New post: we often hear debates on whether zoning is a constraint on housing supply. Instead of arguing in circles, we can look at the data. www.buildingabundance.ca/p/the-zoning... 1/
Michael Wiebe
@michaelwiebe.bsky.social
Economics (PhD UBC), yimby, replication, effective altruism. blog.michaelwiebe.com
"We ended single-family zoning! (But apartments are allowed only in certain areas, subject to restrictions on height, setbacks, and units, plus a large fee.)" "We legalized gay marriage! (But only between 11am and noon in designated industrial areas.)"
Low-end rents have increased because high-end demand has spilled over from the high-end market. We can reverse that by adding high-end supply. But if you're on the anti-market left, this can't be true, because that's trickle-down economics.
NIMBYs: impose $1M tax per apartment to deter high-density housing YIMBYs: try to repeal the tax Anti-market left: "nuh uh, that's just trickle down economics!"
Trickle-down economics: policies that "disproportionately favor the upper tier of the economic spectrum". Does legalizing market-rate housing count as "trickle-down"? 1/
Insightful post by @michaelwiebe.bsky.social on feasible versus infeasible zoned capacity: www.buildingabundance.ca/p/upzoning?u...
Upzoning
When zoning constrains housing supply, upzoning leads to more homes
buildingabundance.ca
Vancouver made laneway homes be rental-only, under the thinking that rental housing is more affordable than ownership housing. But this completely misunderstands affordability. If we allowed condo laneways, buyers would exit the rental market, reducing rents. 1/
Michael Wiebe@michaelwiebe.bsky.social · last wk.When Vancouver legalized laneway homes in 2009, they explicitly prioritized maintaining the physical neighborhood character over increasing the supply of housing. This is why we have a housing shortage.
Belated "who am I?" thread: Hi! I'm Reilly, you might know me from this old tweet: "The majority of Vancouver's land is zoned for residential use but forbids apartment buildings."
When Vancouver legalized laneway homes in 2009, they explicitly prioritized maintaining the physical neighborhood character over increasing the supply of housing. This is why we have a housing shortage.
Block density in the city, get sprawl in the countryside.
Denis Agar (he/him)@denisagar.bsky.social · 2w agoimagine if all these townhouses were permitted at Nanaimo Station instead of on recently-cleared mountain forest?
Auckland and São Paulo both upzoned in 2016, and by similar amounts: 31% and 35% increase in density. But Auckland increased the housing stock by 8% over seven years, while for São Paulo we predict only a 2% increase over ten years. What's going on? 1/
Pop quiz: does the original Jevons paradox imply that improved efficiency increased the price of coal?
Michael Wiebe@michaelwiebe.bsky.social · 3w agoSupply and demand explainer of Jevons' paradox: Left (AI services): improved algorithms shifts supply, which reduces the price of AI and increases quantity. Right (GPUs): when demand for AI is elastic, the demand curve for GPUs shifts right, increasing GPU usage. Paradox! 1/
A common idea is that a land value tax will increase housing supply. But when zoning is a constraint, LVT has no effect on the housing market. (Though it does act as value capture on scarcity rents in land.) blog.michaelwiebe.com/p/a-model-of...
Supply and demand explainer of Jevons' paradox: Left (AI services): improved algorithms shifts supply, which reduces the price of AI and increases quantity. Right (GPUs): when demand for AI is elastic, the demand curve for GPUs shifts right, increasing GPU usage. Paradox! 1/
When does upzoning create land value uplift? Auckland: broad + valuable rights = ⬆️ land values. Vancouver laneway: broad + limited rights = no land uplift. Vancouver Cambie corridor: narrow + valuable rights + assembly premium = ⬆️ land values. 1/
"Growth pays for growth" means defecting on the urban social contract, where each generation pays to maintain infrastructure capacity for the next generation. Higher property values are caused by growth, so they should be captured to pay for growth.
A common argument is that rising land values are a cause of higher housing prices. This is true for some contexts, but false in others. Let me explain. 1/
Vancouver's proposed Villages plan does value capture through a 3% IZ requirement on 4-storey condos. But the plan is facing widespread opposition. Shouldn't we spend that money on paying off local residents, to give them a reason to support it? Eg. a lottery with $10k prizes for locals.
A common argument is that rising land values are a cause of higher housing prices. This is true for some contexts, but false in others. Let me explain. 1/
Feasible zoned capacity: tear down a bungalow to build a 5-storey apartment building. Infeasible zoned capacity: tear down four 4-storey buildings to rebuild at 5-storeys. Both add four floors of allowed housing, but only one will actually get built.
When does upzoning create land value uplift? Auckland: broad + valuable rights = ⬆️ land values. Vancouver laneway: broad + limited rights = no land uplift. Vancouver Cambie corridor: narrow + valuable rights + assembly premium = ⬆️ land values. 1/
Why did Vancouver's 2009 laneway upzoning not lead to any land value uplift? Because the policy was designed to *not* create valuable development rights. Laneways/ADUs were small and rental-only. Hence, it wasn't worth paying a premium. 1/
Michael Wiebe@michaelwiebe.bsky.social · 2mo agoA common idea is that narrow spot upzoning leads to land value uplift, while broad upzoning does not. What explains this? Why doesn't broad upzoning lead to increased land values?
Auckland's 2016 upzoning gives us a real-world example of a clean causal effect. First, building permits increased dramatically in upzoned areas. 1/
The benefits of new housing far outweigh the costs.
A city is voting on allowing a new grocery store. But only existing store owners get to vote, and shoppers don't get a voice. Owners don't want competition, so they block the new store. This is how housing works. Existing homeowners get a vote, future residents don't.
If Manhattan replaced its apartment buildings with detached houses, while keeping office buildings the same, then land values would fall a lot, while housing prices would be much higher. When driven by zoning changes, higher land values are correlated with lower housing prices.
If Auckland, NZ, were a U.S. city, it'd be our fifth-largest. Its story is remarkable. One in five homes in Auckland has been built since 2017, and prices are down 20% from their pandemic peak. In today's third episode of YIMBY Country, two experts share the numbers of a wildly successful reform.
Michael Andersen@andersem.bsky.social · 3mo agoHey, during my sabbatical I made a podcast! It’s a one-shot miniseries about what happened after the world’s most ambitious upzoning campaign won. Here’s the trailer; episodes coming weekly all through June & July. You can subscribe on Apple/Spotify/etc. rss.com/podcasts/yim...
A common NIMBY trope is that zoning is not constraining housing supply, therefore we don't need to upzone. Here's how to actually measure zoning constraints: - do developers build more after upzoning? - is apartment-zoned land more valuable than house-zoned land? 1/
