New developments with suites and capital gains tax
As you probably know, when you sell your principal residence for more than you bought it for, you generally don’t have to pay tax on the capital gain. However what if part of your property is used to generate rental income? Basement suites have long been popular in Victoria as a way for people to afford our expensive home prices. In fact, according to the census, in the last 20 years the number of basement suites roughly tripled. That’s partially a real increase in suites, and partially StatsCan becoming better at finding renters living in suites.
That trend of increasing suites is likely to continue or accelerate. Last year the province’s Small Scale Multiunit Housing legislation was implemented in municipal zoning, which means that essentially every residential lot in the city now allows at least 3, and in some cases up to 6 separate homes. Even the most obstructive municipalities were forced to legalize basement suites, and in most municipalities you can also build detached suites (garden suites or carriage homes) in some form.
Whether having a rental suite on your property risks your Principal Residence Exemption (PRE) to the capital gains tax has been a long-standing topic of discussion on this blog. There was extensive analysis by readers of relevant tax court cases, with the conclusion that the majority of the evidence pointed to the fact that a rental suite does in fact risk your PRE, though records of enforcement were few and far between.
To get a professional perspective on this seeming contradiction, I interviewed Ammo Baines – a partner at local accounting firm Hutcheson & Co – back in 2020. You can read the full interview, but his takeaway was that though there was a risk in theory, he had never seen it in his practice and thought that if a suite was less than 50% of the property it was still very likely that owners could retain the full PRE and thus pay no capital gains tax on sale.
Well it’s been five years, so I interviewed Ammo again a few weeks ago to see what, if anything, had changed. Had the government become more aggressive about pursuing tax on real estate sales? Does the broad legalization of suites and especially detached garden suites make a difference? What follows is the relevant portion of that interview, edited for clarity and brevity.
The last time we spoke you said you had not seen the CRA came back on someone to revoke part of the PRE for having a suite. Have you seen it since?
I have not seen it since with any of our clients, but my discussions with clients have definitely changed. The CRA has come out publicly in June 2024 with some technical interpretations. Technical interpretations are where someone writes to the CRA and asks for information on certain tax issues and the CRA publishes a comment for all stakeholders to see so that people can have an understanding of what CRA’s unofficial position is. Of course no position is ever official, they can do what they want.
These two that came out focused on the Multigenerational Home Renovation Tax Credit, and the BC’s Secondary Suite Incentive Program. In these situations – especially the secondary suite incentive because you have to rent to someone at arm’s length – they’re basically saying in this case there’s divided use and it will be taxable and you have a change in use on that portion of your property that has consideration to report.
These interpretation bulletins are the most I’ve seen explicitly from the CRA on divided use and so I think it’s important that this happened and that they said this.
Author’s note: You can read the tax interpretations (better yet: show them to your accountant) for the MHRTC here and the Secondary Suite Incentive Program here.
What about the question of ancillary use? Do you think that still has importance?
Yes at the back of this all is the issue of ancillary use. You can have a separate entrance and a separate kitchen and all that but if it’s a low enough percentage you may still be able to argue ancillary use. Whether ancillary use is 15%, 30%, 45%, we still don’t know the answer to that. At 50% I would tell a client you probably will have to pay capital gains on that and move accordingly.
What if the suite is 30% of the property?
I think below 30% is the area where you may have a decent argument that the suite is ancillary. It used to be 40% that I would go to for ancilliary. Once you get to 50% you don’t have an argument, after all how can you say half of something is ancilliary? Carriage homes you cannot argue ancillary.
So say someone had a suite that was 30% of their floor space in the house vs a detached garden suite of the same size, the detached is higher risk than the in-house?
Correct, because you would have trouble arguing divided use. The only thing you could perhaps get is if the square footage of the garden suite is really low, you could try.
What else have you noticed about CRA’s shifting focus relating to real estate?
CRA’s attention on real estate matters – maybe not specifically on suites yet – but on real estate transactions, flipping, everything of that nature is a hot topic. It’s becoming more politically acceptable for them to go after those items. When we talked 5 years ago it was people’s livelihood, their home and their PRE and at the time that was sacred ground and hasn’t been touched and I thought they may not touch it because it was politically unpopular. I think also it’s very important to recognize that they need to generate revenue given the huge with deficits. The data that is available is also an important change. Whether it’s data from short term rentals that is fed up to the CRA or additional municipal data on suites.
