Housing Bubble II: The Quest To Build Enough Homes Where People Actually Need Them

[Nite]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Eliminating parking minimums makes sense in theory, as at least in a normally-functioning free market, builders & prices will respond to localized demand, and the market will adjust accordingly. More diversity & choice in housing options, and a less onerous top-down regulatory environment fewer required construction costs are always good thing.

The problem is, we don't actually have a truly free or normally functioning housing market; so what ends up happening is that developers can just cut their costs by not building parking and rents/property values don't adjust accordingly; and the externalities of that lack of parking is then passed on to their surrounding communities instead. In a near-zero vacancy market it's unlikely that every one of those residents is choosing to live there with the intent of being car free. Instead, they just increase demand for street parking, and parking lots & garages (which isn't really a great outcome for good urbanism).

So what's the answer? I'm not sure. Mandating the old 1:1 parking ratio is obviously excessive and unnecessary in most cities and too broadly unsympathetic to context; while also inflating construction costs and even making small builds or retrofits of heritage properties unviable (ran into this problem quite a bit in Toronto before they scrapped parking minimums, eg. couldn't even add a basement apartment to an existing house because it was an old property with no parking, therefore would not support a second unit). On the other hand, scrapping them entirely inevitably leads to the public realm picking up the slack for developers to cut costs.

Either way, a 265-unit development in a city with a ~70% car ownership rate is probably going to lead to quite a few extra cars needing a place to be parked, even if the actual ownership rate of the building is below average. Maybe something like a minimum ratio of 0.1 parking spaces:1 unit, with the required number of spots rounded to 0 if less than 10 units could work? Allow for larger exemptions and lower ratios close to rapid transit, or whatever. In any case, I do think it's in the public interest for a development of this scale to accommodate at least some amount of parking.

There is no shortage of homes with parking, if someone needs parking why would they buy in a property without any???
Same for rentals, why would you rent in a place without parking when most other buildings have more than enough parking.

Forcing developers to build parking just mean more expensive housing for everyone else, even if you don't own a car.
you are basically force non car owners to subsidies the parking spaces for car owners.

[theman23]

^yup, if there’s one thing this country has in abundant supply it’s housing.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Nite

There is no shortage of homes with parking, if someone needs parking why would they buy in a property without any???
Same for rentals, why would you rent in a place without parking when most other buildings have more than enough parking.

Forcing developers to build parking just mean more expensive housing for everyone else, even if you don't own a car.
you are basically force non car owners to subsidies the parking spaces for car owners.

I mean, there is a shortage of homes, with or without parking...

Reality doesn't work so neatly like that, with drivers all choosing to live in homes with parking spaces and all car-free people prefer to live buildings without parking. For example, I have a car but live in an old building with no parking, so I park on the street, as does nearly every other household in the building.

Anyway, if you'd actually read my post you'd understand that nowhere was I advocating for mandating parking spaces for all units. A lower parking ratio (and exemptions for smaller buildings or those near rapid transit) means that there are fewer parking spaces than there are units. The developer can then rent or sell those spaces to desired users, at extra cost to the user (as opposed to bundling the cost of each unit with an associated parking space, regardless of whether or not it's used). The non-car owner is not then subsidising the car owner.

[zoomer]

And now 2 cents from someone who lives in downtown Victoria, raised 2 children a couple miles from downtown and has never driven or had a license. I came to Victoria to go to University and couldn’t afford one then, and realized even back in the 80’s I simply didn’t need one in Victoria. Sure, life is a bit more inconvenient, but the cost savings is tremendous. This city is very much downtown focused, within a fifteen minute walk I can access literally everything I need, within 45 minutes I can walk to many great neighbourhoods, parks, beaches, etc, etc - I have no need to go to a suburb, which pales in comparison anyways. As Casper said, most bus routes go through downtown and if I’m going somewhere further out I find the bus service excellent and the bike lanes just keep expanding and improving.

My apartment building is typical of many, with only 40% of the parking spots being used. In part this speaks to a falling living standard/high rents. Maybe apartment buildings can look to rent out extra spaces to the open market, but that comes with its own challenges.

