OT: The OT Thread

[Bam19]

I mean, you both asked and answered. We don't have much land, yes. But, you can make upgrades on currents lots that are currently becoming derelict. You can build in the sky. All of this doesn't really matter if you are doing it sporadically in certain pockets. There needs to be sweeping upgrades that provide opportunity to buy en masse to not cull, but reach proper demand levels. Currently, the powers that be seem to be content with the way the current market is outside of some band-aid fixes on issues such as foreign ownership, where the only reason they really acted is to keep good faith with the voters.

The truth is, most development companies don't care, and it's not hard to see why. Why spend all their money on an asset that won't be so fast to pay for itself, much less turn a profit? If they can't get owners/renters in ASAP after they break ground, they won't have capital to move on to their next project and so on and so forth. I don't blame them for this, but the buck should be stopping somewhere and it is not. No one really *cares* that the demand is so hot, it's lining their pockets. There's no incentive outside of a political power grab to do anything about it. And the government sure as shit isn't going to ask the GP for another tax raise to build the homes themselves. So, they'll be re-appropriating funds somewhere in the budget to make it work, if they wanted to, themselves. And if they wanted to sink their teeth into another Olympic venture, if you are one of the many younger than 30, and still renting, you should be asking some tough questions.

The Olympics were great, but it's like buying a bunch of cheesecake and devouring it yourself while the rest of the household starves and watches in fleeting enjoyment.

so is the government supposed to build supply and sell it at cost? I also stated building more apartments doesn’t solve the price point of townhouse and SFH. The cost of land is so much that even if the government bought land and developed it by the time you get government bloat in there I doubt they end up no cheaper.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

so is the government supposed to build supply and sell it at cost? I also stated building more apartments doesn’t solve the price point of townhouse and SFH. The cost of land is so much that even if the government bought land and developed it by the time you get government bloat in there I doubt they end up no cheaper.

It absolutely will if they produce en masse instead of piecemealing it. You even can create jobs by contracting building maintenance out. The whole point isn't to even *make* money, it's to provide livable, affordable housing. But if you want to dive into the economics of it, by keeping all housing development privatized you are leveraging mortgages onto families who often are able to just scrape by, youth potential is wasted and the nation remains stagnant in growth. You can treat housing projects as a non-profit project which could lead to more manageable living situations for people who need it. You are sinking costs so much as investing in the future. A...radical idea, I know.

 

[Jyrki]

The problem right now is that private parties aren't even allowed to supply enough housing to a market that could otherwise afford housing on their own. It's causing gigantic pressure on rents - middle-class types who would ordinary buy keep renting, so that landlords have all the incentives in the world to renovict then jack up rates. So these freshly renovicted, or otherwise working poor who can no longer afford their own place have to get roommates instead.

But guess what, the people barely scraping by - poor students, living with disabilities, debt-riddled or otherwise vulnerable - who were renting rooms to keep their bills low can't do that anymore, because anything that can fit a bed now commands a paycheck from a full-time worker. Either they move in with people who can afford their home, or they're out on the streets. Waitlists for subsidized and other forms of public housing were already years-long pe-pandemic - you can surmise what has happened to people without a family home to fall back into.

The easiest way to see there's a major supply crunch is just how high rents are everywhere in the Lower Mainland. It hasn't gotten much more expensive to live in downtown Vancouver, because it was already very expensive to begin. What has happened is that people scrambled for lower rents in the suburbs, but the supply hasn't kept up. A few years ago you'd either pay $1800 for a 1-bed in the West End or $900 for a 1-bed in Newtown. Now you're paying $2000 for that West End 1-bed but more like $1600 for the Newton 1-bed. Similar story with detached homes - stuff in the 'burbs that went for $2000-25000 is now more like $3500-4000 but you could never afford the west side of Vancouver anyways.

Obviously there's also a huge deficit in public housing, in particular co-ops and other non-profit arrangements. But because of low interest rates, increased immigration, international education and foreign investment there has been a mad rush for housing yet municipalities are in charge of allowing private supply to build - with little incentive to ever meet demand on their own. Incumbent residents get to see their equity balloon while keeping increasingly subsidized infrastructure to themselves and benefiting from increased amenities in their urban area.