Do you think the risk of having to pay capital gains tax is different now than 5 years ago?
Yes. Ever since CRA came with these technical interpretations I think it’s really elevated the risk and the clarity about where CRA is going.
Say someone is building a suite right now. Should they proactively file divided use or is it ok to wait until you sell to disclose?
Yes if you’re building a suite and it’s got a separate entrance and everything and it’s anything over 30% then I think you should file divided use. That would be my discussion with the client and I would leave it to the client to push back and take a more aggressive position. 50% it’s not even a discussion, but when it’s close to 30% then it becomes a discussion.
So there you have it. It’s still not common for the CRA to go after small time landlords with basement suites, but it’s quite clear that the landscape has changed. It’s possible that you can still argue a suite is ancillary if it’s less than 30% of your floor space, but even that is questionable given the technical interpretations that made no mention of a potential exemption for small suites. As the CRA said in their technical interpretation, “if two housing units can be enjoyed and ordinarily inhabited separate from each other without access to the other (that is, if each unit is a self-contained unit with its own entrance, kitchen and bathroom), it is our view they will generally be considered separate housing units for purposes of the PRE”
At this point, if you’re buying or building a rental suite on your property, consult a good accountant to get advice relevant to your specific property and situation.
In fact I’d say if you’re planning to put in or buy a property with a suite, your baseline assumption should be that you’ll be paying the capital gains on that portion of the property. If you don’t have to pay, consider it a bonus.
Also the weekly market activity:
| June 2025 |
June
2024
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | ||
| Sales | 185 | 375 | 555 | 661 | |
| New Listings | 427 | 808 | 1178 | 1495 | |
| Active Listings | 3729 | 3763 | 3797 | 3459 | |
| Sales to New Listings | 43% | 46% | 47% | 44% | |
| Sales YoY Change (per business day) |
— | +10% | +10% | -6% | |
| New Lists YoY Change (per business day) |
— | -6% | -3% | +15% | |
| Inventory YoY Change | +10% | +10% | +9% | +48% | |
| Months of Inventory | 5.2 | ||||
Reasonable sales pace continues, up 10% in terms of sales per business day, and we have an extra business day this June. New lists are about flat, which means the year over year inventory has slipped a bit in recent weeks, now down to 9% above the same time a year ago.
When buying a court ordered mortgage sale you could also be tasked with trying to remove the current tenant or previous owner. That involves more court proceedings and employing the assistance of a Sheriff, which costs more money and takes time. You may also be responsible for back taxes and outstanding utilities.
New post for June numbers: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2025/07/12/june-market-remains-stable-as-fear-fades/
There are a half dozen properties in the Victoria Core under court order to sell.
If you’re the kind of buyer who thrives on strategy and can stomach a bit of unpredictability, this route might be worth exploring.
There are pros and cons to buying a property under duress.
-Potential for below-Market Prices
-The sale is overseen by the court for fairness and public disclosure of offers
-No seller emotion
Some of the cons are:
-Sold “As-is, Where -is” No warranties, no repairs, and possible no chattels such as appliances.
-Limited access for inspection
-Court approval required
-Uncertain Title Issues
-Poseession challenges
-No guarantee of winning the bid.
It’s a common misconception that court-ordered sales always yield massive discounts. If the property is in good shape and market conditions are balanced, competition among buyers can keep prices close to fair market value.
Mortgage delinquencies—defined as payments overdue by 90+ days—have risen from 0.14% in 2022 to about 0.22% in early 2025, with projections suggesting they could hit 0.27% by Q3 2025, the highest in over a decade.
Should we be worried about the effect of these renewals on the market?
The short answer is not really as property values have not declined significantly. The home owner can still sell their home and if it were a conventional mortgage they might make a small profit due to mortgage paydown. While rising delinquencies might raise eyebrows, the resilience of property values is the safety net that’s keeping panic at bay.
How about forced sales?
