October: Rates and Regulations
It’s been an eventful month for the housing market both in Victoria and the broader regulatory landscape in the province. In Victoria rates have continued to suppress activity, while the province dropped two bombshells, one on short term rental restrictions, and one on zoning reform.
In Victoria, the picture is a continuation of what was already clear in September. The bump in effective interest rates in the fall (despite no increases from the Bank of Canada) and no relief on the affordability front has sidelined more buyers, while the hopes of a quick bounce back in the market evaporated when the spring sales rally fizzled out. With 407 sales, we are 37% below the 10 year average for activity, even if activity remains well above the worst October on record (278 in 2008 when the financial crisis paralyzed buyers). The decline in sales is broad based across all property types.
Outside of the COVID lockdowns, we now have the fewest sales since 2013 on a seasonally adjusted basis.
New listings are up only 9% from a year ago, however that’s building on a trend of gradually increasing new listings which have brought us above the long-term trend. October’s 1100 listings were 13% above the 10 year average. The highest number of new listings for an October was 1169 in 2007. We are still well within a normal range though, and no sign of distressed sellers blowing out inventory like what happened in the early 80s.
Last month, we talked about the fact that the market has weakened substantially more in the westshore where owners are more dependent on mortgage financing to buy than the core. That continued in October, with 8 months of inventory in the westshore compared to 6 in the core. However the recent hit from provincial short term rental regulations will add condo listings in the City of Victoria and may reverse this trend temporarily.
Sluggish sales and healthy new listings are also evident in the inventory figures. Residential inventory grew by 2% in October which sounds like a small amount but any growth is unusual for this time of year. In the last 30 years of data that has only happened twice, most recently in 2005 when inventory grew 3%, and before that not since 1995 when it grew by 1%. Normally inventory drops by about 6% in October. This tells us that although the absolute increase wasn’t huge, the underlying trend towards more inventory is strong enough to overcome the normal seasonal pattern of decreasing housing stock. That’s clear in the chart below which shows both the raw inventory and seasonally adjusted trend.
It’s also reflected in market balance, which cooled again in October as measured both by the sales to new listings ratio, and months of inventory. The sales to new list ratio (which reflects the balance between buyers and sellers in the flow of market activity) is now about as weak as it was in the true buyers market of a decade ago. This measure tends to react more quickly to changes in the market, but somewhat more stable as an indicator are the months of inventory, which factor in the stock of housing for sale.
Months of inventory are still substantially lower than a decade ago because we have fewer active listings, but it has increased quite quickly in recent months.
Believe it or not this is still not technically a buyers market as measured by months of inventory, though the cooling trend is clear. Outside of the COVID lockdown in April 2020, we haven’t seen months of inventory this high since 2015.
Prices bounced back a little from September’s relatively strong showing, still more or less stalled out in recent months across every property type.
Looking at the median price to assessed value ratio, every property type dropped from September, selling on average very close to their assessed value. Note there are not many townhouse sales, hence the volatile month to month readings.
Conditions are prices are now very similar to what they were a year ago, though the market is cooling more quickly now.
Meanwhile the province dropped the biggest land use reforms in decades today. I would recommend reading the technical briefing, but they consist broadly of:
Legalizing small multifamily housing on nearly every lot in the province (in municipalities over 5000 people)
- 3 units by right will be allowed on lots under 3000sqft
- 4 units by right will be allowed on lots over 3000sqft
- 6 units by right will be allowed near transit stops with “frequent service” (to be defined, but many are assuming it’s BC Transit’s frequent routes which in Victoria are the 4, 6, 14, 26, 27, and 28)
- Design standards around setbacks, lot coverage, and floor space ratio will be released in December.
Moving away from lot by lot rezoning for higher density. This would change the planning and zoning system to a process where each municipality:
- Creates a housing needs report based on standardized methodology
- Engages the community to develop an Official Community Plan that takes into account 20 years of housing need
- Projects compliant with the Official Community Plan get streamlined approval without public hearing.
It’s early days and people are still digesting the changes, but combined this could be a monumental change to one of the key factors underlying the housing shortage in BC. Don’t get me wrong, this will not solve the housing shortage overnight, or even in months or years. But if implemented correctly it has the potential to turn the ship around after decades of going in the wrong direction. When New Zealand was considering similar changes, an economic analysis concluded that the changes were “likely to lead to more affordable and equitable urban living than what would happen in its absence. The difference will be small at first, noticeable within a decade, and enormous for the next generation”. Early results from the kiwis seem to indicate substantial impacts are being felt sooner than a decade out, but we are talking around 5 years, not tomorrow.
Some local governments will welcome the changes and use the provincial backstop as political cover to make the changes they’ve been wanting to make anyway. Others will look for loopholes and find ways to slow down implementation or make the multifamily unbuildable (I wouldn’t expect sixplexes in the uplands anytime soon for example). The contentious public hearings will shift from individual projects to updates of the official community plans which will now become much more impactful. We know that in jurisdictions like Auckland, effective reforms led to an explosion of development of low rise multifamily housing like townhomes, but in California state mandates were successfully slowed down by municipalities wanting to preserve the status quo using a variety of techniques. It remains to be seen how the regulations will be operationalized here.
What’s the impact on the real estate market? Well (if it works), in the long term multifamily housing should become more abundant and therefore more affordable. Single family housing will become more rare and less affordable (continuing the multi-decade long trend we have been on). For a more precise estimate we will have to wait on the details, some of which will be released in December in the form of design guidelines for this new low-rise multifamily housing. Victoria’s missing middle policy did essentially nothing for land values, but it was also ineffective. An effective missing middle policy could have the potential to increase values for developable lots. However the broad nature of the upzoning will limit the leverage of any individual owners since builders can just buy another lot if any given owner is asking too much. In the short term I don’t expect rapid impacts for the same reason that the change to rental restrictions have filtered through to values very slowly: many investors are sidelined by high rates just like regular buyers, so their impact on the market is muted. Stay tuned for more on this topic in the future though.
New post: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2023/11/06/some-rate-relief-but-damage-is-reverberating/
I suppose the land line, times colonist, Canada post were all revolutionary tools back in the day.
Are any of Victoria’s developers in trouble or is it mostly Vancouver.
All those things existed before they were in app form…. Short term rentals on Craigslist, padmapper, rental service agencies, newspapers and many more…. There were these things called taxis before Uber and don’t forget before the government legislated what apps food deliveries could charge restaurants (for some crazy nonsensical reason) restaurants use to have their own delivery drivers that they paid….. Money finds a way and the people that generate it are smarter and more motivated then the people trying to stop it.
An example would be…My Son and 4 buddies went to the GNR show over in Van. They called uber to the ferry, walked on, called uber on the other side, took them to the airbnb right beside bc place (condo, slept 5), called skip the the dishes for dinner…went to the show.
Take all that and divide it by 5 people…its super cheap, and you don’t have to talk to anyone, 3 simple clicks on the phone. Its all in the platform.
I think it was great.
Wink wink nudge nudge, say no more.
But really, this won’t be more than a rounding error compared to legitimate usage of Airbnb I suspect.
where would you advertise? used Victoria?
airbnb did all that for you on a huge platform, just like uber calls your ride, and skip the dishes brings your food.
The legislation may have a loophole there.
I suppose one could offer to rent at “$200/day, minimum 3 months stay”.
It’s then up to prospective guests to ask if they can get that rate for a weekend.
Perhaps a previous guest would mention that possibility in their review of the accommodation.
My thoughts as well which will leave a marketplace for 60 day rentals without explicit advertising for it as it will be understood what month-to-month fully furnished actually means (60 days if you want).
Month to month tenancies are going to remain a thing. Province is not going to compel a tenant to stay for three months minimum imo if they agree to month to month. That would leave tenants relatively powerless to leave asap when they find the place is super noisy or moldy or otherwise unsuitable.
How is that different than advertising a day to day tenancy?
Not sure how this will be resolved. I suspect that it might end up requiring a three month lease on the part of each landlord.
