Peter Dowdy

I don’t think this is a prescription so much as an analysis of how far the current zoning is from what would probably be built if people could build what they wanted.

Demand based zoning – Mountain Doodles What if zoning was responsive to underlying demand to live in an area? A simple model to estimate demand-based zoning in Vancouver.

When discussing reforms like multiplex zoning, demand estimates rarely enter the discussion (except as a force to be countered).
@lausterna.bsky.social and I think that’s unfortunate and we run some simple estimates what it would look like to zone for the demand to live in an area.

Forced private developers to build? Extremely unlikely, since governments spent that time forbidding private developers from building. Why work at cross purposes?

Smells like an absolutely correct thesis supported by the data

Private companies “choosing” not to build, vs what, building illegal wildcat apartments and daring the city to shut them down?

Okay, wow, astonishingly condescending argument to make to a 39 year old parent. Sorry, but this is such obvious stuff. If people’s life circumstances change such that they want something other than urban core living, the demand for it goes down. Why isn’t it?

We can’t know that though, can we? If people were leaving the core because they didn’t like it, the core would be cheap.

The intentional result of the broken Vancouver planning system championed by Hardwick, Geller, Condon, etc.

Financial exclusion, hollowed communities, and longer commutes.

Really looking forward to number 5!

Yea between this and Patrick Condon, our city is awash in pseudo-economics

The Tyee should ask some mainstream economists what they think of Patrick Condon's Bizarro World real estate economics that they have consistently platformed & promoted.

If prioritized homes for people like we prioritize homes for cars we would be much further along in dealing with this housing crisis.

Doesn’t this coincide so precisely with downzoning in Canadian cities that you can’t be sure?

Maybe those are dogs in the pasture

What we now call “reading”, future people will call “deep reading”, and they will have vastly more information at their command.

It is a long-term solution to my congenital caffeine deficiency

Vancouver’s ‘social housing initiative’ calls for 20-storey towers across city Veteran planners question scale of development, effect on urban design

Housing is good, actually. Doubly so if it can increase our merge stock of non-market housing.
If you prioritize your aesthetic preferences over others having housing, or don’t want people of diverse incomes living near you, or have difficulty handling change, then city living might not be for you.

guys its a school please stop requiring rezoning for everything

Defunding housing and transit seems bad

For my child and yours, I proudly support this transformative housing project: 1000+ purpose-built rental homes next to SkyTrain, turning a parking lot into homes for working people. It’s a perfect place to add density for our city!

The results show who is taking the housing crisis seriously!

Yeah, they asked applicant, and he gave a tepid yes on that one. Staff were more confident yesterday.

Making a symbolic gesture *against* good things is not the winning move their defenders think it is.

Vancouver's social housing initiative 简体中文 | 繁體中文 Making Vancouver more inclusive and equitable is a key priority of Vancouver Plan, the city’s long-term land-use strategy. Vancouver’s Social Housing Initiative works toward the critical n...

One of the reasons I was so proud to run with OneCity was @christineboyle.bsky.social’s fight for social housing in every neighbourhood.

Her social housing initiative, passed in 2022, is finally coming to the public for consultation. Make your voice heard!

www.shapeyourcity.ca/social-housing

I thought they said that in the first hearing too. I was in chambers for that one

Only on an extremely near scale; the overall effect on the city is a reduction of rents. New buildings make almost all old buildings cheaper.

The people who would come and pay high rents in that building don’t cease to exist. They continue to exist elsewhere (possibly paying lower rent!) but less well-off, as evidenced by their willingness to pay these high rents instead.

Thank you for communicating this to people. There is a lot of misinformation in this discussion that leads people who care about housing to support policies that hurt housing.

This project will provide very valuable rental housing supply on top of one of the region's busiest transit hubs. There was a lot of discussion at the public hearing on whether new rental (sometimes suggested that this is 'luxury') can help our housing situation. A few things...

Ok now up for Sean Orr: a tough one for me. Number of opposed speakers outnumbered supporters, so one vote should reflect them (WHAT. WHAT. THAT IS RIDICULOUS. WTF)

omg Sean Orr is going to vote against 1000+, zero displacement rental homes.

This, too, is disqualifying.