3 ms·

Sounds like a self-made problem with nimbys and inefficient planning for new housing.

by tnli 10y ago

macspoofing 10y ago
Maybe, but Vancouver doesn't have a lot place to grow.
kitcar 10y ago
There has actually been a massive amount of high rise development - its just questionable if the "type" of high rise inventory coming online is inline with the type of places people want to love. The bigger issue is a non significant number of people are buying the new construction inventory as well as pre-existing inventory and not moving in / not renting them out...
cmrdporcupine 10y ago
This is not like the Bay Area. Vancouver has grown upwards and increased density aggressively for the last 20 years. But the housing market in Toronto and Vancouver didn't go through a correction like the US did in 2008. Constantly low interest rates, high immigration rates, and high foreign investment has led to astronomical housing prices and an unaffordable market.
- Pxtl 10y ago
  To be fair, there are a lot of areas of Vancouver holding on to suburbanity far longer than they should. When you have rail transit stops surrounded by low-density bungalows, you can tell NIMBYism is winning.
adaml_623 10y ago
http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Buy_to_leave http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Buy_to_leave
graeham 10y ago
Arguably, the main driver of the problem is foreign purchase of investment properties which aren't rented. Speculation drives this further, as lots of people have made high returns on a market that 'can only go up'. Nine students 'own' a combined $57M in vancouver property: http://www.news1130.com/2016/09/14/nine-students-own-57m-worth-of-vancouver-property/ http://www.news1130.com/2016/09/14/nine-students-own-57m-wor... Another point that is not often raised is the crazy increases are mainly in detached houses. Condos and attached properties have increased a lot, but not nearly as frothy as detached houses. Suggests the type of purchase that is driving the increases. http://www.news1130.com/2016/02/02/vancouver-house-price-new-record/ http://www.news1130.com/2016/02/02/vancouver-house-price-new...
- zo1 10y ago
  I must be missing some part of the equation here. How is it possible that these properties are not being rented out? Even if the price of the homes are over-inflated, the owners should still be able to get some extra money out of such a capital asset? Is there something that is tilting the balance the other way? I.e. Making renting out for some amount not worth it?
  - mattm 10y ago
    One possible reason is that house prices have gone up so much in the past few years that people can sell quickly and make a huge profit. If you have people renting, you can't just kick them out immediately if you want to sell. Renters would be a liability in this case.
    - jdavis703 10y ago
      I don't know about Canada, but in California you can evict people in 30 days... If you (the tenant) really work the court system, maybe it'll take up to 50 days. 50 days should be enough time to kick someone out and put the house for sale.
      - breitling 10y ago
vkou 10y ago
This is nonsense. Have you been to Vancouver? It is adding new housing extremely aggressively. Anywhere you turn, you'll see a good dozen high-rises under construction. Five years ago, you'd have seen a different set of high-rises under construction. Five years before that, same story. Vancouver isn't San Francisco.
- mazatta 10y ago
  That's quite true, but that development is only able to happen in very tiny bands of the city, and there is a cap on how tall new buildings can be. The vast majority is zoned for single family homes, and any kind of densification is resisted vigorously by existing property owners. E.g. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/commercial-drive-tower-boffo-kettle-1.3656577 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/commercial-dr... There's no question Vancouver is building, but it is not building enough of the right kind of housing (i.e. rental, non-luxury, and > 1 bedroom units).
nwah1 10y ago
The ability for people to speculate on rising land values basically ensures that a large portion of prime land will be underused, or held out of use entirely. If we shifted taxes away from production and onto land use in general, regardless of whether it is vacant or not, we would no longer see this underutilization of land, and also end the perverse incentives of taxes on productive activity.

Sounds like a self-made problem with nimbys and inefficient planning for new housing.

by tnli 10y ago

Sounds like a self-made problem with nimbys and inefficient planning for new housing.

macspoofing 10y ago

Maybe, but Vancouver doesn't have a lot place to grow.

kitcar 10y ago

There has actually been a massive amount of high rise development - its just questionable if the "type" of high rise inventory coming online is inline with the type of places people want to love. The bigger issue is a non significant number of people are buying the new construction inventory as well as pre-existing inventory and not moving in / not renting them out...

cmrdporcupine 10y ago

This is not like the Bay Area. Vancouver has grown upwards and increased density aggressively for the last 20 years. But the housing market in Toronto and Vancouver didn't go through a correction like the US did in 2008. Constantly low interest rates, high immigration rates, and high foreign investment has led to astronomical housing prices and an unaffordable market.

Pxtl 10y ago
To be fair, there are a lot of areas of Vancouver holding on to suburbanity far longer than they should. When you have rail transit stops surrounded by low-density bungalows, you can tell NIMBYism is winning.

adaml_623 10y ago

http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Buy_to_leave http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Buy_to_leave

graeham 10y ago

Arguably, the main driver of the problem is foreign purchase of investment properties which aren't rented. Speculation drives this further, as lots of people have made high returns on a market that 'can only go up'. Nine students 'own' a combined $57M in vancouver property: http://www.news1130.com/2016/09/14/nine-students-own-57m-worth-of-vancouver-property/ http://www.news1130.com/2016/09/14/nine-students-own-57m-wor... Another point that is not often raised is the crazy increases are mainly in detached houses. Condos and attached properties have increased a lot, but not nearly as frothy as detached houses. Suggests the type of purchase that is driving the increases. http://www.news1130.com/2016/02/02/vancouver-house-price-new-record/ http://www.news1130.com/2016/02/02/vancouver-house-price-new...

zo1 10y ago
I must be missing some part of the equation here. How is it possible that these properties are not being rented out? Even if the price of the homes are over-inflated, the owners should still be able to get some extra money out of such a capital asset? Is there something that is tilting the balance the other way? I.e. Making renting out for some amount not worth it?
- mattm 10y ago
  One possible reason is that house prices have gone up so much in the past few years that people can sell quickly and make a huge profit. If you have people renting, you can't just kick them out immediately if you want to sell. Renters would be a liability in this case.
  - jdavis703 10y ago
    I don't know about Canada, but in California you can evict people in 30 days... If you (the tenant) really work the court system, maybe it'll take up to 50 days. 50 days should be enough time to kick someone out and put the house for sale.
    - breitling 10y ago

vkou 10y ago

This is nonsense. Have you been to Vancouver? It is adding new housing extremely aggressively. Anywhere you turn, you'll see a good dozen high-rises under construction. Five years ago, you'd have seen a different set of high-rises under construction. Five years before that, same story. Vancouver isn't San Francisco.

mazatta 10y ago
That's quite true, but that development is only able to happen in very tiny bands of the city, and there is a cap on how tall new buildings can be. The vast majority is zoned for single family homes, and any kind of densification is resisted vigorously by existing property owners. E.g. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/commercial-drive-tower-boffo-kettle-1.3656577 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/commercial-dr... There's no question Vancouver is building, but it is not building enough of the right kind of housing (i.e. rental, non-luxury, and > 1 bedroom units).

nwah1 10y ago

The ability for people to speculate on rising land values basically ensures that a large portion of prime land will be underused, or held out of use entirely. If we shifted taxes away from production and onto land use in general, regardless of whether it is vacant or not, we would no longer see this underutilization of land, and also end the perverse incentives of taxes on productive activity.