Housing Supply Act Discussion - Implementation & Outcomes

[GMD]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The baby boomers part is bs. They were born roughly 1946-1965, so they're aged 58-77. Around 262,000 households owning their home in Greater Vancouver had heads of household born in that timeframe in 2021, and there were 300,820 households where the head of household was younger than that. As every single property owning baby boomer can defer their property tax, if they wish to, the 'big bills coming due' won't bother them.

It will bother all the Gen X and Millennial home owners, who are also much more likely to have a mortgage, and are facing higher mortgage payments and higher property taxes. That's who the politicians are trying to protect.

If there is one thing I've learned following municipal politics, it's that you can jack up the property taxes and nobody aged 58-77 will complain about it. Sure thing. No municipal decision ever takes that age group into consideration. Lol.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by GMD

If there is one thing I've learned following municipal politics, it's that you can jack up the property taxes and nobody aged 58-77 will complain about it. Sure thing. No municipal decision ever takes that age group into consideration. Lol.

The ironic thing about that is people in that age range can defer paying their property taxes indefinitely for an incredibly low interest rate, so they're less affected by property tax increases than everybody else.

[GMD]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The ironic thing about that is people in that age range can defer paying their property taxes indefinitely for an incredibly low interest rate, so they're less affected by property tax increases than everybody else.

Yes, and Changing City pointed this out, but as you say, it is ironic, even though they can avoid this, it doesn't change the volume level of the complaining that comes with an increase.

And, to be fair, deferring the taxes does mean leaving less to their children / paying them later, which is still important to people. Higher taxes are higher taxes, even if the money comes from your children's inheritance instead of from you this year.

[djmk]

I am willing to bet a whole Costco rotisserie chicken that the District North Vancouver will not come anywhere near to building 2,838 housing units

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The ironic thing about that is people in that age range can defer paying their property taxes indefinitely for an incredibly low interest rate, so they're less affected by property tax increases than everybody else.

There needs to be some sort of means-testing for aged based tax deferral. Nobody wants to see granny turfed onto the street but a 75 year old couple living in a $3 million house mortgage-free have options if they can't afford to pay the taxes on it.

[jollyburger]

I guess if they relax parking requirements in new transit orientated developments it could help off-set any changes to development costs?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by GMD

Yes, and Changing City pointed this out, but as you say, it is ironic, even though they can avoid this, it doesn't change the volume level of the complaining that comes with an increase.

And, to be fair, deferring the taxes does mean leaving less to their children / paying them later, which is still important to people. Higher taxes are higher taxes, even if the money comes from your children's inheritance instead of from you this year.

The estate, (which is almost assured to have enough to cover the deceased's debts, as there will be a home to sell) will have other debt - there could still be a mortgage to pay off, credit card debt, a HELOC, income taxes and possibly taxes on any investments. Deferred property tax debt is just another debt, but the home owner had the benefit of the money while they were alive. What's left over will be the amount that can be given away. Children may or may not be beneficiaries!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It's Surrey and Burnaby. It's not clear if they'll get any Accelerator funds now.

I was just reading a thing on this and wonder why Surrey and Burnaby when it's "Metro Vancouver Regional District's proposed fee increases". Is there some detail that those two cities are doing that the rest of the region isn't and that's why they're not going to get funding? Otherwise why are the Feds only taking aim at those two cities instead of all of Metro Van?

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by GMD

Yes, and Changing City pointed this out, but as you say, it is ironic, even though they can avoid this, it doesn't change the volume level of the complaining that comes with an increase.

And, to be fair, deferring the taxes does mean leaving less to their children / paying them later, which is still important to people. Higher taxes are higher taxes, even if the money comes from your children's inheritance instead of from you this year.

Interest rates for property tax deferment programs
Tax deferment program Interest rate
Regular Program 4.45%
Families with Children Program 6.45%
Under the Regular Program, you're charged simple interest at a rate not greater than 2% below the prime rate of our principal banker.

Under the Families with Children program, you're charged simple interest at a rate not greater than the prime rate of our principal banker.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/t...-interest-fees

Between the low rates, and fee simple interest, if anything deferring your property taxes will probably leave you with more money for your kids than if you pay them. Not that it stops people from complaining about it.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by djmk

I am willing to bet a whole Costco rotisserie chicken that the District North Vancouver will not come anywhere near to building 2,838 housing units

Province: So, the DNV will meet its target of 2,838 net new housing units?

