About all those new listings
New listings have been on a tear in April, and it’s worth looking at what might be behind the increase. Ever since rates jumped two years ago and people started facing huge increases in their monthly mortgage payments, I’ve been on the lookout for evidence that owners could be under stress. While mortgage arrears are an extremely lagging indictor, a big jump in mortgage payments could pressure investors to sell their properties, or force owner-occupiers out of homes. While there have been some previous times with higher listings (last fall was pretty healthy), in general new listings have been well within normal ranges. Whether it’s by extending amortizations or tightening their belts in other areas, owners have generally managed increasing rates well. 
However so far in April, new listings are running at 62% higher than a year ago, putting us on track to go from the lower end of the historical range to the top end. Where are all these new listings coming from, and what part of the market is seeing the most inventory? Lets take a look.
Many people believe that the provincial (effective) ban on short term rentals is to blame for the boom, and it’s certainly true that it has motivated a lot more listings in buildings that previously allowed short term rentals than normal. However with the short term rental premium evaporating (at least for the small units), most sellers have been loathe to sell, so the market has not been flooded with inventory. Yes inventory of these units nearly quadrupled from last April, but that’s only an additional 57 listings, and we were around half that just 3 years ago.
When we’ve gained 910 listings in a year, the increase in short term rental listings only explains 6% of the bump. Where have the real gains been? It’s really not in any particular category. Looking at inventory relative to long run averages, all the property types have followed similar paths, with houses and condos/townhouses a little higher than the average for this time of year, with single family up a little less than multifamily.
Breaking those down further by region, we also don’t see a wild divergence, with the westshore showing somewhat more inventory relative to the average right now than the core. If you’re wondering what’s happening with westshore condos, a ton of presales were de-listed from MLS this year given the new construction market is dead slow right now.
In terms of new listings to date in March and April, here’s what the picture looks like.
Again, if you think this listings surge is driven by short term rental microcondos hitting the market, that’s not the case. New listings of small condos were up only 12% from last year, despite the looming short term rental deadline. Owners of those condos generally made alternate plans well before this point.
Also if you’re hoping the new listings surge will relieve the competitive conditions in detached properties under a million, that’s also not happening yet. New listings there are up less than most categories. The core is also seeing a substantially smaller increase in listings than the westshore. As I’ve mentioned a few times, mortgage debt loads are highest in the westshore, so this would be consistent with rate pressure being behind some of the increased inventory. So far the increased new listings are essentially counteracting the normal increase in buyer activity for the spring and keeping the market pretty stable, but we’ll have to see how far this listings run goes. If we continue to see a lot of motivated sellers listing into the summer and fall we could shift back into a buyer’s market quickly.
The question going forward is whether the controversial change to capital gains inclusion rates incentivize even more owners of investment properties to sell before the June 25th deadline. It’s possible, but I suspect the impact on the market won’t be huge, and potentially even difficult or impossible to pick out of the noise. If that’s you and you’re contemplating a quick sale before the deadline, consult your accountant or play with this useful tool by PWL to help model whether it’s worth selling now or holding.
Also the weekly numbers
| April 2024 |
Apr
2023
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | ||
| Sales | 131 | 282 | 465 | 637 | |
| New Listings | 466 | 823 | 1187 | 1036 | |
| Active Listings | 2801 | 2896 | 2964 | 2043 | |
| Sales to New Listings | 28% | 34% | 39% | 62% | |
| Sales YoY Change | — | +12% | +9% | -23% | |
| New Lists YoY Change | — | +74% | +62% | -24% | |
| Inventory YoY Change | +39% | +42% | +44% | +50% | |
| Months of Inventory | |||||
New lists dipped a little compared to the first two weeks, but it’s still an impressive jump from last April. We’re no longer on track to beat the all time record for new listings, but it should be on the high end of the historical range. Meanwhile sales are identical to this time last year. We are on track for a year over year increase in sales activity mostly because we have two extra business days this April.
New post: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2024/05/01/april-market-update-all-about-those-listings/
Bunch of Glanford/High Quadra places listing for under a million as well.
Canada isn’t heading for stagflation. Canadian inflation is falling and BOC says rate cuts still coming,
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bank-of-canada-getting-closer-to-rate-cuts-tiff-macklem-says-7a9c506a
May 1, 2024. “ Bank of Canada Gov. Tiff Macklem said Wednesday officials are confident that inflation will continue to decelerate, and the central bank is “getting closer” to a point where it is able to cut interest rates
Sales to Active Listings Ratio is quite low for this year’s Spring market – mainly due to rise in inventory. I think this will have a significant on prices by September.
Seeing lots of price reductions today. Mostly s***holes in Langford. But you know what they say about Langford s***hole prices being a leading indicator…
I was expecting to see a significant increase in the number of investment condos on the market in Victoria City, starting in April, but that doesn’t seem to have happened.
Have most investors decided to wait until the ban came into effect this month?
May will be an interesting month to watch to see if there is a noticeable impact on listings and rentals in Victoria.
depending on what product you are looking at. lol BOC isn’t juicing anything.
Marko, if inventory keeps building when do you think price drops would start occurring?
Median SFH and condo prices holding in there incredibly well thus far even as inventory pushes higher.
a few years of a buyers market may not be a bad thing. I was not trying to suggest that it was a great sellers market but rather that it is not in total crisis. If I had to guess (and it would be a guess) I expect prices to drop somewhat over the next year or two.
Wait until you see it on the 10 year chart.
If the market is heating up and getting ready for lift off, there’s really no need for a rate drop to support it. Maybe a rate increase is needed if your narrative is in play.
Thurston, you’re dreaming. As time goes on the market will continue to stagnate. Higher for longer interest rates, inventory piling up, new STR rules. Next 6-12 months will be telling.
Bobby , direction is no longer down and at some point this year the boc will juice the market imo
I’m not sure if sales at 20 year lows (adjusted for population) indicates a strong market, especially as were heading into a possible stagflation situation.
Yep seems to be heading up and not down anymore . I think our real estate market will start up where it left off , no long lull like past downturns
Sales are still fairly strong in spite of the mortgage rates. It seems like a fairly healthy market to me.
Saanich not on pace to meet housing targets but improvements made, mayor says
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/saanich-not-on-pace-to-meet-housing-targets-but-improvements-made-mayor-says-8678655
April numbers hopefully today.
If Leo would be the middle man here…So that nothing Is shared online…Or on this blog.
Leo can email me, and I’ll pass the contact Info directly to Leo. If Leo chooses, he can then pass the contact Info along to you.
Since Leo Is the administrator of this blog, he would know my email In order for me to be a member of this blog.
Max. is he taking new patients?
Our family practitioner bought his practice from our former practitioner. He Is young at 47 years old, He Is very rooted here. He runs his practice out of his beautiful ocean front house. The lower level of this house would put any walk In clinic to shame. Latest and greatest everything…Very sophisticated. We really hope he sticks around.
When the torch was passed on to our new, current doctor… He required an Interview. The only rule he had, was he will not prescribe opiates. He Is an outstanding doctor! His staff Is Incredible.
Just a messaging thing for campaign lines. So, they can claim the opposition is both against the budget spending goodies (so called fairness spending) and then again when the opposition votes against the capital gains increases they will cast them as pro rich (anti fairness). That all rolls up with the general lines of anyone who doesn’t agree with every policy is also racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and a climate change denier. You know, what described as positive and non-divisive politics. Also, some minority government hedging to pressure support on votes so the government can cast blame in an election if defeated on certain policies.
The market sales are keeping up really well in spite of the higher rates.
One article suggested it hasn’t been written yet. I think it’s the amount of complaints they are getting from business sector, M.D.s are particularly upset and we don’t have to give them any more excuses to leave Canada. They can get hired in the U.S. faster than you can blink.
Wonder why it is separate?
Liberals are not including the capital gains tax in the budget bill. It will be tabled in a separate bill.
A June rate cut has been a fantasy for a while. Mostly a lobby for it hoping it will happen.
A BoC rate cut in June is still looking awfully iffy to me.
Hot U.S. inflation signal throws Bank of Canada a curveball
https://financialpost.com/news/economy/hot-us-inflation-bank-of-canada-curveball
They are too nice to be lawyers.
I thought they were lawyers.
Do sewer rats have realtors licenses?
I suspect it will be about sewer rats
As we all wait for this weeks blurb.
I know this wasn’t specifically your question, but also worth mentioning, the tax is .5% of the assessed value, BC residents each get a $2,000 tax credit towards it. Effectively no tax on a couple’s interest until B.C. assessment is over $800k.
As Yoda put it, “Do or do not, there is no try”. If you want to sell accept a price that someone is willing to pay.
Giving an exemption for an “attempt” to sell would just provide a loophole for those wanting to leave properties empty, by listing at a price above market.
A principle residence (for spec tax purposes) is defined as the place a person lived longer than any other in the previous year. If I lived in my home Jan-July last year I’m good until Dec 31 of this year.
Marco, there are a number of exemptions related to principle residence, some of which include moving for work. And is the declaration as of Dec 31 of the previous year? That would give a 12 month reprieve if you moved out in January.
I’d be more concerned with insurance issues if it’s sitting empty.
This lady with the rat In her toilet was only around 30 years old, and her husband was on his way.
I didn’t just abandon this lady with the muskrat, now trapped and freaking out In her bathroom. I was told help was on the way.
Marko, after a quick read does not seem to be an exception, May have missed it but I dont see an exemption for major repairs either.
I’ve noticed a number of vacant properties sitting on the market for months…..is there no spec tax exemption for attempt to sell? https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/speculation-vacancy-tax/exemptions-speculation-and-vacancy-tax/individuals
I am all for the catch and release fishing. You are still legally allowed to bring home a couple If they are keepers.
http://www.fishingportrenfrew.ca/nobananas.html
I think the term is bait and switch. Catch and release is for fishing.
I know I’m right.
You’re right Max, that would be a complete waste of time. It would be like trying to fit an F-250 door on a Dodge Ram.
It might sound possible at first but when you try to do it – it just won’t work.
It isn’t just how well maintained the home is. It’s that the home is aging every year and the items are becoming dated and functionally inadequate.
That’s why you will see some beautiful character homes get crushed. Peoples tastes change. Maybe it’s time to get rid of the shag carpets Max.
God I am old. I remember when catch and release referred to fish. My neighbour who runs a B and B was just saying that she is telling her guests to go to Oak Bay for shopping and dinner.
Thank you Ebby Escobar.
Before I wasted anyone’s time…Since my house Is well maintained. I would look at the replacement cost of the building/buildings on my property using my house Insurance policy…Then I would add the land value using my BC Land Assessment, followed by some MLS comparables In the area.
Photoshopping is a big one. I am surprised that has not been addressed by the real estate association.
I can’t photoshop unless I inform the reader if any photos been altered. That’s been in effect for at least 15 years now.
I’m not going to be influenced by furniture. I’m looking for updates in the photos. cabinets, baseboard heaters, plumbing, etc. I also have 20 back years of photos to look at to see upgrades over the years to the interior and exterior with google maps. The year of construction and the updates allow me to estimate an effective age for the comparable sale which I can compare to the effective age of the subject property based on its observed condition. All of which go into my calculation of depreciation from all sources. That’s what the home inspection is for – to assess the rate of depreciation in your home.