I dont think you are going to be able to dance around this one in the long run.
Not just that, most developers use a CCDC construction management contract for construction which does not contain a fixed price guarantee at the onset. Covid escalation reeked havoc on budgets so you are now faced with a one two punch of over budget construction and poor sales.
That seems fine – you just can’t actively solicit less than 90 day tenancies unless you are a licensed STR. Prospective tenants can rent for less than 90 days. The penalties are against hosts and platforms – not guests/tenants.
Yes I think a lot of developers are scrambling, but the normalization of interest rates is killing sales . Canada is in a bit of a leg hold cause they can’t really bring down interest rates until other g7 countries move or we will tank the dollar and that’s inflationary
Won’t be the first time pension funds lost money. Few people know that BCI funded the mortgage for the parkside hotel downtown that went into bankruptcy.
Not conclusive yet, lifelines are being negotiated.
If your ad reads, “month-to-month tenancy, no fixed lease required” is that soliciting or not?
If you are advertising a month-to-month rental you are advertising a tenancy which can be as short as 60 days at the discretion of the tenant.
You can put it up for rent on Craigslist and deal with a shorter term request via the RTA rules I think but I would not be advertising specifically for a term of less than 90 days anywhere because it would fall within the provincial definition of short-term rental and unless you are licensed for this you aren’t allowed to solicit for this. A tenant will be free to give notice on a longer term month to month tenancy.
Minimum term a host may offer without provincial registration is going to be 90 days on any platform including craigslist.
AND
Offers hosted by a platform, where people reserve and pay for the rental service (which may include for example, Airbnb, VRBO, Expedia, and FlipKey)
Offers on other web listing forums (which may include for example, Facebook Marketplace, Kijiji, and Craigslist)
Offers in classified ads in newspapers
There are big fines for hosts and platforms that do not comply. Craigslist and FB Marketplace will not be able to advertise rentals of less than 90 days that ure unlicensed without risking the fine.
No comment, but it would be hard to find another player to take westbank’s place should they fail without some very favorable terms in the current market.
What I am saying is you put your fully furnished unit up for rent and sign a month-to-month RTA to get around the 90 days to bring it down to 60 days. The market for 60 day furnished rentals is going to be bigger than for 90 days.
As far as I can’t tell it isn’t illegal to put your furnished unit up for month to month rent on FB marketplace/craigslist/usedvic/kijiji/etc.? The RTA forms haven’t been changed or amended to reflect a three month minimum.
It’s like of like the government banned age restrictions in strata except 55+ and now a bunch of building have voted to amend their age restrictions from 19+, for example, to 55+. Seems like the government likes to leave loopholes.
A month to month RTA agreement is legal. I’m not quite sure what you are referencing re 60 days. A tenant could give notice on the first day of tenancy to leave at the end of the month but the landlord cannot require this under RTB rules unless they are moving in themselves for a six-month period. Failure to move in and you are liable to pay the tenant a penalty of 12 months’ rent.
What is not permitted now is to list your property for rent on a short term rental platform for a term of less that 90 days without a provincially registered licence (only available if it is your primary residence and the muni permits it) if I understand the proposed rules correctly.
A tenancy of 90 days or more is also likely to be covered by the RTB, meaning that you cannot force the tenant to leave after 90 days unless you both sign a mutual agreement to end tenancy.
I agree 1.5 to 2x seems a little optimistic. BTW, why 90 days? Is signing a month-to-month RTA (60 days) really illegal now? I haven’t seen anything come out from the RTA side in terms of announcements.
This is pretty standard for a recently completed building. When the Encore was completed at one point we had 36 units listed on Saghalie Rd in Vic West. Currently there is just one unit listed between three very large strata corps (almost 500 units). After a while the turnover settles down.
At Custom House you have a number of developer units left (four) and they will sit for a long time because the absorption rate at that price point is very slow. Even if you price a $4 million dollar condo at $3 million it isn’t going to sell right away as the market pool of buyers is small.
As for the re-sales the one bedrooms are all asking 200 to 300k more than pre-sale purchase price.
I just don’t believe that all these furnished rentals are going to get 1.5-2x market rate for terms of more than 90 days. And there only ever were so many 30 day plus furnished rental tenants. The vast majority of long-term tenants want unfurnished. I expect that furnished units will not command much of a premium on the long term market. There are simply way too many furnished rentals for the market demand imo and that is likely to continue to escalate over the next year.
The market will sort this out, no reason for anyone to be upset. A couple of years ago I had a great tenant application but she wanted me to take out the couch and a couple of other furniture items and because she was the best candidate I agreed.
It is pretty simple, when vacancy is low landlord can dictate the terms, when vacancy is high the tenant can dictate the term. This is why it is important to build as much housing as possible.
and I already see renters complaining online about the large numbers of furnished rentals being offerred (they want unfurnished). Maybe the government should step in and ban furnished rentals 🙂
Some emails I’ve receiving from the local management companies.
“There are many benefits to this shift in rental strategy including:
We have already helped 40+ short-term rental owners quickly pivot to this new strategy.”
Betting that interest rates would stay at or near historic lows is not taking a reasonable risk IMHO. If you don’t understand that RE is interest sensitive you shouldn’t be in it.
Keep in mind the other side of the coin – many near or present retirees have been negatively impacted by low rates.
Well 1 down , so much for all that demand side politics
That sounds like a good plan to me. Thanks for the replies
Quadreal taking over Oakridge? People cheering devs going under until they realize that’s their pension fund
One of the first developers to have dedicated offices in Asia selling Canadian condos. One project where most people heard of or been to is the Fairmont Pacific Rim, other ones most people probably have seen is the shangri la and Vancouver house.. Cool architecture, poor build quality and overpriced is what they go for, worked for the Chinese buyers up until now.
Oakridge is a JV, they are not the primary equity provider.
Month to date numbers
Sales: 66 (down 4% from same time last year
New lists: 192 (up 12%)
Inventory: 2722 (up 26%)
No, I have read a lot and am satisfied that our current investments are near optimal. I also have little emotion tied to investments so I don’t care if they go up or down. If there’s a big crash I try to invest more rather than pulling out.
However am looking to have a convo at some point with an advisor as we start to accumulate more planning needs.
Yes, high profile developer, behind some of the biggest projects in Vancouver. For example Oakridge park which is a $5B project. They have projects all over, not just Vancouver.
Not fully confirmed they are bust so don’t quote me on that, but have heard it now from enough people it seems plausible.
Maybe it is not a permitted use, but the unit I saw was def set up as a furnished rental. Maybe they were doing 30-day rentals. I didn’t ask.
How that does that work? It didn’t have the zoning to begin with.
It does seem like the tide has turned with real estate. FOMO goes both ways – buyers don’t buy as easily when prices are static or declining. Maybe we’ll see a buyers’ market.
I think some of these furnished rentals popping up are not going to be rented at these prices, and many of them are going to have to drop their price a bit and nix the furniture to appeal to local renters or list. Carrying costs are way higher than local rents for more recent purchasers and my guess is that many of the secondary or vacation properties were financed using home equity loans based on projected STR income.
These changes are going to affect a lot of self-employed people’s retirement that was based on one or two rental properties because even if they were rented long term I doubt there is going to be much appreciation, maybe even depreciation, for a good while and increased interest rates are causing negative cash flow. I know that renters and first-time buyers will get a much-needed break, but there are many people who worked very hard and took a reasonable risk with retirement in mind who are also impacted.
I wish government hadn’t waited so long to address this, the degree of harm to everyone grew exponentially.
The unit I visited was nice, but I think that many people were depending on short term rentals to make the numbers work.
unit layouts are awkward, the location is suboptimal for the price point. Tough sell for that price just to be on the 3rd floor in a busy intersection next to the inner harbour.
There seems to be nine condos listed in the Custom House at this point. Even a two bedroom for 1.2 million. Is this building not living up to expectations?
Can someone be kind enough to explain exactly who Westbank is and are they in Vancouver?. Tried googling but not getting much in the way of a clear answer.
