Vancouver rightists rising against the Downtown Eastside

Vancouver’s civic right wing, long hidden in the shadow cast by the Vision Vancouver goliath, is emerging cloaked in outrage against one part of a Local Area Plan for the Downtown Eastside (DTES). Not that they have much to complain about. Except for one section, the DTES Local Area Plan continues Vision’s trajectory of performing government interventions in the capitalist market only on behalf of capital. The rightists expect City Hall’s plan to continue Vision’s so far unqualified support for the free market; they feel entitled to this support. Their entitlement has them outraged by the exceptional clause of the plan that offers one lonesome anchor to the low-income community against the real estate speculator market push: the “60/40” social-and-rental-housing-only development plan for the DTES Oppenheimer District (DEOD). If Vision Vancouver votes to support the so-called 60/40 development plan, this will plan the DEOD as the one remaining majority low-income section of the DTES; it will be their first intervention in the real estate market against developer and corporate demands for perpetual, state-unregulated growth and wealth accumulation.

Vision Vancouver plans to eliminate the City’s definition of Social Housing

Social Housing Alliance holds a Vigil outside a Vision Vancouver fundraiser to mourn the loss of social and affordable housing in Vancouver, February 28th, 2014.

The definition of social housing has been the focus of the low-income caucus currently participating in the Downtown Eastside Local Area Planning Process (LAP). While a definition of social housing seems simple, it will actually play a crucial role in debates over the DTES Local Area Plan (LAP) in the coming weeks.

This week – on March 12th – Vancouver city staff will present a final draft of the LAP for the Downtown Eastside to city council. The Vision-led City Council will be using this opportunity to strike the definition of low cost housing and social housing in the City’s bylaws, and replace both with a new definition of social housing.

Bob Rennie’s $25,000 lunch: Why Vision’s Vancouver is so unaffordable

For $25,000 you could have attended a private roundtable lunch meeting today with Vision Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson. Organized by real estate marketer Bob Rennie, it’s the most recent, and perhaps most tasteless, case of the real estate industry filling Vision’s coffers.

Bob Rennie is the most prominent condominium marketer in British Columbia. His following of real estate agents, brokers and, more importantly, developers, has earned him the moniker condo king.

The biggest players in real-estate keep him as close as possible, ensuring they’ll have the ear of BC’s most powerful politicians. Peter Wall of Wall Financial Corp, for example, maintains access to Rennie by paying him $25,000 a month as a consultant.

Four Reasons Why the Redevelopment Model at Heather Place Isn’t Good for Affordability

Heather Place is a housing complex in central Vancouver with 86 units of affordable family housing. The housing is run by the Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation (MVHC), who has announced that plans for the redevelopment of Heather Place are moving forward. If the City of Vancouver approves the rezoning of Heather Place this spring, the affordable housing will be demolished and replaced with mixed market housing.

According to the current redevelopment plan, a small portion (26 units) of the subsidized apartments will be retained while the remaining affordable rental (60 units) will be converted into housing at “competitive market rates,” starting at $1,800 for a two-bedroom apartment. Despite constant pressure and organizing from tenants, including an upcoming open house event on March 1st, rents for the majority of the current units at Heather Place are planned to increase significantly.

To address the concerns of tenants and to counteract the dramatic rent increase, MVHC has now offered both a right-of-first-return and access to minimal rent subsidies for existing tenants. There are four fundamental problems with the subsidy model proposed:

1) Income testing loophole

While the new subsidies are a welcome development, given MVHC’s initial position, the plan comes with a significant loophole. Tenants’ incomes will be evaluated to see if they qualify for a subsidy at the new Heather Place, but the test is based on gross income. This standard is flawed because it does not take into account tenants’ basic costs of living, including student loans. Moreover, the calculation does not take into account child care expenses, which amount to $1,000 per month or more for single mothers at Heather Place.