Vancouver View Cones - Reviews and Amendments

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Oh Jeez, now we're comparing cities in other regions in the world with much different economic systems. Vancouver more affordable than Beirut? Dakar? Surely, you jest. You can buy a nice home in Beirut for $200K. How far is getting you in Vancouver? Again its an apples to oranges comparison.

Vin said that other cities in other countries provide "affordable housing to the masses". Comparing housing affordability across different countries is very problematic considering economic systems, cultural values, population growth etc., but I tried my best to operate within the context that Vin set.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Vin said that other cities in other countries provide "affordable housing to the masses". Comparing housing affordability across different countries is very problematic considering economic systems, cultural values, population growth etc., but I tried my best to operate within the context that Vin set.

Do your own research first. Other cities in other nations may be expensive, but at least most of them fall within the norm of affordability based on the buying power or wage base of the population. Let's be honest here: For such a small population and a backwater, one of the biggest reasons why Vancouver is so unaffordable is because of policies when it comes to the provision of housing and land use, especially when this country keeps encouraging immigration and foreign investments to feed its aging population.

If the suburb municipalities were built like other North American cities, or enact Viewcone policies like Vancouver, the urban sprawl in the Lower Mainland would have continued, with back-to-back single family neighbourhoods, all the way to Abbotsford without any farm lands or green lungs in between. Thank God the suburb cities are picking up the slack that Vancouver has refused to take responsibility for. Otherwise no one would be able to afford any housing in the Lower Mainland, not to mention all the available arable lands plundered for housing use.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Speaking of doing research, posters will be happy to learn that Vancouver is behind 24.2% of all new housing starts in the metro. That's more "responsible" than even Manhattan - 13% of NYC.

If the suburbs really were interested in picking up responsibility (and not just making a quick buck), we'd see rowhouses and townhouses all over Burnaby and Coquitlam, getting them thousands more units than a few tiny little patches of mall towers. The reality is that nine-tenths of them are even more preservationist than Vancouver is.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Vin

Do your own research first. Other cities in other nations may be expensive, but at least most of them fall within the norm of affordability based on the buying power or wage base of the population.

I do plenty of research, but you have ignored everything I have shared.

Let's evaluate your statement above. Look at these statistics. This analysis has some weaknesses since the basket of goods is American-centric so comparing Vancouver to South American, African, or Asian cities isn't a fair fight. However, when compared to European and North American cities, Vancouver would fall in the mid-80s and early-30s, respectively. That means that amount Vancouverites pay for goods relative to their salaries is in line with people from Saskatoon, Chattanooga, Dresden, and Glasgow.

I am not trying to argue that Vancouver is affordable, but your premise that Vancouver's cost of living is out of control while Europe is some affordable haven for the budget-conscious is wrong. This article lists a few important affordability factors that are easy to miss when comparing countries:

Places like Norway, Switzerland, and Iceland all have homes which can be rented for almost half of what one could get in New York City. However, the cost of living in those countries is still much higher than that of the Big Apple when you factor in other common expenses.

For example, the cost of dining out is 25% higher in Norway than in New York City, while in Iceland, restaurant food prices are a staggering 33% higher and groceries 19% higher than in New York City.

Meanwhile, Sweden has a personal income tax rate of around 62%, while Switzerland has a worldwide income tax that can reach as high as 40% — ...in Switzerland, a person is even taxed for living in their own home.

[GenWhy?]

Even I wouldn't say land prices increasing are mainly affected by policy / by-laws. The Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver has the average price of a single-family home increased as much in the past five months as it did from 1981 to 2005...

Metrotown is now up to $1,300psf same as Cambie Corridor.

[GenWhy?]

I'm not that old, but something happened here in 2003 that made houses go from $400k to $1.8m in 2016 and zoning and viewcones didn't get more restrictive in that decade. All other forms of housing has gone up in a relatively stable fashion until about 2014, rental included.

[jollyburger]

From the Butterfly development permit docs (there's more images in the PDF) The blue is Butterfly and the tallest is the Burrard/Georgia 700' dream.



https://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/969burrard/index.htm

[officedweller]

The placement of that cluster makes no sense relative to Georgia & Burrard, which would be to the left of Shangri-La.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The placement of that cluster makes no sense relative to Georgia & Burrard, which would be to the left of Shangri-La.

Sorry just read the text for that slide and it's just showing the development near Alberni/Georgia that might block Butterfly

[Abii]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I'm not that old, but something happened here in 2003 that made houses go from $400k to $1.8m in 2016 and zoning and viewcones didn't get more restrictive in that decade. All other forms of housing has gone up in a relatively stable fashion until about 2014, rental included.

Something happened? We immigrants started coming to the Lower Mainland but boomer era zoning laws didn't change. Immigrants are encouraged to come to the Lower Mainland when cities are not willing to change their zoning laws or make it easier for developers to create supply. Is it any wonder that prices will go up? Immigrants are also more likely to emphasize home ownership and to see their homes as investments than past generations. That adds fuel to the fire.

