1451 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Oh but it was! It has been at 0.5% on quite a number of occasions.

I don’t know anyone who can’t get a place even in this market if they’re willing to rent what is affordable to them and set their expectations accordingly. And I’m not even talking about rich folks, but your average renter. My girlfriend’s early 20-something sister just got a place. No problems at all. And she’s just a regular young lady working an average service job.

[tjv]

June 2013 the vacancy rate was 3.4% and the same as the year prior.  Devon Properties says in the article the real rate is closer to 6 to 7%

 

https://www.timescol...enants-1.327667

Edited by tjv, 27 October 2018 - 04:06 PM.

[Mike K.]

Go here and play around with the tools on the right. Under the Primary Rental Market list on the left, click Vacancy Rate and scroll back to 2001, where you'll see it was 0.5%, 1.5% in 2002, 1.1% in 2003.

 

2005-2007 it was back down to 0.5%. In 2008 it was 0.4% before going back up in 2009. By 2014 it was back down below 1.0% again and hasn't increased since then.

 

It's a fun resource and full of all sorts of data.

[N E Body]

In many ways it’s no different today than it was in the 00’s (when we also had very, very low vacancy rates but builders had no or limited access to capital to build, or rezonings were too arduous) for acquiring a place. But today the costs are much higher and the issue of finding a place has become a political one. Funny how things reversed.

In the mid-00’s Quadra Pacific wanted to build two or three rental towers in James Bay on parking lots of their (then) rental towers (since all sold). City council, despite the low vacancy, voted against them. So efforts had been made to build new inventory but council of the day wasn’t having any of it. In fact the situation was so bad that Devon Properties started publicly challenging the status quo and warning what could happen if council did not allow new supply to materialize. And what could happen happened. Now we have a so-called “crisis.” Although it’s not really a crisis but it is a situation that can be politically usurped in multiple ways.

 

We were discussing the issue that plagues us today in the late 90s. The vacancy rate was still healthy at that time but it was obvious that there was a dearth of construction of purpose built rentals... and, eventually, we knew that would come back to haunt the city.

The only reason 54% of all rentals that exist today were built in the 70s is not because of demand by baby boomers but, instead, was due to government tax incentives... MURBS. MURBS created over supply on an enormous scale but those tax incentives ended the same year as the early 80s recession and nobody could dump the units... so they sat half full right up until around 1997 when the vacancy rate started to edge down significantly.

Edited by N E Body, 27 October 2018 - 05:19 PM.

[N E Body]

June 2013 the vacancy rate was 3.4% and the same as the year prior.  Devon Properties says in the article the real rate is closer to 6 to 7%

 

https://www.timescol...enants-1.327667

 

I agree. It was strange because the vacancy rate had dipped down below 1% just a few years before that and then it quickly climbed... but, just like that... POOF!... it took only two years after that period to dip below 1% again. It was very odd.

[Mike K.]

We were discussing the issue that plagues us today in the late 90s. The vacancy rate was still healthy at that time but it was obvious that there was a dearth of construction of purpose built rentals... and, eventually, we knew that would come back to haunt the city.

The only reason 54% of all rentals that exist today were built in the 70s is not because of demand by baby boomers but, instead, was due to government tax incentives... MURBS. MURBS created over supply on an enormous scale but those tax incentives ended the same year as the early 80s recession and nobody could dump the units... so they sat half full right up until around 1997 when the vacancy rate started to edge down significantly.

 

The vacancy rate was high(er) compared to today between 1992-2000 but it certainly wasn't 50%.

 

CHMC shows the data for the 90's as so:

90: 0.3%

91: 0.8%

92: 1.5%

93: 1.8%

94: 1.9%

95: 3.3%

96: 4.1%

97: 3.4%

98: 3.8%

99: 3.5%

00: 1.8%

01: 0.5%

[N E Body]

The vacancy rate was high(er) compared to today between 1992-2000 but it certainly wasn't 50%.

 

CHMC shows the data for the 90's as so:

90: 0.3%

91: 0.8%

92: 1.5%

93: 1.8%

94: 1.9%

95: 3.3%

96: 4.1%

97: 3.4%

98: 3.8%

99: 3.5%

00: 1.8%

01: 0.5%

 

I'm sorry but I don't believe that data for a minute.

 

Basically, it's saying that there were more people renting in Victoria than there are today... with almost the same amount of stock that existed up until around 2006. That would mean that the influx of people into Victoria literally stayed stagnant for well over a decade. Not sure what CMHC is using for their survey but it seems really out of whack for the 90s in particular. I can remember when the listings for the property management companies took up at least a half of a page in the TC.

 

... and, yes, saying half full was an exaggeration... but for a few property managers it wasn't far off the mark.

Edited by N E Body, 27 October 2018 - 09:42 PM.

[Mike K.]

Even with our tiny vacancy rate today you'll still see hundreds of rentals listed on Craigslist and many of those would have been listed in newspapers if that was still in vogue. At the end of the 90's and into the 00's we started seeing fewer and fewer classifieds/traditional ad-based listings and more usage of Internet-based listings.

 

CMHC's data is pretty bang on. There's no reason to think it's incorrect or suffers from poor data standards.

 

One thing to take into consideration is in the 90's and 00's private rentals in condos skyrocketed but those rentals are not part of the statistics above. So more people were renting, just not in purpose-built rentals.