My cul-de-sac in Richmond has seen non-stop construction over the past 5-years. Lots of housing coming online, right? No! It's all 1970's homes being torn down in favor of square footage-maximizing McMansions that could never be afforded by anyone earning a living in the Vancouver area (outside of the real estate sector, anyways). Whenever one finishes getting built, another home gets fenced and bulldozed straight away. That's done to maximize equity on the property, but since there can't be multifamily homes the new owners just build crap only multimillionaires can afford. You can observe this phenomenon everywhere in the region... detached homes becoming unattainable luxuries, without a corresponding increase in dense square footage to make up for it. Condos are shoeboxes because there's never enough supply to satisfy demand, so there's no reason to not build as small as possible.

I perceive the Olympics as one of the very few avenues through which LM municipalities could be convinced to open the floodgates of upzoning neighborhoods dominated by detached homes and actually let the market provide enough homes. Because right now, it can't even do that and the socio-political trends is for things to get even worse.

 

[Egghead1999]

so is the government supposed to build supply and sell it at cost? I also stated building more apartments doesn’t solve the price point of townhouse and SFH. The cost of land is so much that even if the government bought land and developed it by the time you get government bloat in there I doubt they end up no cheaper.

no la~~~, why the government cannot sell it at cost? Also, land cost, give me a break, the government sets the land price, don't know where you are, stupid poco or van city sold some lands below market value to land developers couple years ago. Here is what the government should do if they really want to help people
(1) building more affordable RENTAL units for the low-income class
(2) building more affordable housing for low to mid-income class, selling them at cost or below cost? However, the owners need to pay taxes if they sell their units to non-approved buyers.

As I said before, gov't is one of the beneficiaries and has no point to solve the housing issue.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

The problem right now is that private parties aren't even allowed to supply enough housing to a market that could otherwise afford housing on their own. It's causing gigantic pressure on rents - middle-class types who would ordinary buy keep renting, so that landlords have all the incentives in the world to renovict then jack up rates. So these freshly renovicted, or otherwise working poor who can no longer afford their own place have to get roommates instead.

Great post, Jyrki. Just in anecdotal news, my brother last year was trying to get into the market and was looking out in Mission and detached homes there were going for $600-800k, no subjects. As you said, the rent market is way out of whack as well. The money is moving East, and if those municipalities have no interest in re-zoning and expanding population, the suburban hell that is housing will only inflate further. My parents bought a detached home on a reasonable big lot in 2002, 4-bed, 2-bath for $250,000. This house has had work done, lots, but I could reasonably see it go for $1.25M as another house on our street that has never had any work done on it when for $1.1M in 2020. That's 5x the price in 20 years. For shits and giggles, I found a 3-bed, 2-bath townhouse last year same city, for $550,000. This is the cruelest joke my generation and those to come will face.

 

[Jyrki]

Great post, Jyrki. Just in anecdotal news, my brother last year was trying to get into the market and was looking out in Mission and detached homes there were going for $600-800k, no subjects. As you said, the rent market is way out of whack as well. The money is moving East, and if those municipalities have no interest in re-zoning and expanding population, the suburban hell that is housing will only inflate further. My parents bought a detached home on a reasonable big lot in 2002, 4-bed, 2-bath for $250,000. This house has had work done, lots, but I could reasonably see it go for $1.25M as another house on our street that has never had any work done on it when for $1.1M in 2020. That's 5x the price in 20 years. For shits and giggles, I found a 3-bed, 2-bath townhouse last year same city, for $550,000. This is the cruelest joke my generation and those to come will face.

I'd be at peace with being a renter if cities and the overall economy weren't so hostile towards tenants. The way housing is inflating, being a tenant is basically throwing large amounts of money into a black hole every month. And if it's taking up most of take home pay you're stuck there forever.

I'm in the province's "sunshine list" and I literally cannot afford to buy anything bigger than 600 sqft in Richmond, yet renting something of that size would still take like 30-40% of my after-tax pay. It's a complete joke. If I couldn't mooch off my parents I would've f***ed off from this province a very long time ago.

 

[xtra]

4 things need to happen for housing to change:
Better transportation infrastructure - if we had a bullet train people could reasonable live in hope and work down town. Overall our infrastructure for transportation sucks
More density. Screw these view cones we have. The smallest high rise should be 8-10 stories. That alone would double our housing
Mindset change. This is the biggest one. People need to move away from the idea of a house with a big yard. Town homes and apartments should be fine if we support it with adequate public spaces.
Our generation entering politics - it’s time we stopped letting 74 year old Doug McCollum and 55 year old vancouver mayor dictate things to us.
Now this all comes as someone who has a house and is benefitting from this madness to the point I may downsize and have a paid off home.

