Above is map from Brian Potter (over at Construction Physics) that shows every census tract in the US where vacation homes make up 20% or more of the total number of homes. What you are seeing is a relatively small number of census tracts — 3,372 out of a total of 84,414 (~4%).
But more than half of all vacation homes are in one of these tracts. And nearly 20% of vacation homes are in a census tract where more than 50% of the homes are vacation homes. So in other words: vacation homes in the US tend to be highly concentrated.
According to Potter, there are, perhaps not surprisingly, three main drivers of demand: beaches, lakes, and ski resorts. This is why if you drill down into Florida — which has the highest absolute number of vacation homes in the US at over 800k — you'll see that these homes are not evenly distributed across the state. They're on the coasts, and to a lesser extent inland near places like Disney World.
Also noteworthy is the fact that these census tracts tend to match up nicely with the location of ski resorts. Here's the same map of the US but with ski resorts overlaid:
And here's a close up of Salt Lake City and Park City, because, I love Park City:
As of Q1-2025, the US had over 147 million homes, and somewhere around 4.3 million of these were seasonal or vacation homes. If you'd like to better understand where these are and the trends surrounding them, I recommend you check out Potter's post.
Maps via Construction Physics; cover photo by Joe Ol on Unsplash
Here in Toronto, we have something known as "Type G" loading spaces. They're used for collecting garbage and they are generally required in multi-family buildings with 30 or more homes (though exceptions do exist). The problem with these spaces is that they're highly consumptive. Below is an excerpt from a recent article in Azure by Kelly Alvarez Doran and Mitchell May:
In order to accommodate a truck’s large arms to swing a garbage bin up and over its frame, residential buildings require what’s known as a “Type G” loading space, which measures at least 13 metres long, four metres wide and 6.1 metres tall. While the area of the loading space alone is significant, the required turnaround space — allowing trucks to navigate in and out of the building — is often double or even triple its size. Current City of Toronto regulations require this loading space to be designed in order to allow a garbage truck to enter the site, collect the waste, and exit the site without the need to reverse onto a public road — resulting in T- or L-shaped paved areas to accommodate the turns of a wide wheel base. Due to the site constraints and density of these developments, Type G loading is often internalized within the building’s footprint. The outcome? A truck’s manoeuvring effectively consumes the ground floor at the expense of retail space and street-level activity.
They go on to analyze what would happen if you took a typical Toronto main street and then intensified it with buildings requiring Type-G loading. The result, for a particular stretch of Dundas Street between Dufferin and Brock, was that you'd end up losing somewhere around 44 storefronts just to accommodate all of this loading.
Here's their diagram showing the Type-G loading areas in blue:
As you know, sixplexes are now permitted in certain parts of Toronto. We've spoken before about how it should be all of Toronto; but nevertheless, they are allowed in areas where they were not allowed before. That constitutes progress.
But it gets much better: This week, Mayor Chow announced that she will be bringing forward a motion to Council to eliminate development charges and parkland dedication cash-in-lieu requirements for new developments of up to six residential homes. This is a big deal and something that is necessary if we want to spur more rental housing.
To quote my friend Craig Race (of Craig Race Architecture), "this is the first thing [Olivia Chow has] done I'm happy about, and I hope to see more." Mayor Chow was criticized for standing around while sixplexes were being debated, and so this is perhaps her now trying to step up. Whatever it is, home builders will take it.
Globizen wasn't looking at this scale before, but I'm now going to adapt one of our screening models to see if the math works. If it does, then expect the industry to mobilize around it.
Above is map from Brian Potter (over at Construction Physics) that shows every census tract in the US where vacation homes make up 20% or more of the total number of homes. What you are seeing is a relatively small number of census tracts — 3,372 out of a total of 84,414 (~4%).
But more than half of all vacation homes are in one of these tracts. And nearly 20% of vacation homes are in a census tract where more than 50% of the homes are vacation homes. So in other words: vacation homes in the US tend to be highly concentrated.
According to Potter, there are, perhaps not surprisingly, three main drivers of demand: beaches, lakes, and ski resorts. This is why if you drill down into Florida — which has the highest absolute number of vacation homes in the US at over 800k — you'll see that these homes are not evenly distributed across the state. They're on the coasts, and to a lesser extent inland near places like Disney World.
Also noteworthy is the fact that these census tracts tend to match up nicely with the location of ski resorts. Here's the same map of the US but with ski resorts overlaid:
And here's a close up of Salt Lake City and Park City, because, I love Park City:
As of Q1-2025, the US had over 147 million homes, and somewhere around 4.3 million of these were seasonal or vacation homes. If you'd like to better understand where these are and the trends surrounding them, I recommend you check out Potter's post.