Everywhere you go in the Lower Mainland you see suburbia hell. In Vancouver we have the moronic view cones and height restrictions (plus a billion other roadblocks). In Coquitlam, where I went to look at a condo today, all I saw were massive parking lots, single family homes and random small towers around Glen street (which is supposedly their downtown). My parents bought a house in North Van in the early 2000s and it sits on a 7k square foot plot of land lol. To this day I don't get it. It's a massive plot of land with literally nothing on it but fucking grass and a boxy home made of paper and glue. The land alone is now worth north of 2 million.

People in North America simply do not get it.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I do plenty of research, but you have ignored everything I have shared.

Let's evaluate your statement above. Look at these statistics. This analysis has some weaknesses since the basket of goods is American-centric so comparing Vancouver to South American, African, or Asian cities isn't a fair fight. However, when compared to European and North American cities, Vancouver would fall in the mid-80s and early-30s, respectively. That means that amount Vancouverites pay for goods relative to their salaries is in line with people from Saskatoon, Chattanooga, Dresden, and Glasgow.

I am not trying to argue that Vancouver is affordable, but your premise that Vancouver's cost of living is out of control while Europe is some affordable haven for the budget-conscious is wrong. This article lists a few important affordability factors that are easy to miss when comparing countries:

There is a consensus around the world with the following ranking based on correct statistics, and you can try to argue with them, not me.

Least afforcable city in Canada (2021 ranking):
Vancouver ranks number 1 as the most expensive city to live in within Canada
https://www.darpanmagazine.com/news/nati...expensive-city-to-live-in-within-canada/

Most unaffordable in North America (2021 ranking):
Vancouver ranked least affordable city in North America
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/local...affordable-city-in-north-america-4549989

2nd least unaffordable in the world (2020 ranking):
Vancouver ranked world's second-least affordable housing market—again
https://bc.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-ranked-w...ffordable-housing-market-again-1.4777809

I would very much love to hear from you regarding these.


Regarding your links to those "articles" and "Stats". Well do you know that the cost of living index that you provided does not include accommodation? Knowingly or unknowingly, using misleading stats means you lose your credibility.
See this:
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/cpi_explained.jsp
Or quote "Cost of Living Index (Excl. Rent) is a relative indicator of consumer goods prices, including groceries, restaurants, transportation and utilities. Cost of Living Index does not include accommodation expenses such as rent or mortgage. If a city has a Cost of Living Index of 120, it means Numbeo has estimated it is 20% more expensive than New York (excluding rent)."
Your other "ranking" shows countries, not cities. Oh I do agree that there are quite a number of much cheaper places to live in this country, but certainly NOT Vancouver. There you go, another of your so-called research debunked.

Please dude, don't follow the paths of some of the forumers here trying to prove me wrong. You are just going to embarrass yourself.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Speaking of doing research, posters will be happy to learn that Vancouver is behind 24.2% of all new housing starts in the metro. That's more "responsible" than even Manhattan - 13% of NYC.

If the suburbs really were interested in picking up responsibility (and not just making a quick buck), we'd see rowhouses and townhouses all over Burnaby and Coquitlam, getting them thousands more units than a few tiny little patches of mall towers. The reality is that nine-tenths of them are even more preservationist than Vancouver is.

Lol you are using the wrong comparison, dude.
You should compare New York City with other cities in New York state, then tell us the percentage of housing provided by NYC. Manhattan is only a small part of NYC.

As the primary employment, commercial and cultural centre of this region, Vancouver's 24.2% provision of housing in this area is abysmal, and I'm surprised you post the figure as some kind of badge of honour. It is like saying the entire city of Toronto providing 24% of housing while Mississauga, Richmond Hill and surrounding municipalities provide 76%.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Abii

Something happened? We immigrants started coming to the Lower Mainland but boomer era zoning laws didn't change. Immigrants are encouraged to come to the Lower Mainland when cities are not willing to change their zoning laws or make it easier for developers to create supply. Is it any wonder that prices will go up? Immigrants are also more likely to emphasize home ownership and to see their homes as investments than past generations. That adds fuel to the fire.

Everywhere you go in the Lower Mainland you see suburbia hell. In Vancouver we have the moronic view cones and height restrictions (plus a billion other roadblocks). In Coquitlam, where I went to look at a condo today, all I saw were massive parking lots, single family homes and random small towers around Glen street (which is supposedly their downtown). My parents bought a house in North Van in the early 2000s and it sits on a 7k square foot plot of land lol. To this day I don't get it. It's a massive plot of land with literally nothing on it but fucking grass and a boxy home made of paper and glue. The land alone is now worth north of 2 million.

People in North America simply do not get it.

So the immigrant dream is now to sandwhich a family of six into a shitty 2 bed skybox? Or are newly arriving families splurging for those $2 million+ three beds along the Cambie Corridor?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

Lol you are using the wrong comparison, dude.
You should compare New York City with other cities in New York state, then tell us the percentage of housing provided by NYC. Manhattan is only a small part of NYC.