 

[Jyrki]

4 things need to happen for housing to change:
Better transportation infrastructure - if we had a bullet train people could reasonable live in hope and work down town. Overall our infrastructure for transportation sucks
More density. Screw these view cones we have. The smallest high rise should be 8-10 stories. That alone would double our housing
Mindset change. This is the biggest one. People need to move away from the idea of a house with a big yard. Town homes and apartments should be fine if we support it with adequate public spaces.
Our generation entering politics - it’s time we stopped letting 74 year old Doug McCollum and 55 year old vancouver mayor dictate things to us.
Now this all comes as someone who has a house and is benefitting from this madness to the point I may downsize and have a paid off home.

I don't think view cones are that problematic. At their worst they still don't take up much square mileage and arent drivers behind NIMBYism. There's no view comes in the west side, which is by far the most hostile area to density.

 

[Bubbles]

4 things need to happen for housing to change:
Better transportation infrastructure - if we had a bullet train people could reasonable live in hope and work down town. Overall our infrastructure for transportation sucks
More density. Screw these view cones we have. The smallest high rise should be 8-10 stories. That alone would double our housing
Mindset change. This is the biggest one. People need to move away from the idea of a house with a big yard. Town homes and apartments should be fine if we support it with adequate public spaces.
Our generation entering politics - it’s time we stopped letting 74 year old Doug McCollum and 55 year old vancouver mayor dictate things to us.
Now this all comes as someone who has a house and is benefitting from this madness to the point I may downsize and have a paid off home.

1. I know you're probably speaking in hyperbole, but Hope is incredibly tiny. It's surrounded by 3 giant mountains on each side and has nowhere to grow.

2. Bullet trains only work where there is a lot density, Asia-like density not even seen in downtown Vancouver. Makes no sense for small populations.

3. The mindset thing I agree, I suppose. If you look at just Vancouver proper the vast majority of neighbourhoods are still single family. It's only densified around the skytrain areas and downtown.

4. Agreed. Old man McCallum is my mayor and hates pot so much he won't let them have stores, but is more than OK to take money from his taxi friends.

 

[CanuckleBerry]

I don't think view cones are that problematic. At their worst they still don't take up much square mileage and arent drivers behind NIMBYism. There's no view comes in the west side, which is by far the most hostile area to density.

The view cones are dumb, but I think you've hit the correlation here bang on. Like bandwagonesque mentioned, the zoning in Vancouver proper is insane. If there's nowhere else to build density at scale then obstructions like view cones just get amplified when they shouldn't be a big deal. It's kind of mind blowing just how much of Vancouver's 114 sq km is exclusively detached housing.

 

[bandwagonesque]

The view cones are dumb, but I think you've hit the correlation here bang on. Like bandwagonesque mentioned, the zoning in Vancouver proper is insane. If there's nowhere else to build density at scale then obstructions like view cones just get amplified when they shouldn't be a big deal. It's kind of mind blowing just how much of Vancouver's 114 sq km is exclusively detached housing.

The row-houses in Strathcona look great, and I’d guess by looking at them that they fit at least twice as many residents as detached housing. If you want the dream of having your own little castle and never hearing conversation on the other side of your walls, you just can’t live in or near the core of an economically robust international city. This isn’t unique to Vancouver or North America.

 

[F A N]

I'd be at peace with being a renter if cities and the overall economy weren't so hostile towards tenants. The way housing is inflating, being a tenant is basically throwing large amounts of money into a black hole every month. And if it's taking up most of take home pay you're stuck there forever.

I'm in the province's "sunshine list" and I literally cannot afford to buy anything bigger than 600 sqft in Richmond, yet renting something of that size would still take like 30-40% of my after-tax pay. It's a complete joke. If I couldn't mooch off my parents I would've f***ed off from this province a very long time ago.

Ya it's not a good financial situation either way. If you're not paying high rents you're likely borrowing a lot of money to buy a place. If you can do at least 25-30% down payment, your mortgage payments will be similar to the cost of renting the same place.

The only solace for homeowners is the fact that the value of the property has been shooting up. But for those who bought a place to live in it, that doesn't help the cash crunch. Strata fees (if you have them), cost of insurance, and property taxes have gone up. So the increase in property values are just paper gains.