Most clients don’t even understand what the market is. There is no rule or practice for retail advisors to compare their net of fee returns to a benchmark, that only exists on the institutional side. Most people are content with 5+% returns and not losing any money regardless if the S&P return is +20% or -20%.
Are you talking about financial advisor or investment advisor? Someone at the bank or someone at like woody gundy?
Vic developer also in trouble according to insider contacts, not your typical single family house builder but have a few high rise completed downtown. Not offshore money related either.
Already mentioned Chinese investors pulling out.
Just in Van and it seems a lot of projects are now sitting
Steve saretsky is talking about a big developer in Van in trouble
Are you someone who has followed that advice yourself? Have you found yourself a good advisor, which you actually use regularly? More than a one-and-done meeting. I’ve given up, as one is worse than the other, so I’m genuinely asking to see if others have different experience.
Pretty interesting times with Westbank going under
Patrick-Probably the main reason I chose to invest in real estate instead of equities. Figured that out early. My first advisor was selling me mutual funds while he was buying the fund’s stock.
Those are not financial advisors, those are salespeople. No doubt its incumbent on everyone to find good advisors
I am sure that someone here has the actual numbers but I got the impression that we are building a fair number of purpose built rentals. Might there actually be a little less demand than people think? What is the vacancy rate in Greater Victoria right now?
You’re being too kind. How about the financial advisors that talk people INTO making bad mistakes? Specifically into buying products that will pay the financial advisor a fat commission yearly? And even worse, convincing them to borrow against their house equity to do it.
In my experience of talking to people that have financial advisors, it is typically the same sad story, where the “nice young man from the bank” has convinced the client to invest in lousy funds with high commissions going to the “advisor/bank”. Inevitably these funds are the banks own underperforming funds, mostly because of grossly high MER fees.
A friend of mine went to look a place to rent last week, it wasn’t listed as furnished, but learned that it was furnished when he was looking at the rental. When he said he had his own furniture and didn’t need it furnished, the prospective landlord told him that he would need to pay to store the furniture that would be taken out of the unit. Apparently, the prospective landlord got upset when he laughed and turned to leave without filling out a tenancy application.
Yes. Same for financial advisors. People think they are there to beat the market, while what they’re actually for is to be financial counsellors that talk you down from making bad mistakes.
Thanks again!
213 furnished rentals on craigslist. Average price of a 1 bed is about 2000 and a 2 bed is 3000. Seems like 95% are STRs converting to long term. Can’t be that many people each month looking for these types of high end furnished places would be my guess.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-bc-airbnb-new-rules-rentals/
I have to agree with Marko that I just cannot see the system changing much up here. I can see this government deciding to limit and lower commissions if this becomes an issue.
Parts of the Commonwealth don’t have selling agents.
The purchaser’s Barrister will look over the contract and hire a Chartered Surveyor to inspect the property and some times provide an estimate of value typically for a flat fee. This seems to work well for them as the Barrister, home inspector and appraiser are unbiased as their fees are not based on a commission.
There still is a listing agent that shows the property and sets an asking price.
Would that system work in Canada? Probably not, as we have grown accustom to the way things are done today.
I thought this 13 years ago when I started but I’ve never been convinced that nothing will change in my lifetime. 80% of my job is counseling. AI can’t deal with two irrational emotional parties trying to put a transaction together.
I’ve now had a lot of people over the years that first met me when I set them up on a mere posting and even after a successful mere posting sale they switched to using my full service services, even thought I am still more than happy to set them up on a mere posting. People aren’t super keen on dealing directly with the other party I find which isn’t shocking how entitled, complicated and polarizing people can be these days.
The technology and options are there to sell privately but the consumer is not embracing.
CNN : “the verdict handed down in a Missouri court on Tuesday that found NAR and two brokerage firms, Homeservices of America and Keller Williams Realty, were liable for $1.8 billion in damages for conspiring to keep commissions artificially high, may mark the beginning of the end of how homes are bought and sold.”
Our family has bought and sold several homes by ourselves and it saved everyone a lot of money. I’ve also used an agent that I trust and respect at times.
But honestly……buying or selling without an agent works great when it is possible and you have more control. (You have to do your own due diligence anyway, which has often revealed major mistakes by the listing agent. Kind of shocking actually. )
Our lawyer handles the exchange of money and the other obviously important stuff. Much much cheaper than a sales agent.
Its odd to me why more people don’t do it. But each to his own.
Anyway…I think we will see the beginning of the end on how homes are bought and sold as the article on CNN mentions.
Patrick dunking on Marko by doing basic homework is one of my favourite things on this blog.
Dasmo, now I am trying to remember where I met you, was it the back room of the Penny Farthing but that what have been pre Covid.
They had a local rep, his name was Len Meyer and the guy that came out to measure was named Mike. I can’t remember the name of the two installers, they might have been from Vancouver. I just called the 1-800 number that was in their mail-out (still get them to this day) and scheduled an appointment. This was at the height of covid. He brought a laptop and some samples/cutouts of windows, had brochures, etc. They had a promo for financing, but we went with the 3% cash discount instead. We had to give a 1/3 deposit, then 1/3 on commencement of install, then 1/3 at project completion.
Dasmo: Yes I do think that VV has been successfully hacked. And yes it is me complaining about it.
Good grief. This is your # 1 example of the city delaying a permit? That’s just user error of the Abbotsford guy submitting an incomplete application. There’s an existing bylaw in Abbotsford requiring a storm water management plan (ESC plan – Erosion/Sediment Control) for building permits for lots >2,000 sq.m. The plan is just during construction to prevent contamination from the construction sites from rainwater or melted snow into rivers and other sites. If he didn’t submit the plan, of course they won’t approve his building permit until he sends it in. He should have known that, or used a professional to help with his application.
Abbotsford have some of the worst flooding in Canada, from “atmospheric rivers” (rain) including the recent flood disaster in november 2021 https://www.abbynews.com/news/abbotsford-flood-one-year-later-timeline-of-a-disaster-1830312
So maybe the entire construction site floods, and so there must a plan in place to mitigate that.
Re car-free – this pilot project for a 1000 person car-free community in Tempeh is interesting and off the ground already. https://culdesac.com/
Sounds very similar to composite decking (like Trex).
Wow, thanks for your detailed write up. I really appreciate getting all the nuances that you provided about your experience with the product (and the pic). I was expecting the higher cost, but it’s nice to hear you found the value in it. Did Anderson travel over from the mainland or did they have a local rep on the island that you went through? Thanks again! ( > symbol allows the quote indent to show)
Thanks, but those are the clad/hybrid windows and they do tend to call them composites over in the UK.
I am thinking more of the wood fiber and polymer blended material composite like this….
https://www.andersenwindows.com/windows-and-doors/materials/composite-windows-doors/
It seems Anderson is the only one close to the area that is doing them.
“I suppose the details will bring answers to questions like how to a build a 4 or 6 plex around existing trees?
‘I suppose the details will bring answers to questions like how to a build a 4 or 6 plex around existing trees?
lots of owners in city of Langford.. potential buyers, would want to get rid of their trees…. so the land price potentially go up.
Well BC Housing don’t provide the builder exam study material. But BC Housing ‘s basic web page for the builder exam does provide a link to a BC Housing pre-approved third party course for comprehensive training to prepare for the exam, that reports a high% pass success rate. https://www.bchousing.org/licensing-consumer-services/owner-builder/exam
Just click the “owner builder training” link provided by BC Housing at the bottom of that page , and that will launch
https://ownerbuildertraining.com
The cost is $799. Seems well worth it, given that thousands of BCers have taken it, many supportive testimonials, it is “BC Housing Approved (their stamp for that is at the bottom of the page )” and the company says “We are proud to say our exam pass success rate is over 99%” .
What’s the complaint here? You pay $799 for recommended training, and there’s a high pass rate for those who take this BC Housing approved course. I wonder, what’s the pass rate for people that skip the approved comprehensive training and just use a free online study guide?