I am not comparing kitchen to kitchen. I am comparing the effective ages based on their observed conditions. That you have to learn from years of experience. Because not all updates increase or decrease the effective age.
Photoshopped pictures are not going to fool me.
They seem to like older houses that have a water closet down In the cellar…But make no mistake, they have no problem doing a wall to wall jump up a 3″ stack to enter through the upper level toilets. The look on this lady’s face was sheer terror. I shut the bathroom door and told her to call someone. I was just there dropping off a window (wrong place at the wrong time). I could not stop laughing the entire way home…She was hysterical.
I think, with technology, it has become increasingly common to misrepresent properties for sale. Most MLS listings have photoshopped images that don’t have any resemblance to what you actually see in person. Recently, they have taken it a step further and place some “virtual” furniture and non-existent floorings to the pictures to make it look attractive. If the appraisers are relying on these pictures, they are likely to overestimate the values of the property.
I believe the new term Is “catch and release”.
The Hopesmore neighborhood seems to be a case study of sales trends over the past 4 months, there were 3 sales in that neighborhood of similar homes between Feb and now. 3986 Bel Nor place (1.39), 1532 Palahi Pl (1.34) and 1566 Macola Pl (1.33).
Good to see listing and sales up . Seeing sold signs in oak bay Fairfield, so maybe up from here . We just need prices to start to march upwards to put a fire under this market. Can’t keep real estate down for long in Canada
We did what any reasonable person does, we went through the comparables with our reputable/seasoned realtor and priced based on their recommendation. I don't think you really believe that someone who is arrogant enough to list way over market value is going to fess up to it here, right?
I’m good if it’s post Boer War and has had the coal heating upgraded to nat gas
I am going to guess 3,400.
It would be cost prohibitive, but getting two or three appraisals might be more helpful. In hot markets, an appraisal would probably come in under the sale price, in cooler markets, an appraisal might be overly optimistic.
The property has to be what the buyers are looking for. A hundred year old heritage house would not have the interior layout that’s in style and have all those hidden gremlins waiting to surface. Essentially, a nightmarish money pit. I wouldn’t touch anything pre WW2.
Will it break 3500?
I read that VicReAnalyst and I didn’t find it compelling at all. It sounded more like fabrication to me. Because that type of scenario doesn’t happen.
You misunderstand the purpose of an appraisal when it comes to a sale. The appraiser is not a magician or a mind reader they are not trying to guess what the offer between two parties. There job is to determine if the current offer to purchase is reliable and reasonable for the lender to place a mortgage.
So they know the offer and in most cases are sent the Contract of Purchase and Sale to review to determine if there are any terms or conditions in the sale that would make it more or less valuable. Which could have been the reason why there was a discrepancy. But we don’t know. Because the study was flawed right from the start as it assumed the sale price was correct.
If you start out with assuming the sale price is correct then the appraisal will always be wrong. The truth is you don’t know which one or if either are correct. It’s a flawed study.
I can do the same with real estate agents if I compared the median asking price to the median sale price. But that too would be a flawed study.
Month to date market activity
Sales: 637 (up 7% over last year, identical sales rate by business days)
New lists: 1553 (up 61%)
Inventory: 3031 (up 48%)
2 more business days to go
Waiting for the sales numbers this morning but sales were solid last week, I didn’t notice any specific slowdown personally.
It’s funny, next spring is the one that should be the record setter for new lists and inventory from the mortgage renewal pressure and not this one. Only 10% for renewals this year and next year it’s the peak of the renewal wave at 33%. By then, the BoC rate should be at 50 or 75 points lower than now. I don’t think most buyers consider things like that, and are more focused on their immediate costs (I’m not one of those), but surveys are starting to indicate that a large portion of buyers are starting to defer plans to next year hoping for better rates to take the edge off buyer costs. It should be an interesting convergence of higher demand combined with high inventory next spring.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/majority-of-aspiring-homeowners-awaiting-rate-cuts-before-buying-bmo-survey-1.6865922
Whatever, that sounded overly defensive. I think there were some stats Leo posted comparing appraisals based on whether or not the sale price was disclosed and the data was pretty compelling.
That’s an interesting statement from Marko about the main floor bedrooms of a house. As the number of rooms is also directly related to the square footage. A home with three bedrooms on the main floor will typically be larger in floor area to that of a home with two-bedrooms. The appraiser may elect to adjust for the difference either in the square footage, or the number of bedrooms, or a combination of both. As long as the method she chooses is consistently applied over the small judgement sample then any of the methods is reasonable. Another way is to look at this is the cost to cure. You might have a three-bedroom house and a two-bedroom house with a den. What would it cost to convert that den into a bedroom? Generally the difference between a den and a bedroom is just a closet. Or what is more important to the buyer for that type of house in that location?. A three-bedroom would appeal to a family while a two or even a large one-bedroom would appeal to a retiree. Depending on the neighborhood you might get different answers. An adjustment for number of bedrooms then becomes highly subjective.
So while Marko may have not have seen an adjustment for a bedroom, that does not mean the appraiser has not considered this in her analysis. You have to read the entire report to understand the analysis of how she is determining those adjustments. Not just look at the number and say I disagree. All that means is that you have two people that disagree. It doesn’t tell you which one or if either one is correct. That’s why it is important to not just look at subjective individual adjustments but objective cross checks that are not subject to a person’s opinion. Such as a time trended analysis of when the property was previously purchased. There is no subjectivity to that analysis as the number comes in the same no matter who does the number crunching. The same with a Sales to Assessment Ratio as it can provide a cross check to the final estimate of value to determine if the value is fair and equitable relative to recent sales in the neighborhood. Or reviewing the last sale of a similar property in the complex or along the subject’s street and then adjusting that comparable for when it sold.
Generally, an appraiser has a lot more tools in their tool box when estimating market value while a real estate agent may just have a feeling for the value. If you have five or six independent methods of estimating value and all of them are close to one another then that type of evidence trumps someone’s feeling. The appraiser is estimating market value, she is not trying to guess the sale price as there are many reasons including the terms and conditions of the offer that may have an effect on that sale price. That’s why a good appraisal starts with a review of the Contract of Purchase and Sale to find out what is included in that purchase.
The other statement being that the appraiser has not seen the interior of the comparable sales. With today’s technology that may not be as important as you may think. Aerial views, interior photos and today’s data systems or simply costing out the comparable sales in a similar manner as the subject will show if the comparable sale is reliable for appraisal purposes as the resulting residual land values will all be similar. If they are not, then there will likely be something in that comparable sale which may cause it to be excluded from the analysis. That happens a lot in condominiums with different degrees of views or which floor the comparable sales are situated.
As for changing real estate agents? I’ve never seen a significant difference in what a property sells for by the agent used. Most Properties sell at fair market value under normal marketing conditions. The role of the agent is to facilitate a sale between buyer and seller. As long as the agent is working in the best interests of his client or not misrepresenting a property in say its square footage then the system works well.
Won’t show up in the stats this week given the lag. That’s why I am curious to see what Marko’s experience has been.
How were you priced compared to market?
I’ve heard that too (anecdotally). It would be interesting to hear from Leo if he is seeing that. So far I don’t see lower prices though. Toronto market has definitely slowed, as detailed in many stats shown here https://youtu.be/9OQ_6EVRVqg?si=YUH3OStz_JoUJ6Jj
I am more referring to just deciding not to offer where last couple weeks an offer would have likely been made.
We just did a 50k price drop on our Cowichan Valley property at our realtors suggestion after 21 days or so on market, no offers. Of course that isn’t to say it’s just due to a slowdown in buyer interest, there are so many factors that could come in to play, ours is a niche property for sure.
@VicREanalyst Good question. I am indeed in the hunt for a house here, and I’ve been to a lot of open houses in the last several months…very patient though as inventory is swelling, and I am keen to see what happens as renewals come up…one realtor bragged to me this weekend how he had 20 offers on a house, but when I checked the listing it still came in under list. I’m waiting.
I skipped on a couple places in the last 10 days that I typically would have checked out because I figured they weren’t going anywhere and I want to see what May brings for listings.
Heard that buyer interest drastically slowed down this past week versus the prior weeks, Marko are you seeing this on your end?
These old heritage homes in Rockland are really beautiful, but too expensive to maintain, and the neighborhood is full of legal and illegal rentals. This may explain why large portion of upper income families landed in South Oak Bay and Estevan Oak Bay, where luxury homes are newer and less renters around.
That part was facetious
I tend to agree with Marko that ultimately the problem is pricing. On reflection I dont see why a seller’s appraisal would influence me much as a potential purchaser. For all I know he got three different appraisals and gave me the super high one.
Personally I dont see the point of changing agents unless your agent seems incapable of making efficient appointments for showings.
I’ve had a few appraisals on my personal properties recently they have been nothing short of horrible. One was 50k too high, one was 150k too low and one is 300k too high. I am familiar with most of the comparables and sometimes it is incredibly obvious the appraiser never viewed the comparable or is just incompetent in general.
I saw an appraisal the other day where the subject home had three bedrooms upstairs and the appraisers three comparables had two bedrooms upstairs (if you know anything about real estate you would know the market appeal for three beds up is much higher).
Appraisals are good for preventing certain types of fraud (to make sure buyer isn’t buying a $1 million house for $2 million), but otherwise using it for the purposes off putting together a deal, I would pass.
Hope you aren’t being serious? What is a “better realtor” going to do when the seller is overpriced? 99% of the time, assuming minimum levels of skill is met like professional photos, floorplans, correct data input, etc., the problem is the price, not the realtor.
The property in question is on its third different top 10% producer realtor.
This is why in this market it is quite the tricky business decision as to whether take on an overpriced seller, or not. Some sellers will give you the price reductions until it sells while other sellers will switch agents with price reduction so you want to be the last realtor standing, no the first. Right now I have a couple of sellers wanting to overprice and I am not sure what to do. They want to give me the listing if I agree to a different realtor’s market evaluation, which I don’t agree with and feel is way too high.
I was once fired as the 4th realtor on a property in North Saanich and the 5th one finally sold it once the market went crazy in 2016.
While I tell myself this, I do happen to know someone who had it happen. Took them quite a while to figure it out. The people, not the rat.
An appraisal doesn’t really tell a person what you can sell a place for… The appraisal might give a false expectation one way or another. The no viewings and no interest part tells them they are off on price. Probably just needs to find a better realtor.
You can’t live in a start Patrick.
No doubt when there’s slow sales and lots of inventory hitting the market new starts slow down. Good thing research shows social housing has also increased a lot in Auckland
https://x.com/StuartBDonovan/status/1776861889529548830
It’s almost like it’s a different country and there’s more factors at work.
? Basically HFL’s entire list of pro-housing councilors got elected in Victoria. Yes, generally happy with how that is turning out. The current crop is way better than the last one.
You seem confused about upzoning though. It’s not that it’s the only way to get housing production. You can also pull a Langford and just say yes to everything. That works, but
It does legitimately happen, but it’s not particularly common. Especially considering the massive rat population in Victoria, OB, and I am assuming all the other munis as well.
If your personal finances are stretched too far for a house purchase, look no further for revenue than our city streets. Times Colonist tells the story of a husband and wife who were peacefully eating dinner at home last Tuesday when a chap walks in and helps himself to the husband’s wallet. So far, so Victoria but
the same chap had carjacked a vehicle on Monday….
and had carjacked a vehicle on Sunday…..