As the primary employment, commercial and cultural centre of this region, Vancouver's 24.2% provision of housing in this area is abysmal, and I'm surprised you post the figure as some kind of badge of honour. It is like saying the entire city of Toronto providing 24% of housing while Mississauga, Richmond Hill and surrounding municipalities provide 76%.

26,547 in NYC out of 45,219 in NY, 2019. 28,141 of 44,392 for Vancouver and BC in that same year. Like it or not, we're actually outbuilding the Big Apple at times.
And Vancouver is a small part of Metro Van. So what? No matter how much you move the goalposts, the proportions still hold up.

The CoT is actually 28% of Metro Toronto. 26% two years before. Since I'm using the wrong comparison, how about you show us an example of a city core that's provided 55+ percent of new homes in its metro? Don't bother replying until you find one.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

26,547 in NYC out of 45,219 in NY, 2019. 28,141 of 44,392 for Vancouver and BC. And Vancouver is a small part of Metro Van. So what? No matter how much you move the goalposts, the proportions still hold up.

28% of Metro Toronto, actually. 26% two years before that. Since I'm using the wrong comparison, how about you go and find an example of a city core providing 55+ percent of new homes in its metro? Don't bother replying until you find one.

Vancouver is a major municipality in the province of BC.

NYC is a major municipality in the state of NY.

You can't compare a district to an entire city. It is like comparing Point Grey to the rest of Vancouver. Duh. Goalposts are moved here, but not by me, but you.

You just said Vancouver provides 24% of housing, how is 28,141 of 44,392 equal to 24%? Your numbers don't even match!


Regarding Toronto,
The city of Toronto provides 90%of public housing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Eat your own words buddy!

Toronto provides 90 percent of the public housing in the Greater Toronto Area and 37 percent of the total social housing in Ontario, well beyond its share of population or its share of the tax base.

https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/c...using-affordability-availability-repair/

Here, this shows that Toronto can take 42% of all newcomers in the GTA area:
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2019/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-124480.pdf

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

Vancouver is a major municipality in the province of BC.

NYC is a major municipality in the state of NY.

Six of one, half a dozen of another.

Originally Posted by Vin

You can't compare a district to an entire city. It is like comparing Point Grey to the rest of Vancouver. Duh. Goalposts are moved here, but not by me, but you.

You just said Vancouver provides 24% of housing, how is 28,141 of 44,392 equal to 24%? Your numbers don't even match!

No, Point Grey to Vancouver is the Upper West Side to Manhattan. Manhattan's one of the Five Boroughs, the same way Burnaby or Etobicoke are one city in a bigger, amalgamated city.

I said Vancouver provides 24% of housing in Metro Van. Metro Van provides 63% of BC. Try and keep up.

Originally Posted by Vin

Regarding Toronto,
The city of Toronto provides 90%of housing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Eat your own words buddy!
https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/c...using-affordability-availability-repair/

Here, this shows that Toronto can take 42% of all newcomers in the GTA area:
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2019/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-124480.pdf

90% of PUBLIC housing. Learn to read before you start celebrating, Vancouver has the most of that in the metro as well.

That same document says one page down that the rest of the GTA combined will still outnumber Toronto 2:1. Ditto the GVRD and Vancouver. And I'm still waiting for my 55+ percent; 42% still leaves the suburbs doing most of the work.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Six of one, half a dozen of another.



No, Point Grey to Vancouver is the Upper West Side to Manhattan. Manhattan's one of the Five Boroughs, the same way Burnaby or Etobicoke are one city in a bigger, amalgamated city.

I said Vancouver provides 24% of housing in Metro Van. Metro Van provides 63% of BC.Try and keep up.



90% of PUBLIC housing. Learn to read before you start celebrating.

All your quotes do not justify your argument that Vancouver is a major housing provider. If you can't do so, what's the point of you quoting all those low numbers? At least I can prove to you that the share of Toronto's housing supply to the GTA (@ 42%) is way higher than Vancouver to the GVRD (@ 24%).

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

All your quotes do not justify your argument that Vancouver is a major housing provider. If you can't do so, what's the point of you quoting all those low numbers?

Because despite your "arguments" to the contrary, the City of Vancouver is adding the same proportion of housing (or more) that other, bigger city cores are. We're outbuilding the Big Apple at times. That's hardly irresponsible.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Because despite your "arguments" to the contrary, the City of Vancouver is adding the same proportion of housing (or more) that other, bigger city cores are. We're outbuilding the Big Apple at times. That's hardly irresponsible.

Nope, not at all.

And we should be holding a higher standard than other places since we profess to be the Greenest City on the planet by 2020.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

Nope, not at all.

And we should be holding a higher standard than other places since we profess to be the Greenest City on the planet by 2020.

You just said 24% is abysmal. Toronto is 26%, so by your logic, you shouldn't use them as an example of good planning when they're just as "abysmal" as Vancouver.

Vancouver emitted 5.38 tons per capita last year, against Toronto's 6.42. We've already got a higher standard.