(Pic is screenshots from the two websites linked above)
I suspect you’re talking about something like this:
https://www.internorm.com/en-uk/products/windows/composite-windows/hf-410/homepure
The above style of window from a reputable brand is big money – think $70 to >100/sq. ft. What, specifically, are you looking for?
“The closest shop I found doing them is Anderson windows in Surrey.. but their site is mostly just the sales angle on selling the product. I am curious if anyone has had experience with the product. If it’s actually any better or not.”
I apologize as I’ve completely forgotten how to quote, but we had Anderson Windows installed Feb 2021 and absolutely love them. There is a lot of flexibility in design. We have a variety of different styles, from 2 panel and 3 panel sliders, to picture windows, awning windows, casement windows and fixed windows with grilles in the panes. The outside windows are black and aluminum wrapped, and the inside are either white or have a wood finish to them, depending which room they are in and what the trim is for that room. (Living room and dining room still have stained trim, while all other rooms have painted trim.) They look so unique, it’s hard to describe without pictures. I’ve attached the dining room window, but even this picture only shows what the fixed windows look like, with that neat double curve thing happening. (My sister said my windows look 3D haha).
We had a salesman come to our house in November 2020 who gave us the salespitch and quote, signed a contract and then a different guy came a week later to measure. It took about 6 weeks to manufacture the windows, which we were told was somewhere in the Midwest USA (not Canada). The install happened in mid-Februrary and took a full 5 days. The price we paid/was quoted included everything, including wrapping the outside of the window casings, stools and apron in black aluminum to match our black windows which I was not expecting. I seriously just thought they were going to install the windows in the opening and then I would have to deal with any exterior finishing. That part alone took them 2 full days.
Was it more expensive than vinyl windows? Heck yeah we had sticker shock at the price but no regrets. The quote I had gotten for vinyl windows didn’t include install. I was told I had to arrange my own window installer and there was even one basement window in my house that they said they couldn’t even replace because it was “weird”. I would have not paid this premium if I had a newer house, but my house is a 1939 build and has beautiful coved ceilings and stained wood trim and fir floors, and I wanted to get something that would enhance and pay homage to the era. I believe I did increase the value of the house as there is a stark contrast between what I had (a mix of mostly aluminum windows, 1 vinyl window and just 3 wood windows) and what I have now. I’m sure lots of people will say $30k for windows is ‘crazy’, but I don’t care. I love my windows so much and it was worth it to me. I’d even be willing to give anyone a tour of my house if they want a closer look!
It isn’t your limited experience, it is like that across BC. It is an ongoing compliant in the owner-builder groups I am involved in. You submit everything in the submission check list and two months later they get back to you that they want X, Y, Z that isn’t on the checklist.
Just from two days ago in one of the groups
Reply from someone else
Then you wait another two months for the civil engineer person to produce the drawings of water going into a rock pit, which after another two months the municipality will want an amendment for whatever non-sense reason.
Just this week alone I’ve emailed the owner builder study guide to an architect, a lawyer, a retired builder of 40 years. You know how messed up the process of building a house in BC is when BC Housing is running a useless exam and providing zero study materials to the point were people are reaching out to a random guy they found on YouTube for help.
Yes, if they could become more flexible and pragmatic on tree removals, it would help a lot.
Nope, familiar with the fibreglass, but fibreglass and other common window materials are often used in them.
Kind of explained here…
https://www.perfectsteelsolutions.com/composite-windows-guide/
The closest shop I found doing them is Anderson windows in Surrey.. but their site is mostly just the sales angle on selling the product. I am curious if anyone has had experience with the product. If it’s actually any better or not.
Well of course, the clock starts ticking when you submit your development permit application. They can hardly approve it before they receive the application. They are working on a digital application process, where your application gets checked digitally when you submit it, which will flag errors and omissions before you file it, that should speed things up. It’s expected to be started in Saanich and Victoria in March 2024.
Are you talking about fiberglass windows?
I’d be extremely skeptical of this. Maybe 4 months once they decided they had everything they wanted as part of the application. In my limited experience, even if you have all the bullet items on their submission lists complete, they may well come back with further requirements (which may require an amendment by a professional).
I think once you add up all the time required to prepare the submission (the arborist report, land surveying, plans and engineering, city engineering (sanitary/sewer/highway), the owner builder exam, etc.) it’s easier to see why ‘getting a permit’ can take a year.
When you’re as important as Marko, you announce things from on high.
Marko won’t admit that he was wrong. Your facts are nonsense. You don’t have enough common sense.
That’s already taken into account. For the record…. As I’ve said, it’s a speedy 4 months, not “a year” (as you say)
…From Saanich.ca
How long will the [Saanich garden] permit process take?
Upon receipt of a complete [Saanich garden suite] application it will take approximately 1.5 to 3.5 months to obtain a Development Permit, a Building Permit will take approximately six weeks.
https://www.saanich.ca/EN/main/local-government/development-applications/garden-suites.html
Has anyone here worked with or has had composite windows installed? If yes, how do find the product as compared to other window types? and is there a recommended manufacturer and installer working on the island?
Why play these silly games where you announce who you are muting? Or at least pretend to be muting, since you reply anyway. If you want to ignore a comment, just ignore it and move on. I expect most people here like to read both sides, and make up their own minds.
Of course. You call “biased” and don’t even believe a stats report direct from the source (Saanich) where they measured and reported the 4 month average development garden permit timeline. Too bad your “mute button” doesn’t work for “Saanich.ca”, and everything else in the world that contradicts your “we’re soooo screwed” narrative. Tell that to the successful Victoria developers responsible for near record 5,000 units per year Greater Victoria housing starts over the last two years. Oh wait, that’s official BC government stats…. are those “biased” as well?
see next message
Really large trees have no business being on residential lots in the first place imo and that should be part of municipal planning and there should be no prohibition against their removal, although you should maybe have to plant medium sized trees/shrubs or pay for planting large trees somewhere else more appropriate.
Keeping giant trees on urban lots is not some climate change savior or excellent ecosystem solution imo because they all become hazards one day and they cause loads of problems all along the way in the form of foundation, perimeter drain, sewer line and falling branch damage. Medium sized trees, mixed hedges, tough perennials and water wise planting seems way more beneficial overall in an urban residential area and fit with increased density, carbon sequestration and climate change mitigation. Plant big trees where there are big spaces and not next to houses.
I personally have experienced tree root and related problems so many times, including from municipal trees, that I no longer would be interested in living anywhere near a big tree and I don’t really see the logic of the current protection mantra. Each municipality also has to deal with the infrastructure and maintenance headaches they cause every single year. That money could pay for a lot of climate change mitigation strategies.
I suppose the details will bring answers to questions like how to a build a 4 or 6 plex around existing trees? Been down that road with saanich for 6 months over a half dead giant poplar weed.. so many large lots are treed.
Red alert! Marko’s “nonsense” detector has reached 9/10! One more notch and your ass is muted. This is your final warning.
Don’t worry, the budget will balance itself.
Unfortunately I am going to have to start muting people that are quoting people I already have muted as it is a waste of time reading complete non-sense.
Yes, four months for a DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, but you also need a BUILDING PERMIT for a garden suite. It would be useful if people actually read the report and used some common sense.
“Building Permits
A total of 17 Building Permit applications for garden suites have been received since October
2020. Nine Building Permits have been issued as of October 2021.”
I am not a mathematician but just the building permit, let alone development permit+building permit, can’t possibly average less than 4 months. Secondly, I would take that report with a grain of salt. I would personally pay for Leo to do a proper unbias one. If Leo wants emails of clients in Gordon Head that have hired the proper professionals (survey, arborist, designer, etc.) and are waiting in excess of a year on a professional submitted application I can provide. This is also on properties specifically bought for a garden suite so we made sure no trees close by, no ROWs in the backyard, etc.
I’d expect the court applications to remove covenants to also come from homeowners themselves, and this legislation will make it easier for them to succeed. In BC, a homeowner can sometimes remove restrictive covenants on their own property, by applying to the courts.