How he spent a profitable Wednesday is left to our imagination, but certainly we should all gravitate towards this seemingly penalty-free revenue stream.
They have to climb up a sewer pipe and decide it is a good idea to enter a water filled tunnel with no reasonable expectation of survival. Not really a Sunday drive.
The independent appraisal is a good idea which I will pass onto David.
To answer your question Barrister I have to make some assumptions. I’m assuming what you want to know is how is the upper income market for single family housing is doing in the neighborhood around St. Charles. So indulge me as I have to change the wording of your question into one that I can answer.
The median price for a detached house within a two-kilometer radius of St. Charles is $1,334,950 with an average exposure of 35 days-on-market. Middle income houses lay within the 25 to 75 percentile of all sales in this area which is from $1,100,000 to $1,750,000.
Upper income would be homes over $1,750,000 to $2,250,000. Luxury would be the top ten percentile of sales which would be in excess of $2,250,000 all the way up to $3,375,000 excluding water front.
Your buddy’s house is listed in the luxury range for homes within a 2 kilometer radius. There are 23 homes competing in price with your Buddy’s property but only about three (3) sell a month in this price range. That’s close to 8 months of inventory which puts your friend’s home in a market that favors buyers. The average days-on-market is 71 which is double that of a middle income home. That’s why he hasn’t had a great number of people go through his home. There aren’t many buyers in that luxury price range.
The BC Assessed values are not working in your buddy’s favor. Prospective purchasers rely heavily on these numbers to be reasonable when making an offer. The majority of homes within this area are selling at around 103% of their current assessment. I suspect your buddy’s home has been renovated and the BC Assessments are not reflecting this updating. If I was his real estate agent I would get an appraisal done from an independent and unbiased source to show prospective purchasers that the BC Assessment is not fair and equitable relative to recent sales in the neighborhood.
Or what the appraisal might also show is that the asking price is too generous.
I don’t track above 2 mil too much other than what’s IVO of some the places or neighbourhoods I am interested in. Anecdotally, it seemed fine around 4 weeks ago, I had a few acquaintances that listed and sold their places in the 2-3 mil range all in one week. They all had conditional offers with long closes. It seems the over 2 mil market really has its own market drivers separate from the rest of the market. But again, I don’t pay too much attention to it, to really say anything.
Umm really, good research, did not realize assessment was so low. But out of curiosity how is the 2 to 4 million market doing?
Sewer rats In that area will swim past your toilet trap and enter the house…Its like a highway for them.
I have seen this with my own eyes.
https://www.theexterminators.ca/blog/how-to-deal-with-rats-in-sewers-drains-and-toilets/
Is It an Infill unit or the entire house?
Nevermind, Umm…really answered that for me.
Well, purchased in 2018 for 1.37 and looking for 2.7 at 800k over assessed, why would he think anyone would look at it? Not to mention the heritage designation headache.
Just talked to a neighbour who has an old heritage home for sale on St. Charles. He told me that no one has even looked at the home in the last two months in spite of a pretty big price drop. (Obviously the price is the problem but his asking seemed reasonable to me. At the least you would think people would look at it in the spring market.
I think the correct term would be “Life lease housing”. Like a time share for people who’s time Is running out very rapidly.
The story in Auckland is collapsing construction of new STARTS, not completions. Described in the NZ article as “new consents [starts] continuing to tumble”
I shouldn’t need to remind you that that the important metric for the current situation is housing starts, not completions. So that’s a little silly to see you quote completions to try to compare with starts. Because completions represent old news – housing starts from up to 1-2 years ago.
The funny part is that even Auckland completion data you did quote 18,642 units (which is 11.2 per 1,000 pop. for Auckland) is still less per capita than the Vancouver or Victoria housing starts in 2023, which were both 12.5 per 1,000 population. So whether you use apples to apples (which i did comparing starts to starts), or apples to cherries (which you did comparing starts to completions), Vancouver and Victoria still have higher new housing numbers than Auckland
Another question to discuss would be how can the approval process in Victoria and Vancouver be so terrible, yet record numbers of approvals were granted in 2023 for both Vancouver and Victoria, among the highest in Canada, and even higher (per capita) than the “miracle” upzoned city of Auckland?
I haven’t seen you give the city much credit for anything on approvals in a long time. Is that on purpose, or do you want to perhaps throw them a bone for their record approvals of housing starts in 2023?
That seems pretty cheap. They want 500k plus GST plus strata fees for a new 1 bedroom condo In Langford. They don’t feed you a four course dinner daily, clean your suite weekly, or do your laundry…But they will throw In a couple e-bikes.
So what If you have to cough up the 255k…Seems like a pretty safe place to park your money.
Weird way to describe the most completions ever in a 12 month period.
“ While the number of new homes being completed in Auckland will inevitably start to slow at some stage as fewer new projects get underway, for the moment the supply looks strong, with 18,642 new dwellings receiving their CCCs in the year to February. That’s a record for any 12 month period, and the monthly average is also sitting at an all time high of 1554 a month”
Thank you for the explanation. Suspect there will be more demand with each passing year.
There are different types of care-a-minimums both private and non profit.
The most common type is a purpose built adult complex for 55 and over where the residence are in need of assistance in their daily lives and access to medical.
The complex has strata titled suites that may be purchased along with a monthly service fee. Here is an example of one.
“A Large 1 Primary bed, w 2nd bed/study, Living & Dining, Full kitchen, in-suite storage rm, shoe & linen closet, walk-in shower w seat+handle. New windows w custom waffle blinds, balcony to enjoy w glass panels, free Laundry just down the hall. This 55+ Strata: shared lounge/dining rm, guest suite, 24 hour staffing/security, activity rm, & First Alert Service. Monthly strata & service fees provide for a daily, professionally cooked 4 course dinner w service, weekly housekeeping, 24 hour staffing. ”
Asking $255,000 with the monthly strata and service fee of $1,650 per month.
The re-sale value of the unit tends to follow inflation in the market place. The family would be able to sell the condo after their parent is no longer in need of it.
For example the past sale’s history for the above condo was:
$110,000 in July 2003
$160,000 in May 2007
$227,000 in Feb 2019
and now asking $255,000 in April 2024
I think this is a growing market as it provides an option for families that are worried about their parents living alone in their house.
Can someone maybe elaborate exactly what care a minimums actually are and how they operate? Much appreciated.
Typically there are not many leasehold condominiums, and care-a-minimums that sell in Victoria. But for the last few months I have been seeing an increase in activity in these market segments
To me it is signaling an aging population that is down sizing to lower their cost of housing.
I think if I were to build a condominium complex today it would be a care-a-minimum that offers support community and services for retirees. Where retirees or their family buys a strata unit, and for a monthly fee light housekeeping, laundry service, staff, and dining services.
I would entertain the idea of life estates for independent living similar to St. Clair Villa on Haultain.
Thanks. It would be good to know if current starts are mostly in ex. Royal Bay/Langford.
I know in Oak Bay this year there have been six starts. All of the them secondary suites in existing structures. No new redevelopment.
I don’t think we will see the effects of the current market conditions on missing middle redevelopment until after the June 30 in force date.
Remind me why Saanich would want to be part of Victoria?
More signs of the Auckland NZ upzoning “miracle” flopping.
Auckland NZ housing starts collapsed by 27% in 2023
Construction starts for 2023 in Auckland are 25% (per capita) below Victoria or Vancouver.
2023 stats:
— Auckland NZ housing starts, 9.4 per 1,000 people (15,448 total, down 27% in 2023)
— Greater Victoria, 12.5 starts per 1,000 people (4,992, an all-time record number)
— Greater Vancouver, 12.5 starts per 1,000 people (33,244, an all time record, +28% from 2022)
https://www.interest.co.nz/property/126197/theres-looming-crunch-coming-residential-construction-industry-new-dwelling
Auckland housing starts down 27%.
As much fun as a line by line comments section of a blog review of city spending would be, it seems pretty apparent the mayor seems to believe they are in the “bailiwick of senior governments”.
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/mayor-alto-looks-ahead-to-victorias-challenge-of-tackling-large-projects-with-limited-resources-8033218#google_vignette
Might be dumb, but I can respect the honesty of not hiding what they actually believe (even if it’s nuts), unlike the rest of the council and mayor that run a bait and switch on what they campaign on, or just hide what they believe because they know it’s unelectable and the then implement their ideological madness once they are in office in the hopes the general population will not notice until it is too late.
Yes we got the letter last week (or the week before).
Man arrested for carjackings days earlier walks right into someone’s house, while they’re at home, near Royal Jubilee.
What TF is happening to Victoria?
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/victoria-man-recounts-chasing-thief-who-stole-his-wallet-in-his-sock-feet-8664429
Dumb thing to say by councillor Kim, but what is Victoria involved in that has nothing to do with municipal services and what percent of the budget does it make up combined
It goes to march, just not labeled
The chart goes to November 2023. Are there more recent months? I don’t know what start means but if it is break ground it would be good to see spring 2024 stats.
In terms of municipal regulatory costs and time, it would be great to improve this but I’m not sure you get to a profitable redevelopment in Victoria at current costs and interest rates. I’d be interested in the missing middle math.
Our family got a letter to join the citizen’s assembly on Victoria-Saanich amalgamation. Anyone else here among the chosen?
They need more taxes to expand their unending bureaucracy. All in the name of building affordable housing of course. And their fat pensions.
From: https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-councillor-says-tax-rates-too-low-as-city-approves-7-93-increase-1201219/?am
Okay, these nut cases need to get the boot from office. Hopefully people don’t get fooled by the missing middle scam candidates again. It’s very simple to keep a municipal budget and taxes on track: don’t get involved in things that has nothing to do with municipal services.
Actually there is a vacant land tax – we’ve been trying to develop / subdivide our property for so long I’d forgotten. The municipal hurdles are painful.
I do like what the province is trying to do in getting more housing developed.
Bobbyk,
I’m not smart or lucky. I’m fortunate. Some on this blog and elsewhere have been calling for the second leg down so long their shoes have worn out. Some have sold their homes 10-15 years ago as a play to time the market. Is it coming? Don’t know, but if it does we may take the opportunity to buy / build a nicer home.
I cant and don’t try to predict the market.
Specific to the tax that was being discussed, we have a few options – but we’re not running for the hills over it. The most tax efficient option at the moment is to do nothing. I believe the government(s) cannot tax their way out of this housing crisis.
Agree with you there. Munis will not even have submitted their 1 year report yet so doesn’t make sense they will step in with anything drastic.
Totally agree.
How are presales doing in Victoria. Some reports out of Vancouver are suggesting that presale investors have almost dried up,
I doubt that the government will do anything until after the election regarding Oak Bay Housing. I suspect that some of the recent polls have the NDP concerned. After the election it might be a different matter assuming they get a real mandate. If BC United continues to implode it may be a somewhat different election than I assumed it would be three months ago.
The smart move might be to rezone around the University and fund major student housing highrises. It would provide real needed housing in an area that is clearly a provincial responsibility without have to directly attack Oak Bay. A strong message of “We are here to help” as opposed to “we will step on your face”.
Most likely: province rezoning land directly as they have done several times in the past when they want things built and the municipality isn’t playing ball.
I get you want to punish gov’t staff somehow, but staff generally reflect the will of council. Just compare the OCP survey that Victoria sent out (“Shoudl we do 4-6 storey buildings everywhere or just lots of places?) vs View Royal (“List the top 10 things you hate about upzoning:”).
