Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-18-2023, 02:53 PM   #1581
accord1999
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
I'm glad I did, because man is that New Zealand graphic compelling. In summary - Auckland did a big upzoning. Immediately after multi-family construction had a huge increase and rents flat-lined. They compare to Wellington (same country, no upzoning) and the difference seems pretty obvious.
Auckland having a 25% premium in median rent in 2016 might have just been because it had a housing market boom first. In 2010 the premium against Wellington was much smaller, about the same as it is now after Wellington also had a housing boom.

And rents didn't flat-lined, Auckland rents were about $480 in November 2016 and are now about $640, Auckland rental growth rate has been pretty consistent for more than a decade. The rest of the country having higher growth in rental and housing prices is probably just the "Toronto/Vancouver" effect as residents and investors look elsewhere because prices got too high in Auckland.

Last edited by accord1999; 09-18-2023 at 02:58 PM.
accord1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 03:15 PM   #1582
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Auckland having a 25% premium in median rent in 2016 might have just been because it had a housing market boom first. In 2010 the premium against Wellington was much smaller, about the same as it is now after Wellington also had a housing boom.

And rents didn't flat-lined, Auckland rents were about $480 in November 2016 and are now about $640, Auckland rental growth rate has been pretty consistent for more than a decade. The rest of the country having higher growth in rental and housing prices is probably just the "Toronto/Vancouver" effect as residents and investors look elsewhere because prices got too high in Auckland.
Should have said flat in real terms (ie inflation adjusted).

Personally, I think a big increase in supply of something is likely to make the price of that something lower than it otherwise would be.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 03:39 PM   #1583
Torture
Loves Teh Chat!
 
Torture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoho View Post
I listened to a Calgary councillor on radio today he said the only thing they agreed on was to look at this so the Federal funding wouldn’t stop for now. He said this zoning is a long way from seeing the light of day and when 400k residence get a notice in the mail of this he would be very surprised if it passes.
I would put money on Greg McLean.

One of my favourite parts of the hearing was when Craig Chandler (!) called in to support the affordable housing strategy and he and Greg McLean got in a bit of a tiff.
Torture is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 03:55 PM   #1584
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture View Post
I would put money on Greg McLean.

One of my favourite parts of the hearing was when Craig Chandler (!) called in to support the affordable housing strategy and he and Greg McLean got in a bit of a tiff.
Greg McLean is the Calgary-Centre MP. You're thinking of Dan McLean, Ward 13 councilor.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 04:19 PM   #1585
Torture
Loves Teh Chat!
 
Torture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TorqueDog View Post
Greg McLean is the Calgary-Centre MP. You're thinking of Dan McLean, Ward 13 councilor.
Too many McLean's. I guess I just lost a bunch of money.
Torture is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 05:03 PM   #1586
Yoho
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: North America
Exp:
Default

https://twitter.com/user/status/1703891654326018394
Yoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2023, 05:14 PM   #1587
TorqueDog
Franchise Player
 
TorqueDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
Exp:
Default

Best part is the top reply I saw to that tweet:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1703893317501718601

"AND Taxpayers Pay MORE taxes for all the Infrastructure Upgrades to meet density stress!"

No, you f-cking dumb-ass. We pay more taxes to sprawl the city out to build net-new infrastructure, it is far cheaper to leverage and upgrade existing infrastructure in built-up parts of the city.
__________________
-James
GO
FLAMES GO.
TorqueDog is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
Old 09-18-2023, 05:25 PM   #1588
D as in David
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture View Post
Too many McLean's. I guess I just lost a bunch of money.
As a ward 13 resident, I'll be selfless and offer up Dan as the McLean-to-go.
D as in David is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to D as in David For This Useful Post:
Old 09-18-2023, 06:52 PM   #1589
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
I had to use an archive to read that: https://archive.ph/jHP47

I'm glad I did, because man is that New Zealand graphic compelling. In summary - Auckland did a big upzoning. Immediately after multi-family construction had a huge increase and rents flat-lined. They compare to Wellington (same country, no upzoning) and the difference seems pretty obvious.
Thatís pretty impressive that the affects are seen within 2-3 years. Iíd have guessed that it would take a decade to make a meaningful difference.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 01:00 AM   #1590
GullFoss
First Line Centre
 
GullFoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree View Post
So it might increase affordability and density?
I think let's stick with affordability because this was an affordable housing policy.

First, if the best possible outcome is a minor impact, it's not necessarily worth the loss of certainty. Say there's 1,000 homes in a neighborhood and as a result of blanket R-CG you get two duplexes, one townhouse and 997 single family homes. Are those additional 5 dwellings worth creating uncertainty for 1,000 families? What if no duplexes or townhouses got built; was it worth creating uncertainty for 1,000 families then?

Secondly, even if it does work, it does little for affordability. Subdividing a $1.5m lot in Elbow Park to build a duplex that sells for $1.7m...is that helping affordablility? Probably not. And if instead a developer developed townhomes, they sell for $1.1m each. Again, does nothing for affordability.

Third, let's assume it's going to have a minimal impact in the most likely scenario. And even in the best case scenario, the duplexes and townhomes created in these neighborhoods won't be affordable. So why address it under an affordable housing legislation?

It's really tough to argue that extending the blanket to all neighborhoods is about affordability. You can do it and pretend you believe it, but it's pretty disingenuous.

Is there a need for blanket R-CG for some communities? Yes.
Does it make sense to extend it to every neighborhood? No

Last edited by GullFoss; 09-19-2023 at 01:05 AM.
GullFoss is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GullFoss For This Useful Post:
Old 09-19-2023, 01:40 AM   #1591
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GullFoss View Post
Secondly, even if it does work, it does little for affordability. Subdividing a $1.5m lot in Elbow Park to build a duplex that sells for $1.7m...is that helping affordablility? Probably not. And if instead a developer developed townhomes, they sell for $1.1m each. Again, does nothing for affordability.
If you increase the supply of something, you reduce its price. That's just how it work.