Again not really. Banks offering support tools (like amortization extensions and refinancing), distressed selling hasn’t spiked in a meaningful way.
In short, the system is absorbing the shock—for now—largely thanks to solid equity positions and cautious lending during the pandemic. But if rates don’t keep easing and affordability gets worse, that equilibrium could start to wobble.
Many Canadians renewing pandemic-era mortgages are heading for a payment shock.
In 2025, 1.2 million mortgages are up for renewal—and 85% of them were signed during the ultra-low interest rate environment of the pandemic. Many of those rates were around 1.75%, but today’s market is very different.
Banks expect mortgage payments to rise by 15–20%, even for borrowers who were stress-tested at rates 2% higher than their original contract. That stress test may have helped ensure affordability, but it doesn’t prevent borrowers from facing real payment increases.
Most pandemic-era mortgages were stress tested, especially those issued by federally regulated lenders—commonly referred to as “A” lenders. These include major banks and credit unions. While the majority of pandemic-era borrowers were stress tested, there was a meaningful slice—especially in the private and alternative lending space—that wasn’t.
One option to ease the burden? Extend your amortization period by 5 years. While it increases long-term interest costs, it can significantly reduce monthly payments and help with short-term financial stability.
Bottom line: whether stress-tested or not, homeowners will feel the change.
5 year bond yield back above 3% now, a full round trip in a year. Interested to see how the market holds up in a prolonged 4% mortgage environment without expectations of further cuts.
Ok but as a landlord why do I need to rent to only 2 income families? I make a point not to rent to families due to a host of issues.
All you gotta do is think before you press “post comment”.
I was referring to 2 income families, jackass.
Bridge financing can be a useful tool when transitioning between properties, but it’s not without its risks. One of the biggest concerns is failing to sell your current property within the expected timeframe—and at the price you anticipated.
Lenders don’t always share your confidence in your property’s value. Many require a firm sale agreement before approving bridge financing, while others rely on appraisals—either conducted by humans or determined by algorithms. In fact, about 80% of property valuations today are generated by Automated Valuation Models (AVMs).
But here’s the catch: Canada has only a few AVM providers. If one AVM undervalues your property, and multiple lenders rely on that same model, your financing options could quickly narrow.
AVMs offer speed and scalability, but they can overlook the hyper-local nuances that human appraisers often catch—like neighborhood trends, recent upgrades, or curb appeal. That gap between perceived algorithmic value and actual market value can become a serious hurdle, particularly when time is tight. The benefit of an AVM is that it is quick and near instant approval.
I hear several people on this platform complain about appraisals, but the chances are that it was done by an AVM not a human. The downside for the lender is if the AVM is wrong and the lender suffers a loss, they can not sue the AVM company. The lender is willing to accept a higher loss in mortgages for a lower cost and approval speed to themselves for a valuation. For example I came across a condominium in Victoria where the BC Assessment inputed the assessment incorrectly. Since the AVM heavily relies on the assessed value the lender was at risk. In this case the lender became suspicious and had a human perform an appraisal.
Here is one of the largest AVMs in Canada
https://www.rpsrealsolutions.com/automated-valuation-models/
Lol another horrible take, guess you never heard of roommates…. Lmao
With AI replacing tech workers every day, many renters will not be able to afford anything. Canada already has a relatively high unemployment rate, add to that government cutbacks (Victoria is a government city) and the prospect of finding a renter that can afford $4000+ rent is becoming bleak. Investing in single dwelling properties has become infeasible. Soaring insurance rates and property taxes to feed the hungry beast also contribute. Heaven forbid the house needs any major repairs, you might never regain your investment.
Speaking of broadmead, 1015 Thistlewood just went pending at 1.56. 60k above ask and 100k above assessed. Nice big flat clear lot but will likely need more than one 4plex to make up for the land value.
Sounds like he or she would be selling at a loss based on the first comment?
There are no investors in the marketplace. Investors are phoning me on a regular basis to sell, no one is phoning me to buy rental properties.
I’ve started turning down rental property listings where seller expectations are too high. The tweak the government made last year increasing the notice period from two months to three months has actually made a huge impact in terms of selling a tenanted property.