Extremely unlikely this is one of the outcomes IMO
Where they are more likely to intervene is for higher density builds. Not worth it for fourplexes.
Big chunk of the cost is directly caused by that muni’s policies. Direct costs, increased risks, or cost of delays.
I think this is very true to an extent, and that those who make the rules & those who cheer them never get it until they see the law of unintended consequences in action. This province has become pretty unfriendly to being a landlord, and money is very mobile
How can any municipality in Victoria meet a housing target when it costs more to build a new unit than it can be sold for? It is not like they are in the business of building houses.
The people who were buying units to rent out have stepped out of the picture. Who wants to be a landlord in an anti-landlord environment with uncertain carrying costs, increasing taxation and greater regulation? I really doubt owner occupiers are going to buy enough presales to get projects moving.
I think hardly anyone is going to build unless the project is already in progress or it is with government funding until interest rates come down and/or market prices rise.
Predictions are hard and even harder for future events.
Remember if you are being chased by a mob of taxidermists do not play dead.
Who really cares thought and what are the tangible impacts of not meeting targets? Municipal staff will never get fired for such lack of progress. Municipality gets some sort of penalty from the province applied so municipal taxes go up more than other municipalities and eventually the residents vote out counsellors who make like 20k/year? Only to be replaced with other inept counsellors who make 20k/year.
This isn’t tangible like no progress is made and the entire planning department gets laid off. Only thing at stake is poorly paid political positions.
and highly doubt province is showing up in Oak Bay anytime soon and issuing building permits for fourplexes in South Oak Bay. They going to override the P.Engineer that is going to put together a report that the crumbling infrastructure can’t handle such?
Westerly, so smart decisions made by many when the market was clearly overvalued and interest rates were starting to head up is called luck.
Please tell me then what the “smart people” like you are predicting given it appears that housing market in Victoria and many places in Canada may be heading for a second leg down given continued slows sales , rising inventory and interest rates?
That may be lucky people. I’m not talking hindsight
Westerly, I believe smart people already sold their properties back in the highs of the market in 2021 and early 2022.
Smart people are not dumping their properties as a result of this tax, quite the opposite.
We won’t be dumping our property as a result of this tax, quite the opposite. We will defer a sale until it makes sense. We will, in the meantime, find ways to minimize the expense, most likely through triggering the capital gain over several years. Each year we can trigger $500k and pay tax on 50%. Still have to work out the pros / cons.
Peter’s on cue: search T1091 and ss 45(3) cra.
Might be a small window to reduce tax between now and June (25?) but after that there’s still room to minimize the effect. Smart people will not be paying tax on 67%. Smarter still, if possible, turn the property into an income producer (rent or otherwise) and see what happens down the road.
There’s a person living in those cars. I wonder how much rent they pay. That motor home looks luxurious.
Large parts of Victoria are just really crappy.
“Sidewalks and curbs just get in the way of parking on the front lawn. Part of Saanich’s rural charm.“
Just out for a walk in my old Saanich neighbourhood. Nostalgic.
You can make a special tax election to defer having to pay the tax until the year you sell. Looks like you can also declare up to 4 years of PR status before you even move in, which is quite generous:
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individuals/topics/about-your-tax-return/tax-return/completing-a-tax-return/personal-income/line-12700-capital-gains/principal-residence-other-real-estate/changes-use/changing-your-rental-business-property-a-principal-residence.html
People are dumping properties over this capital gains hike proposal. My Mother Inlaw Is listing next week.
I have a client that owns a manufactured home on Native Land where the client lives. The land owner wants to re-develop the manufactured home park for multi-family and the home owners have to vacate the sites. As this was (is) the principle residence the client can not claim a capital loss. The client also owned a rental property that now has to be sold to buy a modest home for the client to live in. And that means she will have a capital gain on the sale of the rental.
If instead my client move into the rental property then that would be a change of use and there will also be capital gains. But when do you have to pay the tax? In the same year? or when you sell the property in the future?
Ironically, if my client had rented the manufactured home then they might have have been able to declare a capital loss.
I was not quite correct, here is something more accurate. But the main point is that you can have only one principal residence at a time which means you cannot be exempt from capital gains on two properties over the same time period.
https://www.taxtips.ca/filing/principal-residence-exemption.htm
Just a few things:
Patriotz, you were thinking this doesn’t work because there’s a deemed disposition. That’s not going to be an issue, though, if we’re talking about cottages (which was the situation ummreally was referencing in the quote he cited), as there is no deemed disposition to begin with (the deemed disposition rules only kick in on a change of use of a personal use to a ‘business’ use or vice versa).
Ummreally, if we are indeed talking cottage, and say you really wanted to declare your cottage a principal residence, you wouldn’t have to move into it. There is plenty of CRA guidance to the effect that even the occasional cottage use is enough to declare it your principal residence if you choose.
Yes, the rules are different if the secondary residence is not a personal-use but an investment property. Then you would have to move into it and then yes there would be a deemed disposition.
Even with the cottage situation, though, there’s a more fundamental reason why this scheme doesn’t work, or at least doesn’t work under the wording of the Tax Act, and that’s because fundamentally you can’t have two principal residences at the same time. It’s not a moment-in-time test. Essentially, by declaring one property your principal residence for some number of years, you’re losing those years on the PR status of the other property. The rules are of course more complicated really, but basically you can’t double up on PR status. So it just doesn’t work.
When I say it doesn’t work, I mean it doesn’t work properly, legitimately, under the law. Now the reality is that until a few years ago when the rules were tightened up, plenty of people were doing things like this and getting away with it, because for one thing, you didn’t even have to REPORT a sale of a property that was a principal residence, and so it would have been dead-easy, and maybe even done inadvertently, for people to be doing this kind of stuff, never reporting anything, and completely ignoring (deliberately or by oversight) the fact that you can’t really claim PR status at the same time for 2 properties. However, the reporting rules have now been tightened up significantly and CRA is quite focused now on these types of things.
I am probably imaging it but the 2mil to 4mil market seems extremely slow. Sales compared to listings seems a bit on the negative side. Are out of town sales still holding up?
I understand what you are saying, but I really have nothing to hide here. I am just as transparent with this online community as I am with my customers. But your right…If my Wife knew I was saying this shit…She wouldn’t like It. I repent.
The point I was trying to make Is I am a tax collector. Now when It comes down to brass tacks that costs me money. These costs must be passed along to the customer…Otherwise I would be tits up tomorrow.
I have been using the same accountant since I was 20. He will actually give me shit If I stray off coarse…And I pay this guy.
He’s like my life long tutor…This Is how you play the game.
I wouldn’t divulge some of my business practices on line. Best to keep them to oneself.
Or maybe a Great Leap Forward?
Another thing I will mention before I crash for the evening. My accountant advised me to not supply material, since It becomes a tax on tax for the customer. I have no problem with supplying the material but they will pay GST x 2.
Most trades charge for drive time
You guys should really start looking at your household bills more closely. You will notice fuel surcharges are everywhere.
I am a road star and my ICBC jumped to $982 per year!
Absolutely…Just like every other healthy operating business In town.
I just Invoice them…I don’t give them my gas receipt.
Max, so your saying you bill clients separately for fuel ?
Sinclair Hill is the worst damned road ever and has been that way for years. It’s as bad as the shelboure shit show and there isn’t even an excuse that there is road work going on.
No Its not. I Invoice my clients or customers weekly. I used to Invoice monthly…In my line of work you can very easily run people out of money In very short order. You are correct that I pay for It using my credit card…In fact my entire business existence Is run through my credit card. It makes for very easy book keeping. I can even write off my accountant…And he tells me that every time that I see him.
Anything that It costs me to do what I do Is an expense… within reason. Vehicle expenditures are a given. Fuel, tires, Insurance, maintenance…Of coarse that would be a 100% write off.
What I am trying to say Is…It all gets past on to the customer. Even the carbon tax.
Max even if you write off gas it’s still your own money you’re spending.
I am currently overseeing a high end renovation east of the University In Cadboro bay down towards Peppers. It Is noticeably hilarious when you cross the boundary from Victoria Into Saanich. The road conditions on the Victoria side are super smooth, then you cross this clearly obvious line where the potholes are downright dangerous…And I’m In a 1/2 ton 4×4 pickup truck with really good suspension. If I lived on that road I would sell and move to the Victoria side.
University students will place hold the rental even If they are not there… And they pack Glocks.
Max’s accountant carries a Glock, to match the firepower of CRA agents.
Whatever, UVic uses dorms for their summer ELC programs. They are never really empty.
My accountant once told me you should always expect an audit. It doesn’t matter If your self employed or not…The CRA algorithm will just pick you at random. They don’t want stories, they want facts, they want numbers. They will comb through your bank statements. If everything adds up…your a free man.
Always expect the unexpected!
They can jack the price of fuel to $5 per litre, They can jack ICBC premiums to the moon, They can jack the price of maintenance and tire replacement as high as they want. I am a sole proprietor…100% write off.
I don’t really know what you mean. At $2.12 per litre at the pumps…The roads should not be losing any money.
Now I’m curious…Please elaborate.
Just wait until you hear how much money our roads are losing.
I don’t know If any of you guys listen to 100.3 the q. There Is a huge recruitment advertising campaign going on right now for positions within the RCMP. It seems that no one wants anything to do with that occupation anymore.
If you ask the nurse politely, she Is required to teach you how to use your IV for your Opioid addiction.
Transit Is a huge issue when It comes to housing targets. Provincial funding, coin box collections, digital apps, and advertising does not even come close to paying the bills. BC Transit Is a complete failure, they can barely afford to keep the lights on.
Ya, with panic moves Eby is making, who knows what their internal polls are telling them. They went from two weeks ago suggesting a ban on public drug use would imperil the vulnerable to placate the extreme right wing, to hey, lets ban public use today..lol. So, any policy that is meant to see results after the next election, let alone 5 years from now, isn’t actually a policy.
I think lots of municipalities are going to miss their housing targets, not just Oak Bay and West Vancouver 🙂
It will be interesting to see the consequences, if any.
When I was In my early 20’s I used to build spec houses using a private lender paying 15% Interest. I would live In them for a year, have all my mail delivered there. I would even collect the GST rebate on the build which Is an audit In Itself. After a year, I would sell the house and I would not have to pay a dime on my gains…And I got to live there for a year. This was completely legal to do. This would have been 1994. I built three spec houses over the coarse of four years. I used my tax free gains as a down payment towards my forever house without needing CMHC Insurance. I am still In this forever house.
The game has seriously changed since then. The CRA has their eyes all over real estate.
Back to using the old Soviet five year plan models.
The CRA is paying a lot more attention to this in recent years than they used to.
Strange, I know a few people it has worked very well for.
It’s not complicated. Homes don’t magically appear out of nowhere. For homes to exist we need completetions. For completions to exist we need starts 12-24 months ahead of time. For starts to exist we need approvals 6-18 months before the starts. For starts to exist beyond the historical norm we need policy reforms 6-24 months before the approvals.
If a municipality isn’t making progress on policies right now, they are already falling behind on their 5 year targets
But the article doesn’t mention that. Interestingly, this one does:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-its-chaos-cottage-owners-rush-to-sell-ahead-of-capital-gains-tax/
That doesn’t work, because turning a secondary property into a primary residence is a deemed disposition.
