The real problem with Vancouver’s outrageous house prices

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Delirium

here's the answer!

[B][SIZE="3"]Luxury $18 million Vancouver penthouse for sale — to local buyers only, his price: $18 million. There’s a caveat. Only a local Vancouverite — or an aspiring one — should apply.

....."or an aspiring one"......is a cute legal loophole.....as many foreign billionaires do aspire to be convenient "Vancouverites"!

[ssiguy]

My sister and brother-in-law moved back to Ontario years ago.

They prefer Ontario but also were tired of working hard for the privilege of owning a shoe box. The funny thing is that he still works primarily in BC in construction but it's worth his while to fly back and forth and stay with my brother or friends.

Ontario gets it's property and income taxes from him and BC misses out.

A lot of people may not love the idea of moving to a smaller, quiet city but you are assuming those people will stay in BC which is a very bad assumption. Every province in the country is vastly cheaper than BC most with higher wages and Vancouver has the longest commute times of any city in the country including big, bad Toronto.

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver has the longest commute times of any city in the country including big, bad Toronto.

Are you referring to that silly TomTom study, which also said Ottawa is more congested than Chicago? That study has been discredit many times over. it's not about commute times, it's about commute time differentials between free flow and non-free flow rush hour traffic. The point being, that that's not a factor in this discussion.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by ACT7

Are you referring to that silly TomTom study, which also said Ottawa is more congested than Chicago? That study has been discredit many times over. it's not about commute times, it's about commute time differentials between free flow and non-free flow rush hour traffic. The point being, that that's not a factor in this discussion.

ACT7, commute time becomes relevant to the discussion at hand if research suggests that higher housing prices in Vancouver serves to force increasing numbers of low income Vancouverites further away from the city and into distant suburbs (e.g. Mission/Hope/Chilliwack etc.) for more affordable housing, thus driving them to commute (pun intended) longer distances by automobile (in large numbers on crowded highways) to job sites in Vancouver (given inadequate mass transit options)!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

ACT7, commute time becomes relevant to the discussion at hand if research suggests that higher housing prices in Vancouver serves to force increasing numbers of low income Vancouverites further away from the city and into distant suburbs (e.g. Mission/Hope/Chilliwack etc.) for more affordable housing, thus driving them to commute (pun intended) longer distances by automobile (in large numbers on crowded highways) to job sites in Vancouver (given inadequate mass transit options)!

No, I think you missed the point. The TomTom study is not a comparison of absolute commute times.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

No, I think you missed the point. The TomTom study is not a comparison of absolute commute times.

I guess I did miss the point because I wasn't questioning the flaws of Tom Tom's research methodology per se (which I do understand) but rather the perception of a lack of understanding as to how high house prices can impact increased (absolute) commute times (if the commute time research study is done properly).

[casper]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

ACT7, commute time becomes relevant to the discussion at hand if research suggests that higher housing prices in Vancouver serves to force increasing numbers of low income Vancouverites further away from the city and into distant suburbs (e.g. Mission/Hope/Chilliwack etc.) for more affordable housing, thus driving them to commute (pun intended) longer distances by automobile (in large numbers on crowded highways) to job sites in Vancouver (given inadequate mass transit options)!

I think it provide a good argument for why housing stock in Vancouver should be more expensive that Burnaby, and other areas to the east of vancouver.

People tend to put a premium on their time. The longer the commute the less desirable the location, the shorter the commute time the more desirable.

The strategy of regional town centers and having the CDB spread around lower mainland should help even out the housing prices.

Getting rid of high restrictions on buildings and zoning in Vancouver to permit more density and increased supply of apartment buildings and townhomes will also help.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by casper

I think it provide a good argument for why housing stock in Vancouver should be more expensive that Burnaby, and other areas to the east of vancouver. People tend to put a premium on their time. The longer the commute the less desirable the location, the shorter the commute time the more desirable. The strategy of regional town centers and having the CDB spread around lower mainland should help even out the housing prices.
Getting rid of high restrictions on buildings and zoning in Vancouver to permit more density and increased supply of apartment buildings and townhomes will also help.

All good points casper,...a multifaceted/multi-pronged approach involving greater decentralization of CBD employment zones, improved mass transit options, the opening up of new housing options/greater housing densities etc., all need to be pursued in concert!

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by casper

I think it provide a good argument for why housing stock in Vancouver should be more expensive that Burnaby, and other areas to the east of vancouver.

People tend to put a premium on their time. The longer the commute the less desirable the location, the shorter the commute time the more desirable.

The strategy of regional town centers and having the CDB spread around lower mainland should help even out the housing prices.

Getting rid of high restrictions on buildings and zoning in Vancouver to permit more density and increased supply of apartment buildings and townhomes will also help.

The "we can just build our way to affordability" mantra is very naive. It hasn't worked thus far in Vancouver.

A lot of the price distortion making areas closer to downtown desirable are offshore buyers looking to be near so called "good schools" or UBC.

