Coquitlam looks for ways to protect displaced tenants amid shifting rental market

With an increasing number of Coquitlam residents at risk of demoviction, Coquitlam council discussed strengthening the city’s rules around tenant displacement Monday.

Coquitlam has about 3,700 units of purpose-built rental housing. Approximately 61 percent of those units – more than 2,200 homes – are at least 45 years old.

Besides the city’s stock of 1970s-era apartments, there’s also the issue of provincially mandated zoning that concentrates density in concentric circles around transit stations, with building heights ranging from 20 to 8 storeys.

“The confluence of aging buildings and the potential for additional density elevates the risk of displacement through redevelopment,” stated a city staff report.

Besides paying $750 to $1,000 for moving expenses, the current rules require developers to pay between three and ten months of rent to tenants depending on length of tenure. However, not every developer is eager to abide by those rules, noted Coun. Matt Djonlic.

Some residents have described: “developers not paying up and then having the audacity to, in one case, to try and come here to get us to water down our tenant protection bylaw policy,” he said.

That request was “resoundingly rejected,” he added.

Turning the policy into a bylaw would give the city power to levy fines on developers who fail to abide by Coquitlam’s rules.

The fines need to be substantial, contended Coun. Dennis Marsden.

“If they’re taking steps to avoid paying $1,000, I’m quite fine if the penalty is $5,000,” he said. “Let’s make sure that they’re not making a business decision that paying the penalty is cheaper than paying the relocation.”

Coun. Trish Mandewo also advocated “hefty penalties” for violations.

The policy may require a balanced approach, according to Mayor Richard Stewart, who recounted developers describing relocating tenants as “onerous.”

The city needs to incentivize – or at least not disincentivize – keeping buildings full up until demolition, Stewart said.

Given the unforgiving nature of the housing market, it’s crucial the city’s tenant relocation policy kicks in early in the development process, according to Coun. Brent Asmundson.

“Once you’ve got a pre-application in . . . with this market [tenants] are going to start looking early because it’s the only smart thing to do,” he said. “To leave them without compensation, even if they’ve left prior . . . to me isn’t fair.”

Since 2015, the city’s policy has been enacted on 13 developments totalling 1,285 homes.

The current policy ranges from 10 months of paid rent for tenants who have been 20 or more years, to three months rent for tenants who have lived in the building for five years or fewer.

Several councillors suggested moving expenses – currently set at $750 for a one-bedroom or studio and $1,000 for two or more bedrooms – be adjusted to keep up with inflation.

For Coun. Teri Towner, the conversation was evidence of the need for more affordable housing in the city.

“We really have to keep advocating for more below-market and non-market housing, rent-geared-to-income, more alternate forms of rental, because even market rental now isn’t affordable for so many people,” she said.

The bylaw would apply to anyone redeveloping a purpose-built rental project of at least fine units, as well as to strata-title rental properties with a single owner. The rules would need to return to council for approval before becoming a bylaw.