Thank you for that explanation. If that Is the case It should be Regional. What Is with this divide…Its a waste of money. We all live In the CRD…And Stew Young should be the mayor of the entire Region.
The idea that certain services are better provided and managed closer to the people that use the services. If another level of government causes a problem with it, the cost will be owning the problem. There are services the province wouldn’t be able manage from the higher level. For example, it would be trying to manage a land use policy for Fort St. John, Downtown Vancouver, and Langford all in one. 3 very distinct areas that require local embedded knowledge to manage properly. Something that a government policy analyst from UVIC or UBC would not likely be grasp effectively because of bias and would result in confusion and failure. It’s why the Feds have no role in healthcare other than handing out a cheque, imagine someone making healthcare policy in downtown Toronto trying to determine healthcare needs in Port Hardy.
So a Municipality Is just a puppet? A shell company? A laundry mat to wash and filter a bunch of bullshit before It reaches the Provincial level?
I assume people will get around around the capital gains on secondary properties the way they do today. Move into your secondary property and make it your primary residence and then sell it.
Not anything a municipality can really take to court. The municipalities are creations of the province and anything they do, have or want to do can be managed by the province. The issue will be if they get too involved at the municipal level of government business, they will own all the problems politically and risk punishment at the ballot box.
20k Is still 20k…Think of how many Big Macs that could buy. I think the end game here Is they want everyone to only own one house. They are trying to take the Investment part away.
Dumb article. No one is selling their cottage to avoid $20k in extra taxes when they eventually do sell it. If they’re going to pass it off the to their kids, they could just sell it 50% at one year and 50% the next and avoid the tax anyway.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/personal-finance/young-money/article-youre-no-longer-middle-class-if-you-own-a-cottage-or-investment/
Meh, the easy end to it is just to end the municipality. Amalgamate oak bay into Victoria or Saanich (or both). Problem solved. Same with View Royal.
I have been looking for the new hospital plans for greater Victoria that the province is going to build in tandem with the tens of thousands of housing units in their five year plan. It takes years to build new hospital facilities so I assume the province has already started.
https://www.uvic.ca/residence/visitors/index.php
The Province needs the cooperation of the cities. This “serious repercussions” threat is counter productive.
Maybe double secret probation will work.
https://youtu.be/r3LzJzQ3wj4?si=n8eiui43ZD0c-W2C
As you can see in Sannich, some municipalities are playing ball.
The cities have only been given a 5 year target. Maybe they’re going to do it all in year 5. How can there be serious repercussions in years 1-4?
Zoning interventions are most likely.
Yes, all land use power rests with the province.
Nope. Reviews every 6 months.
Meh , I’m hopeful it just ends up in court , and using a stick on municipalities backfires .
Any of those “escalating repercussions” involve actually building housing? And are they going to ignore city housing bylaws? And I’m not referring to merely “social housing”, the province has been directly involved in that forever. The cities won’t be offside with their targets until the end of 5 years – that’s 2028 to begin with the “escalating repercussions” – what will that take another 5 years (2033) to see results?
Nope, they have already announced there will be escalating repercussions. The province also steps in to directly upzone land on a regular basis. They did it a few times for social housing recently.
The BC gov’t say exactly what they’re going to do with the housing targets in that quote, and it’s just “ monitor progress and work with municipalities to better understand challenges and opportunities”. It’s wishful thinking to read more into it than that.
That’s what I mean. Oak Bay is going to not hit their target and see what the province does. Will they waggle their finger and say naughty municipality or will they directly upzone land to get the housing built?
Well this is the process, and it’s nothing as consequential as a game of chicken.
“Municipalities will be evaluated after six months, and every year thereafter, on their progress toward achieving the housing targets and actions taken to meet the target. The Province will monitor progress and work with municipalities to better understand challenges and opportunities.”
I suppose most of the student housing would only be occupied for nine months of the year. Would there be a plan for those units during the remaining months?
I’m a NIMBY who supports any student housing UVic wants to build that doesn’t pave over places like Mystic Vale or Finnerty Gardens. The 783-student building that UVic recently completed is great; they should build a couple more of those.
More student housing on-campus means fewer idiots living near me (hopefully).
If they put forward some effort they could get 98 highly needed affordable units in relatively short order. The OB United Church project was opposed by all the “stop overdevelopment” neighbours who had placards on their lawns nearby and their own website, but should be revived.
https://www.focusonvictoria.ca/investigations/oak-bay-neighbourhood-wrestles-with-a-98-unit-housing-proposal-r107/
Difficult to meet a target that you don’t want to meet. But I’m not convinced they will win the game of chicken with the province
There are over 22,000 students at U.Vic. Building another 400 or 500 residences is still a drop in the bucket. Frankly, the buildings could pay for themselves considering what rents are these days.
It could be done in one development. 700 condos would go in nicely at the old Sealand site covering the marina building and that under used parking lot with an ocean view.
Remember the protest they had over building the med school on the UVIC endowment? Would folks do the same over student housing? Remember, we are in the whiner society now, complain about everything, say it’s someone else’s fault, and the complain about any proposed solution until nothing happens; just so that you can complain again.
If the province built 400 to 500 student housing units up by the university that would really help both the Oak Bay numbers and the real need for student housing at the University. Building student housing is long overdue.
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/oak-bay-unlikely-to-meet-provincial-housing-target-says-report-8655977
Somewhere way down in this thread someone mentioned “Housesigma”. I haven’t been on there before. Signed up, looks pretty useful – thanks!
It should also be known that the West Hills Development Is a 30 year build out. They will pause the builds when sales slow down. They will accelerate the builds when sales pickup. They are In no hurry. You have to have a very sharp pencil. The margins are very tight with these guys. For example, a plumber Is lucky to make a grand profit per house…That Is ridiculously cheap. 100 houses Is a hundred grand profit.
The same thing goes for framers, electricians, roofers, Insulators, drywallers, painters, cabinets, tile guys.
Even realtors… Do you really think the In house realtors at West Hills are making 6 and 3? Think again.
You can make a decent living with these guys…But you won’t be making any money.
Now you can’t exactly blame the developers. At the end of the day, they have to sell their shit at a price that people can afford to buy.
☮
I knew you worked for the CRA. Are you packing a glock?
Lol my line of work requires that unfortunately.
Honestly I don’t know how the young contractors do it . I guess when you’re in it , then it’s just the new normal . I would be pulling my hair out if I was a GC today
If I wasn’t spending other peoples money…I would seriously lose my shit.
I am 100% transparent with everyone I deal with. Its go…or don’t go.
You can’t even destroy a rock wall for a garden bed without getting It tested. Even when Its tested you have to make an appointment to dispose the mortar (with a certificate).
And of course Marco’s squirrel habitat report
Max , good stuff , man 100 grand just to do asbestos abatement and I’m guessing before deconstruct
You have an amazing memory…You are correct. That was In the West Hills development. My Son graduated Belmont at 17 and has been framing houses ever since. He Is now 19 and has over 34 houses under his belt. His boss along with his 5 man crew frame a house every 10 days off the foundation. Right now they are super busy up on Skirt Mountain…That’s right beside Bear Mountain. Not to be confused with Triangle Mountain.
Yah Covid with all its lost income, productivity, sense of impending doom and uncertainty was a real great backdrop for love making.
Weren’t you the one that said your son got laid off awhile ago in the westshore building SFH?
Had a price on Dufferin In Oak Bay 4400 sq/ft build. Dead level lot, 10′ hole for an 8′ basement, 3 stories, 12/12 roof. $75 grand foundation and framing…Three separate framing quotes. That’s $17 per sq/ft to crib the foundation and frame the house. The asbestos removal and demolition of the existing house Is a $100 grand. Trades In the SFH market are not slow IMO.
Ya the sfh and condo towers are very different animals . Trades in the the sfh market seem to be getting slower so I wouldn’t be suprised if quotes coming in are more competitive. Condo projects are were u hang out if u have a drug habit , never my shtick
I know a fairly well known custom-home builder in town, couple months ago he didn’t see prices coming down for his projects but now he’s starting to see that too. Definitely seems to be lagging the larger developments where some are seeing close to a double digit decrease for some trades now compared to peak.
Only a small bump
That Is too funny dude. Everyone was on the CERB and deferred their mortgage payments for 6 months…There was no time for hate. It was a great big party smashing pots and pans together. It was love more than anything. Probably a lot of pregnancies.
Vicreanalyst, ya I have no finger on the pulse with condos, all my experience is with sfh and townhouses . I know I just stayed away from them
Not on bigger pojects.
Whatever , bang on there’s very skinny margin on building materials , no real cost savings between building a house and a half dozen units . Labour has gone through the roof , and sub trades get so little done in a day . Real productivity in construction has fallen off a cliff .
Yes. A healthy dose of the principle of charity is in order.
I’ll try to explain it to you without using a crayon.
Economies of scale comes about when ordering materials and appliances. The suppliers are willing to lower their prices when you buy in bulk amounts.
Here is another example if you are buying flooring for 30 condominiums you would then be able to buy directly from the manufacturer in say Atlanta and have it delivered rather than buying from a local retail outfit.
I’m not sure what you mean but it sounds like jibber jabber.
If a SFH lot of 10,000 square feet vacant lot is a million and you build one house the land is a million per house. Build a fourplex on the site and the land value is ex. 250k per home. That is a 750k/unit difference.
Building plus land costs are currently very high for both multifamily or single family new builds vs. existing housing stock which probably affects marketability in a higher interest rate environment. Bringing down land value through taxation is probably not the answer. As Leo has pointed out, increasing density to bring down the land value per unit probably is a solution over time.
We talk about the bonus windfall of going missing middle. But that’s not the reality.
There are three building sites that are zoned for multi-family being promoted as missing middle in Victoria
2345 Howard at $1,200,000 or $209 per square foot of land
956 Heywood at $1,475,000 or $241 /sq. ft.
931 McClure Street at $1,775,000 or $235/ sq. ft.
But a single family zoned lot at Wootton is asking $1,600,000 or $224 per sq. ft.
There is no bonus windfall for multi plex land over that of a single family. Our problem is that the demand for single family land is greater than development land. Developers are having problems buying land at a price where it is economically feasible to build multi-family in Victoria City. Instead they are looking at land in less desirable areas along residential collector roads in areas such as Vic West and Esquimalt where the land is cheaper. Or they have to buy the property today and wait half a dozen years for prices to increase to make the project viable.
The cost to build multi-family housing doesn’t have any economies of scale to bring costs down if there are less than 12 units. We don’t have any lots big enough for 12 or more units without having to assemble adjoining properties. And since a lot of these properties have undergone renovation from the past gentrification craze in the neighborhoods, there are very few building sites that are economically feasible to develop in the city.
We have to get the price of land down in Victoria and Oak Bay. We are going to have to lay the boots to those old pre-1960’s small houses on large lots by taxing them differently.
That is good information re development slow down Leo and I agree with your proposed solution – seems sensible.
Except that’s precisely what it did with missing middle. They were worried about land values, so they tried to do land value capture based on an economic analysis of what lift there might be. Costs went up, rates went up, and the projects which may have barely penciled no longer did and the policy was a lame duck.
