Author: admin

Currently, over 50% of Vancouver’s population is living in rental units. However, Vancouver citizens may have been noticing an extreme decline in availability of rental housing; and far fewer options available especially for those with kids or pets. No matter the budget, options have become extremely limited.

According to experts, a healthy rental market will hover between 3% and 5% vacancy. Vancouver has been right around the 0.5% mark for the last two years; and has been at 2% for more than ten years. Despite this, over forty thousand people move to Vancouver every year. Despite this favourable economy, Vancouver lacks enough rental inventory. Currently, rental prices are higher than ever before.

This all raises the question: why have more rental units not been added to the market? It all boils down to a few key issues:

– Land and construction costs have risen, coupling with lengthy approval times due to increased condo development;

– Community opposition: anti-development groups are strong within Vancouver and are considerably aggressive;

– Those who would benefit from more rental housing do not represent themselves at city council meetings, making impossible for a vote to favour more rentals.

A long term fix for Vancouver’s lack of rental units could be brought on by encouraging the collaboration of the private and public sectors to plan and build rental housing. This could help to quicken the process of approving rental projects, including subsidised options, which would in turn increase the range of options available and at lower costs.

Do you rent? How has the low vacancy affected you?

UBC Sociology Professor Nathan Lauster is speaking out against single-family homes in Vancouver. His soon-to-be-released (November 2^nd, 2016) book “The Death and Life of the Single-Family House: Lessons from Vancouver on Building a Livable City” addresses his concerns for creating a city focused on better environment, greater urban vitality, and health of the citizens.

While a single-family home is becoming increasingly difficult to attain; Lauster is busy promoting the idea of multi-family living.

According to Lauster, one of the largest issues arising from single-family dwellings stems from the large amount of large needed to house a single family – the amount of space is not considered to be energy efficient as it encourages the family to drive rather than walk or bike. An issue, he says, that is as bad for our health as it is for the environment.

Lauster also states that encouraging us to be out in our environment would also encourage us to be more multiculutrally-friendly, as citizens would be near their neighbours rather than hidden away on a private property. Lauster disputes the idea that living in a single-family dwelling reflects a successful life; a mindset that he says causes a lot of people feeling like failures that they can’t afford a big house on a private property for their families to live in.

Vancouver is already starting to move in the direction of replacing the older single-family homes with new development – one such example can be found along the Cambie Corridor. According to Lauster, Vancouver is already well on its way to eradicating the single-family home; but believes that this process in Vancouver will see an increase in the speed at which it’s changing.

Do you covet the single-family home? Do you agree with Lauster on his views of Vancouver’s future? Let us know in the comments.

According to the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre, complaints over wrongful evictions in the Vancouver area have increased dramatically in relation to the recent increases in Vancouver rental housing prices of recent months. A new landlord can set rent to whatever price they want; whereas there are strict rules for how quickly rental costs can be increased on an existing tenant.

Some are saying that penalties for landlords who break the rules of the Tenancy Act are far too lax – a mere two month’s rent in compensation to the previous tenant. In one such recent case, a Ms.Gazzola was given two months to remove herself from the home she had lived in for almost thirty years, with the excuse that the house had been sold and that the buyer’s family was to be living in the home. When the sale was finalized, it turned out to be new, more higher-paying tenants who moved in. This called for an appeal to be filed for compensation for the loss of her home.

If the appeal is awarded in favor of Ms.Gazzola, the new owners of the house will be required to pay her two months’ rent – an amount that they can easily and quickly recoup through the new high amount they are changing for rent; and an amount that some believe is not enough for Ms.Gazzola to have had to move over 45 minutes away, to a house with a steeper rental cost.

A group aimed at protecting tenants’ rights, the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre, exists to help people such as Ms.Gazzola. According the group, there has been a large increase in the amount of calls about “bad” evictions in the last year – jumping from 62 calls in a year, to 152 calls the next.