It’s not just developers pushing for lower parking minimums, here the city has been very aggressive on it and viewed this as the key redeeming feature of otherwise so-so development. A city councillor nearly quashed the massive 1,500 until Starlight rental development when he brought forward a last minute amendment to greatly reduce the parking. After a delay of several months and negotiations an agreement was reached to revisit the parking for phase 2, but largely maintain the previous agreed upon parking for phase 1. Starlight argued that having minimal parking would reduce the amount they could charge for rent. Meanwhile the city has floated the possibility of charging for all on street parking through a permit system. I can see that might be the next step as even in our building there are a handful of people who park on the streets to avoid paying for it in their rent. What a hassle.

Anyways, yes, there are many people who don’t need parking for whom this will be an opportunity, even if the micro-apartment units are best suited for single people. On the other hand it could handcuff people or limit their employment possibilities if they can’t have a vehicle. If that’s the case, then they move - assuming they can find anything, but that’s a whole other kettle of fish.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nite

There is no shortage of homes with parking, if someone needs parking why would they buy in a property without any???
Same for rentals, why would you rent in a place without parking when most other buildings have more than enough parking.

I’m really curious to know where in Canada you live, where there’s “no shortage of homes” and renters faced with becoming homeless would just refuse to rent something they found that’s both available without 10-15 more applicants than apts, and in their price range, because they don’t like that there isn’t enough parking for them?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nite

Same for rentals, why would you rent in a place without parking when most other buildings have more than enough parking???

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

For example, I have a car but live in an old building with no parking, so I park on the street, as does nearly every other household in the building.

Please do us a favor and actually answer his question. Even a basic answer like “money doesn’t grow on trees” will do

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Nite

Seems like his quality of life is much better now by not owning a car which cost the average Canadian $1300 a month or $15,600 a year.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...ational%20Post

Most Canadians lives, in our major cities, would improve significantly, both health wise and financially, by not owning a car and using mini mobility devices, transit and car share for the few times they actually need a car instead.

The latest notjustbikes podcast with RM transit talks about how life improves by not being tied financially to a car.

Sure, if you want to be that twee little guy riding his scooter to work on a dark and rainy Vancouver day, or a -30 day in Winnipeg.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Nite

Seems like his quality of life is much better now by not owning a car which cost the average Canadian $1300 a month or $15,600 a year.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...ational%20Post

Most Canadians lives, in our major cities, would improve significantly, both health wise and financially, by not owning a car and using mini mobility devices, transit and car share for the few times they actually need a car instead.

The latest notjustbikes podcast with RM transit talks about how life improves by not being tied financially to a car.

• Video Link

The people you should feel bad for are the ones stuck in car dependent places where they are force to spend $1,300 a month just to get food to eat or to leave their neighborhoods because there is no other way to do so.

We've discussed this in other threads, but $1,300 is the average cost for someone who buys a new car every 4-5 years and rents a parking space at home.

The breakdown to reach $1,300 is:

$600 - Depreciation
$80 Maintenance
$111 Insurance
$200 Gas
$200 Parking
$200 Interest
$10 - Admin Fees

In Ontario, admin fees don't exist. Many own their older cars outright, meaning no interest payments. And since the average Canadian's car is 12 years old, they don't depreciate by much any more, maybe $200 a month at most. They also typically own their parking space without overhead costs as the majority of Canadians either live in ground related housing or an apartment with free parking. You can probably get gas costs down if you don't drive a ton.


The average Canadian spends far less than $1,300 a month on their car. The "floor" for owning an old but reliable car for relatively low amounts of mileage would probably be closer to $400-500 a month ($100 depreciation, $100 gas, $100 insurance, $100 maintenance), with most Canadians spending somewhere in between the two figures.

I can assure you that I personally spend less than $1,300 a month to own and maintain not 1, but 2 cars right now. I'm probably spending about $800-$1,000 a month combined for my two cars including depreciation, maintenance, parking, insurance, gas, etc. - and the median age of my cars is above that of the median canadian car.

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

We've discussed this in other threads, but $1,300 is the average cost for someone who buys a new car every 4-5 years and rents a parking space at home.