Now land lift should be much higher going from low density to perhaps 10 floors so there’s more lift to capture, and because there is still a rezoning process here, municipalities with CAC policies can apply them at that point. But generally all land lift capture will slow down building. The idea there is some free money that governments can simply scoop off without any downstream impacts is just not true. Governments have been chasing this idea of free social housing by various schemes for decades and it doesn’t work, just transfers the cost to other new housing instead of just properly funding social housing construction through taxes.
The simple solution is to have a lifetime cap on the PRE. Problem of untaxed excess gains solved without any complex new policy or penalizing redevelopment. But that will never happen.
Thanks whatever. Could be a little late for me to move back in with my parents :-).
Westerly that isn’t the way the real estate market works. There will always be buyers and sellers even in the worst real estate markets. In down markets it just takes longer to find a buyer. In severe downturns property values have to fall to the point that investors will once again start to buy. That sets a price floor where the rental income provides a positive cash flow to an investor with a return on their down payment that is at a rate close to what they could achieve from other investments with the same level of risk.
However that can get tricky as prices and rents could both be falling as people leave the city. Most often the market over corrects before rebounding and stabilizing.
For first time buyers they have the option of selling and moving back into their parents home or moving to a province that has better opportunities and waiting for the market to rebound. But that brings a lot of new inventory onto the market with the seller following the market down as prices fall.
There are some that can’t or won’t move back home and then the lender will start foreclosure proceedings for missed payments. If you think you might be in this situation then speak with a lawyer about bankruptcy early. For a lot of those caught in this predicament they will know a year or more out that they have a problem. Start now.
So prices kept going up but the market dropped. People stopped buying and selling? This helped supply how?
There was no price collapse from the 1974 Ontario land speculation tax.
You can see the numbers here for Toronto, (source: Toronto RE board). http://www.mysearchforahome.com/2013/07/home-prices-in-toronto-history.html
Just another HHV “oops” post 🙂
Thanks Patriots. Other than collapsing prices, how many more residences were created as a result of that tax? Assuming for the moment that supply is the issue.
https://financialpost.com/personal-finance/mortgages-real-estate/ontario-tried-a-speculation-tax-on-property-and-the-market-collapsed-overnight
You might ask, why don’t governments try this today? Because it worked – too well.
Wow there’s some tripe on here the last day or so. Prices dropping 20-40% would primarily be from interest rates going up or serious recession. The people most hurt by that would be young low to middle income families. Retirees in Oak Bay would not even blink – although they could do some renos cheaper to allow themselves to stay in their homes longer.
Those that would benefit the most are investor / developers. They have cash in their pockets, can afford to sit out a recession, land-banking all the way. The best time to buy property is when interest is high and prices are low.
Want to increase land availability? Lower capital gains, get rid of all these ridiculous property taxes / penalties scams etc that do way more harm than good. You cannot tax your way out of this housing problem.
Two great elections coming up this year and next.
Just a false dichotomy imo. A tax that applies to windfall profits due to upzoning above a certain amount and is used for ex. affordable housing on a 4 million dollar profit is not going to stop redevelopment. I’m not opposed to a capital gains windfall from rezoning to create more density, but to apply the primary residence exemption to the entire gain does not seem to promote overall tax fairness.
Assuming they collect that would give you an idea of how incredibly restrictive zoning was on that land.
Doesn’t bother me at all though. A few people getting a windfall in exchange for a ton of housing is a lot better than every single family home owner getting a windfall for absolutely nothing.
Of course they’ve negotiated. Insane not to.
Sounds like a great opportunity to negotiate the realtor fees down with them if they really want the listing.
It is not a scam. Will they get 3x? Not sure but the parties are sophisticated.
How is a 4 million dollar unearned tax free windfall as a result of government policies fair? The primary residence exemption is creating significant tax unfairness in this case imo. There should be some contribution to a housing affordability fund required for short term above market gains in this scenario.
How is that unfair? In what school of real estate investment is buying a 300sqft condo a good idea? Buy land around a major transportation hub on the other hand is a more savvy move, speaking of which some Saanich owners will also be able to cash in on the new OCP.
Well, they just should of asked the realtors for the cheque and really no need to sign to try a sale if its that much of guarantee. If those realtors are that confident they should be willing to offer to buy on the spot. It’s really just the old door knock sign up trick that usually doesn’t pan out for the quoted price. The key thing to remember, if the person comes to you, it’s most likely a scam and if you can’t spot the mark or stooge in the room, it’s you.
The soil in many areas is not easy to compact. You don’t want settlement under a road, so it is often better to backfill with gravel.
There is a distinct meanness lately.
Know someone with a primary residence in Vancouver near a sky train station. They and their neighbours have been approached by and signed on with real estate agents. They’ve been told they can get about 3x market value as a group sale with the new up-zoning. Current market values are around 2 million.
So, this means that these homeowners win an extra 4 million dollar tax free lottery due to government changes. Meanwhile the Janion owner lost their legal zoning and $100,000.
Seems just sightly unfair. Especially the tax exemption on an unearned over market windfall.
Ok, so confirmed that the policy is as written in the SSMU technical briefing I just didn’t read it carefully enough:
1. the TOA areas will not be force-upzoned for various reasons, some mentioned in my previous comment
2. By end of 2025 munis will need to produce housing needs reports using a standard methodology, update their OCPs to accommodate housing needs, and make sure zoned capacity is there to match housing needs
So no requirement to up zone TOA per se, but hitting the zoned capacity without it would be very difficult
Bond trend for the last month.
Josh, I’ve mentioned this before but several public sites have recent sale prices as well as sale price history such as house sigma. 210 Montreal St sold @ 1.365 after being listed at 1.4
Sale price for 210 Montreal St please and thank you?
Maybe it’s just me , but househunt is becoming more radicalized lol .
So like in this scenario there’s some factor that causes house prices to drop while other costs remain stable? Like food, gas costs etc remain stable? And employment and wages remain stable? It’s just the housing that dives? And then only people who get divorced or become disabled abd can’t work – a relatively small percentage- would truly suffer from the rapid decline , everyone else only losing a grin? Hmmm … that seems like magical thinking to me. I mean, I don’t think it’s likely (or possible?) for house prices to decline that much without it causing suffering.
Whatever just think harder and come up with a better solution.
I am not going to shed a tear for any home owner that thinks a 20 percent drop in their home price would devastate them. You’ll still have a home and still be making the same mortgage payments. All what will happen is you’ll lose the grin on your face.
And for those that don’t have a mortgage nothing in your life will change if prices dropped 40 percent.
What would change is that more people would be able to afford to buy a home.
A drop in prices would benefit more people than would be hurt. So boo hoo to you.
Yes for most people, no for the lowest income folks. No amount of regulatory reform will make the private market build homes that rent for $500/month shelter rate. I don’t think anyone is arguing that it will. Yes to more social housing. Not sure what percent of the market can’t be served by market housing, maybe 10 or 20%? That’s still 2x to 4x more social housing than we have now.
I like the policy because it recognizes that there’s nothing inherently wrong with short term rentals if there’s enough housing. Perhaps it will incentivize some municipalities to permit a ton of housing to ensure their vacancy rate stays up and they can continue to allow short term rentals. West Kelowna has opted out of the short term rental restrictions.
Totally agree that it may not be a workable model for investors to buy up units for short term rental if it can be banned again later. Also a little unclear what the timeline is here. CMHC stats are released in January or February. If West Kelowna gets the CMHC report next year that its vacancy is under 3% are short term rentals banned again immediately? Does it have to be 2 years? Is there a grace period? All unknown but we’ll find out next year I guess.
Great!
Also, a question for you on the str regulations. I saw a post from you praising the government for allowing munis to opt out if their vacancy rate goes above 3%. My question is, if a city drops the str regs because vacancy >3%, and allows str, then if vacancy rate drops in future below threshold (? 2%) are they forced back to banning them? If so, I wouldn’t praise that, it sounds absurd. There’s a reasonable chance that cities see vacancy rates >3% in the next few years, especially with a recession.
I am constantly puzzled by the “affordable” housing discussion that happens in Canada’s most expensive and desirable cities. Why is it the job of any level of government to make SFHs an affordable commodity? Yes, we need to ensure that there is appropriate density to allow all income levels access to housing as well as find solutions for the unhoused. However, this idea that owing a SFH in one of the most desirable places to live is some sort of entitlement for our kids is ridiculous. There are plenty of places to buy a SFH in Canada for much less. Let the market determine prices – if they get too high, people will move to other places and demand (with prices) will fall.
If we fixed the bureaucracy that stifles building – would that alone result in enough supply? I still don’t see how. For example, who will supply social housing for the most difficult to house? I could be wrong but I can’t imagine the private market doing a good job at that.
You know what’s stupid? I have a huge empty backyard that I never use, with an apartment building behind that. Would be nice to build something there. But basically impossible.
If you bought a property as a place to live, a drop in potential sale price should be irrelevant. You thought the purchase price was worth it, right?
I’m not missing it, no doubt permitting is part of the challenge. I spoke to the lead planner in Kelowna, they said part of their success if because they can turn around a building permit for a quadplex within a few weeks if it’s a design that’s been built before, a couple months if new.
Zoning is one big part of the problem being addressed. The only thing worse than spending tens of thousands on dumb consultant reports is spending all that money, waiting years, then finding out your project is rejected. One the approvals are by right then permitting becomes the biggest barrier.
The government strictly limiting what can be built where and putting every request to change that through years of process is not hands off capitalism. We have a centrally planned housing production system and it’s not working.
The BC government can change the LGA tomorrow. They already changed it a couple times. Municipalities have zero power except what is given to them by the province. That’s why there’s no court challenge about the province stepping in and forcing all of them to update their single family zoning. Their is no dispute about who holds land use powers.
As for the TOAs, the reason they didn’t force upzoning immediately is because many cities have policies like tenant assistance that kicks in on rezoning, and they didn’t want to kill those policies by unilaterally upping zoning near transit until there was a legal framework to apply them outside of that. That change just went in, so it’s no longer a barrier. TOAs will be incorporated into the updated OCPs, and then by end of 2025 zoning is supposed to be updated to “better match” the OCPs, so zoning in TOAs may need to be updated by that point. The wording is a little vague though, so I’ve reached out to the province to clarify.
Wow, whateveriwanttocallmyself.
Force everyone in Oak Bay to move by applying confiscatory taxes, because they only care about money. Light a stick of dynamite to force them off their asses. 40% drop in house prices would be great, and if people go bankrupt, so what.
You’re a man of the people.
But time is the great leveller – hope you remember all your comments here years down the road when you’re feeling perhaps a little more vulnerable and someone comes hard after what’s yours.
But wasn’t they when the govt was more hands on in building housing for poorer folks and coops and such? I mean, I thought we got to this place because of decades of hands off capitalism – this being the inevitable result (the freight train we all should have seen coming but somehow didn’t).
It did for a long time actually, low income people just lived in accommodation that middle income people didn’t want, such as basement suites, old apartments and mobile homes. Problem is that middle income people are now competing for these properties because affordability has declined so much.
There were also “projects” built for lower income people but that’s not where most of them lived.
BC Cities still effectively control their own land use through their broad powers to write and regulate their zoning bylaws. These are outlined in law here and you can see how wide the cities powers still are: http://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/r15001_14#division_d0e44295
For example, when writing new city land use bylaws, the new law only states that the cities need to “consider” the “guidelines” for the new transit-oriented-areas. Yes, the BC government could change these laws in the future and give the cities less power, but they didn’t do that in 2024 and they would be in for a big fight if they did in the future.