District of North Vancouver Council: But of course. The DNV will absolutely build 2,838 housing units.

Province: In five years, correct?

District of North Vancouver Council: <collective spit-take> FIVE YEARS? Absolutely not! We meant 2,838 units by the eventual heat death of the universe. FIVE YEARS?! That's utter madness. Show us a city city anywhere in the world that has built even half that many homes in a decade. You can't just *build* homes, after all. It's practically a lost technology. Our most senior Adeptus Mechanicus has assured this Council that with the proper incantations and anointment of various oils and unguents, we might be able to see our way towards preparing to break ground on perhaps an eighteen-unit townhouse complex by the end of the decade. Five years...

[jollyburger]

District of North Vancouver Mayor Mike Little said the provincial housing targets are pretty much in line with his municipality’s rolling average for completions over the last five years, which won’t be a challenge to continue. But, he said, the province can’t expect any municipality to bring on so many below-market rental units on their own.

“The gross numbers we can achieve,” Little said. “The ratio of non-market units will be a big challenge without further provincial and federal financial support.”

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/no...argets-7615714

[jollyburger]

April report (presented to council back in May) on the rezoning backlog in CoV:

As of the writing of this report, the Rezoning Centre is processing approximately 120 rezoning enquiries and 100 rezoning applications. This volume is more than double normal workload.
These applications collectively represent:
1. 35,000+ housing units
2. 8.7+ million sq. ft. of job space

https://council.vancouver.ca/20230530/documents/ub1.pdf

[MIPS]

Why not just build Public Housing Complexes?

Clusters of 25-35 story towers available as rentals or purchase, integrated with schools and shopping while performing monolithic redevelopment on low density half-century plots.
The Projects ain't ever going to be pretty historically but you cannot deny they will add thousands of new residences in relatively short amounts of time.

Edited: No, I am not delusional.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Why not just build Public Housing Complexes?

Clusters of 25-35 story towers available as rentals or purchase, integrated with schools and shopping while performing monolithic redevelopment on low density half-century plots.
The Projects ain't ever going to be pretty historically but you cannot deny they will add thousands of new residences in relatively short amounts of time.

Edited: No, I am not delusional.

I agree. Barring some major global event that crashes the system or pulls a Thanos, the market is not going to correct itself. Public housing is the only option.

[jollyburger]

Sims:

“We only need to look at Burnaby, that’s right Burnaby… We’re looking at Burnaby as a role model, they’re doing a lot of great things. They’ve been able to successfully marry densification and homes around their SkyTrain stations. So when we think about it, it makes a lot of sense. More homes surrounding SkyTrain stations means a smaller carbon footprint for people that live near the area. It also means a more interconnected city.”

“At the end of the day, we need more housing. We look at King Edward… seven or eight storeys on the northwest corner of that street above Canada Line. It seems quite ridiculous, and so that’s a lost opportunity,” said Sim.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skyt...wers-vancouver

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Sims:

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skyt...wers-vancouver

There is one small area that should be kept lower: "the helicopter flight path for Vancouver General Hospital."

Aside from that... yes there's too many people who don't want buildings more than two storeys tall - not just in the CoV but across the region. I hope this push from the gov convinces every town and city in BC to start building missing middle housing to replace a lot of the SFH that still makes up a lot of the housing here.

[Migrant_Coconut]

... They’ve been able to successfully marry densification and homes around their SkyTrain stations...

Yeah, with the tradeoff of not densifying the rest of Burnaby. Hope this isn't a prelude for ABC's own pivot to a Grand Bargain.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Yeah, with the tradeoff of not densifying the rest of Burnaby. Hope this isn't a prelude for ABC's own pivot to a Grand Bargain.

Except that Burnaby is also planning Urban Villages and more...

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Except that Burnaby is also planning Urban Villages and more...

A lot of the Burnaby Urban Village plans are a bit less ambitious than you might expect.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Except that Burnaby is also planning Urban Villages and more...

Kinda been over this a few times: those Urban Villages effectively only densify the walkup apartment zones which were already "dense" to begin with; the SFHs are almost 100% untouched, which is the problem.