Thanks. For other readers, Austin TX has almost precisely 1M pop, so it would be at "18" on the second chart, whereas SF, CA, would be at 0.87M, and thus at 2 on the 2nd chart, a fifth of Vancouver's rate.
So are the Edmontonians who were available in 2014 to be building 30% more housing than they are there now, available to move to Vancouver for a few years? How come Edmonton gets to spike up construction when it wants, and Vancouver can't seem to?
Exactly the right question. From reading through the MacPhail Report, my short answer is: in Vancouver we regulate new housing like it's a nuclear power plant, and we tax it like it's a gold mine.
Because the regulatory approval process is so slow, difficult, and expensive (Ginger Gosnell-Myers: "It's easier to elect a pope than to approve a small rental apartment building in the city of Vancouver"), you get massive economies of scale from building large projects instead of small projects. A small project will take just as long to get through the process.
Problem is, large projects take a long time to plan and build (years and years). So they're not very responsive to changing market conditions.
This is why Metro Vancouver and the GTA have such terrible "supply elasticity," while Montreal and Edmonton are at the top. Vancouver and Toronto build a lot of their housing in the form of high-rises. https://morehousing.ca/supply-elasticity
Thanks. For other readers, Austin TX has almost precisely 1M pop, so it would be at "18" on the second chart, whereas SF, CA, would be at 0.87M, and thus at 2 on the 2nd chart, a fifth of Vancouver's rate.
NB: SF is f****d.
So are the Edmontonians who were available in 2014 to be building 30% more housing than they are there now, available to move to Vancouver for a few years? How come Edmonton gets to spike up construction when it wants, and Vancouver can't seem to?
Exactly the right question. From reading through the MacPhail Report, my short answer is: in Vancouver we regulate new housing like it's a nuclear power plant, and we tax it like it's a gold mine.
Because the regulatory approval process is so slow, difficult, and expensive (Ginger Gosnell-Myers: "It's easier to elect a pope than to approve a small rental apartment building in the city of Vancouver"), you get massive economies of scale from building large projects instead of small projects. A small project will take just as long to get through the process.
Problem is, large projects take a long time to plan and build (years and years). So they're not very responsive to changing market conditions.
This is why Metro Vancouver and the GTA have such terrible "supply elasticity," while Montreal and Edmonton are at the top. Vancouver and Toronto build a lot of their housing in the form of high-rises. https://morehousing.ca/supply-elasticity