California state government enacted similar “upzoning” legislation to BC in 2021. But like BC, the California cities also have control over the bylaws for land use, and the upzoning flopped because the cities found ways to block it when they wanted to. Same thing will happen in BC in NIMBY areas.
There are some people with truly mind blowing amounts of wealth, even here in Canada. Someone who decided they weren’t “that rich” because they went to another richer friends house and that house turns with the sun but theirs doesn’t – so not that rich. Those people can def afford to pay more and given the total shit show of a housing market and sad state of affairs for so so so many (an increasing number actually) – they should pay more. But because they are so rich they don’t even bother to be landlords and they’re pretty invisible and under the radar when there’s talk of solutions.
I think you’re right that there’s no chance that we can fix the unaffordability problem if we just continue as we always have. An intervening factor that could help a lot, imo, is government investment in low income housing. Lots of it too. I mean, whoever thought that the private market could ever accommodate housing needs of the poorest was delusional or doesn’t understand basic economics (or both). In this case we need the money to acquire that housing / land (however expensive it will be) probably from taxes – right? Then, we can tax those with more and do more to protect the middle, rather than creating massive opportunities for the already rich by gutting the middle to “save the poor” (still have my doubts that it would do down like that).
I’m upper middle btw so yeah I’m biased here.
Not really, the chances would be good that most of the developers would be bankrupt and couldn’t buy up the land.
But there is no chance that we will be able to keep house prices high and create more affordable housing. The two are mutually exclusive.
But I doubt we have any choice in the matter at all. The market is going to do what it does. And here we are today with high immigration and yet Toronto is facing a possible glut of condominiums for sale. As unsold condos have increased 41 percent from last year.
So WTF is going on!
I think we are experiencing once again the Boomerang generation as kids sell their condo or house and move back in with their parents or move to other provinces for better opportunities. Just like what happened in the 1980’s bust.
Bill Bennett’s (and later Vander Zalm’s) Socreds were in office all through the 1980’s. They weren’t blamed for the recession and RE bust and to be fair it was beyond any provincial government’s control.
Interesting that Glenn Clark’s government was blamed for the much milder decline in RE prices in the late 1990’s. By those who liked high prices anyway, i.e. the RE industry.
So in your scenario this would fix things because developers could snap up land dirt cheap qnw have time to build more dense housing while the people who lost their shirts work their way out of bankruptcy so that they can buy back from the developers in 20-40 years? So the solution is to concentrate the ownership of land into an even smaller group and wait for the benefits of that to trickle down to the masses? Just trying to see how that would work.
You aren’t backfilling, the COV is backfilling. They are forcing home owners to test the city side of the property to make sure it isn’t contaminated, if it is then they give you a higher estimate to upgrade the services so you as the home owner can pay for the city to deal with their contaminated soil.
Before: You call COV to upgrade services to your lot line. They come and upgrade services and cost is fixed amount.
Now: Before COV comes to upgrade they want the home owner to send them a report of soil samples where the city trench needs to be dug to install service. If no contamination, you are an extra 10k out + cost to put in services and yes they can backfill using same soil BUT you still had to pay for the test/road permit/traffic control to carry out testing. If contamination then you are completely screwed as they city will want home owner to pay for it.
It’s not sure the $10k +/- of non-sense testing but also I imagine the company drilling the holes in the road has to coordinate with city staff as to where the city would be digging trenches for new services, etc. It is all a painful process.
I bet by next year you have to get a traffic engineering report that will note what the impact on the neighbourhood/street will be as a result of having to close to road to drill the holes for the samples.
But why? It’s kind of awesome having a base here. It’s part of the local culture. I say keep the base where it is and transition away from current housing to mix of townhouses and apartments on base still owned by feds.
I don’t want to get into a debate but I was under the impression that rents in the pmq are below market and I’d say they should be.
Whatever , I don’t think a Hail Mary recession like the 80s is coming or the 90s blah . Homeowners today are getting lots of support , probably why theres very little in the way of distressed sales . It’s up from here
Yes Dee, a 20 to 40 percent drop in home prices would be good for housing in the long run. Some people will lose everything they own – but they have to take the hit for the good of the team.
After a couple of years in bankruptcy they will be fine.
If you are one of the unfortunate that lose it all, think on the bright side as at least your kids will now be able to afford a home.
The Feds, as usual, are not being clear on what they plan to do with the married quarters at Esquimalt or Belmont Park.
That housing was never for long term occupancy. It was only for temporary housing for the military. An entire generation has now grown up in that shitty housing. And they don’t get a deal on rent. They have to pay the same rent as those off the base.
The Feds idea is if they have more housing for the military then that will take the pressure off of Esquimalt and Victoria that have military renting off base. They are not being very clear if they would allow non military to buy or rent on the Married Quarters land.
I say the hell with it. Decommission the entire fu*&ing base and move it and the military families to Prince Rupert.
They wouldn’t make you sample if you are backfilling with the same soil would they? That wouldn’t make any sense. I thought it was meant for soil that is being trucked away and dumped.
“What we need for long term stability is a 1980’s style recession with property values falling by 20 to 40 percent. The NDP did it before – they can do it again.”
Are you joking? Like, do you really want this to happen? Sounds painful.
Problem is lot of BS applying to SFHs as well such as this new soil sample testing bullshit. Even if you have an old house and need a new sewer/storm/water you are screwed now.
Or if you want to add a suite which requires upgrading the water line to the house you are going to be out 10k for soil sample testing on a suite, lol.
If the cost to service multi-family land goes up – then you would just have to buy the land for less. That’s the simple answer.
However, you are not likely to be able to do so as someone wants that same lot to build a single family home.
What we need for long term stability is a 1980’s style recession with property values falling by 20 to 40 percent. The NDP did it before – they can do it again.
I’ve heard rumblings about building more (military?) housing on the military lands in Esquimalt. Is that what you’re talking about Whatever? I think it’s a great idea since so many military people have to wait on long waitlists to get into the military housing. My understanding is that there is a fair bit of empty land on the base there. Why not build a couple of towers for the military folks? Similar to building student housing on university lands. Or even assisted living on hospital lands. Why not build housing in underutilized lands for people who use those spaces most anyway.
Might be more money in building a single family home as opposed to 4 small units . A lot less hassle and probably quicker turn over .
When you increase the density of a parcel of land, that increases the cost of the land. Development property is not purchased on a price per square foot of land but on a price per buildable square foot of land.
Increase the density from 1.5 to 2.5 and a developer can now pay more for the land as they can build more smaller units to maximize profit. The problem with most cities is that single family land is worth the equivalent or more than development land especially in the areas that the province wants to see more development.
We have to bring the cost of residential land down and we can do that by encouraging more home owners to list their homes for sale. Not by encouraging more people to stay in their houses when they retire with deferred property tax programs or by keeping property taxes low on under utilized properties.
Another way is for the government to increase the competition among contractors. If the Feds did open up Esquimalt to development then the land should NEVER be sold to one developer. Instead it should be sold on a lottery system to many builders that would then compete on price and speed to build these homes. Sell the land to one contractor and they will spend the next 20 years parsing out the land.
What we need to do is break the cycle of increasing prices. And we could do that by flooding the market with cheaper land.
Or we could just do nothing. Because a prolonged recession will accomplish all of the above. Land prices tank in a recession.
You are missing the permitting insanity thought. I’ve seen the city staff comments on the first missing middle project in Victoria after developer submitted for BP and good chance it doesn’t move forward the comments/requirements are so insane.
This is one of a long laundry list of items. If you build a 4,000 sq/ft SFH you don’t require electrical and plumbing drawings; however, the COV building department at THEIR DISCRETION can request electrical/plumbing drawings for anything 4 units or more even thought code doesn’t require it. That’s a 10k expense. I mentioned the 10k soil sampling expenses last week, add like another 20 things.
They want things on a missing middle project that are normally for high-rises. Not to mention they are requiring 400′, yes 400′ of brand new sidewalks for this particular project. They want the applicant to have the civil engineer re-draw the sidewalks after city staff previously agreed on a design, etc. The re-drawing impacts trees on the property which the parks department likely won’t approve so you have the engineering department requesting something parks department won’t approve.
I spent $80k on 100′ feet of sidewalk/roadworks on a SFH two years ago, can’t even imagine what 400′ is going to cost. Had same issue, what city engineering wanted parks didn’t approve, it was insane, like 6 months of delays because the two departments couldn’t agree on how to deal with a tree. I made a video about it -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6aSPG47AQo&t=2s
I’ll continue to be a broken record, but I don’t think people have to worry about multi-plexes lining their streets anytime soon.
Janion 296 sq.ft. condo sold today for $340,000 and here is the sales history on the unit
2022-03-31 $445,000
2018-08-15 $315,000
2016-12-14 $148,900+GST (brand new)
My minor quibble here is we need to bring down the cost of land per home. That’s easy to do by permitting more density. Kind of impossible to bring down the cost of land unless you’re proposing to blight it.
Most new housing built in the city are contracts between the owner and a builder. While most new housing in the Westshore is builders buying land and selling on speculation of finding a buyer later on.
Why so little speculation builders in the Victoria Core? Because the land is just too frigging expensive. They can buy one lot in the city for the cost of two or three vacant lots in the Westshore. If the contractor builds three houses at a time then the contractor has economies of scale that will help keep costs down.
You will pay upwards of 30 percent more to build the identical house (excluding land) in the core than you will to buy one in the Westshore.
Want to solve the housing problem? Bring the cost of land down in the city.
Interest rates don’t have to come down to build housing.
The land prices have to come down.
And that is accomplished by having more existing properties listed. Start by getting rid of the property tax deferral in BC. Raise the property taxes on under utilized properties so that more retirees have to sell their homes and move into condominiums.
In other words, light a stick of dynamite under their arses to get them to move on. As it is now, there are one or two people living in a house that would house half the people of a Croatian village.
We have had a large increase in the number of people living in Greater Victoria. Yet the population of Oak Bay hasn’t really changed much.
Definitely. Most owners do not have the risk tolerance for that.
But by-right approvals is a game changer for small builders that currently are basically only building new single family because they have neither the capital nor the risk-tolerance for the rezoning process. That’s what happened in Kelowna anyway.
The tax rate in Oak Bay is lower because the property values are higher than most of the adjoining neighborhoods. You can’t just look at the tax rate, you have to consider the tax rate and the property value as a whole.
Some one living in a home that is mostly land value will change their minds about continuing to do so when they are paying a base property tax that is higher than more expensive homes. They will sell to a developer that will redevelop the site sooner rather than paying a high base for the next several years.
I’m not a person that likes the idea of using taxes to solve social problems. But Oak Bay is different. Money is what is dearest to most that live there. So you hit them where it hurts. Make it so it is less desirable for retirees to move there by draining their bank accounts.
The Feds are looking at public lands to develop economical housing on prepaid leased lots. That would probably work but the lease has to be less than 99 years. A 60 year prepaid lease would guarantee that the price of the properties would be less than a home on a freehold lot. If the housing to be built is for rental purposes then the lease would not be prepaid. There would be a monthly ground rent paid to CMHC which can be adjusted depending on the income level of the renters.