There are several grounds to do so, including these two:
—- because of changes in the character of the land, the neighbourhood or other circumstances considered material, the registered charge or interest is obsolete;
—- modification or cancellation will not injure those entitled to the benefit of the registered charge
If the entire province allows multi-family, this strengthens the argument that there has been a “change in the character of the neighbourhood” . An uphill battle to win, but maybe the neighbours don’t want to pay the legal fees to fight it. There’s examples where covenants to subdivide got removed (e.g. tri-X timber) in BC here, https://canliiconnects.org/content/documents/36893
I’m wondering about what the sale of rental housing is going to do to tax revenues. There will be an initial bump up from capital gains taxes, and then a sharp decrease if more homes are owned as principal residences and have capital gains tax exemptions and no rental income to pay taxes on. Not to mention the immediate lost revenues from STRs which included provincial and federal taxes on each booking, tax on the relatively high rental income, plus GST and capital gains taxes on resale. Has to be a very large hit to tax revenues over time.
Informative post. Thanks
The recent increased involvement of the province in housing is recent enough to be at the “we’re from the provincial government, and we are here to help” stage. But it usually doesn’t take long for governments to do what they do best, adding taxes and fees. How long before the province gets into the act, and starts piling on development fees like the cities?
Yup already happening metro vancouver just upped the fees by $20k per apartment
Yes. And even more so if it is politically popular. Even “vacancy control” (inability to up rent between tenants) is on the table in my view even though people keep thinking not. I don’t think there are sacred cows anymore. I’d be concerned about this if a Mom & Pop landlord
So Leo can we c dc’s go up 400 percent to put a little more jingle in the coffers
This is really inside baseball, but CACs are really toxic, and very different than the normal DCCs.
Small explanation: there are fundamentally two types of development charges that municipalities can ask for. The first are called development cost charges (DCC), and the second community amenity contributions (CAC)
DCC can be charged at building permit time and are due on every type of housing that is built including single-family homes. They are meant to cover the direct costs of development in terms of upgraded water, sewer, road, and Park infrastructure that arise from the new development. They go into a pool, and the municipality is supposed to set them to roughly cover ongoing costs to upgrade infrastructure. Generally these fees are fine with the caveat that municipalities often charge multifamily housing much more than single-family housing. Also, they directly add to housing costs so they should be kept reasonable to cover actual costs and not be seen as a cash cow. However, in general, these fees are predictable and not a massive problem.
Community amenity contributions are a different animal entirely. First of all municipalities are actually not allowed to mandate them as a condition of approval. They are supposed to be voluntary contributions that developers can offer on a specific site which may be higher density than is anticipated under the official community plan, or otherwise may have a larger impact on community infrastructure that is not covered by the DCC . They have some more flexibility and unlike DCCs, which are very limited in what they can be spent on, they can be spent on anything such as a new library, a new fire hall, or an affordable housing fund.
The problem with them is twofold: The first is that they are not allowed to be mandated, but that is exactly what municipalities have done by creating rules around CAC and making them a defacto requirement to get successful rezoning. They are voluntary only in the sense that a developer can volunteer not to pay them, and then council will volunteer not to approve their project. This is in direct contravention to provincial guidance, which says they should not be seen as selling zoning. Setting up this kind of fee system also directly undermines one of the key actions that we need to take to solve the housing shortage, which is to end exclusionary zoning, where every project needs to seek. Individual rezoning to be built when the municipality is dependent on income from those rezoning, they will be incentivized to never make zoning more permissive
The other problem is that they generally have been negotiated lot by lot and many municipalities have a policy of negotiating them based on anticipated land lift. The problem with that is often these negotiations take place early in the process, and when it comes to actually getting approvals and starting construction, the economics of the project have changed, and the land lift has shrunk substantially. This is what is happening now in Vancouver where a lot of projects are being cancelled because the city tried to capture a lot of the land lift and now that rates and construction costs are up, the project is no longer financially viable. Instead of land lift encouraging more construction as it would in the free market, the city is trying to capture all the profits which strangles housing construction. Those individual negotiations also slow down the process, add risk and increase the potential for corruption. See Ontario for an example of what can happen when elected officials have a lot of influence on what developers get approval, and what the terms are.
The BC expert panel on housing supply and affordability recommended CACs be abolished a few years ago and the development approvals and process report made a similar recommendation a few years before that.
I’ve been told by some people in the know that the province is planning on doing this and adding a little bit more flexibility to DCC so they can be used for a few other purposes, but would still be predictable as they are now. In other words, CAC’s were on their last legs anyway
I don’t think municipalities will have a problem getting the money out of new developments for infrastructure. There’s plenty of new fees that can be added
Leo’s response on Twitter:
B.C. NDP housing bill oversight could cost municipalities tens of millions: mayors
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-governments-upzoning-policy-could-strain-municipal-infrastructure-mayors
In the last 12 months the government took away the right from stratas to restrict rentals and banned previously legal STRs. What makes you think they can’t do something about restrictive covenants that may not be politically popular? They do whatever they want at this point.
North Saanich has already gone after the Dean Park covenant and this was way before the housing push. The North Saanich argument was the definition of “single family home” has evolved and doesn’t necessarily mean just one unit. This came to be when North Saanich was rezoning everything to allow suites and Dean Park residents complained and wanted to be exempt.
Secondly, most restrictive covenants are private; therefore, not being a lawyer, the municipality cannot enforce them. The association would have to take you to court.
Why have children when they cost the system money for at least the first 18 years with healthcare, daycare, education, and parks?
We can bring in more immigrant between the age of 18 to 25, and the parking problem will be solved because they walk their sick vomiting ass to the ER.
Heck, we can save the planet and feed the fish or Kronos the titan at the same time.
I suspect that Broadmead will become THE place to live given the individual restrictive covenants on each lot that prevent the development of even a granny suite let alone three rental units in the same house.
Honestly all we need is something non-zero. Even $50/year would probably be enough to get a lot more SFH owners to clean the crap out of their garages rather than storing their cars for free on the street.
Nice. People losing their homes isn’t good for anyone.
A Tesla circling the block all night would decrease density.
You mean pre-1950 when Victoria when housing was built around the street car lines? The street cars were well used in the 1920s but declined after that due to the motorcar and were not economically viable. Density is required both for economics and for the ability to access the stops, and it probably needs to become a lot more expensive and inconvenient to use personal vehicles to encourage public transit use and support the service.
https://www.capitaldaily.ca/news/victorias-long-lost-streetcars
Just by a Tesla with full-self-drive. Who needs parking when your car can just circle the block until needed?
That’s probably a bit steep for Victoria, but there’s a good argument that $0 isn’t the correct price either.
https://www.vox.com/2014/6/27/5849280/why-free-parking-is-bad-for-everyone
Make sure to add in that cost as a driveway frontage fee for homeowners too, don’t want the city to lose out on revenue and no need to subsidize homeowners having reserved access to public street frontage with their private driveways, especially if that frontage has value in charging a parking permit fee.
Uber drivers love screaming, feverish children vomiting in their personal vehicle.
Victoria, and most other cities for that matter, had pretty efficient transit systems when density was lower than today. It’s just that back then many people didn’t have the choice of driving.
A ton of rental listings on craigslist.
We are not Tokyo. We don’t have the transit system or the density to affordably move the population around on public transit to the places they need to go. And lots of people are not able bodied. Maybe one day, but I don’t see that happening before we go through parking wars and a lot more densification.
Frank, I think you are required to have a pick up truck usually with either a cattle or horse trailer..
Uber recommends to not take an Uber if you’re suspected to have a contagious infection. Fever and vomiting is likely contagious. But I take your point, in that the Uber would work for a lot of things. Much easier for a single person to use Uber for everything. It’s hard for me to think about always taking my whole family everywhere in an Uber, but they do that in NYC.
If you had a crap application it could take a year.
Uber?
Which on those would work best to take your 2 year old with fever and vomiting to the ER? A skateboard?
People use their bike, or the bus, or roller blades, or walk, or skateboard, or scooter.