The current shortage of rental housing in Vancouver is a likely candidate to have contributed to the increase in poorly-evicted tenants – the number of applications to dispute eviction notices was well over 4,500 between August 2015 and July 2016. However, the tenancy branch could not comment on that number in relation to previous years as they had since changed their method of data collection. It is possible that this number is higher this year due to an extreme shortage of available suitable rentals – people are getting desperate, and are becoming more willing to pay steep rental prices just to get themselves and their families into a home.

These increased rental prices make it easier for a landlord to break the rules – as they know they can easily cover the costs of a penalty if they end up losing the case. Though, according to the Tenancy Branch, a large portion (18 percent) of the decisions do go in favor of the evicted tenants. Fifty-five percent end up being dismissed, sixteen percent are resolved by settlement, and only ten percent end up in favor of the landlord.

The tenancy branch remains strong that the Tenancy Act, and its subsequent penalties, is fair and balanced.

What are your thoughts on the penalties for “wrongful” evictions? Have you been in either side of this situation?  Tell us your stories below!

Younger adults are leaving Canada’s most expensive cities at a rapid rate, according to Statistics Canada data.

The latest intraprovincial migration numbers show that the number of people leaving the cities for different parts of the province is accelerating, especially amongst the millennial demographic. Millennials are a demographic that will be entering their prime earning and home-buying years soon, so this is not a positive trend to be witnessing.

The total change of people that left the city for another part of the province is called the net intraprovincial migration. For example, if someone from rural Ontario moves to Toronto, and no one leaves Toronto, the net intraprovincial migration is one. If one person moves to Ontario, and three people from Toronto move to Hamilton, the net intraprovincial migration is minus-2. The ideal scenario is that a region attracts more people from other parts of the province than they lose. This number is different from immigration, but is just as important.

Getting people to move to a city is a positive thing, but it’s even better to retain the people who are already living there. At the end of the day, cities are built to sustain people’s lives and not to serve as a marketing tool for attracting new residents who may be disappointed once they arrive. A major change in the intraprovincial migration numbers could be indicating that there is an underlying problem not being addressed or reflected in current government stats.

142,000 people leave Toronto for other parts of Ontario

Toronto’s net intraprovincial migration numbers have been plummeting. Between 2012 to 2017, the net intraprovincial migration was minus-142,465, which is a 77 percent greater loss than the period before. This means that over 142,000 more people left Toronto for other parts of the province than Toronto attracted. This loss is happening much faster than the rate of population growth. It’s clear that what’s happening is that more people are leaving Toronto for cheaper parts of Ontario.
When we look at the age breakdown of those who are leaving, the 20 to 34 year old age bracket saw a net decline over 300 per cent larger than the period before.

To compare, the 35- to 49-year age bracket saw a net decline around 48 percent larger than the period before. Toronto is losing young people at a very rapid pace, to other parts of the province.

B.C.’s Lower Mainland area (including Vancouver) loses over 18,000 people to other parts of the province

The Lower Mainland, the most densely populated part of British Columbia, is also losing people, though faring a bit better than Toronto.

From 2012 to 2017 the region saw a net migration of minus-18,670 people, a loss that was 180 percent greater than the period before. Though the number seems relatively small, B.C. is a province with a much smaller population than Greater Toronto. The net loss to other regions represents a huge increase.

As with Toronto, more people are leaving Lower Mainland for cheaper parts of British Columbia. Two interesting demographics are changing in the province. To start, seniors represent the largest loss with the 65-plus demographic showing a net migration of minus-2,575, a whopping 344 percent more people compared to the previous period.

Secondly, the millennial demographic of 20-to-34 year olds saw net intraprovincial migration reach minus-139, a 103 percent decrease from the period before. This demographic was previously the only demographic not in decline across the region.

It is ironic that the regions of Vancouver and Toronto spend huge amounts of cash to attract millennials. Theoretically, at this point in their lives, millennials should be putting down roots and entering their prime earning years. Retaining millennials is typically a win for both the local economy, as well as birth rates in the region. Any savvy business person knows that it’s cheaper to retain an existing customer than it is to attract a new one. Perhaps it’s time for politicians to take a page from that book?