It's also not rosy for landlords either. You're basically renting out a rent controlled property but your property taxes and strata fees have gone up. Is it worth the trouble being a landlord? Might as well sit on the property for a few years then sell it, which of course doesn't help with the rental supply.

 

[xtra]

1. I know you're probably speaking in hyperbole, but Hope is incredibly tiny. It's surrounded by 3 giant mountains on each side and has nowhere to grow.

2. Bullet trains only work where there is a lot density, Asia-like density not even seen in downtown Vancouver. Makes no sense for small populations.

3. The mindset thing I agree, I suppose. If you look at just Vancouver proper the vast majority of neighbourhoods are still single family. It's only densified around the skytrain areas and downtown.

4. Agreed. Old man McCallum is my mayor and hates pot so much he won't let them have stores, but is more than OK to take money from his taxi friends.

Points one and two go hand in hand. And I only said hope for hyperbole like you said. But chilliwack would be fine if we had some decent transit options.

people in england travel 2 hours to London on transit and aren’t bothered but we don’t have the infrastructure for that here

heck how 152 doesn’t have a skytrain running down it to white rock blows my mind.

improve transit to the point it’s the preferred option over driving and we have the ability to spread out.

but the key factors are points 3 and 4

 

[F A N]

Mindset change. This is the biggest one. People need to move away from the idea of a house with a big yard. Town homes and apartments should be fine if we support it with adequate public spaces.

Hasn't this happened already? A million dollar detached home in East Van 10 years ago is now like $2M. I would imagine that 95+% of the people who don't already own a million dollar home would be so priced out of the market that they wouldn't even dream of buying a detached home?

 

[xtra]

Hasn't this happened already? A million dollar detached home in East Van 10 years ago is now like $2M. I would imagine that 95+% of the people who don't already own a million dollar home would be so priced out of the market that they wouldn't even dream of buying a detached home?

I don’t think it really has. I think most people want a house with a yard still as opposed to the England style row homes.

now we can’t afford it so that’s an issue but when people talk about a family they talk about a house with a yard and such

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

I’m thankful that I own my own place and atleast in the market.

For the younger generation and those not in the market, I do feel for them.

This city is beautiful but incredibly expensive.

And it’s only going to get worse.

 

[F A N]

I don’t think it really has. I think most people want a house with a yard still as opposed to the England style row homes.

now we can’t afford it so that’s an issue but when people talk about a family they talk about a house with a yard and such

As long as detached homes are an option and relatively plentiful it is always an option for comparison. There’s also a generation of us who grew up in detached homes or have parents and grandparents who have. Our school friends also lived in detached homes growing up. So it’s going to take some time I think.

In reality, BC actually has a lot of land. Its just that many of us who grew up at a certain location don’t want to move too far away. A lot of people don’t want to cross more than 2 bridges to get to work.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

I don’t think it really has. I think most people want a house with a yard still as opposed to the England style row homes.

now we can’t afford it so that’s an issue but when people talk about a family they talk about a house with a yard and such

Townhouses can have yards, albeit small.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

My uncle, Sandy Hucul, retired professional hockey player and coach, feared defenseman, pioneer of hockey in Arizona, and winner of coach of the year in the WHA, died in Phoenix this morning. Uncle Sandy was a major part of my childhood and I will miss him.

Don Cherry wrote about him.

 

[F A N]

My uncle, Sandy Hucul, retired professional hockey player and coach, feared defenseman, pioneer of hockey in Arizona, and winner of coach of the year in the WHA, died in Phoenix this morning. Uncle Sandy was a major part of my childhood and I will miss him.

Don Cherry wrote about him.

My condolences and RIP to your uncle.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Sorry for your loss, Chairman.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Sorry for your loss, CM. May he Rest in Peace.

 

[Egghead1999]

Townhouses can have yards, albeit small.

Strata Fees and gross taxes are not cheap

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Strata Fees and gross taxes are not cheap

No, and I've vehemently been anti-strata in the past. But, that's where we are now.

 

[Canuckle1970]

My uncle, Sandy Hucul, retired professional hockey player and coach, feared defenseman, pioneer of hockey in Arizona, and winner of coach of the year in the WHA, died in Phoenix this morning. Uncle Sandy was a major part of my childhood and I will miss him.

Don Cherry wrote about him.

My condolences to you and your family, Chairman. So sorry for your loss.