Saying something many times on HHV doesn’t make it true. A Saanich report from April 2022 measured this and found that “ The average approval time for a development permit for a garden suite [in Saanich] is four months.” So sorry, it’s not “a year” as you keep saying.
https://www.saanich.ca/assets/Local~Government/Documents/Garden~Suites/garden-suites-final-1yr-review-20220428.pdf
see next msg
So I guess we’ll see if the province is right. 130,000 missing middle plexes is a lot.
Just let me know when a multi-plex is built under this legislation or COV Missing Middle that I can drive by.
As I’ve said many times, a year to get a building permit for a garden suite in Saanich.
How does that work when there is no requirement for on-site parking and units have already been built without this?
Or just eliminate on-street parking all together so roads can be used for actually getting somewhere.
Yep, I’m moving to Wyoming. Lots of room to park there.
They have in some cases, but as the article states new apartment blocks get built and add more cars. They listed an example of 28 cars being added to a street that already has congested street parking.
It is simple math. Once the number of residents cars exceeds available street parking, resident-only parking ceases to provide parking for some of the residents, and it’s a daily game of musical chairs to see which residents are out-of-luck that day. This is in top of the other issues such as there will be no parking for anyone visiting your home, such as a tradesperson or someone picking up/dropping off your kid etc.
The basic idea is that the streets shouldn’t be parking lots for more and more cars.
Currently. The new legislation changes this for six-plexes at least:
I don’t know if it will take decades. It did not in Auckland. The rate of construction doubled and this was directly attributed to the legislative changes that are similar to BC’s. Maybe high interest rates slow that down here. Things moved very quickly and there was a severe shortage of tradespeople. Seems like corners were cut and there are a lot of leaky/substandard build stories plus the parking pressure
https://realestatemagazine.ca/b-c-could-learn-from-aucklands-aggressive-housing-policy-bcrea/#:~:text=According%20to%20BCREA%2C%20the%20AUP%20led%20to%20a,a%20twofold%20increase%20in%20construction%20activity%20by%202021.
Doesn’t solve it. If you have higher density and less or no onsite parking residents are competing with each other.
So why don’t they just go to resident only parking, as Vancouver has in many districts?
One only needs to look at Auckland, the poster-child model city for advocates of densification. And plenty of Auckland neighborhoods now have on-street parking nightmares. For example, the picture here is on-street residential area parking that is only good for two hours at a time. And residents who have been used to parking on their street are out-of-luck. And the Auckland politicians tell them the residents on-street parking days are gone.
“It is unreal,” a long-time resident said.
For Victoria, The solution is simple, force developers to provide parking spots
=======
https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/108391001/onstreet-parking-a-thing-of-the-past-for-booming-auckland-suburb
“The days of parking on the street outside your house are numbered, an Auckland politician says, as housing intensifies and commuters search for free car-parking spots.
Tensions are rising between residents and commuters on Auckland’s North Shore as the demand for on-street parking escalates.
With parking at a premium there had been verbal confrontations between residents and those who wanted to park on the street, a resident said.
Two s-called “ghost houses” in Byron Ave were purchased last year by developers and Auckland Council gave consent for 14 terrace houses to be built across these neighbouring properties, a move residents predicted would bring 28 extra resident vehicles into the street and increase the on-street parking tensions
“While I sympathise with residents, the days of having on-street parking as a matter of course are gone,” Devonport-Takapuna Local Board chairman George Wood said.”
Assuming you can one day make it through the beaucracy with your local muncipality, these changes could benefit you.
How many owners in the COV and Saanich have gone out of their way to obtain an occupancy on their basement suite once suites were allowed under zoning? It would be a nightmare; therefore, I imagine less than 2% of owners have done such.
But the city isn’t even leaving it up to deveopers…..they are imposing parking maximums on developers which is just ridicolous imo. I actually think if you left it to the free market it would end up being somewhat okay
i. Developers are going to try to maximize profits either via sale price or rental potential and having parking helps on both fronts. Try selling a $1 million dollar townhome without parking, probably won’t fly well. Therefore, I do think the market itself will make an effort to provide parking. I wouldn’t be surprised if in certain areas like Fairfield it made economic sense to have a car elevator (ramp would eat up to much space on a small lot) to go down to a parkade below a six-plex.
ii. We are 20 years away from having parking problems if we are going to be realistic. It is going to be YEARS before the first permit is issued under this legislation plus a couple of years to build plus a number of years for multiple multi-plexes to be built on one street. While I am not a huge fan of Elon Musk and his predictions, I do think there is a reasonable chance that in 20 years autonomous cars are actually a thing and you can order a self-driving car to pick you up infront of your building. This would greatly reduce the need for having a car.
Fyi, streets lined with four-plexes, five-plexes and six-plexes are very common in Croatia, this is what a typical street of such configuration looks like in terms of parking (each condo has a private garage plus an additional 2nd outside parking spot) – https://maps.app.goo.gl/RJ1B7PaBCgoFLLe78
I can’t see the second parking spot flying in Victoria as it would mean parking spots in the front yard, but there is a solution to everything.
Yup you don’t really know.
I can definitely c the municipality’s and provincial butting heads , it will not help to get projects going
Charge 200 a month for overnight street parking. Actually 300 might be a better deal for the city.
Why would that add planning layers? They already have teams in place that create OCPs. So, once they have the OCP and OCP-compliant plans, shouldn’t that lessen the workload on municipal workers? But yeah, leave it to the muni’s to make an excuse to add more layer of highly paid government workers.
Interesting excerpt from Justin McElroy’s newsletter:
https://subscriptions.cbc.ca/newsletter_static/messages/metromatters/2023-11-03/
Average detached sale price in Greater Vancouver now at $2.23M. 10% increase from same time last year.
I guess you really don’t know the Vancouver market, lots of luxury homes/condos are still below 2017 prices. Also the flagship oakridge development is facing some significant challenges.
Parking wars are no fun. I think the municipalities need a strategy on this. Like maybe you should have to pay for street parking to incentivize no car a bit more, but I agree that parking needs to be part of the housing plan. Leaving this up to developers to decide is short term thinking which is going to create long-term conflict and unsolvable problems. These problems are going to be compounded on bike routes where the street parking has been eliminated.
Most families with children want and need a car and a parking space.
Advocating for non-car infrastructure is fine, but that’s an aspirational part of an eco-agenda, and should not be confused with ideas to advocate for family housing. Because typical family housing needs a parking spot. Most advocates for little/no parking requirements for multi-unit builds have a car and a parking spot for themselves that they aren’t prepared to give up.
Seems a simple case of “Do as I say, not as I do!”
Got my curiosity up, and I found that the state government is actually soliciting people to move there.
https://travelwyoming.com/wy-relocate/
This is something I can get behind.
578,000 is how many people they need to man the missile silos. Probably more nukes than people.
Good news incoming for homeowners obtaining or renewing 5-year mortgages. Canada 5 year bond yield has been in free fall lately. Down 64 basis points in a month, from 4.42% to 3.78%. https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/bond/tmbmkca-05y?countrycode=bx
If these yields stick, mortgage rates for 5-year are expected to fall (slowly). Based on the historical 1.5% above the 5 year yield, that would put a 5-year mortgage at 5.28%.
Given China’s shaky RE situation, maybe Chinese investors should go all-in on Vancouver, where RE still always goes up.
I solemnly promise that I will become a certified YIMBY kook in exchange for the resurrection of the E&N railway and implementation of other rail in Victoria 🙂
insiders contacts are saying there is likely to be a fundamental shift in the mindset of Chinese investors on RE given they have finally experienced the RE doesn’t always go up in China. Likely to filter through to foreign holdings in Canada and will be a big catalyst for cities like Vancouver and Toronto and will no doubt impact Victoria as well.
After a slow October in higher end sales quite a few yesterday afternoon. Brand new house in Oak Bay sold @ 4.5 mill and a newer one at $3 mill. A couple of 2.7 mill/2.6 mill sales in Fairfield and Mt Tolmie, also newer houses. Another 1 year old one in North Saanich at $2.2.
