EcoDensity: making Vancouver sustainable, livable, affordable

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

Cold hard numbers, you mean like how the single family home next door to the west is now worth $5,074,000 according to BC Assessment? or how the adjacent one to the east is valued at $5,061,000? Not that it's worth engaging on Twitter, but I expect more nuance on SSP.

What does that prove, other than the fact upzoning turns family homes into ‘“development opportunities” rather than homes? Thereby pushing them even further out of reach for families.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What does that prove, other than the fact upzoning turns family homes into ‘“development opportunities” rather than homes? Thereby pushing them even further out of reach for families.

You proved that new homes are more expensive in general. FF proved that too, plus how new multi-unit homes are cheaper than new detached homes. Is your solution to just keep the old detached homes until they fall apart?

[seamusmcduff]

It's pretty reductionist to attribute the entire home value change to speculation when property values are known to be influenced by countless factors, and correlation doesn't equal causation.

Vancouver has a fixed land area where the population continues to grow, homes aren't being built as fast as people are moving here, the City is one of the most desirable places in the country, but it's upzoning that's the issue and nothing else.

[chowhou]

Fun fact, each side of the duplex is almost as large as the house that was there before, so who can really complain about a cheaper, newer, higher quality, equally sized home?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Fun fact, each side of the duplex is almost as large as the house that was there before, so who can really complain about a cheaper, newer, higher quality, equally sized home?

But as a house owner you know, it’s owning the land that counts.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by whatnext

But as a house owner you know, it’s owning the land that counts.

Absolutely not. Land is absolutely secondary to having an actual structure to live in. No one needs to own land, everyone needs to live in a structure. The less land needed per unit of housing, the better.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

But as a house owner you know, it’s owning the land that counts.

Land value tax would fix that. But then your SFH would cost a lot more to keep.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Hard to argue with cold hard numbers:

Mortimer
@mortimer_1

27m
The missing middle affordability math...

You could have bought the entire original house for $2,680,000 in 2019

Now you can buy the new half duplex for $3,498,000 (and have the fun dealing with your co-neighbour)

2455/2453 W 10TH AVE, Vancouver

https://x.com/mortimer_1/status/1852142397167489025

That's a well-sized duplex with 5 bedrooms! 2,327sf for $3.5m in Kits.

My trusty inflation calculator (understand it's not 100% reliable and leaves out our local post-COVID house price inflation) tells me this 2019 price would be ~$3.2m today. So yes, you could pay the same amount for a detached, but you'd have an old house. For an "extra" $200k someone already tore down the old home, designed the new one, got permits and paid all the fees and you end up with a mint house.

Not to mention that in maybe 20 years someone will buy this house off you for double and build apartments, as this is currently inside the TOA allowing up to 8-storeys, and will be inside the expanded Broadway Plan extension.

To be honest I have no idea who could afford either the detached or the duplex lol

[GenWhy?]

A row of homes to the east at Balsam and 10th are the same vintage as the original home we're discussing, and it would be great to see some assemblies in Kits for new mid-rises.

[GenWhy?]

That strip of shops between Vine and Yew look like a goldmine now too for 12-storeys

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

That's a well-sized duplex with 5 bedrooms! 2,327sf for $3.5m in Kits.

My trusty inflation calculator (understand it's not 100% reliable and leaves out our local post-COVID house price inflation) tells me this 2019 price would be ~$3.2m today. So yes, you could pay the same amount for a detached, but you'd have an old house. For an "extra" $200k someone already tore down the old home, designed the new one, got permits and paid all the fees and you end up with a mint house.

Not to mention that in maybe 20 years someone will buy this house off you for double and build apartments, as this is currently inside the TOA allowing up to 8-storeys, and will be inside the expanded Broadway Plan extension.

To be honest I have no idea who could afford either the detached or the duplex lol

Nothing says we're winning the affordability wars like a $3.5 million duplex.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Nothing says we're winning the affordability wars like a $3.5 million duplex.

Agreed. At the heart of it not much has changed - rules or prices or availability

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Nothing says we're winning the affordability wars like a $3.5 million duplex.

In the context of $5M+ SFHs, it's a step in the right direction.