The Ultimate Vancouver Rumour Thread!

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by rofina

That attachment leads into a whole new rabbit hole for discussion, but really would drive me back full circle to where I started.

From the City document;



AKA - AirBnB use is filling a void that hotels left behind. Demand, meet supply.

Follow up questions;

- Why is it not economically viable to run a hotel in Vancouver? I have to assume its cheaper to build a hotel room versus a DT condo? It would seem counterintuitive AirBnB could be profitable vs a lesser expensive hotel unit?
Without having a clue, I'm quite sure the answer will be government interference at some level.

- (somewhat rhetorical) Why is there not enough supply of housing to meet all demand necessary?

Either way - both of the above point to failed policy.

The insane run-up in Vancouver land prices have made some uses less economic. Of course, if a parcel was zone only for a hotel it should have theoretically been worth less. However if developers believe there is "wriggle room" with council on that kind of zoning, well, the price will increase accordingly.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

That attachment leads into a whole new rabbit hole for discussion, but really would drive me back full circle to where I started.

From the City document;

AKA - AirBnB use is filling a void that hotels left behind. Demand, meet supply.

Follow up questions;

- Why is it not economically viable to run a hotel in Vancouver? I have to assume its cheaper to build a hotel room versus a DT condo? It would seem counterintuitive AirBnB could be profitable vs a lesser expensive hotel unit?
Without having a clue, I'm quite sure the answer will be government interference at some level.

- (somewhat rhetorical) Why is there not enough supply of housing to meet all demand necessary?

Either way - both of the above point to failed policy.

AirBnB started out leasing out spare rooms in people's homes. Once it became a platform for investor condo purchasers to make a return while seeing their capital value appreciate (they hoped) it became a disruptor, damaging the rental market and the hotel industry.

For many years operators didn't pay any hotel taxes. The owners pay residential tax, not commercial tax. They don't offer the services that hotels offer (cleaning, security, on-site check-in staff etc.), so they avoid those costs. They can charge less than a hotel room, and still potentially earn more than a typical rental income. The other strata owners have to put up with the reduced security (guests don't care if the door latches behind them) and disruption (parties, damage to common property etc) that some AirBnB tenants bring.

Those are some of the reasons why many cities have moved to limit AirBnB operators, including in Vancouver. It's why there have been fewer hotel operators coming into the Vancouver market, and why older, cheaper hotels have been closing and selling to condo builders or as non-market housing. The margins are too tight, and the profit from selling at land value too great.

Taking the Fairmont Pacific Rim as an example of why a developer would always build more condos, and never a hotel (if the didn't have to because of zoning). The 175 condos have a 2021 assessed value of $747m. The hotel, which has slightly more floorspace, is assessed at $159m. The more recent Trump Tower has an assessed value of $59m for the hotel, and the slightly larger 216 condo component (in terms of floor area) has a valuation of $525m.

[officedweller]

I would shudder to think what the taxes would be on a hotel if it were assessed at residential prices, but had to pay commercial rate property taxes.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

AirBnB started out leasing out spare rooms in people's homes. Once it became a platform for investor condo purchasers to make a return while seeing their capital value appreciate (they hoped) it became a disruptor, damaging the rental market and the hotel industry.

For many years operators didn't pay any hotel taxes. The owners pay residential tax, not commercial tax. They don't offer the services that hotels offer (cleaning, security, on-site check-in staff etc.), so they avoid those costs. They can charge less than a hotel room, and still potentially earn more than a typical rental income. The other strata owners have to put up with the reduced security (guests don't care if the door latches behind them) and disruption (parties, damage to common property etc) that some AirBnB tenants bring.

Those are some of the reasons why many cities have moved to limit AirBnB operators, including in Vancouver. It's why there have been fewer hotel operators coming into the Vancouver market, and why older, cheaper hotels have been closing and selling to condo builders or as non-market housing. The margins are too tight, and the profit from selling at land value too great.