[red-paladin]

We need to keep this thread on topic.

[Steveston]

I apologize if this ground has already been covered (don't have the time to read all the previous posts), but I hope people have read this study from Metro Vancouver, which puts real numbers to something we all know anecdotally: that there is a real cost to living further out in the suburbs.

http://www.metrovancouver.org/servic...Report2015.pdf

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Steveston

I apologize if this ground has already been covered (don't have the time to read all the previous posts), but I hope people have read this study from Metro Vancouver, which puts real numbers to something we all know anecdotally: that there is a real cost to living further out in the suburbs. http://www.metrovancouver.org/servic...Report2015.pdf

Steveston, the crazy thing here is that I really never looked closely at official data on Canada's national socioeconomic realities to effectively assess Vancouver's cost-of-living "crisis"! I just took one quick look at my wife's teacher paycheck, her modest apartment's high rent/utility bills and figured out that Vancouver isn't paradise! The bigger picture reality is that any degree of urban sprawl (due to high housing prices in Vancouver) results in higher service delivery costs/potential debt to local governments and their low wage earning constituents!

[quobobo]

The "we can just build our way to affordability" mantra is very naive. It hasn't worked thus far in Vancouver.

If you think we've tried building enough, then you're most likely not familiar with Vancouver's zoning code. This is a map of Vancouver where yellow is zoned for detached homes and blue is everything else (industrial, commercial, "comprehensive development" spot rezonings, agricultural, and multifamily residential):



Stanley Park and False Creek aren't mistakes - the City confirmed to me that parks and marinas are allowed in areas zoned for other things. Even when you exclude those two, detached home zoning still takes up about 2/3 of Vancouver's land area.

"building our way to affordability" would mean allowing apartments on more than a small fraction of Vancouver's land area and doing the same in the suburbs.

(image source: my own work, using the CoV's open zoning data. 1 and 2 family districts are coloured yellow)

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by quobobo

Note that about 2/3 of Vancouver is still zoned for detached homes.

True enough ... but at what starting prices, let alone for larger houses?

[whatnext]

You know it's getting bad when even relatively well-paid academic jobs go begging:

..The faculty housing crisis is most acute at the University of British Columbia. A new 1,000-square-foot condo on campus sells for about $800,000, much less than the $1.8-million average price for a detached house, but still out of reach for many new professors.

Last year, UBC missed out on 18 hires who turned down job offers because of how unaffordable Vancouver has become, according to a survey of the university’s deans. For another 70 appointments, the housing issue was a key part of negotiations, the deans reported....

...Dr. Rea says that when he goes to conferences in Hong Kong or Taipei, he has seen ads for the units on campus that he and his colleagues can’t afford marketed to foreign buyers.

“Should UBC be leasing its land for a hundred years to the open market and mostly to the global rich?” he asks.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle30123278/

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by whatnext

You know it's getting bad when even relatively well-paid academic jobs go begging:

..The faculty housing crisis is most acute at the University of British Columbia. A new 1,000-square-foot condo on campus sells for about $800,000, much less than the $1.8-million average price for a detached house, but still out of reach for many new professors.

Last year, UBC missed out on 18 hires who turned down job offers because of how unaffordable Vancouver has become, according to a survey of the university’s deans. For another 70 appointments, the housing issue was a key part of negotiations, the deans reported....

...Dr. Rea says that when he goes to conferences in Hong Kong or Taipei, he has seen ads for the units on campus that he and his colleagues can’t afford marketed to foreign buyers.

“Should UBC be leasing its land for a hundred years to the open market and mostly to the global rich?” he asks.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle30123278/

The most livable city...

[Shift]

There's always Surrey..

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Jebby

You do realize that there probably still is more square feet of new builds coming on the market every year in Vancouver than in nay of the suburbs?

There's probably more new square feet being built in Vancouver than in all the suburbs, excluding Burnaby, combined.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Take a drive down West 2nd near Olympic Village, Main St, Cambie, Marine, Kingsway, Oak, and around Marpole. Then head over to SE Marine/River District Area.

"Snob rezoning", plus all other restrictions, including viewcones, are preventing more affordable housing to be built in Vancouver proper.

Main, Cambie, Kingsway, River District etc are pretty pathetic when it comes to the rate of developments happening elsewhere.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Vin

"Snob rezoning", plus all other restrictions, including viewcones, are preventing more affordable housing to be built in Vancouver proper.

Main, Cambie, Kingsway, River District etc are pretty pathetic when it comes to the rate of developments happening elsewhere.

Huh? Have you been along Cambie Street lately? Or is it just because it's not towers that it doesn't meet your approval?

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Huh? Have you been along Cambie Street lately? Or is it just because it's not towers that it doesn't meet your approval?

You call those mid-rise developments towers? Nah, we need more glass skyscrapers. Moar!!!! After all, we are on SkyscraperPage!