The breakdown to reach $1,300 is:

$600 - Depreciation
$80 Maintenance
$111 Insurance
$200 Gas
$200 Parking
$200 Interest
$10 - Admin Fees

In Ontario, admin fees don't exist. Many own their older cars outright, meaning no interest payments. And since the average Canadian's car is 12 years old, they don't depreciate by much any more, maybe $200 a month at most. They also typically own their parking space without overhead costs as the majority of Canadians either live in ground related housing or an apartment with free parking. You can probably get gas costs down if you don't drive a ton.


The average Canadian spends far less than $1,300 a month on their car. The "floor" for owning an old but reliable car for relatively low amounts of mileage would probably be closer to $400-500 a month ($100 depreciation, $100 gas, $100 insurance, $100 maintenance), with most Canadians spending somewhere in between the two figures.

I can assure you that I personally spend less than $1,300 a month to own and maintain not 1, but 2 cars right now. I'm probably spending about $800-$1,000 a month combined for my two cars including depreciation, maintenance, parking, insurance, gas, etc. - and the median age of my cars is above that of the median canadian car.

I also have 2 trucks for under that cost, but that's without knowing how to factor in depreciation exactly. Not all costs double, so the second id more efficient - for example my gas usage doesn't increase at all, since I can only drive 1 at a time.

2002 Sierra = 22 years old. Doubt it's really depreciating.

2014 Silverado = almost 10years old. Looking at similar ones, it's probably worth 25k, bought it for 42k. Over 10 years that's only $142 a month. If it's only worth 5k in 10 more years, that's $166. If we call it $200 it's still under 1300 for both.

Insurance $270
Gas $420
Maintenance $210
Tires $125
Undercoating $32
Parking $17

Totals 1074. $1274 with that rough guess at depreciation.

Sorry, this is getting into the weeds off topic, but I love my trucks and love my budget spreadsheet, lol.

[Coldrsx]

https://mcusercontent.com/89a5a47cdd..._One_Pager.pdf

[Innsertnamehere]

Breakdown for mine and my wifes car is something like:

$260 Insurance
$150 depreciation (my car is a worthless POS which is worth barely above scrap value and doesn't depreciate as long as it continues to run, my wife's has decreased $13k in the 7 years since she bought it new, so about $150/month)
$300 gas (roughly, 4 tanks at $50 for her fuel sipper and one tank at $100 for my gas guzzler)
$200 maintenance (tires, breaks, oil changes, etc.) - doesn't include unusual repairs, but I've only had one "unusual" repair for $600 in the last 4 years we've owned both cars.

Total $910/month for two cars. If I sold mine and started taking the bus to work, which serves as the "secondary" car, we would be down to about $550/month to own and operate a Honda Civic LX which was purchased new in 2017. Mine costs "only" $360 a month to own and operate, but I drive it only like 7,000kms a year as I bike to work in the summers and we use the Civic for weekend trips.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

We've discussed this in other threads, but $1,300 is the average cost for someone who buys a new car every 4-5 years and rents a parking space at home.

The breakdown to reach $1,300 is:

$600 - Depreciation
$80 Maintenance
$111 Insurance
$200 Gas
$200 Parking
$200 Interest
$10 - Admin Fees

In Ontario, admin fees don't exist. Many own their older cars outright, meaning no interest payments. And since the average Canadian's car is 12 years old, they don't depreciate by much any more, maybe $200 a month at most. They also typically own their parking space without overhead costs as the majority of Canadians either live in ground related housing or an apartment with free parking. You can probably get gas costs down if you don't drive a ton.


The average Canadian spends far less than $1,300 a month on their car. The "floor" for owning an old but reliable car for relatively low amounts of mileage would probably be closer to $400-500 a month ($100 depreciation, $100 gas, $100 insurance, $100 maintenance), with most Canadians spending somewhere in between the two figures.

I can assure you that I personally spend less than $1,300 a month to own and maintain not 1, but 2 cars right now. I'm probably spending about $800-$1,000 a month combined for my two cars including depreciation, maintenance, parking, insurance, gas, etc. - and the median age of my cars is above that of the median canadian car.

I doubt your average driver considers depreciation an "expense". Sure, it is in accounting terms but Joe Blow doesn't see it as a cost.

And since forumers have assured us how much cheaper it is to run an electric car, perhaps we should be planning for more people to own private vehicles, not less.

[GenWhy?]