578000 was what was left over after they shot all the lefties with stupid housing density ideas.
How did they decide on 578,000?
Population of Wyoming- 578,000, and they want to keep it that way. Not a very friendly place to outsiders I’ve heard.
Beginning to appreciate the older boy’s Wyoming place. 812 acres at least gives you some privacy.
I don’t remember the exact details but I believe some high end neighbourhoods managed to carve themselves out of the rules for various mostly BS reasons
Hope so. Densifying requires a lot more non-car infrastructure
I got a permit to construct the 600 sq/ft shop in the back yard connected to sewer and the plan was that the Wife and I would retire back there then pimp out the main house.
The main house has a in-law suite with 2bedrooms/kitchen/bath, the upper main level has kitchen/3 bed/ 2bath. We also have a guest suite under our 18’x18′ back deck with 1 bath/kitchen/0 bedroom…bachelor.
So it could be 3 suites in total.
We don’t rent anything out right now, they are just there.
Will these new changes benefit us anytime soon?
What about a 1981 built 2600 sq/ft house with a 10,000 sq/ft lot with a 600 sq/ft shop in the back yard near Jenkins and Jacklin where you can walk to anything you could possibly imagine including high frequency bus stops?
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/11/02/lytton-wildfire-rebuild-permit-issued/
It only took 2.5 years to get a permit to rebuild one house in Lytton. Thank goodness our government is prioritizing housing!
Can we bring back streetcars while we’re at it?
For developers to get more density they have to guarantee affordability.
Developers would have to say to landowners, ” I can’t give you an inflated price for density because my rents are fixed at this level. I can only give you the current market rate for that parcel of land. So you’re not going to get less than a single family lot, but you’re not going to get more.”
-UBC Professor Patrick Condon comments on the Cambridge model regarding land price appreciation as a consequence of rezoning.
If land prices inflate due to rezoning, then that increases the cost to the developer which could then make the project uneconomical. If we don’t control land prices then we can’t solve the housing crisis. As the benefits of density go to landowners, not renters.
There was a study done on the Auckland changes. Seems like increased use increased values most in middle income neighbourhoods which had the most competition from developers to get lots for townhouses – and parking is an issue. Higher income areas remained lower density. Previously zoned areas that allowed higher density lost value relatively.
I agree with this. Currently the first time buyer is willing to pay more than a builder/developer for a small “starter home” but this could well change in the future.
I am guessing that two possibly unintended consequences will be that :
a) This might not inflate newer or larger houses but that it will make the very low end of the housing stock (1000 square foot and smaller run down houses on large lots more valuable. While many here might applaud that, those are the houses that enabled a lot of less financially endowed young couples (think Marko’s parents 30 years ago) get into the housing market. (me included). While it is no longer viable for a couple starting out to build their own house like my parents and my in-laws did, a lot of people can get started in something they can fix up and possibly add to. This could well push some people out of the SFH market and into multi unit housing. While it might improve the housing stock overall, I am not sure they will see it that way.
b)The combination of smaller back yards and pushing people out of car ownership is going to put more pressure on having local outdoor parks and playing fields. I am not expecting local councils to be very proactive in acquiring land to build more. It would be interesting to see this 20 year housing demand study and OCP process be required to include recreation facilities, park land, land for schools, etc. While I can easily see people with no housing thinking that more housing is THE important issue, I am betting the first thing they will do once they have a place to live is to want a car and local places for their kids to play.
Tough question as some of these roads where already in the OCPs for more density; therefore, they already has increased valuations as a result. For example, see price of this SFH on Sooke Rd -> https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/26088931/1919-sooke-rd-colwood-colwood-corners
Marko, do you think this increases the valuation of SFH lots along transportation corridors that used to be devalued as they were on busy streets? I’m thinking about roads like Foul Bay, Cadboro Bay, Fort, Shelbourne, Hillside, Cook, Quadra… Also I see that the sixplex zoning will be anywhere within 400 meters of a frequently used transit stop and there will be no minimum parking requirements! That is quite a big radius and a lot of street parking competition.
Do you think 100 years ago there were 10 consultants involved in sewers/sidewalks? It was probably a guy with a tape measure and level, someone infront of him cutting trees, and someone behind him framing the sidewalk and pouring it. Today you need 10 consultants and the end result is the exact same, you get a piece of concrete to walk on except the resources and reports that go into are building it are incredibly expensive.
Should, but will never happen. Voters can’t see new sewer pipes.
Okay Frank.
From my perspective, they are both the problem.
They will need to be upgraded. Not sure why people make such a big deal about this. When Oak Bay was first built out, did they say well there’s no sewers so we can’t build here? Or did they just put the sewers in?
This is what the city should be spending their time and money on, ensuring basic services are there and grow with need.
Condo construction in Victoria
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/p09XzidLQAM?feature=share
You have a clue about union workers because you know exempt managers…
From my experience the managers are the problem.
I do have a clue as I know some of their exempt managers, I am not saying all of them but there are many. Some really silly stuff goes on too like bullying etc. amongst each other, like I am talking about 50 year old women….
You sound a lot like Frank when you talk about something as if you have a clue.
Yes, definitely can strata title them. Freehold would not be possible I believe.
CRA still does audits in person, I think your particular file just didn’t get the pleasure this time around.
Yes, separate titled affordable townhouses would be a big success.
The big developers may be smart enough to realize they can maximize profits by adding Broadmead/uplands style covenants to allow SFH only. And forget about multi-family. That makes it more exclusive and increases values. But everywhere else in BC is still zoned for multi-units so I don’t think it will matter much.
I would have thought that the individual units in 4-6plex would be able to be separately titled to be affordable?
Parking is going to be a big issue in the future. Something to consider when you are looking at where to buy. Cul de sacs will be annoying.
Yes Patrotz , it’s a nonsensical statement that you constantly repeat. Of course if the price is low enough so that it makes economic sense to buy then it will sell at market value. It’s the same as saying that at the right price a house will sell. When does it not? Or “you’re buying location” As far as I understand it, all homes have a location.
However, It may take a very long time to find that buyer as there are fewer prospective purchasers for 4 and 6plexes than there are for single family and strata homes.
And then, how many people are willing to spend 2.5 million to build but only to sell at 1.7 million?
Wasn’t me that said it 🙂 When my parents were CRA audited 7 or 8 years ago two CRA employees physically came to their house at one point. When I was audited this year it was pretty obvious that my CRA file person was working from home as there was a dog barking in the background during every conversation.
Always enough buyers at market price, as usual. The real question is are the buyers willing to pay enough to make it worthwhile to build them.
People aren’t actually working longer or even what they are supposed to, that’s the problem with most of these union jobs. There is often no set deliverable, lots of these people do 3 hours of actual work a day, that’s why everyone likes working from home because instead of being stuck in the office surfing the internet they can do other things like chores.
You can build four and six plexes, but who is going to buy them? Is there a big enough market for 4 and 6 plexes in Victoria?
Investors are going to be purchasing them based on their rental income. Are the rents going to be high enough to provide a reasonable rate of return to support the cost of construction?
One may end up spending 2 or 2.5 million to buy the land and build them, but can only sell them at 1.7 million.
You just answered your own question here, Marko.
It will likely increase SFH price for sure as there will be less and less supply over time, and SFH on large lots will see price increase based on land sqf price.
That will be an issue for sure, and who is going to foot the bill for the upgrade?
Also, it has been known for decades that houses in that Saanich area are prone not only to flooding, but also suffers damp and moldy houses.
So you go apply for a four-plex in Saanich, Oakbay, etc., and you run into something like this
https://www.saanichnews.com/news/couples-long-battle-with-saanich-over-a-300000-storm-drain-ends-with-a-win-294846
I’m no expert, but most neighbourhood’s sewers and water are designed many decades ago, and will need to be upgrade as demand increase.
I’m still waiting to see where Oak Bay going to take this legislation, because a good portion of Oak Bay sewers and water services are already undersize. And, some of their archaic sewers are still on a single pipe system where storm water and sewer are tied together.