Right now there are no investors in the marketplace, only end-users who want vacant possession.
10 year high in terms of inventory; therefore, there are options out there for end-users in terms of vacant properties (flexible completion/possession) or owner-occupied properties (also typically flexible in a slow market).
Then you throw in the government changing the notice period to three months. This means that a buyer making an offer today (early July) would not be able to secure vacant possession of tenanted property until early November. If you were to list in September the buyer is looking at vacant possession in January! What kind of end-user buyer is looking for property in September hoping to take possession in January when they can find something vacant or owner-occupied and move in in October? Also, the buyer doesn’t want to worry about the tenant challenging the notice, or similar issues when once again they can just buy a vacant property.
It has become so difficult selling tenanted properties that I’ve started recommending to my clients they try a mutual end to tenancy in exchange for multiple months of compensation (aka cash for keys) before listing.
In the past 15 years I was always very hesitant to recommend this approach to clients because my client would be out $ to tenant and then would potentially lose revenue each month sitting on a vacant property if it didn’t sell so definitively some risk; however, right now other option is you simply aren’t able to sell.
My advice….don’t get bridge financing unless you are a compulsive gambler and can afford the cost of the worst case scenario.
Looking at the rental market in Victoria. Massive amount of aparments but not many basement suites? That’s a complete switch from the past.
2025 , ya no capital gains on principal residence, so I would max that out before looking at buying a rental. Also residential rentals is a Shite return if there’s no property appreciation over a length of time .
Still unclear what you are trying to do. Are you wanting to sell your principal and rental property to upgrade to a better principal residence? Selling your rental will trigger a tax event if it’s done at a profit.
Groot, thank you. I had not heard of bridge financing. Top of the list when talking the bank broker next. There’s a higher rate and pressure to sell, but maybe less pressure than otherwise with that term. I wounder why more people don’t use this option.
VicRE-this is in a pretty desirable area. It has a bright future — when the overall market recovers.
But you know, I still feel that going into the stock market while looking for a house you don’t essentially need might be the better option, given the opportunity cost of sitting on cash for up to a year waiting on a property. Trying to upgrade to a “better” house from one that is solid can take longer in some ways than buying a first property or detached house. So it’s a bit of a different situation, no?
Thursty, what do you mean maxing out principle property first?
Edgar, thank you. To answer your questions, it is a one half duplex with a suite, in good condition because a lot of money was recently put into it. And yes, I am getting full market rent. But you know what? One of them recently gave notice so the agreement technically ends at the end of August, so it could potentially be rented empty. Would that be helpful? I for one have had mixed reads on that but then again proving recent rents would be almost as useful as tenanted situation for a potential investor (if there are many of those left).
Regarding my current primary, I would love to sell it too once a suitable new one is found in a new area of town, but to avoid taking decades to pay off the new mortgage and preserve other capital, probably it will be necessary to rent it out after the move. Financing seems to be unaffected by whether it is sold or not.
Thanks for your advice, and yeah I know the gap between a cheaper rental now and a more expensive new purchase incurs the market increase as well incentiving to sell/buy sooner rather than later where prices increase.
.>. Nanaimo covenant: “No building shall be erected on any of the said lands other than one private dwelling house”
Edgar,
The above excerpt from the Nanaimo covenants survived the case and is unaffected.
To me, that represents an ongoing prohibition against building a 4-plex.
Because a 4-plex isn’t “one private dwelling house”. That term has been used all over BC legal system, and always refers to the dwelling unit, not the whole building.
‘Note that the Nanaimo judge specifically addressed this and said that he was not saying a 4-plex is “one dwelling house”. He said “My task is not to rule on whether a fourplex meets the definition of “one private dwelling house” in the building scheme”. That indicates to me that the building of a 4-plex could still be challenged by another case to enforce the existing covenant, under the argument that a 4-plex isn’t one dwelling house, it is 4.
Perhaps there is some other reason that this clause in the covenants wasn’t dealt with in the case?
If the rental is in a undesirable area then dump it. location, location, location. Buy the shittiest house in the nicest neighborhood you can afford, it’s that simple.
Ask your bank about bridge financing.
