Greater Vancouver Population to Grow 40% by 2041

[misher]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...nts-they-cant/

B.C., with 5-million people today, will grow by 1.3-million by 2041. More than three-quarters of those new residents are expected to make their homes in the Lower Mainland, a.k.a. Greater Vancouver.

The population of Greater Vancouver is 2.5 million. A 1 million increase represents a growth of 40%. This means that we will grow about 2% a year. Vancouver's housing goal (which its currently failing) was 85,000 new units over 10 years. However demolitions represent about 20% so this means if we followed this goal we'd gain 6,800 units annually. We have about 330,000 units in Vancouver. If we followed Stewart's 10 year plan's goal we'd gain 2.06% more housing annually, barely keeping up with immigration. This of course doesn't count phenomenons causing us to require more housing even discounting immigration, the increasing desire for people to live by themselves/away from families, the reduced size of housing (more people can fit in a house than a condo), AirBnB, longer lifespans, and international students/visitors. I'd say if we followed Stewart's housing goals, we'd barely tread water and keep things stable. But we're not, Council is blocking development and is chasing developers out of town. So expect the housing crisis to get worse by 2041 not better. Though greater Vancouver is more than just the city of Vancouver, so if the muncipalities build the housing Vancouver at a rate of faster than 2% maybe the problem will get better. Just Vancouver will shrink and soon become a suburb, probably of Burnaby or Surrey.

I really don't understand how people can expect housing prices or demand to go down under these conditions. Supply must catch up or we must change how many people we are putting here.

[GenWhy?]

https://vancouver.ca/people-programs...l-housing.aspx

"Following Council’s approval of the amended Secured Rental Policy, we're working on necessary next steps for the implementation of policy directions. This work will be taking place over the coming year, including:

Recommendations to amend zoning for select commercial areas (C-2 zoning districts) to enable rental housing development up to 6-storeys through a ‘pre-zoning’ approach
Enhanced rental housing rezoning options in low-density transition areas
Any proposed changes will be subject to Council approval.

Opportunities for public engagement will take place in early 2020, with a report to Council anticipated for spring 2020."

[misher]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

https://vancouver.ca/people-programs...l-housing.aspx

"Following Council’s approval of the amended Secured Rental Policy, we're working on necessary next steps for the implementation of policy directions. This work will be taking place over the coming year, including:

Recommendations to amend zoning for select commercial areas (C-2 zoning districts) to enable rental housing development up to 6-storeys through a ‘pre-zoning’ approach
Enhanced rental housing rezoning options in low-density transition areas
Any proposed changes will be subject to Council approval.

Opportunities for public engagement will take place in early 2020, with a report to Council anticipated for spring 2020."

If C-2 gets 6 what will C-3A get? My dream for towers down Broadway is getting more realistic every day.

[Aroundtheworld]

When will council learn that half-measures mean half results?

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by misher

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...nts-they-cant/



The population of Greater Vancouver is 2.5 million. A 1 million increase represents a growth of 40%. This means that we will grow about 2% a year. Vancouver's housing goal (which its currently failing) was 85,000 new units over 10 years. However demolitions represent about 20% so this means if we followed this goal we'd gain 6,800 units annually. We have about 330,000 units in Vancouver. If we followed Stewart's 10 year plan's goal we'd gain 2.06% more housing annually, barely keeping up with immigration. This of course doesn't count phenomenons causing us to require more housing even discounting immigration, the increasing desire for people to live by themselves/away from families, the reduced size of housing (more people can fit in a house than a condo), AirBnB, longer lifespans, and international students/visitors. I'd say if we followed Stewart's housing goals, we'd barely tread water and keep things stable. But we're not, Council is blocking development and is chasing developers out of town. So expect the housing crisis to get worse by 2041 not better. Though greater Vancouver is more than just the city of Vancouver, so if the muncipalities build the housing Vancouver at a rate of faster than 2% maybe the problem will get better. Just Vancouver will shrink and soon become a suburb, probably of Burnaby or Surrey.

I really don't understand how people can expect housing prices or demand to go down under these conditions. Supply must catch up or we must change how many people we are putting here.

You are right, but what this will really put preassure on is quality of life more so then prices. If prices go up, inequality goes up and desirability goes down, possibly irreversably. If prices dont go up well then great, the city is probably not growing faster then housing units can be built and people still chose to live here and buy, or stay here. This article though is also the primary reason why I left becuase I spent some time a while back and analyzed where the region was heading. There will be major issues well past my life span and I place great importance on things improving year over year, not the opposite. Vancouver is still important to me but now I watch from the sidelines, where I feel much more comfortable and optimistic about the future.