Also, when people move into new housing, even if it's expensive, wherever they were living before becomes available. The article linked above discusses, including citations to research on the topic.

Quote:
One argument is that only by building affordable housing can you increase affordability. Market-rate dwellings will simply go to people on higher incomes, leaving lower earners high and dry. But recent studies from the US, Sweden and Finland all demonstrate that although most people who move directly into new unsubsidised housing may come from the top half of earners, the chain of moves triggered by their purchase frees up housing in the same cities for people on lower incomes.

The US study found that building 100 new market-rate dwellings ultimately leads to up to 70 people moving out of below-median income neighbourhoods, and up to 40 moving out of the poorest fifth. Those numbers donít budge even if the new housing is priced towards the top end of the market.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-19-2023, 07:33 AM   #1592
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
If you increase the supply of something, you reduce its price. That's just how it work.

Also, when people move into new housing, even if it's expensive, wherever they were living before becomes available. The article linked above discusses, including citations to research on the topic.
The studies sound promising. But what about Houston? I brought them up earlier as a city that had actually done this, and they have had the same challenges as everyone else. I think this is presented as a panacea, but in reality it's extremely difficult.

And really, Gull Foss gives a good example of the type of savings you could reasonably anticipate in a community like Elbow Park. You move the needle from say $1.7m all the way down to like $1.2m. It's not actually helping the vulnerable and students.
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 07:51 AM   #1593
Roughneck
#1 Goaltender
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the middle
Exp:
Default

What about Houston? It’s a city that doesn’t have zoning but instead has ordinances and deed restrictions and a bunch of other ‘not zoning restrictions but mechanisms that achieve the same thing. You’re not going to get much affordable housing built when you still enforce high parking minimums that add $40-70K cost per unit or when people can challenge and bog down development permits with complaints regarding all the ordinances they feel are being skirted.

Houston just shows that simply saying you have less restrictive zoning doesn’t mean much of anything and there’s a lot more layers to what needs to be done. Which is why the blanket RC-G zoning change is just one part of a long list of changes the city is making.
Roughneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 08:01 AM   #1594
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck View Post
What about Houston? Itís a city that doesnít have zoning but instead has ordinances and deed restrictions and a bunch of other Ďnot zoning restrictions but mechanisms that achieve the same thing. Youíre not going to get much affordable housing built when you still enforce high parking minimums that add $40-70K cost per unit or when people can challenge and bog down development permits with complaints regarding all the ordinances they feel are being skirted.

Houston just shows that simply saying you have less restrictive zoning doesnít mean much of anything and thereís a lot more layers to what needs to be done. Which is why the blanket RC-G zoning change is just one part of a long list of changes the city is making.
Ok, so is there a city that's actually taken the approach we are and shows some progress?
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 08:27 AM   #1595
Roughneck
#1 Goaltender
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the middle
Exp:
Default

Minneapolis is still early into their similar housing strategy and early signs are showing promise.
Roughneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 08:53 AM   #1596
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Ok, so is there a city that's actually taken the approach we are and shows some progress?
If you follow the link Bizzaro posted it had two examples of Aukland and Minniapolis where housing costs rose less than peers.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 09:07 AM   #1597
calgarygeologist
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck View Post
Minneapolis is still early into their similar housing strategy and early signs are showing promise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
If you follow the link Bizzaro posted it had two examples of Aukland and Minniapolis where housing costs rose less than peers.
In terms of success for Minneapolis how much can be attributed to policy changes and how much to population changes? If I'm not mistaken the population saw a decrease in 2018/19 and is growing at a much slower rate than similar cities.
calgarygeologist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 10:10 AM   #1598
Torture
Loves Teh Chat!
 
Torture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
If you increase the supply of something, you reduce its price. That's just how it work.

Also, when people move into new housing, even if it's expensive, wherever they were living before becomes available. The article linked above discusses, including citations to research on the topic.
The more I have this debate the more I realize how hard it is to convince somebody with facts when they've already made up their mind based on feelings. Like, I literally just posted the article which references studies in Auckland and Minneapolis. It literally talks about cases like Elbow Park, etc in there, that yes, some high priced homes will be made, but that increased supply still helps.
Quote:
One argument is that only by building affordable housing can you increase affordability. Market-rate dwellings will simply go to people on higher incomes, leaving lower earners high and dry.
But recent studies from the US, Sweden and Finland all demonstrate that although most people who move directly into new unsubsidised housing may come from the top half of earners, the chain of moves triggered by their purchase frees up housing in the same cities for people on lower incomes.
Want to go dispute that? Fine, read the multiple papers that are cited and tell me where they got it wrong but this "what about Elbow Park / Houston / wherever" is tiring.

People that study planning and urban studies have across the board said policies like this are beneficial. Are they the silver bullet, no, they're part of a solution. (just like this strategy). Want to dispute that it doesn't work? Fine, but bring some stronger arguments.

Last edited by Torture; 09-19-2023 at 10:19 AM.
Torture is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
Old 09-19-2023, 10:18 AM   #1599
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist View Post
In terms of success for Minneapolis how much can be attributed to policy changes and how much to population changes? If I'm not mistaken the population saw a decrease in 2018/19 and is growing at a much slower rate than similar cities.
The study compared it to cities with similar population trends but different rates of new housing approval (Omaha, Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City)
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2023, 10:20 AM   #1600
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
If you follow the link Bizzaro posted it had two examples of Aukland and Minniapolis where housing costs rose less than peers.
In fairness it was Torture who posted it, I just linked a non-paywall version so others could read it.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:45 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021