[N E Body]

Even with our tiny vacancy rate today you'll still see hundreds of rentals listed on Craigslist and many of those would have been listed in newspapers if that was still in vogue. At the end of the 90's and into the 00's we started seeing fewer and fewer classifieds/traditional ad-based listings and more usage of Internet-based listings.

 

CMHC's data is pretty bang on. There's no reason to think it's incorrect or suffers from poor data standards.

 

One thing to take into consideration is in the 90's and 00's private rentals in condos skyrocketed but those rentals are not part of the statistics above. So more people were renting, just not in purpose-built rentals.

 

In the TC article posted by tjv above, you'll notice that Rob Hunter from Devon disputes CMHC data. If anyone should know, it's him. I've heard it from other property management people, and witnessed it personally, over the last 20 years. Maybe there are times when their data is bang on but there are definitely times when their data is askew.

[Mike K.]

Sure, it may not line up exactly with other data sources but apartments were not 50% vacant in the 90’s. Things weren’t quite that bad.

Reed Kipp of Devon told me the other day that their vacancy rate is actually lower than the 0.5% rate, things are just that tight at the moment.

[N E Body]

Sure, it may not line up exactly with other data sources but apartments were not 50% vacant in the 90’s. Things weren’t quite that bad.

Reed Kipp of Devon told me the other day that their vacancy rate is actually lower than the 0.5% rate, things are just that tight at the moment.

 

Mike... I already admitted that it was an exaggeration... but I did know of a few buildings that had vacancies of 15-20% in the mid nineties.

 

About the proliferation of ads in the TC in the 90s... and speaking of Devon... yes, I saw the interview on Citified where Reed Kipp talks about the fact they have 8 units available from a portfolio of 5300+. That contrasts greatly with the 30-40+ ads you would see in the TC during the 90s... in both Devon and Brown Bros.

[spanky123]

I'm sorry but I don't believe that data for a minute.

 

 

Remember that the data only reflects purpose built rentals which are part of the market. Much of the ebb and flow is picked up by secondary suites and other forms of rentals.

[tjv]

I never recall having problems finding places to rent in the 90s or 00s EVER.  Lots of places to view and I had my choice of what I wanted.  I don't recall any friends every saying in that period they had trouble finding places either.  Regardless, I don't believe that data for a second.  Only in the last few years have we had issues with people finding places.

 

According to that data in 2001 had lower vacancy than today, can anyone find any news articles about people having trouble finding places to rent?  I moved in early 2001 and my personal experience was I had lots of choices

[spanky123]

I never recall having problems finding places to rent in the 90s or 00s EVER.  Lots of places to view and I had my choice of what I wanted.  I don't recall any friends every saying in that period they had trouble finding places either.  Regardless, I don't believe that data for a second.  Only in the last few years have we had issues with people finding places.

 

According to that data in 2001 had lower vacancy than today, can anyone find any news articles about people having trouble finding places to rent?  I moved in early 2001 and my personal experience was I had lots of choices

 

I owned lots of rental properties from the mid 90's - mid 00's. Whenever I had a vacancy I would post notice of an open house in Monday mag and I always had tenants secured by the end of the day at my asking price. That may not be as hectic as it is today, but there was definitely more tenants then decent properties. 

[Mike K.]

I on the other hand remember people facing great difficulties. But you didn’t hear about it because prices were low, so the only scapegoat was lack of supply which tied ultimately back to the City of Victoria’s and the greater region’s anti-development attitude which is not something the governments of the day were interested in debating.

But today we not only have the same rental conditions, but prices have soared. Therefore now the vacancy rate is a crisis.

[spanky123]

But today we not only have the same rental conditions, but prices have soared. Therefore now the vacancy rate is a crisis.

 

Prices have soared but our dollar has tanked as well which makes us an even more attractive destination in a global economy. If you price rent in USD then Victoria is no more expensive than any secondary City in a developed country. If you follow the local tech scene as an example, lots of people relocate here to do remote work for US or internaional companies. I seem to recall a survey recently that stated up to 25% of the tech workforce works remotely for USD.

Edited by spanky123, 28 October 2018 - 08:17 AM.

[N E Body]

 Whoops! Darn phone.

Edited by N E Body, 28 October 2018 - 08:21 AM.

[N E Body]

We were also in the market in 1991-1992 and the choices and prices were myriad. Nothing like today at all.

Edited by N E Body, 28 October 2018 - 08:23 AM.

[Mike K.]

Like I said before, nobody has trouble finding a place if they can afford a wider range of rents.

Where the trouble starts is if you have $1,000 available for rent.

[Rob Randall]

Victoria: Pacific picnic

Yaffe, Barbara.The Globe and Mail; Toronto, Ont.

15 May 1979

 

Mr. Kinlou, living on his savings, rents a room in a downtown apartment-hotel as he hunts for an affordable flat. The former producer for closed-circuit television said: If I wanted to pay $300 or $400 a month rent, I'd have a good choice. For $150 a month and a good location, it's not easy.

Mr. and Mrs. Neering live on the $698 minimum monthly income guaranteed to couples over age 65 in British Columbia. They have no money for indulgences and have been grateful to generous offspring when confronted with unanticipated expenses.

Some years ago, housing was a critical problem though vacancy rates have since eased and non-profit low-cost housing is more plentiful. Victoria-born Mayor Michael Young said in an interview the city's unique population means a potential housing problem and shortage of health resources will always exist.