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

[urbandreamer]

All of Vancouver between Fraser and Boundary, the Fraser River and 49th should be turned into Montreal-style three storey flats, with pockets of ground floor commercial strips every 6 blocks or so. Vancouver could house an additional 3 million people in this scenario.

As of right zoning would require 25% of units be available to first time homeowners making under $75k, available with low down payments so long as these people cannot rent out or resell their discounted flats for a number of years, I'd suggest 15-25 is fair. These folks would get discounts in the form of low or no income tax for 10 years, thus ensuring working adults inhabit these units.

Possibly the affordable homes would be built above the CRU "villages" both on high streets and corner lots.

I'd suggest a strict high quality, localized architectural aesthetic be maintained throughout the area. Eg. similar to this excellent TH/flats development in Esquimalt
https://imgur.com/a/R1PrdFK

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

All of Vancouver between Fraser and Boundary, the Fraser River and 49th should be turned into Montreal-style three storey flats, with pockets of ground floor commercial strips every 6 blocks or so. Vancouver could house an additional 3 million people in this scenario.

As of right zoning would require 25% of units be available to first time homeowners making under $75k, available with low down payments so long as these people cannot rent out or resell their discounted flats for a number of years, I'd suggest 15-25 is fair. These folks would get discounts in the form of low or no income tax for 10 years, thus ensuring working adults inhabit these units.

Possibly the affordable homes would be built above the CRU "villages" both on high streets and corner lots.

I'd suggest a strict high quality, localized architectural aesthetic be maintained throughout the area. Eg. similar to this excellent TH/flats development in Esquimalt
https://imgur.com/a/R1PrdFK

Why would we want 3 million more people in Vancouver? Just because the Liberals think it’s a great idea? No thanks.

[urbandreamer]

This reminds me of talking to my aunt in Nanaimo. She was saying how much she wants Nanaimo to densify and turn into another Victoria. The look on her face when I said na, it's going to look more like Richmond with towers all along the waterfront and filled with new (non-white) Canadians and thousands of SA TFW renting basement apartments! (She's indigenous.)

It's why I've come to realize that Alberta and BC are actually very similar, from roughly between Alberta Highways 21/36 and West.

[casper]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

All of Vancouver between Fraser and Boundary, the Fraser River and 49th should be turned into Montreal-style three storey flats, with pockets of ground floor commercial strips every 6 blocks or so. Vancouver could house an additional 3 million people in this scenario.

As of right zoning would require 25% of units be available to first time homeowners making under $75k, available with low down payments so long as these people cannot rent out or resell their discounted flats for a number of years, I'd suggest 15-25 is fair. These folks would get discounts in the form of low or no income tax for 10 years, thus ensuring working adults inhabit these units.

Possibly the affordable homes would be built above the CRU "villages" both on high streets and corner lots.

I'd suggest a strict high quality, localized architectural aesthetic be maintained throughout the area. Eg. similar to this excellent TH/flats development in Esquimalt
https://imgur.com/a/R1PrdFK

It is happening but in slow motion. Rupert, Kingsway, Broadway are all densifying. Same thing around the skytrain station and the Fraser river.

While 3 Million sounds like a reasonable long-term aspiration. We are probably talking 100 years out.

Originally Posted by whatnext

Why would we want 3 million more people in Vancouver? Just because the Liberals think it’s a great idea? No thanks.

Not today. But 50-100 years out, 3 million more in Vancouver proper sounds doable. But we need to preserve that farm land so those people have a local source of food.

[Build.It]

I especially like that building in green. It should be copied and pasted everywhere.

[urbandreamer]

^Exactly. Boundary and Nanaimo should turn into ultra dense West Georgia/Robson alternatives and 49th/54th/57th/Marine Drive also solid 8-15 storeys.

You've got a solid grid street network here, now it's time to turn it from suburb into city.

[casper]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

^Exactly. Boundary and Nanaimo should turn into ultra dense West Georgia/Robson alternatives and 49th/54th/57th/Marine Drive also solid 8-15 storeys.

You've got a solid grid street network here, now it's time to turn it from suburb into city.

Definitely.

Originally Posted by Build.It

I especially like that building in green. It should be copied and pasted everywhere.

Well it is much more in keeping with a west coast vibe. The middle brick like one just looks like it belong in Ontario or Quebec. It almost fits in given the old-world look of parts of Victoria. Not certain that translates as well to Vancouver.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

....As far as most of the ALR being on floodplains, that is not an excuse. All of Richmond is on a floodplain but didn't stop the city from just building some flood protection ditches in order to house it's 220,000 in habitants. It's not called "Ditchmond" for nothing.

Yes, and Richmond's not looking at a billion-plus in upgrades to its dikes for nothing either.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

....There is NO reason why there should be any greenbelts within one km of a transit station or freeway.

So I guess you're not fond of Stanley Park, Hastings Park, Central Park, Deer Lake Park, Burnaby Lake Park, and the other large parks within that distance from highways and transit stations?

