News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6.6K     0 
The supply gut is an illusion. There is an over supply of really expensive per square foot units. Plenty of units above $2000 a square foot that were bought by assignment speculators, rolling in their profit from their previous assignment sales blew up in their faces in spectacular fashion.

Sustainably increasing production back to levels achieved in the 70s at the very least needs to be the goal.

The municipalities throw up every barrier imaginable. A project like the triangle site modular homes would take 5 years to get ready to build in Toronto or Vancouver if they ever even would entertain such an idea.

The federal government is eliminating excuses for municipalities that say they're doing everything they can while they are obviously not doing everything they can.
The triangle site has been in the works way longer than five years.
 
Fine program but I don't know why we need to spend so much money reinventing the wheel. Calgary and Edmonton saw an unprecedented amount of new residents, and we built such that housing costs stayed one of the most affordable in the country, and now we're in a bit of a supply glut because we've built too fast. It's not homebuilding methods holding back Vancouver and Toronto.
Volumetric Modular construction is a scam that companies have been trying to sell to governments for decades because ever 30 years or so the feds decide they want to throw billions of dollars at an old problem and companies like ATCO stand to gain. There's nothing modern or innovative about it. Factory mass production is one of the oldest ideas of modern (re:early 20th century) architecture.
 
Early stages, but it looks like Calgary Housing Company is going to be doing a Marda Loop project, based on this RFP:

Enmax Substation 4 is located at the NW corner of 14th Street and 34th Ave SW:
 
Noticed fencing (couldn't make out the contractor's logo) around the parkade across from Bow Valley and the Library (610 3 St SE). Photo from Google Maps, for context.

Anyone know what's going on there? Couldn't find anything on DMAP.

1770392764421.png
 
Volumetric Modular construction is a scam that companies have been trying to sell to governments for decades because ever 30 years or so the feds decide they want to throw billions of dollars at an old problem and companies like ATCO stand to gain. There's nothing modern or innovative about it. Factory mass production is one of the oldest ideas of modern (re:early 20th century) architecture.
There is a clear case for government intervention though: scale is needed to make cost reductions real and across the country and governments need to stop blocking its use. It is also useful as a competitive benchmark to reduce profit of contractors by growing productive capacity.
 
That was my first thought as well. I'm happy to see that parkade go but all those trees are so mature and healthy, it would be a shame to lose them.
They
There is a clear case for government intervention though: scale is needed to make cost reductions real and across the country and governments need to stop blocking its use. It is also useful as a competitive benchmark to reduce profit of contractors by growing productive capacity.
When has government every:
-achieved scale to reduce costs? Generally, any scale achieved by government works in reverse due to inefficient organizational structures
-reduced profits of contractors? Government could only do so through subsidies and if that worked, why should government target reduced profit margins in certain sectors? The market determines profit
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urb
Early stages, but it looks like Calgary Housing Company is going to be doing a Marda Loop project, based on this RFP:

Enmax Substation 4 is located at the NW corner of 14th Street and 34th Ave SW:
So I’m glad that something is going to happen on that site, but was holding out hope that they’d find some sort of commercial opportunity for the old substation building (just the white building, not the brick building).
 
If an "innovative construction method", or really any technology or service for that matter, is only viable with gargantuan public subsidy then it bretter be a truly magical golden unicorn of a technology. VMC is not that. Sure some of the modular buildings in Scandinavia are decent looking but at the end of the day the quality is at best comparable to traditional construction. Cost is not lower just because construction is being moved to a factory - whatever cost savings may come with that are lost by adding the cost of operating a massive factory and shipping the modules from the factory to the site. Really the only benefit to modular is the massively reduced time of on-site construction.

I'm not saying VMC doesn't deserve to exist or has no benefit, I just do not for one second believe that it is the panacea to the housing crisis the industry is saying it is. Those advocating for that need to get their history straight because I have yet to hear a coherent argument for why now is the time for modular to catch on when it has failed time and time again for decades. So far the argument I hear from people is "well we just didn't try hard enough"
 
Anecdotal, but I share office space with some architects/builders... and the number one thing I hear them bitching about are the delays/roadblocks in terms of permits, environmental assessments, and the slow back and forth with whatever bureaucrat is assigned to the file. I hear zero complains about construction methods not being innovative enough.

I'm no big-city urban planner, but it kind of seems like the best thing governments could do is look for ways to make the existing rules, endless consultations, and permitting processes more efficient on their end. Otherwise, let everything else (design, technology, price etc.) be handled by free market forces. If modular construction is the answer, then the market will figure it out (it probably already has, but came to a different conclusion).

The path towards efficiency/affordability in any field rarely involves more government involvement. Set the framework, make them efficient as possible, and then get the fuck out of the way.
 
Anecdotal, but I share office space with some architects/builders... and the number one thing I hear them bitching about are the delays/roadblocks in terms of permits, environmental assessments, and the slow back and forth with whatever bureaucrat is assigned to the file. I hear zero complains about construction methods not being innovative enough.

I'm no big-city urban planner, but it kind of seems like the best thing governments could do is look for ways to make the existing rules, endless consultations, and permitting processes more efficient on their end. Otherwise, let everything else (design, technology, price etc.) be handled by free market forces. If modular construction is the answer, then the market will figure it out (it probably already has, but came to a different conclusion).

The path towards efficiency/affordability in any field rarely involves more government involvement. Set the framework, make them efficient as possible, and then get the fuck out of the way.
All of the literature I've read (which isn't exhaustive and doesn't make me an expert by any means) corroborates this. The construction productivity crisis is as much if not more of a regulatory problem than it is a technology problem.
 

Back
Top