Bridge financing is a short-term loan used to “bridge” a financial gap until more permanent funding becomes available. It’s like a financial stopgap that helps individuals or businesses stay afloat during transitions.
Common Uses
– Real estate: Homebuyers use bridge loans to purchase a new property before selling their current one.
Key Features
– Short duration: Typically lasts from a few weeks to a year.
– Higher interest rates: Because of the short term and risk involved.
– Collateral-backed: Often secured by assets like property.
Pros and Cons
| Pros | Cons |
| Quick access to funds | Higher interest rates |
| Flexibility in usage | Short repayment terms |
| Enables time-sensitive deals | Risk of over-leveraging or default |
Bridge financing can be a lifesaver when timing is critical—but it’s not without its risks.
My 2 cents would be don’t think too hard , probaly wont matter much . The one thing I would say is maxing out principle property before buying a rental for what it’s worth
so you want to sell your rental, keep your current principal and buy a new principal? As marko had noted, if you are trying to sell a property that’s currently tenanted then you will need to take a further discount.
I was in a pretty similar spot about a year ago. I ended up selling two rentals and my primary condo to buy a SFH in a nicer area.
Hard to give solid advice without knowing a few more details. Is your rental a condo, townhouse, or SFH? I’m guessing you’re cash flowing because your tenants are paying close to market rate? Would they consider ending their lease early if you offered them a bit of money? That can make it way easier to sell without a lease in place. Are you also planning to sell your current primary first before buying something else?
Honestly, the short-term market is just too hard to predict. If you’re hoping to buy something that’s going to be really attractive once it hits the market, selling first can definitely help. Being in a position to make an unconditional offer with a solid deposit and quick close makes a big difference in securing properties that are going to generate a lot of interest. But if you can make those kind of offer and buy without selling first, maybe it’s worth waiting.
One thing to keep in mind is that if you’re buying and selling in the same market, waiting for prices to rise is actually worse when you are upgrading. Say your condo is worth $500K and your house is worth $1.2M, and you’re eyeing a $2M property. If the market goes up 5%, your condo is now $525K, your house is $1.26M, but that $2M place is now $2.1M. Even though your assets went up, you’re actually worse off since the gap got bigger. And that’s assuming condos and houses go up at the same rate, which they usually don’t. SFH tend to do better.
Also, I wouldn’t put short-term money into equities. I personally just found a bank offering a promo rate on a high interest savings account and parked my money there while I was waiting to buy. Got 5% and didn’t have to worry about anything. Trying to squeeze out an extra couple percent isn’t worth the risk if your time horizon is short
Hi All, There’s obviously a lot of experienced posters here, so I’d like to jump in with any advice or information important to my decision to sell or hold, if possible?
I have a rental property near the core generating a modest few hundred dollars a month positive cash flow, but of course the price has been more or less flat the past few years. I’m in the market to buy a new primary residence over the next year, and a more liquid investment or cash would help to close. The more recent reports I’ve read — mortgage sandbox, TD, RBC, CREA — suggest modest growth or decline in 2025 and increased moderate upside in 2026.
My working plan is to sell in August/September after observing the affects of the next BOC rate announcement, but naturally I worry the market could turn to the upside in the fall winter spring for any unforeseeable reason, and this could be a tactical mistake. As to where to park the money, this should be in guaranteed accounts, which is what I have done in the past, but I may instead park it in dividend funds because there is more upside potential in these this year than real estate and because if the market does go down, I can choose not to buy a new house and hold (less than ideal, but avoids a loss). On the other hand, having to pass up on a great new house to avoid losing some money is an opportunity cost all its own.
I’d love to hear an opinion or two or personal experiences on this one. Probably there are a lot of people in similar situations.
It’s summer. I think we can allow our blog host to take some holiday, lol
You can say no if you haven’t started yet: https://www.stephensandholman.com/blog/what-happens-when-an-executor-refuses-to-act-in-bc/
My understanding is that executors can be personally liable if they distribute the estate before paying the debts. You need to pay the debts first. But here you should probably consult a lawyer.
Sorry this has become a burden in what may already be a tough time!
… I would think between the province possibly stepping in and a judge I wouldn’t be confident those covenants hold up for the distant future.