I think by now I'm seeing / hearing that new rentals are as much or almost as much as Vancouver. Using Insertnamehere's car costs (as the $200 parking sounds about right for new rental buildings).

Standard new rental rates Vancouver w/ avg. $600 car cost :

Studio - $2,100 + $600 = $2,700 / mth
1-Bed - $2,700 + $600 = $3,300 / mth
2-bed - $3,500 + $600 = $4,100 / mth
3-bed - $4,200 + $600 = $4,800 / mth

Add any bike parking or storage you want to rent out if it's not included, then all your other regular monthly bills.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Total $910/month for two cars. If I sold mine and started taking the bus to work, which serves as the "secondary" car, we would be down to about $550/month to own and operate a Honda Civic LX which was purchased new in 2017. Mine costs "only" $360 a month to own and operate, but I drive it only like 7,000kms a year as I bike to work in the summers and we use the Civic for weekend trips.

So with a central parking in a new parkade I think it's about $200 so we're looking at about $550-650 for one car per month.

[harls]

$600 a month to park a car? Holy crap. Better come with F1 babe pit crews that polish it on a daily basis.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by harls

$600 a month to park a car? Holy crap. Better come with F1 babe pit crews that polish it on a daily basis.

$200 for parking. The other costs other posters have devised is the running cost.

[urbandreamer]

$420/month gas to drive a pickup truck? Ouch.

No wonder the rural roads are empty on weekends these days.

I typically drive about 25000km per year, and unfortunately in Toronto it's much more expensive for parking and insurance vs Waterloo, so I'm spending $600 monthly in Toronto vs $350 in KW gas included. My car hasn't depreciated at all thankfully.

Did I mention the appeal of living in small town Eastern Ontario, apparently the cheapest insurance in Ontario?

I've certainly noticed since covid began, my underground parking garage has filled up with cars, as less people commute by transit. And also the proliferation of luxury vehicles and new minivans and trucks, as doubling rents attracts a wealthier tenant profile.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Did I mention the appeal of living in small town Eastern Ontario, apparently the cheapest insurance in Ontario?

I've certainly noticed since covid began, my underground parking garage has filled up with cars, as less people commute by transit. And also the proliferation of luxury vehicles and new minivans and trucks, as doubling rents attracts a wealthier tenant profile.

Definitely. A friend of mine who moved to Ompah a few years ago apparently (according to him) pays less than $1000 a year for auto insurance, as a 30 year old man!

[Coldrsx]

Budget 2024 - Alberta

Family, Social Supports and Housing
Housing affordability is a top priority of the government. In line with Stronger
Foundations — Alberta’s 10-year strategy to improve and expand affordable
housing supply and housing supports, the 2024 Capital Plan allocates
$829 million over three years — an increase of $355 million, or 75 per cent,
from Budget 2023 — to fund projects that enhance affordable housing and
social supports in various locations around the province. Together with CMR
funding, almost $1 billion is being allocated to seniors’ facilities and housing.
Key projects supported include:
•
$405 million, including $75 million in new funding, for the Affordable
Housing Partnership Program, to support the goal to create 13,000
affordable housing units.
•
$130 million, including $125 million in new funding, for the Seniors Lodge
Modernization Program to ensure lodges continue to be a viable housing
option for Alberta seniors.
•
$91 million for the Affordable Housing Strategy, to fund the maintenance
of government-owned social housing buildings.
•
$75 million for the Indigenous Housing Capital Program, including
$30 million in new funding to Indigenous communities to construct,
purchase, or redevelop housing for Indigenous peoples in need.

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/23c8...7.pdf#page=103

[toaster]

Originally Posted by Nite

There is no shortage of homes with parking, if someone needs parking why would they buy in a property without any???
Same for rentals, why would you rent in a place without parking when most other buildings have more than enough parking.

Forcing developers to build parking just mean more expensive housing for everyone else, even if you don't own a car.
you are basically force non car owners to subsidies the parking spaces for car owners.

Are you serious? Because they can't afford places? I've never seen a more out of touch post on here. Couples making incomes over 200k+ are only getting approved for mortgages that could get you not even get you a shoebox bachelor unit in Toronto. So they max out to buy anything, and think about paying for parking and other things after.