A scenario would be that a young couple buys the home with a 60 year lease and raise a family. At around the 30 year mark the kids are gone and the now older couple rents out the property for the remaining 30 or so years . At the end of the lease the house is demolished and a modern home of the standards of what will be in 60 years from now is built.
The government is making home ownership homes, that will transition into rentals and then redeveloped with new homes in 60 years. A constant renewal of housing in the city.
That is not why owner occupiers are not “redeveloping”. The tax rate in Oak Bay is less than many other municipalities.
First of all, there has to be some motivation to do this in that it has to make economic and personal sense. Most people are not in the redevelopment game and the bar is that it is unreasonably expensive and troublesome for an owner who is not themselves a developer to tear down and rebuild and costs can spiral. Why would they take on such a project? Only if they are experienced developers or motivated to build for a family member imo.
Even when the new fourplex rules come into play I don’t think owners will be “redeveloping”. Places will get sold to developers when the numbers work and then changes will happen. Interest rates probably need to come down first.
I don’t think you understand how land use works. Province controls all of it. Municipalities have no power other than what is delegated to them.
As far as housing goes, doing something about it is very popular. Polls show people support housing in general, just not next to them. Hence why the best place for reforms is at the provincial level, not the municipal one where all the complaints are from neighbours of specific projects.
That would be nearly impossible to administer Westerly. Just do it using the BC Assessments ratio of land to improvements.
What if there’s 3 bedrooms but only 2 people? Under-usage. You should write to Trudeau.
Oak Bay is a bit different than most districts. There are many small houses on large lots that are not being re-developed as the owners don’t want to pay higher taxes. This is the fault of our current property tax system. The more one improves the property the more property taxes are paid.
What we need is a tax system that recognizes the current tax system but also penalizes those that have not been improving their properties. If you live in a small pre 1960’s home that under utilizes the land then your property taxes should be increased. Those properties should have to pay a base tax that is higher than the current tax rate they pay.
If the owner redevelops the land then perhaps in some cases they could pay lower property taxes than the older housing? If the house value is say less than 50 percent of the land value then they should be paying 50 percent more property taxes than they are currently paying.
I doubt that one can get housing to change in Oak Bay unless you motivate Oak Bay residents where they think most – in their pocket book.
Sidewalks and curbs just get in the way of parking on the front lawn. Part of Saanich’s rural charm.
Municipalities are a creation of the provincial government. A point Danielle Smith is making in Alberta currently.
Frank, Eastdowne has sidewalks on both sides as does pretty much every street in North Oak Bay, are you sure your property is in North OB?
Compare this to many parts of Saanich that have no sidewalks on either side of the street which I find very odd.
Do you know how beautiful it is here right now?
Eastdowne area.
I imagine Ravi will fix housing in the same way that this government has done such a great job with both the medical system and with the drug addicts on our streets.
Still cannot comprehend why Frank chooses to live in Winnipeg but owns properties in North Oak Bay and Ladysmith. SMDH.
Frank, what street in North OB has no sidewalk?
It is naive (or at least unrealistic) to think that the province can strong arm municipalities to upzone in areas that the municipality doesn’t consider suitable for upzoning. The “naive” part is the statement that “Ravi better slap down this nonsense”. Because “Ravi” can’t… politics doesn’t work like that, because the local politicians answer to the local voters, not to a higher level of government. .
The local politicians that defy the province rules will be popular, and re-elected. California found that out with their failed upzoning that was ignored by the cities, because the city politicians listened to their voters, so they would be re-elected. Same thing will happen in BC.
Without sidewalks, pedestrians are at risk of injury, especially at night. My North Oak Bay property has no sidewalks, how can people living in four plexes with no parking get to the bus safely. There’ll be bodies strewn all over the streets.
I’m all for open data, but also I don’t see it as a huge deal. You either like the place at the price it’s listed or you don’t. Knowing that it’s been listed at the same price for 100 days is somewhat useful but you will get that info if you’re even remotely interested in making an offer.
Also
Ravi better slap down this nonsense. The exemption is there for munis who literally can’t accomodate new housing because of hard infrastructure constraints, not lacking nice-to-haves.
well well….look what we have on a council meeting agenda tonight in View Royal 🙂 I can’t wait to see what BS Oak Bay will try going forward.
As far as I understand they are considering 80% of View Royal as “underserved by sidewalks.”
https://viewroyalbc.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/?preview=70967
Coastal Flood Risk Areas Map – Technical Memo
THAT the Committee recommend to Council that staff be directed to prepare an application for a four-year extension from the Small Scale Multi-Unit Housing Legislation for the lands identified on the Coastal Flood Risk Areas map until the Coastal Adaptation Plan and Official Community Plan update are completed. (SCOHL-01-24)
SSMUH Housing and Infrastructure
THAT the Committee recommend to Council that a request for a four-year extension from the Small Scale Multi-Unit Housing Legislation be considered for those areas that are underserved by sidewalks to allow for the Transportation Master Plan, Drainage Master Plan, and Development Cost Charges Bylaw updates, and amendments to be completed. (SCOHL-02-24)
Draft Transit Oriented Area (TOA) Amendment Bylaw No. 1134, Small Scale Multi-Unit Housing (SSMUH) Amendment Bylaw No. 1135, 2024 and Garden Suite Regulations
THAT the Committee recommend to Council that any additional properties not required to be included on the Transit-Oriented Areas Designation Map be removed. (SCOHL-03-24)
2024 04 19 Standing Committee on Housing Legislation Minutes
And rushed last summer when they thought it was peak (rates)…. I guess the question is: how many market timers are now left? Is there a big number of people sitting on cash waiting to ride the next anticipated upswing or those that figure they just need to buy what they can or forever be left behind on the next lift?
Lots of people were rushing to buy in Feb trying to front run the spring market.
Also, it seems odd how much faith some folks are putting on a quarter point drop in the BoC rate to ignite the market. Maybe after about four or five drops you will see something. A quarter will probably result in a quick flutter of activity with the market soon realizing it was just a quarter.
I believe in Calgary the re-listing practice is banned (unless you get a new agent).
I personally believe that all the data should be opened up to the consumer and I know it can be frustrating to see re-lists, but when you start looking at beyond Canada/US the availability and fluidity to real estate sales information we have is just insane compared to the rest of the world.
This is a listing in my building in Zagreb listed by the biggest and most well known real estate brokerage in Zagreb – https://eurovilla.hr/en/property/855335/
And beyond the horrible listing with no photos or address good luck ever getting your hands on any sales data in the building.
(The reason a lot of listings don’t have an address is the agent doesn’t want people trying to go directly to seller to cut out the agent). Try that for transparency 🙂 No address, no photos, no sales data to gauge listing price.
People complain about organized real estate but it has its benefits. It’s insane we can pull up listing details/photos for a house that sold 20 years ago including the photos from that sale 20 years ago and send it to our clients with on click.
+1, that’s a reasonable theory for sure.
The realtor view on the portal gives a listing history for a property whether sold or not sold, with all the times it has been listed on MLS, for how long and the prices. These data points really should be more available to the consumer.
New housing targets out. That means local municipalities with housing targets include:
Victoria
North Saanich
Central Saanich
Saanich
Oak Bay
Colwood
Esquimalt
Sidney
View Royal
The only local ones not on the list are:
Langford
Sooke
Highlands & Metchosin
https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0062-000620
I think it is just the realization that rates are not falling and spring is the time to list. People have probably been holding on for a better selling time and realizing next year may not be better rates so now is the time. Lots of people have mortgage renewals coming up.
Im betting divorce rates have something to do with this. Tons of people started really hating their spouses during covid but it takes a long time for people to go through the throes of divorce and getting their places listed. Probably wouldn’t be very easy to get that kind of data though. The listing surge could also be read as a symptom of market sentiment.
Many sellers would beg to differ.
Prices are significantly down from peak in spring 2022.
A drop in rates would stimulate sales. I do wonder if the investment demand is drastically reduced for years? A good thing to slow appreciation and I guess if we get a lot of purpose built rentals along with lower immigration/study/work permits then this could keep rental rates in check. If we don’t get more rental housing then this will result in worsening conditions for renters.
I do agree that the str listings are a small percent, but not as small as identified based on legal units.
Marko, yes interest rate cuts will get the ball rolling again . Everyone is rooting for them as it’s the only way to get more housing . We are 2 years into this and really nothing has changed , if we were to get lower prices it should have happened by now . This year might be the high for inventory, cause I don’t think low inventory has gone away imo
And no deterioration in the labour market. 5,000 listings will be tough given how many more people live in Victoria now compared to 12 years ago, but the big difference is that in 2012 people were not renewing into mortgage rates significantly higher than what they had, this is completely different now.
I think we need interest rate cuts for prices to push up across the board.
Going forward , even with more listings I’m guessing prices will start to push up , I think this is the bottom . Last 2 big recessions , prices where flat for a long time , but this time I’m thinking it’s different imo
Thank you Marko for the interesting reply.
Problem is things slow down in the fall seasonally and it is also always surprising how long sellers are willing to sit on market even with vacant properties. If there was to be substantial downward pressure on prices in my opinion it would occur next spring. We need to get to 5,000+ listings on current sales volume and this isn’t happening by the fall.
I think we are topping out at 3,400 listings for the year which is high compared to last 8 years but we were at 5000+ 10-12 years ago.
Not distress….right now I have on the roster of new listings in May; moving into retirement home, moving into kids SFH basement, estate sale, upgrading to larger home, kids finished uvic selling property that was purchased for kids to stay at while at uvic, moving back to Croatia.
I haven’t dealt with a lot of divorces in terms of a sale. More commonly I am seeing a buyout (I know sounds crazy at these interest rates but often parents of the one party staying help out) and then you help the bought out side purchase something.
https://www.businessinsider.com/meteoric-rise-spectacular-fall-airbnb-queen-vacation-rentals-real-estate2024-4?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-us
End of Summer will tell the tale of our housing market IMO. I gather the next few months inventory will continue to grow, by Sept/Oct/Nov is when we’ll begin to see price reductions. With increased inventory it’ll cause downward pressure on prices. Even tho price reductions are happening, on most every listing, it’s hard to track as most have expired/cancelled then re-listed under a new MLS at a reduced price. This drives me crazy as it brings no transparency to what’s really happening regarding price drops on specific properties.
Marko, any idea why most people are listing right now? Other than death, divorce and relocation.
I am going to have to side with Leo on this one, I think STRs are a very small % of the increase in new listings. New listings are surging in most places across Canada, even in markets that weren’t large on STRs.
(Doesn’t change my opinion from previous thread that banning STRs does have a consequence of less housing being built).
Also, I’ve received quite a few phone calls in the last couple of days from people wanting to list in the next couple of weeks. The vast majority of these, even when repeat clients, are completely out of the blue which goes back to my theory that it is impossible for “insiders” to predict new listings coming to market months in advance.
Where I have noticed an increase is in the number of listings of properties that were purchased during Covid. The turn over rate for properties bought in the last few years has increased.
The majority of strs were never legal. Ex Saanich had loads and it is not a permitted use even in a primary residence. I think strs are more than 6% of the bump and more to come next month.
End of this summer might be interesting.
1.86% until December 2025.
A lot of us are on the downward trajectory of mortgage obligations…Like almost done.
I don’t have or want an str In my principle residence.
If I want to make money, I drag my ass out of bed and go to work, just like everyone else.