Taking the Fairmont Pacific Rim as an example of why a developer would always build more condos, and never a hotel (if the didn't have to because of zoning). The 175 condos have a 2021 assessed value of $747m. The hotel, which has slightly more floorspace, is assessed at $159m. The more recent Trump Tower has an assessed value of $59m for the hotel, and the slightly larger 216 condo component (in terms of floor area) has a valuation of $525m.

I'm not at all a fan of AirBnB in residential buildings being operated like hotel units.

But I'm also confused why a City would impose a hotel tax, Ill even have to google what that is. It seems ridiculous, and I suspect a major reason why the numbers might not make sense to operate one in Vancouver.

[Denscity]

I think hotel taxes go towards tourism advertising?

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by rofina

I'm not at all a fan of AirBnB in residential buildings being operated like hotel units.

But I'm also confused why a City would impose a hotel tax, Ill even have to google what that is. It seems ridiculous, and I suspect a major reason why the numbers might not make sense to operate one in Vancouver.

MRDT

https://www.destinationbc.ca/what-we...rces/mrdt/faq/

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Denscity

I think hotel taxes go towards tourism advertising?

They do, generally. It's a Provincial tax. I can't think of any hotel, in any city I've stayed in, that hasn't added some sort of tourism levy. (Oops, Jollyburger beat me to it).

[WarrenC12]

All places love to hammer tourists. Just look at what you pay in/out of airports.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by Changing City

They do, generally. It's a Provincial tax. I can't think of any hotel, in any city I've stayed in, that hasn't added some sort of tourism levy. (Oops, Jollyburger beat me to it).

Yes or a "resort tax/fee". Vegas may call it something else.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Yes or a "resort tax/fee". Vegas may call it something else.

There’s a difference between a “resort fee” which is added by hotels onto the nightly room rate (in order to make the room appear cheaper than it is) and a Hotel Tax which flies through a government to a destination marketing body.

[Vancouver_Highrise]

The destination marketing fee can be waived.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

MRDT

https://www.destinationbc.ca/what-we...rces/mrdt/faq/

Oh, so its a 3% tax. I doubt that's the reason for hotel non interest in the City.

I was imagining some egregious surcharge, much like parking taxes.

[WestEnd604]

This thread appears to have jumped the shark.

[jollyburger]

Arnos Matis posted these teaser images from a concept project that would add a new skin to an existing building. Anyone recognize that 60/70s apartment in the back? (Might be a concept and not related to an existing building but two days ago they said more details will be released soon)



http://www.arnomatisarchitecture.com...t-bioframe.php

[C3YVR]

My guess is 1122 Gilford is in the back, and I think 2001 Beach was planning on a reno.

[simons]

Rear building looks like Panorama Place (2055 Pendrell)

[Vancouver_Highrise]

That's 2055 Pendrell in the back. Honestly not a fan of the top?

[C3YVR]

Yes I think 2055 Pendrell in the back and reno on 2001 Beach.

[jollyburger]

Maybe but I'm puzzled how they suddenly go from some "tame" rehab of the building to that? Also if it was looking back at Pendrell shouldn't the rendering be on the corner of a block?

Though it must be east of Pendrell since they include the North Shore mountains in the back..

https://www.urbanyvr.com/west-end-be...artment-tower/

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Maybe but I'm puzzled how they suddenly go from some "tame" rehab of the building to that? Also if it was looking back at Pendrell shouldn't the rendering be on the corner of a block?

Though it must be east of Pendrell since they include the North Shore mountains in the back..

https://www.urbanyvr.com/west-end-be...artment-tower/

I agree with your original suggestion that this is (as the AMA website says) just a design concept. It might be any existing tower in the West End, or more likely none in particular. The concept building suggests extra floors manufactured in CLT added on top of an original concrete tower. I'd be quite surprised if an 11 storey 1960 building could have an extra 11 piled on top without really expensive seismic upgrades that would make the entire exercise hideously expensive - with or without clip-on parts to make a new skin.