawl and more cars for the hoi polloi.

One bright day some one will come up with a bright idea for a job-rich sustainable, clean manufacturing base: but that is along way off for BC!

For the foreseeable future, we are faced with a post-Olympic, gloominess that may last a while.