Yes, the BC government could just pass a law to over ride any of these covenants. I don’t think they will though.
I’m not a landlord, but there are easier ways to invest in RE.
e.g. H&R REIT stock (hr-un.to) is in play for an expected buyout. Stock trading at $12.38 cad. 4.8% Div. Has NAV of $20.62/share. Globe and mail reports multiple recent buyout offers from big players – Blackstone, Canada federal pension manager (psp), and Crestpoint. Obviously has risks of no deal occurring, so do your own DD.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-blackstone-us-equity-funds-in-talks-to-buy-hr-assets-as-activist/
https://www.hr-reit.com/investor-relations/#stock-information
I haven’t seen the covenant for broadmead however the verbiage used in the Nanaimo case was fairly standard for its time (around the same timeframe as when the broadmead covenants would have been put into place). Maybe it is worded well and they would be able to uphold their restrictions but I would think between the province possibly stepping in and a judge I wouldn’t be confident those covenants hold up for the distant future.
The problematic paragraph in the Nanaimo case was:
No building shall be erected on any of the said lands other than one private dwelling house together with a garage and/or other suitable outbuildings appurtenant to the said dwelling per lot as the same is now defined which dwelling house shall be not less than 1400 square feet in area (exclusive of garage or other outbuildings) subject to proviso set out in Section 3 hereof, and the owner of such dwelling house shall use same only as a private dwelling for not more than one family.
I think most people would read that and think only sfh would be allowed but the judge scrapped the last section after the final comma and interpreted the rest as allowing a fourplex
<…. the fact that BARA has never tested their sfh restriction in court likely has more to do with the previous economics of developing in Broadmead than the covenant being strong. I
I haven’t seen the exact wording of the Broadmead covenants… have you? The judge in the Nanaimo case was not saying that a 4-plex could be considered a single-family-dwelling. He actually reaffirmed that the term single-family-dwelling is unambiguous “ there is no doubting the meaning of “single-family dwelling.” I read that as the judge saying he would enforce the covenant if it had said “only a single-family-dwelling can be built”. But it didn’t say that. The term “single family dwelling” has specific legal meaning, and has been used for at least 100 years in municipal bylaws, building codes, tax assessments, real estate transactions etc.
The problem with the Nanaimo covenant was that it didn’t mention what type of dwellings could be built, and didn’t say “single-family-dwelling” . The only reference was to what “usage” an owner could make of his dwelling, specifically the odd covenant phrase that “ and the owner of such dwelling house shall use same only as a private dwelling for not more than one family.” So if someone has a grandparent living with them, would that violate the covenant as that might imply two families, since the term family is not defined. So the judge decided that wording was ambiguous.
If the Broadmead covenants are poorly worded, only covering “use” of the dwelling by a single family, but making no comment on the dwelling itself, I could see the Nanaimo case having relevance, Failing that, if they refer to the dwelling type, and use any language like “single-family-dwelling” , there is the nothing I see in the Nanaimo case decision to weaken them.
Maybe if someone posts the wording from a Broadmead covenant, it would clarify this.
Marko- Provincial governments have constitutional authority over land use and property law so the BC Legislature can pass laws that override or nullify restrictive covenants if it’s in the public interest which would be a fairly easy sell given the housing situation. They already did this previously with the Agricultural Land Commission Act which makes private covenants that conflict with the act unenforceable.
If I was a developer and the right property came up in Broadmead that would be zoned for 6 stories under the SSMUH legislation I would be very tempted to try to develop it.
Patrick – the fact that BARA has never tested their sfh restriction in court likely has more to do with the previous economics of developing in Broadmead than the covenant being strong. I also don’t live in Broadmead so I am not overly invested either way but I agree that I do like the neighborhood the way it is now.
>> I don’t think the economics are there for a developer to go through with removing the covenants to develop which is what will keep fourplexes from being built, rather than the covenants actually being strong and enforceable
Fourplexes and other missing middle multiplexes have been a flop, with small insignificant numbers. The advocates have fallen silent.
Better to build giant towers (what people can afford) and SFH (what people want and some can afford).
