Canada's 'housing bubble' deemed close to bursting

[vanman]

Originally Posted by samne

All this said, I didn’t see many families in the core city.

There's an elementary school under construction in Coal Harbour and another planned in Olympic Village because the demand is so high. The other two existing schools downtown are at capacity.

[giallo]

Most kids/families seem to live around Yaletown. I always see a ton of families at David Lam Park.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

What's the price income ratio and how does that compare to the GTA? Absolute prices are somewhat irrelevant.

I know that the absolute prices are somewhat irrelevant. However, that means that grouping somewhere like Timmins with Toronto is as silly as saying that because housing prices are so low in Timmins that there isn't a problem in Toronto. Still goes back to my point about subdividing so that the numbers make sense.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by giallo

Most kids/families seem to live around Yaletown. I always see a ton of families at David Lam Park.

No kidding. Biking the seawall on a sunny weekday and most of the playgrounds are absolutely jammed with kids/families which is great to see.

[Denscity]

Originally Posted by vanman

There's an elementary school under construction in Coal Harbour and another planned in Olympic Village because the demand is so high. The other two existing schools downtown are at capacity.

Ya that guy is definitely from "out of town" if he thinks there aren't many kids living in downtown Vancouver lol.

[goodgrowth]

Great video on why greenbelts are bs:


• Video Link

[Nouvellecosse]

^ While provocative titles are good for clicks, the video's actual thesis isn't that greenbelts are BS but instead that expecting them to do all the work themselves rather than simply being part of a larger solution is BS. He points out how they tend to be politically convenient since there's less opposition to them compared to the other measures that are necessary to avoid sprawl including increased density of existing residential areas.

While I appreciate the need for clicks, in this case it can be misleading in the sense that people can draw the wrong conclusion if they look at the title and not watch (or watch closely enough) the actual content. The wrong conclusion is that greenbelts should be eliminated, while the right conclusion is that they're just one piece of the puzzle and people should stop opposing the other necessary sprawl reducing measures. Than again, nuance in a title can be tough.

[casper]

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

Great video on why greenbelts are bs:

He does not understand what an Agricultural Land Reserve is. They are to preserve high quality agricultural land for agriculture. In BC they were never intended to control or stop subdivisions.

They are reserved and only used for the highest quality agricultural land.

[Wigs]

Home prices have definitely dropped as the housing market slows down in Ontario.
Here's the SFH benchmark price (typical 3 bed, 2 bath home) for the largest markets outside Toronto for the past 5 years - June 2017 - June 2022


https://creastats.crea.ca/en-CA

In K-W it's almost a $200k price drop from the peak of $1.06 Million. I pity the bastard that bought at the peak.
____________________________
Benchmark SFH price June 2022
London-St. Thomas: $690,400
Niagara Region: $765,300
Ottawa: $778,100
K-W: $876,900
Hamilton-Burlington: $1,009,500

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by casper

He does not understand what an Agricultural Land Reserve is. They are to preserve high quality agricultural land for agriculture. In BC they were never intended to control or stop subdivisions.

They are reserved and only used for the highest quality agricultural land.

If we had good governments at all levels that were cooperative,we would see them move the big employment draws out of places bordered by lots of arable farmland. Instead, we see them add to it. And then we start seeing food prices skyrocket.

[Nouvellecosse]

Most major metro areas in the country are bordered by quality farm land because back when they were first settled it was important for food to be produced close to consumers since the transportation technology of the era made it impractical to transport food across long distances. Also, many cities are on current or former flood plains since locating near waterways gave access to transportation, and flood plains tend to be highly fertile due to sediment deposition. So not encouraging employment in places bordered by arable land rules out many of the country's major cities.

The solution (to this and several other problems) is to not waste land with low density development patterns.

[Wigs]

Canada's highest value agricultural land imho is BC's Okanagan Valley, Nova Scotia's Annapolis Valley, PEI (with its iron rich red soil), Quebec practically anywhere near the St. Lawrence, and southern Ontario/Niagara Region.

One can grow practically any vegetable/fruit (minus say tropical/citrus etc) Canadians desire in these areas. We should protect these areas as much as possible.

We should not be completely reliant on global supply chains, nor should your daily food purchases come from as far as South America or Southeast Asia.
Such a colossal waste of resources to transport food 1000's of kms away.