[Tetsuo]

Can we get more investment in infrastructure, not only transit and roads but also recreation.

More trails for example

[lokyin]

We need to quickly densify another corridor within city of Vancouver after Broadway. Ideally Hastings - super underutilized in terms of density. That and West End really needs to give itself up to much higher density redevelopments...

[Migrant_Coconut]

Main, Commercial-Victoria and the rest of Broadway would be good options too.

Originally Posted by misher

Though greater Vancouver is more than just the city of Vancouver, so if the muncipalities build the housing Vancouver at a rate of faster than 2% maybe the problem will get better. Just Vancouver will shrink and soon become a suburb, probably of Burnaby or Surrey.

Rest of the post aside, it's hard to see how this'd happen when even the largest suburbs are building 64% as fast as Vancouver.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by lokyin

We need to quickly densify another corridor within city of Vancouver after Broadway. Ideally Hastings - super underutilized in terms of density. That and West End really needs to give itself up to much higher density redevelopments...

The Arbutus Corridor is rapid transit ready, so that is the first place o would densify. It can easily have more Transit capacity than Cambie so I would plan for even higher density than we are seeing along Cambie.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by logan5

The Arbutus Corridor is rapid transit ready, so that is the first place o would densify. It can easily have more Transit capacity than Cambie so I would plan for even higher density than we are seeing along Cambie.

It’s Point Grey, and can’t have greater capacity unless you piss the NIMBYs that originally stopped the Canada Line from going there.

Hastings makes the most sense right now beside Broadway.

[misher]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It’s Point Grey, and can’t have greater capacity unless you piss the NIMBYs that originally stopped the Canada Line from going there.

Hastings makes the most sense right now beside Broadway.

Am I the only one that thinks we need 5000+ small condos around UBC? I feel this would heavily reduce the burden on transit (getting to/from UBC across Vancouver) and the burden on our rental market as many UBC students live across Vancouver due to cheaper rents. Plus we will have a skytrain there eventually.

UBC is one of the few areas that still has a bunch of undeveloped land (I'm talking about the grassy parts not the forest).

And best of yet few NIMBYs to oppose it.

[nds88]

Originally Posted by lokyin

We need to quickly densify another corridor within city of Vancouver after Broadway. Ideally Hastings - super underutilized in terms of density. That and West End really needs to give itself up to much higher density redevelopments...

Hastings is quite congested already with traffic. IMO we need to densify every skytrain stop. There are still many single family homes across the street from 29th ave Station and Nanaimo Station. Commercial/Broadway should also have some towers too. In addition, re-zoning areas along broadway close to the future skytrain stations

[Migrant_Coconut]

Don't forget Rupert and Renfrew. The entire Expo-Millennium-Boundary triangle should be at the top of the list.

Originally Posted by misher

Am I the only one that thinks we need 5000+ small condos around UBC? I feel this would heavily reduce the burden on transit (getting to/from UBC across Vancouver) and the burden on our rental market as many UBC students live across Vancouver due to cheaper rents. Plus we will have a skytrain there eventually.

UBC is one of the few areas that still has a bunch of undeveloped land (I'm talking about the grassy parts not the forest).

And best of yet few NIMBYs to oppose it.

Not sure what you mean by "grassy," but UBC is indeed getting a ton of new residences. Given student housing rates though, they're likely not going to attract any current student renters without MIRHPP and/or massive public subsidies. Staff, maybe.

As for reducing transit use, UBC's not just some academic monastery - you need housing for the faculty and researchers too. And more housing means more infrastructure/amenities to support it, which means more support staff either living on-site or commuting in... and the students are going to want to spend the nights and weekends downtown... so we can forget about a contained community.

[scryer]

If we are talking about densifying other corridors, then I totally propose Granville Street. The street on the peninsula deserves an upzoning never-seen-before south of West Georgia to prevent it from becoming a second East Hastings. I want to keep the bars but I want to also build ontop of them including towers (if view-cones will allow it) and medium density 12+floors.

Granville street south of the peninsula also deserves greater densification efforts and upzoning as well (I'm thinking 6-12+ floors). Especially at the future South Granville station where it should be towers there along with the rest of Broadway.

But before we go crazy with densifying other corridors, let's remember the shameful waste of potential that Broadway/Commercial Station is right now...

[misher]

Originally Posted by scryer

If we are talking about densifying other corridors, then I totally propose Granville Street. The street on the peninsula deserves an upzoning never-seen-before south of West Georgia to prevent it from becoming a second East Hastings. I want to keep the bars but I want to also build ontop of them including towers (if view-cones will allow it) and medium density 12+floors.

