In retrospect, it should have been obvious. A casual glance while driving over the Cambie or Granville Bridges at night reveals cliffs of glass lit with an incandescent glow. If there were 15,000 empty condos – more than entire housing stock of Concord Pacific Place when built out – most of the units would have been dark.
But lots of people wanted to believe the myth anyway. Repetition gave it the allure of truth. Hopefully, Andy Yan at Bing Thom’s office (BTAworks) has killed it off.
The popular belief that there are large numbers of empty downtown condos with offshore owners is largely disproved by a new study released by BTAworks. The study, undertaken to examine condo ownership in Downtown Vancouver also confirmed that the majority of the area’s condos are not-owner occupied…
“Working with BC Hydro data, we were able to determine that only 5.5 to 8 percent of study condos were unoccupied,” states Andrew Yan, a BTAworks researcher and Urban Planner who led the study….
Ok, what does 5.5 to 8% work out to? Whats the number?
And you don’t mention the rest of the story:
“the majority of growth in Downtown condos has been dominated by investors and those looking for a second home, rather than homeowners.”
“If Vancouverism 1.0 is embodied by tall skinny towers and one bedroom, investor-driven condominium projects for Downtown Vancouver, then Vancouverism 2.0 needs to redress this imbalance by providing more affordable family-oriented housing units with great supporting amenities”
I found those bits of the article very interesting. How about expanding upon your post and talking about that?
Lots of projects are dominated by small investor 1 bedroom units – Yaletown Park (3 towers), Electric Avenue, The Hudson, Spectrum, etc. – in those buildings 2 bedroom units are usually under 900sq ft.
The exceptions are the higher end buildings (those directly on the water) like Concord’s Cooper’s Park neighbourhood.
Gordon,
Do you think it’s feasible for the City to impose a minimum number of 2 and 3 bedroom units on new condo / apartment developments?
Because of the profitability of making more, smaller units, developers will be inclined to do this unless pushed or prodded in some way to do something different.
(There’s been an interesting discussion on this at my blog as well, coming off a post on 300 s.f. condos in India. The discussion is how to live with a family of 4 in a 2 bedroom.
I did an interview last night, and will make a couple postings soon on this issue…)
Wendy said: “Gordon, Do you think it’s feasible for the City to impose a minimum number of 2 and 3 bedroom units on new condo / apartment developments?”
I think that may be a good idea. As long as it is a minimum number.
Regarding all those empty investor condos, I think a real help would be to ban stratas from imposing no renter clauses. It is such a waist to have even 5% to 8% of the units sitting empty when there is such a demand for rental units.
Apparently this study involved a sample of 13 buildings. Is that really a representative structure for sampling?
er ….. I meant to say waste not waist 🙂
My concern with the study, as another poster already mentioned, is the sample size of… 13 buildings. I just don’t think it’s reasonable to draw any kind of conclusions for that small of a sample.
However, I think the author of the study is onto something about the shortage of 2 and 3 bedroom (aka family) homes. That in itself is a major issue arising from this report.
Derek, I agree completely. There is a need for larger apartments in the central area of Greater Vancouver. In fact, I would say that even the studios and one bedrooms need to be larger versions of themselves. Micro suites just aren’t a long-term, livable proposition for people who have any activities or interests whatever.
The kind of long term tenants we hear about in “renoviction” stories, people who have lived 20 or 30 or more years in the same suite in the same building are living an urban lifestyle that won’t be duplicated in the newer, ultra compact apartments. At some point, the occupant will demand more space and will have to move.
I doubt that the City, or any of the other municipalities in British Columbia who live off DCCs, has the slightest in interest in doing anything about the size or number of bedrooms of apartments. Provincial legislation and enforceable standards are needed.
On the other hand, I suppose that more space per unit, means less units per building.
I mean beginning to think that we could have went with taller buildings in a couple of places. In Hong Kong they get up to 50+ stories. Not everywhere of course (right right along the waterfront would create almost a wall…).
But more building situated like the Shangra-la. 62 stories, good location for a tall building, creating a landmark building. We may need more of those. Thoughts?
I am trying to find out more about the proposed micro condo developments being planned in Vancouver. I do not mean the lane way housing projects, but instead the 300 sf micro condos that are being planned. Does anyone know who the developer is?