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Yes, and Richmond's not looking at a billion-plus in upgrades to its dikes for nothing either.



So I guess you're not fond of Stanley Park, Hastings Park, Central Park, Deer Lake Park, Burnaby Lake Park, and the other large parks within that distance from highways and transit stations?

Parks are obviously not "belts".

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Yes, and Richmond's not looking at a billion-plus in upgrades to its dikes for nothing either.

So I guess you're not fond of Stanley Park, Hastings Park, Central Park, Deer Lake Park, Burnaby Lake Park, and the other large parks within that distance from highways and transit stations?

I’m always amazed when I talk to people who work for the City of Richmond how much in denial they are that rising sea levels are going to make the place uninhabitable. Anyone with property there should get out now.

[GreaterMontréal]

The CMM will adopt a new urban plan shortly. What emerges from the new plan is the increase in the density threshold around TOD's. 3x more density

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

^Exactly. Boundary and Nanaimo should turn into ultra dense West Georgia/Robson alternatives and 49th/54th/57th/Marine Drive also solid 8-15 storeys.

You've got a solid grid street network here, now it's time to turn it from suburb into city.

The problem with that is that it will create zero affordable housing. The land alone will mean every apt will still start at $700k which is more than twice what your average Vancouverite can afford and they will be bought by speculators, money launders, and foreign buyers.

In order to get REALLY affordable housing the gov'ts must be their hands on cheap land like from the ALR or gov't owned and be built as modular housing which is much faster, much cheaper, and always of superior quality. This is what PP are proposing and he is absolutely right.

[urbandreamer]

In order to get affordable housing, we've got to make Vancouver as undesirable as North Battleford SK. Importing 3 million third worlders yearly could accomplish this goal by 2044. I imagine PP is already working with the WB/CI people to help make Canada Cheap Again. A big earthquake would help too.

[Build.It]

Dude, just wanted to say your posts are gold

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

. This is what PP are proposing and he is absolutely right.

This is absolutely not what PP is proposing. He is proposing to apply pressure on municipalities. He is not proposing to have government seize land or build modular housing.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is absolutely not what PP is proposing. He is proposing to apply pressure on municipalities. He is not proposing to have government seize land or build modular housing.

Poilievre's housing talk is all hot air. Who's really applying pressure to municipalities? Who's blowing up restrictive zoning? The BC NDP and the federal Liberals.

Who's talking big and doing nothing? PP. He hasn't even addressed this flagrant anti-housing gatekeeping in his own backyard--probably because it's led by conservatives.

PP's talk on housing is very big, but equally opportunistic. I wouldn't expect a Poilievre government to achieve nearly as much as some people think it will.

[casper]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The problem with that is that it will create zero affordable housing. The land alone will mean every apt will still start at $700k which is more than twice what your average Vancouverite can afford and they will be bought by speculators, money launders, and foreign buyers.

In order to get REALLY affordable housing the gov'ts must be their hands on cheap land like from the ALR or gov't owned and be built as modular housing which is much faster, much cheaper, and always of superior quality. This is what PP are proposing and he is absolutely right.

Is that his plan? I don't think so. He is falling back to traditional conservative thinking that if government gets out of the way private industry will compete and drive down prices. Well that is not the case. Private industry will try to max out the profit from a project.

The only way "affordable" housing is built is for government to build it and either operate it or hand it off to an arms-length non-profit. That is what the liberals are doing. If the conservatives get it, watch those programs get shutdown. That is what they are going to do.

[goodgrowth]

Originally Posted by casper

Is that his plan? I don't think so. He is falling back to traditional conservative thinking that if government gets out of the way private industry will compete and drive down prices. Well that is not the case. Private industry will try to max out the profit from a project.

The only way "affordable" housing is built is for government to build it and either operate it or hand it off to an arms-length non-profit. That is what the liberals are doing. If the conservatives get it, watch those programs get shutdown. That is what they are going to do.

I don't know why this thinking keeps getting repeated on here. Profit margins are not the major factor in housing costs. It's land costs/construction costs/fees.

"Affordable housing" is alright... but we need scalable mass market housing that's affordable.

[casper]

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

I don't know why this thinking keeps getting repeated on here. Profit margins are not the major factor in housing costs. It's land costs/construction costs/fees.

"Affordable housing" is alright... but we need scalable mass market housing that's affordable.

I am not. But lets assume I am builder that owns a lot in Vancouver and I am going to build a tower. If I know I am going to sell out before completion regardless of what I build. Will I build high margin high-end units or lower-end lower margin units?

[goodgrowth]

Originally Posted by casper

I am not. But lets assume I am builder that owns a lot in Vancouver and I am going to build a tower. If I know I am going to sell out before completion regardless of what I build. Will I build high margin high-end units or lower-end lower margin units?

The ad-hoc incremental nature of upzoning and development approvals in cities has created these market conditions.

Supply gets drip-fed instead of flooded.