|
Flocons de Jambon posted:The great thing about how they organized Uptown is that there's about 5 routes that go from there downtown, but they all stop at different stops. Could've had effective high frequency along the busiest corridor, but nah, spread em out all over the place so the central area can have both multiple parking lots and a faux pedestrianized street. people who ride buses don't have much money to spend at the mall
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Rare actually good Kerry Gold article. Is there a statistic somewhere on what fraction of existing Vancouver dwellings even have a view of the mountains for the view comes to affect? My gut feeling is less than half, and maybe even a third or less. A whole lot of housing is basement suites, laneway homes, apartments too low or facing the wrong way, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 07:50
|
|
|
Also, if there was medium density everywhere they wouldn't have to keep jamming more tall towers into downtown that hurt the precious view cones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Is there a statistic somewhere on what fraction of existing Vancouver dwellings even have a view of the mountains for the view comes to affect? Oh yea probably very few. The "protected public views" or "view cones" are very specific about protecting a framed view from specific pedestrian spot, usually places where lots of people walk by like in parks and major pedestrian streets and stuff. eg. if you're walking South on Cambie you get a very nice mountain view. If you're walking along the seawall, you get a very nice eastward view of mountains, and a handful of peek a boo views of mountains between towers. That these specific protected views may end up preserving or creating a view for some nearby house is coincidental.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
I'm pulling into the Uptown Bus Exchange, I'll call you back after I walk half a kilometer to my connecting bus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:In Vancouver it’s massively transit, in victoria it’s walking and biking. Victoria isn't a transit city, we're a proximity/walking distance city. What we need is a simple matrix for massively upzoning based on proximity to jobs and amenities. This is true but it also feels like a catch-22. I rode a lot of buses in Victoria growing up and service/routes are just not very good. It was often faster and more convenient to plan a 30 minute walk into my trip than to count on a bus transfer.  Good luck if you have reduced mobility.I wonder how they predict demand for transit vs active transportation. Covid has probably thrown a wrench in everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 21:13
|
|
|
kaom posted:This is true but it also feels like a catch-22. I rode a lot of buses in Victoria growing up and service/routes are just not very good. It was often faster and more convenient to plan a 30 minute walk into my trip than to count on a bus transfer. I take Vic transit periodically, and there's still plenty of people using it, even after they switched to an awful app-based system based on phone-screen QR codes that can't be properly read by the machine when it's sunny out. If they finish building an actual rapid bus system with dedicated lanes I think transit usage will go up a lot from the burbs, but only if decent connections exist once they get to the city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Probably don't want to take transit in Ottawa.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
Toronto had the same issue on a few street cars a couple of years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
Seems like a bit of a nothing to me. They got reports so they investigated and didn't find any but deep-cleaned them anyway. Leading headline with 'quietly' to imply nefarious intent. Bedbugs are horrendous so I understand the panic though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
Fidelitious posted:Seems like a bit of a nothing to me. They got reports so they investigated and didn't find any but deep-cleaned them anyway. As someone who used to do quite a few bedbug investigations in the past, I can say it is not uncommon for someone to confuse a bedbug for something more benign, like carpet beetles. Bedbugs don't do well in nature, and they generally prefer warm areas to make their homes, such as headboards, pillows or mattresses. Many outdoor insects this time of year are scrambling to someplace warm before they freeze. If they were bona-fide bedbugs, chances are they were brought onboard by someone who, unfortunately, has their clothes infested with them - so much that they fall off accidentally and land in common areas. There is not much any transit authority can do to prevent them from coming onboard unless they request all passenges to strip naked and bag their clothes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2023 04:13
|
|
|
Guigui posted:There is not much any transit authority can do to prevent them from coming onboard unless they request all passenges to strip naked and bag their clothes. Welcome to the party bus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2023 04:46
|
|
|