I wonder what happens with huge developments where muncipalities approved thousands of SFHs lots like Royal Bay and Westhills. Will Gablecraft (Royal Bay developer) start building four-plexes to maximize profits?
Thanks Marko. Have no experience with that so good to get your perspective. I think this article sets out what these changes might mean for Victoria: https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/latest/127470595/changing-face-of-aucklands-suburbs-fast-and-furious-housing-growth
To summarize, very fast change from SFHs to missing middle in some areas – although maybe interest rates temper this. This is mostly led by development companies and there are some concerns about quality of these units as corners are cut in some cases.
Increase in land values for SFHs on larger lots, decrease in appreciation rates for homes over time as more inventory builds, decrease in rental rates for the same reason, parking wars with the advent of more buildings without any on-site parking or not enough parking, and concerns about inadequate transit.
Many delays in getting building permits are caused by applicant’s errors/deficiencies in the application. HHVers here have described this in their own applications, where for example the city told them that they’ve exceeded allowable FSR sizes, which they dispute. So that causes a delay, as would be expected.
On the bright side, Saanich, Victoria and 14 other cities in BC are beginning rolling out a digital permitting process in March 2024 to speed up the process, and reduce errors in applicant submission .This will spot errors/deficiencies in the application by doing an automatic digital review of the application they are submitted, and are expected to speed up the process.
https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2023HOUS0132-001568
New digital building permit tool will help create more homes faster
“People will soon see new homes approved faster as we make good on our commitment to position B.C. as a North American leader in digital permitting and construction,” said Ravi Kahlon, Minister of Housing. Once completed, the new digital building permit tool will make it faster and simpler for builders and developers to digitally submit building permits for new housing and for local governments to receive and process the application. The tool will also automatically review the submission to ensure it is compliant with key parts of the BC Building Code to prevent any delays with the submission process. The tool is expected to begin testing in partnership communities [including Saanich, Victoria] by March 2024, following which it will be expanded into other communities.“
I just can’t see this being economically viable with current building code. Especially now that you can actually buy a teardown and do a fourplex or sixplex from scratch.
I wonder if there might be more house-plex conversions of large older homes like has been done previously in the Rockland area under the new legislation. Seems like this might be less expensive than teardown/rebuild but I don’t really know. Looking at Auckland which made these changes in 2016 it does seem like there was a subsequent boom in construction and also rents stopped rising due to the new supply. Maybe the same will happen here.
First of all, what exactly are they going to take about tomorrow specifically? Everyone will wait at least a month or so to digest all of this.
Second of all, I don’t do open house as I don’t believe in being unproductive. I made a video on this topic 6 days explaining my thoughts on open houses -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxtaGSdwYx8
At the hospital I worked when I was scheduled. Busy? That’s great, hire more staff or pay me overtime and I’ll think about it. At least at the hospital we didn’t create make work projects. I felt like we actually did something useful for society in ICU. At the municipalities they create a million policies they can’t even understand and then they are “short staffed.”
Thing is municipal staff are not really accountable to anyone. Let’s say the turn around time for a garden suite permit in Calgary is two weeks and in Saanich it is 14 months, what are you going to do? It isn’t like you can fire Saanich and go to Victoria to get your permit.
A lot of people email me complaining about the owner builder exam results and turn around time from BC Housing and what is one suppose to do? If they want to take three weeks to give you results for a multiple choice exam you wrote online you can’t do anything. You think someone at BC Housing in a cushy desk job cares that you can’t get a permit and you can’t start construction on your 900 sq.ft. home in Williams Lake before winter sets in? LOL
Wish an expert in the field of civil municipal engineering would chime in on this. Can a typical SFH neighborhood/street in BC handle every SFH going to a 4-plex in terms of sewer, water, storm, etc.? What about hydro, etc?
In theory yes, but not in reality. Builders aren’t even buying teardowns in the COV and that is 6-plex, let alone anything livable. If you buy next to a teardown there is a possibility in the next 10 years. If you buy in South Oak Bay in-between two newer builds I think you are good for 50 years just based on economics.
They might, and take their day off around Christmas instead. People work longer days to get every second Friday off, it’s like asking you if you’re going do some open houses on the weekend? were you skipping your days off when you were a nurse because the hospital was busy?
It’s not just covenants, but lots of other issues like bare land stratas (SFHs titled strata). I can’t see that working without some major amendments to the strata property act.
You mean how staff scramble to issue building permits for garden suites in Saanich (which fall under bylaws they wrote)? Only takes more than a year in a housing crisis for a simple building permit.
Do you really think anyone is going to skip their flex Friday tomorrow because of this announcement?
How is the missing middle going in the City of Victoria? Still waiting for someone to let me know when the first permit is issued.
Yes, good point. My expectation is that it wouldn’t pierce these covenants, because other zoning changes don’t pierce them.
There’s nothing stopping a neighborhood group of residents to create covenants for themselves to prevent any of their properties from having more than a SFH. It would only apply to those properties that agreed of course. As we saw with the age restrictions, it is always possible for the government to over ride this, but so far they don’t attack covenants.
Is there any indication how the new legislation affects those areas with covenants on the properties like Broadmead, Uplands, British Properties etc.? I would imagine a few lawyers could make out fairly well testing some of these…..
On a related note, it will be interesting to see which municipalities become much less receptive to proposals that break the OCP. This will meet the demand for quite a while meaning there is no need or excuse to exceed the OCP. Why condone excessive greed when there is plenty of legal opportunity available.
I bet things are pretty busy in municipal planning offices this morning as they try to figure out what they have to scramble to get in place.
Now all the buyers who want SFH will have to consider that at anytime the neighbor’s house could turn into a 4 plex. So would you still be willing to pay the same price as before?
Vaughn Palmer: End of the line for single-family neighbourhoods in most of B.C.
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-end-of-the-line-for-single-family-neighbourhoods-in-most-of-b-c
Thurston is starting to use punctuation. Positive development!
I thought they were under 5000 but they aren’t. As for other bylaws, I think various munis will try to make the case they should be exempt for various reasons. Too early to say how much of this the province pre-empted, but I know they were anticipating it.
Like Vancouver , municipalities will be looking at a big jump in dc’s to pay for all the infrastructure. I’m thinking oak bay would have to bump them up by 400 percent on multi family and less on single family. Money has to come from somewhere and not tax’s . Wouldn’t hurt to have a big surplus
Lighten up Maggie!
I agree with this. I think one big missing element that remains is the cost of building the units. For an extreme example, if people could just haul in 3-4 tiny homes on wheels to their properties (like a fifth wheel or other mobile home) and they would qualify for rentals , the rental housing crisis would likely end immediately. But that’s not how it works, and by law proper housing needs to be built, at considerable expense and time. It would be interesting to hear if the new government rules also ease the requirements for the additional housing, that would allow cheaper and faster units to be built.
How would the OCP legislation affect the restrictive Metchosine NIMBY bylaw?
It would be difficult to find a “satirist” capable of presenting a red herring with less wit than Adrian Raeside. Perhaps at an anti-SOGI rally at the legislature, but even then it would be a tight contest.
Ben Mycroft, director of development for GableCraft homes, said the province is “on the right track,” although he says there might be obstacles at the local government level when its comes to things like parking, sewer capacity and aging infrastructure.
Province introduces legislation to spur small-scale multi-unit home construction
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/province-introduces-legislation-to-spur-small-scale-multi-unit-home-construction-7771229
I am left wondering what I am missing in my understanding of why real estate will not become a “bit” more valuable.
If I can create another unit on my large lot, either with a suite or a coach house above that large garage…. or a extra house on the lot…. all the numbers begin to work better for me.
I do realize that units will not suddenly appear in backyards overnight (They still have to be built) but there is no doubt that the numbers for the deals I am looking at right now are looking much better. At the very least…. I’m not expecting to get them for a much lower price because the numbers work better for me and everyone else.
Also: Anyone know what 2870 Kirby Creek road near Shirley, Sooke sold for? Or was it simply taken off the market?