Granville street south of the peninsula also deserves greater densification efforts and upzoning as well (I'm thinking 6-12+ floors). Especially at the future South Granville station where it should be towers there along with the rest of Broadway.

But before we go crazy with densifying other corridors, let's remember the shameful waste of potential that Broadway/Commercial Station is right now...

Have always felt that Granville/Broadway should just be a yaletownlike extension of downtown. Two towers on one side should be paralleled by two towers on the other side. You have Granville island which is a major tourist hub. With the First Nations developments there should be towers, trendy bars/restaurants, hotels, and shops throughout. Currently South granville retail is dying, it needs a massive boost.

[VarBreStr18]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It’s Point Grey, and can’t have greater capacity unless you piss the NIMBYs that originally stopped the Canada Line from going there.

Hastings makes the most sense right now beside Broadway.

Hastings is already super clogged with vehicular traffic Densifying is relatively easy, but moving people efficiently is a nightmare. Should density along existing sky train routes ,such as further east along Evergreen line.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by VarBreStr18

Hastings is already super clogged with vehicular traffic Densifying is relatively easy, but moving people efficiently is a nightmare. Should density along existing sky train routes ,such as further east along Evergreen line.

Hastings actually has excess capacity compared to places like 1st Ave due to people trying to avoid the Strip. Also, they could remove the on-street parking to provide better curbside bus lanes.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Don't forget Rupert and Renfrew. The entire Expo-Millennium-Boundary triangle should be at the top of the list.



Not sure what you mean by "grassy," but UBC is indeed getting a ton of new residences. Given student housing rates though, they're likely not going to attract any current student renters without MIRHPP and/or massive public subsidies. Staff, maybe.

As for reducing transit use, UBC's not just some academic monastery - you need housing for the faculty and researchers too. And more housing means more infrastructure/amenities to support it, which means more support staff either living on-site or commuting in... and the students are going to want to spend the nights and weekends downtown... so we can forget about a contained community.

I think he's talking about the marginal grassy fields around some of the existing buildings, like the one Brock Commons is built on: https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/05/2...ive-on-Campus/

There's also Acadia Park. WTF is up with the empty section in the middle? Did they just forget to finish it?
https://vancouver.housing.ubc.ca/res...s/acadia-park/
It's intended to be Student Family residences.

Problem is obviously that Public Sector tends to move slower than Private Sector, and it's not like housing is UBC's #1 Priority.
Maybe they could allow developers to build on the UEL Block A and B. Not sure if they're leasehold or not, but the current UEL plan has no plans to redevelop it.

Originally Posted by scryer

If we are talking about densifying other corridors, then I totally propose Granville Street. The street on the peninsula deserves an upzoning never-seen-before south of West Georgia to prevent it from becoming a second East Hastings. I want to keep the bars but I want to also build ontop of them including towers (if view-cones will allow it) and medium density 12+floors.

Granville street south of the peninsula also deserves greater densification efforts and upzoning as well (I'm thinking 6-12+ floors). Especially at the future South Granville station where it should be towers there along with the rest of Broadway.

But before we go crazy with densifying other corridors, let's remember the shameful waste of potential that Broadway/Commercial Station is right now...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granvi...nment_District
Not sure if the bars and nightclubs are compatible with even office towers... But then again, condos in NEFC, so

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

Can we get more investment in infrastructure, not only transit and roads but also recreation.

More trails for example

Metro Parks definitely needs more funding. Also, how the Province somehow hasn't opened up Pinecone Burke properly is crazy.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Main, Commercial-Victoria and the rest of Broadway would be good options too.



Rest of the post aside, it's hard to see how this'd happen when even the largest suburbs are building 64% as fast as Vancouver.

Source?

[scryer]

Originally Posted by fredinno

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granvi...nment_District
Not sure if the bars and nightclubs are compatible with even office towers... But then again, condos in NEFC, so

I'm not sure what you mean by compatible. Care to expand?

Maybe I am misunderstanding your perspective on this but in theory I would think that office would be the most compatible with the bars and clubs. Typically an office-like business will operate Monday-Friday 09:00 - 17:00 whereas bars and clubs would operate 20:00 - 02:30am Thursday, Friday, Saturday. Again in theory their "busy" hours don't even intersect with each other. The only thing that I can really think of is that a standalone office tower would have a retail podium that would only be profitable if the bar/club brought business everyday.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Source?

CMHC reports that Vancouver had 6,823 housing starts last year; Burnaby, the runner up, 4,411. That's 64.6%... and dropping, since Burnaby's overall population growth actually seems to be slowing down.