Good news for everyone that had "Feds bail out hosed over extended mortgage holders" on their fiscal update bingo card.quote:... there's Big Impressive Round Number in loans for developers alongside a pittance toward affordable housing construction. quote:The fall fiscal update, to be presented Tuesday by the federal finance minister, will include billions of dollars in loans and direct funding for the construction of affordable housing, a senior government source has told CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fall-economist-statement-housing-1.7033392
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
Is removing the stress test during renewal just a 'kick the can down the road until things are better' decision or does it really bail out homeowners?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 04:38
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:I'd like to see support for cohousing (people getting together and building their own building). Direct financial grants would be nice, but getting rid of taxes would be pretty easy to do, with little in the way of political consequences. Waive CACs, waive DCLs and other levies. Exempt the building from PST or GST so people aren't being taxed to "sell" units to themselves. Bit late to this, but I also would like to see this. My Grandparents built a home in England using a similar scheme in the late 40s/early 50s, and my Nan still lives in that home to this day. Every weekend my Grandad would go down and help build the homes. There was a queue system with the homes being built and depending on how much you worked you'd get a better home. My Grandparents also got bumped up the list because they had their first child and that gave their some extra points. This was a time in the UK where it was probably the most socialist it's ever been with Atlee's Labour party running the show. My Grandparents met working for a cooperative just called the co-op, a big Hudson's Bay type store back in the day. I don't know if their housing scheme was a byproduct of their workplace, or just a more realistic option at that time. If a similar scheme existed today, I'd be all over it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 04:52
|
|
|
Tangy Zizzle posted:Is removing the stress test during renewal just a 'kick the can down the road until things are better' decision, or does it really bail out homeowners? Its for insured mortgages, meaning they paid the high ratio fee, and the mortgage is backed by an insurer. So a bank isn't exposed by taking on the mortgage if it's just renewing and not adding more money. Small group, I would think. If they didn't stress test people wanting more money than they already have,then they are kicking the can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 05:16
|
|
|
The stress test on a straight (ie non refinance) never made any sense to me (except cynically). All it does is lock the borrower into renewing with whoever their previous term was with, who now has them over a barrel because they may not qualify anywhere else. Stress test at origination or refinance by all means, but what’s the purpose on a regular renewal?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 05:52
|
|
|
spoof posted:The stress test on a straight (ie non refinance) renewal never made any sense to me (except cynically). All it does is lock the borrower into renewing with whoever their previous term was with, who now has them over a barrel because they may not qualify anywhere else. Stress test at origination or refinance by all means, but what’s the purpose on a regular renewal? I think I have to agree on this one. They passed it at point of purchase and they're now locked into this thing. You're not saving anyone from a bad decision at renewal time with a stress test, the decision already happened. Now you're just shrinking their options to 1 and probably making them end up at a higher rate which seems like entirely missing the point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
Presumably the other choice they could make, if they can't afford new rates for borrowing that amount of money, is to sell the house they can no longer afford and rent?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 15:55
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Presumably the other choice they could make, if they can't afford new rates for borrowing that amount of money, is to sell the house they can no longer afford and rent? That's a downright un-Canadian suggestion
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Purgatory Glory posted:Its for insured mortgages, meaning they paid the high ratio fee, and the mortgage is backed by an insurer. So a bank isn't exposed by taking on the mortgage if it's just renewing and not adding more money. Small group, I would think. If they didn't stress test people wanting more money than they already have,then they are kicking the can. I guess it also means that desperate people can't try to refinance with a shady lender instead. The Canadian gov't has given big banks the green light (pretty much) to extend mortgages multiple generations to prevent evictions, maybe this is their way to keep the issue from 'looking bad' instead of 'being bad'
