Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
No one is saying you have to go to that large of an extreme. If there were more townhouses available then the price would drop, and the same would apply to condos. It's also not just detached homes that could be torn down, it's also industrial and commercial space. For example, there's entire blocks along terminal that are empty.
A lot this "detached housing" is also in a state of total decay. These places don't have families living in them. Most are sub-obtimized and, if rented at all, to single people without families. A massive proportion of the detached houses in Vancouver are total tear downs. A large proportion are then slums that absentee landlords won't put a dime into.
|
Exactly, zoning changes don't equate to "bulldozing" entire neighbourhoods, but if they did, that would obviously mean there was a greater demand to live in a more central environment (even if it was a smaller space) than in a single family home.
Cliff doesn't understand that demand to live in central Vancouver has far outstripped the land's capacity to supply living units as single family homes. Speculation is occurring because the land those units occupy is so valuable.
We could also do a much better job of blending different types of zoning together instead of our current boutique and discrete model of zoning one land block on a case by case basis. We should follow the 12 zone model like they have in Japan where dense residential can mix with single family homes, commercial and certain types of light industrial (like breweries).