Maps via Construction Physics; cover photo by Joe Ol on Unsplash
Here in Toronto, we have something known as "Type G" loading spaces. They're used for collecting garbage and they are generally required in multi-family buildings with 30 or more homes (though exceptions do exist). The problem with these spaces is that they're highly consumptive. Below is an excerpt from a recent article in Azure by Kelly Alvarez Doran and Mitchell May:
In order to accommodate a truck’s large arms to swing a garbage bin up and over its frame, residential buildings require what’s known as a “Type G” loading space, which measures at least 13 metres long, four metres wide and 6.1 metres tall. While the area of the loading space alone is significant, the required turnaround space — allowing trucks to navigate in and out of the building — is often double or even triple its size. Current City of Toronto regulations require this loading space to be designed in order to allow a garbage truck to enter the site, collect the waste, and exit the site without the need to reverse onto a public road — resulting in T- or L-shaped paved areas to accommodate the turns of a wide wheel base. Due to the site constraints and density of these developments, Type G loading is often internalized within the building’s footprint. The outcome? A truck’s manoeuvring effectively consumes the ground floor at the expense of retail space and street-level activity.
They go on to analyze what would happen if you took a typical Toronto main street and then intensified it with buildings requiring Type-G loading. The result, for a particular stretch of Dundas Street between Dufferin and Brock, was that you'd end up losing somewhere around 44 storefronts just to accommodate all of this loading.
Here's their diagram showing the Type-G loading areas in blue:
As you know, sixplexes are now permitted in certain parts of Toronto. We've spoken before about how it should be all of Toronto; but nevertheless, they are allowed in areas where they were not allowed before. That constitutes progress.
But it gets much better: This week, Mayor Chow announced that she will be bringing forward a motion to Council to eliminate development charges and parkland dedication cash-in-lieu requirements for new developments of up to six residential homes. This is a big deal and something that is necessary if we want to spur more rental housing.
To quote my friend Craig Race (of Craig Race Architecture), "this is the first thing [Olivia Chow has] done I'm happy about, and I hope to see more." Mayor Chow was criticized for standing around while sixplexes were being debated, and so this is perhaps her now trying to step up. Whatever it is, home builders will take it.
Globizen wasn't looking at this scale before, but I'm now going to adapt one of our screening models to see if the math works. If it does, then expect the industry to mobilize around it.
New developments are often criticized for how they perform at the ground floor. But a big part of this has to do with all of the back-of-house services and other requirements that they need to accommodate. Type-G loading is a big one and it's simply not feasible on smaller projects. Projects between 31-60 homes can apply for an exception, but I think this flexibility should already be built in.
Beyond increasing the unit trigger, what else could we do? Well, the obvious ones are (1) make the trucks smaller and more nimble and (2) centralize garbage collection. Our approach to garbage collection is decentralized. It is collected from every house and every building. But there is the option to cluster the pickups, which is what many European cities do.
Here's Barcelona via Google Street View. Note the bins.
Admittedly, this isn't nearly as convenient as having a truck come right to your door or building, and it's not the most attractive way to decorate a street. So I'm inclined to start with option one. And for that, there are cities like Tokyo we can look to. Tokyo is famous for its strict garbage collection rules and for its smaller, cuter trucks. Here's a comparison to North American trucks via ChatGPT (meaning, I can't be held liable for any inaccuracies in this chart):
We aren't quite Tokyo. Few cities are. But surely there are ways we can be just as functional and take up a lot less space. This would not only benefit our main streets, but also improve the overall viability of infill housing.
New developments are often criticized for how they perform at the ground floor. But a big part of this has to do with all of the back-of-house services and other requirements that they need to accommodate. Type-G loading is a big one and it's simply not feasible on smaller projects. Projects between 31-60 homes can apply for an exception, but I think this flexibility should already be built in.
Beyond increasing the unit trigger, what else could we do? Well, the obvious ones are (1) make the trucks smaller and more nimble and (2) centralize garbage collection. Our approach to garbage collection is decentralized. It is collected from every house and every building. But there is the option to cluster the pickups, which is what many European cities do.
Here's Barcelona via Google Street View. Note the bins.
Admittedly, this isn't nearly as convenient as having a truck come right to your door or building, and it's not the most attractive way to decorate a street. So I'm inclined to start with option one. And for that, there are cities like Tokyo we can look to. Tokyo is famous for its strict garbage collection rules and for its smaller, cuter trucks. Here's a comparison to North American trucks via ChatGPT (meaning, I can't be held liable for any inaccuracies in this chart):
We aren't quite Tokyo. Few cities are. But surely there are ways we can be just as functional and take up a lot less space. This would not only benefit our main streets, but also improve the overall viability of infill housing.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