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
Tangy Zizzle posted:I guess it also means that desperate people can't try to refinance with a shady lender instead. The Canadian gov't has given big banks the green light (pretty much) to extend mortgages multiple generations to prevent evictions, maybe this is their way to keep the issue from 'looking bad' instead of 'being bad' Shady lenders are always an option as they operate under their own rules. The only caveat here is that shady lenders want a lower loan to value, so high ratio folks are never going to go private.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
oh lol radio this morning said that $15M loans announcement is just more money for 2025.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
spoof posted:The stress test on a straight (ie non refinance) never made any sense to me (except cynically). All it does is lock the borrower into renewing with whoever their previous term was with, who now has them over a barrel because they may not qualify anywhere else. Stress test at origination or refinance by all means, but what’s the purpose on a regular renewal? Yea agreed. This is essentially what is being "fixed" here by this measure. Now people are no longer locked in and have flexibility on renewal. This should make it more affordable for people to renew. The most significant thing for the stress test is the original stress test before they've bought a home.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 22:47
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:The most significant thing for the stress test is the original stress test before they've bought a home. Why is it more important that they be able to afford it at initial purchase than 4 years later? It seems like they're in the same financial straits whether they had an existing mortgage or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2023 23:12
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Yea agreed. This is essentially what is being "fixed" here by this measure. Only being "fixed" for insured mortgages. Uninsured are still locked in. Subjunctive posted:Why is it more important that they be able to afford it at initial purchase than 4 years later? It seems like they're in the same financial straits whether they had an existing mortgage or not. There's scope to not enter into the financial strait at initial purchase by not purchasing. At renewal, as you noted your only other option is to sell which carries a high transaction cost and ends up being a forced sale in a short window. Call it harm reduction, if you will.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
spoof posted:Only being "fixed" for insured mortgages. Uninsured are still locked in. Why should a seller be favoured over a buyer? Buyers are harmed by this policy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
Mantle posted:Why should a seller be favoured over a buyer? Buyers are harmed by this policy. I'm not sure I follow. Are buyers harmed by the existing policy (stress tests on renewals), or by the proposed changed in policy (stress tests only on uninsured renewals)?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 01:37
|
|
|
spoof posted:I'm not sure I follow. Are buyers harmed by the existing policy (stress tests on renewals), or by the proposed changed in policy (stress tests only on uninsured renewals)? Forcing people to sell, regardless of reason, is assumed to increase supply and thus lower prices. So your scenario of forced sales sounds good for buyers. It is this: spoof posted:Only being "fixed" for insured mortgages. Uninsured are still locked in. Harm reduction for sellers is harm to buyers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
The stress test is intended to make sure people have affordability float if things change in the future. There's a failure in logic if you can't renew a mortgage if you are in that float zone. The point of the stress test is to make sure people have some sort of potential to absorb this kind of situation and to reduce the systemic risk to the lending market.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 02:10
|
|
|
The stress test at renewal only applies if you move to another lender. If you fail the stress stress test, the most likely scenario is not that you'll be forced to sell but that your current lender will offer a renewal, but at a rate which reflects the situation (ie, take my less than competitive rate, or eat a forced sale). The banks don't really want to force a sale, but they'll take the extra margin from a captive borrower. The bank wins in this scenario, not a potential buyer. This harms borrowers, benefits banks, and is neutral to potential buyers. I do think that the stress test helps some buyers by decreasing the amount that can be financed and thus the price that borrowers are able to offer which reduces the clearing price. I support this - Canadians are wildly overleveraged. At the extreme, if we ban mortgages entirely, the price of houses should fall significantly which would help buyers (with capital). I'm actually curious what the median house price would be if financing was impossible (including through other secured or unsecured means).