I encourage every Canadian that has space to plant a backyard garden or even grow things in planters if space is an issue.

/step down from soapbox

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Most major metro areas in the country are bordered by quality farm land because back when they were first settled it was important for food to be produced close to consumers since the transportation technology of the era made it impractical to transport food across long distances. Also, many cities are on current or former flood plains since locating near waterways gave access to transportation, and flood plains tend to be highly fertile due to sediment deposition. So not encouraging employment in places bordered by arable land rules out many of the country's major cities.

The solution (to this and several other problems) is to not waste land with low density development patterns.

What if governments stopped giving companies grants and other tax incentives unless they located in a place that is not surrounded by farmland? That would see the shift from areas that have prime farmland being paved over to other places thriving.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by giallo

Most kids/families seem to live around Yaletown. I always see a ton of families at David Lam Park.

They must have a great time playing amongst all the Canada Goose poop. 💩

[giallo]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Canada's highest value agricultural land imho is BC's Okanagan Valley, Nova Scotia's Annapolis Valley, PEI (with its iron rich red soil), Quebec practically anywhere near the St. Lawrence, and southern Ontario/Niagara Region.

One can grow practically any vegetable/fruit (minus say tropical/citrus etc) Canadians desire in these areas. We should protect these areas as much as possible.

We should not be completely reliant on global supply chains, nor should your daily food purchases come from as far as South America or Southeast Asia.
Such a colossal waste of resources to transport food 1000's of kms away.

I encourage every Canadian that has space to plant a backyard garden or even grow things in planters if space is an issue.

/step down from soapbox

I'd swap the Okanagan for the Fraser Valley. While there are some important crops that grow in the Okanagan (apples, grapes, peaches, cherries, nectarines, corn etc), the soil in the Fraser Valley is super rich thanks to the Fraser River. Its growing season is longer than the Okanagan's as well.

Originally Posted by whatnext

They must have a great time playing amongst all the Canada Goose poop. ������

It wouldn't be a certified Metro Vancouver park without it!

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by giallo

I'd swap the Okanagan for the Fraser Valley.

okay, let's keep both

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What if governments stopped giving companies grants and other tax incentives unless they located in a place that is not surrounded by farmland? That would see the shift from areas that have prime farmland being paved over to other places thriving.

What if you explained why you'd rather economically stifle the country's major metro areas including Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver rather than just encouraging more efficient development patterns?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What if governments stopped giving companies grants and other tax incentives unless they located in a place that is not surrounded by farmland?

What tax incentives are you taking about?

Locating in Toronto or Vancouver is pretty damn expensive. That companies choose to do it, is because they perceive a greater value than locating elsewhere.

The best example of the above was Amazon's HQ2. All kinds of cities did all kinds of crazy stunts and offered them all kinds of tax breaks. Where did they locate in the end? New York City and Washington DC. Eventually settling on just DC. And not some cheap suburban part of the DC area either. Crystal City in Arlington. Their reasons? Good transport links. Access to good educational institutions. And a city that their workers wanted to live in. Tax breaks had very little to do with it.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

What if you explained why you'd rather economically stifle the country's major metro areas including Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver rather than just encouraging more efficient development patterns?

Some of these folks just can't get over their jealousy for the big metros. They'd rather see Canada fail than Toronto and Vancouver succeed. It's bizarre. In an increasingly urbanized world, our success as a country is very much dependent on our larger cities being globally competitive. If you think Sudbury or Regina has it tough now. Just wait till Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary become even less globally relevant.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

What tax incentives are you taking about?

Locating in Toronto or Vancouver is pretty damn expensive. That companies choose to do it, is because they perceive a greater value than locating elsewhere.

The best example of the above was Amazon's HQ2. All kinds of cities did all kinds of crazy stunts and offered them all kinds of tax breaks. Where did they locate in the end? New York City and Washington DC. Eventually settling on just DC. And not some cheap suburban part of the DC area either. Crystal City in Arlington. Their reasons? Good transport links. Access to good educational institutions. And a city that their workers wanted to live in. Tax breaks had very little to do with it.

They abandoned the New York City option.

What is interesting is Phase 1 HQ2 in Washington DC has around the same software developers employed by Amazon as they have in Vancouver.

Vancouver did not bother giving any incentives. I am not even certain if it submitted a bid.