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 03:13
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:The most significant thing for the stress test is the original stress test before they've bought a home. The best indicator of whether I can afford a mortgage in 2023 is clearly whether I could afford a mortgage in 2018.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
Mantle posted:Why should a seller be favoured over a buyer? Buyers are harmed by this policy. It's the canadian dream man. You leverage yourself 4:1 into a decent house on good land, you work, chip away at buying the leveraged part of your investment, eventually maybe you retire and sell with no capital gains tax on the appreciation. It's a bit insane when you lay it out next to the stock market analog but it only works when you never get margin called. As soon as that starts happening on a large scale, people lose faith in the vision, housing prices crash and the net worth of the country evaporates. Imagine people are only comfortable investing in houses if they can put like 50% down because interest rates may spike up temporarily at the exact time they have to renew and the bank won't renew them. It'd be armageddon. The government's job is to protect the interests of canadians. I say that leans towards protecting the investments of canadians and shielding them from chaos more than helping non-house havers find a bargain. The stress test is great because it kind of protected people from themselves but you've got a situation here with the rapid rise in interest rates where they need a little extra protection. It's even in the interest of people who are passing the stress test with flying colors to help the people who would otherwise lose their house because it helps maintain all house values. It sucks for renters and other people who didn't have a house yet who were responsibly saving believing they were in a somewhat free market but if you thought the canadian government would do anything other than bend over backwards for homeowners, that seems like maybe also a gamble that didn't work out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:11
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:helps maintain all house values This is the problem, I say as a homeowner.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:22
|
|
|
As a homeowner who probably wouldn't have to worry about mortgage renewal problems if their house value temporarily dropped by 20, 30 or 50%. Imagine the feedback loop if housemargin calling was a thing, a few thousand C- people get margin called with suddenly high interest rates, they have to sell, that lowers the value a bit, the C people get called, lowers the value, the BBB people get called. Nobody wants that, it'd be fun to watch as a rich anarchist but otherwise, it'd be a lot of pain and chaos for good people who wake up and try their best.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:good people who wake up and try their best. Try their best to keep denser housing or public housing from being built near them, yeah (which is to say in the places people most want to live).
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Why is it more important that they be able to afford it at initial purchase than 4 years later? It seems like they're in the same financial straits whether they had an existing mortgage or not. Yeah I see that perspective. I mean more like it's best to try to stop someone from making a bad decision in the first place. After they've already been in the home for five years and now bad things have happened and they're having trouble, well I'm more empathetic to switching to a perspective that we should try (within reason) to help people try to stay in their home and crawl their way out of financial distress. I think the thing to be careful of is that if it is barriers to entry alone that are high, that there's not people finding clever ways to get around that. Edit: I think the thing that troubles me more about the locked in state on renewal is less things around the homeowner and more around how the inflexibility gives enormous advantage to banks to be able to do whatever they want. Maybe another approach to this problem could be regulation on banks to ensure they can't jack up interest rates because their client has zero other options. I dunno. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Nov 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:It's the canadian dream man. You leverage yourself 4:1 into a decent house on good land, you work, chip away at buying the leveraged part of your investment, eventually maybe you retire and sell with no capital gains tax on the appreciation. It's a bit insane when you lay it out next to the stock market analog but it only works when you never get margin called. As soon as that starts happening on a large scale, people lose faith in the vision, housing prices crash and the net worth of the country evaporates. People who are not yet born are not “gambling” that housing prices will go down. Nor are children or adults who haven’t had the good fortune to save up a down payment. Housing needs to be a cheap place to shelter humans, not an asset class to speculate on. That “average Canadians” are doing the speculating doesn’t change that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:As a homeowner who probably wouldn't have to worry about mortgage renewal problems if their house value temporarily dropped by 20, 30 or 50%. Imagine the feedback loop if housemargin calling was a thing, a few thousand C- people get margin called with suddenly high interest rates, they have to sell, that lowers the value a bit, the C people get called, lowers the value, the BBB people get called. Nobody wants that, it'd be fun to watch as a rich anarchist but otherwise, it'd be a lot of pain and chaos for good people who wake up and try their best. To turn your previous post around. People who buy houses are gambling that the value of the house won’t go down. If they go down, then welp, they lost that bet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
tagesschau posted:The best indicator of whether I can afford a mortgage in 2023 is clearly whether I could afford a mortgage in 2018. I mean if the person can't afford a home they can't afford a home. That's not changing. That's not the issue here. The issue is that the person was seeing rates they could much better afford at BMO/Scotiabank whatever but due to government regulation they're only allowed to borrow from TD, which is leveraging that power to raise rates and extract more money from people just because they can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2023 18:51
|
|