But I don’t think many people want to buy an expensive small missing middle unit and live in it.
Yes, it would be surprising to see someone motivated enough to challenge the Broadmead covenants so they could build a 4-plex.
BARA (Broadmead) reports they’ve never needed to fight a challenge in court, which says something for the strength of their covenants. I don’t live there, so don’t care all that much. But Broadmead is a nice SFH neighborhood, and I hope it stays that way.
Can the province blanket override covenants like they overrode strata bylaws (previous no rentals, age restrictions, etc.) if they wanted to?
I am thinking if someone attempted a fourplex in Broadmead or Dean Park (like got a building permit from the municipality) and then the association sued them it wouldn’t look good if the government didn’t step in to address the matter.
I think the reason the Dean Park association was so upset with North Saanich is they know without the restriction at the municipal level privately it is much more difficult to enforce.
I find it so intriguing how people would have a meltdown over secondary suites in Oak Bay, etc., and then bam all of a sudden fourplexes being built in South Oak Bay on residential streets. Kind of crazy how quickly things shifted.
I sat through so many years of strata AGMs with people yelling and visibly upset over rental bylaws, age bylaws, etc. In one building people spent years campaigning to introduce rental restrictions and after many years of meetings, arguments, motions, etc., they finally voted in something then bam the government bans rental restrictions. And guess what, life goes on. So what the person living next to you is a renter and not an owner – big deal. Easier to get rid of anyway if they are problematic.
What Bara says the covenants say and the actual words of the covenant are not the same thing the actual covenants would have to use quite precise language that would not have been common during the time that the covenants were written.
The one family wording is specifically what was addressed in the Nanaimo case and was removed from the covenant. Then the covenant just becomes one dwelling building which becomes a fourplex or more of the zoning is there.
I don’t think the economics are there for a developer to go through with removing the covenants to develop which is what will keep fourplexes from being built, rather than the covenants actually being strong and enforceable
Why would that be different compared to anywhere else in Saanich?
The wording in the Broadmead covenants is quite clear, and is worded differently than Nanaimo. It is summarized here. Not sure if you could convince a judge that 4 separate suites in a building was using the dwelling as a SINGLE family residence. I mean the term “SFH” is quite clear everywhere in housing and not confusing. And it doesn’t mean a 4 suite multi-plex. And there are other Broadmead covenants that also refer to no more than a “single family” residing on the property, which would be another hurdle to overcome. It might be possible to build the 4-suite building if you convinced the judge that it was intended for one extended “family”. But the matter could be relitigated if 4 separate families moved in, because the covenants don’t end with getting a building permit. They also cover “usage” of the property by one family max. Presumably a SFH with no suite but two separate families living in could violate the “one dwelling, one family” Broadmead covenants.
https://broadmead.ca/broadmead.ca/uploads/2021/04/14bBugleFall.pdf
“ The Covenants on the properties throughout Broadmead are clear that no building shall be used for any purpose other than as a single family residence. That is, secondary suites for the purposes of rental income are not allowed. As well, the Covenants state that no lot shall have erected upon it more than one dwelling for one family or household.”
Executor of an estate. I really need help here. Are we really on the hook for debts and property taxes? Can I just say no? They can have the estate…I don’t even want it. Can someones passing become my problem?
North Saanich at the time (I was living in Dean Park) had hired a lawyer and the they argued that the definition of “one family home” or whatever the wording in the covenant was has evolved over time.
Not a lawyer, but I would think so too. I like how these controlled subdivisions never enforce certain covenant restrictions like cedar shake roofs only.
I think if someone was willing to put up the time and risk there is a pretty decent chance of being able to remove the single family restriction for broadmead or dean park. The Nanaimo language that caused the judge to throw out the single family restriction was fairly common language used in the past so if it is present in either neighborhood covenants I think they would have similar results. Also the selective enforcement of other restrictions would weaken the case for upholding the covenant. It might be worth the risk for developers to look into it a bit for land that would be zoned for more than just a fourplex
No, the Dean Park covenants are still fully valid, and in force. It was unnecessary for the municipality to provide a second “zoning” layer of support to Dean Park, where other covenant neighbourhoods didn’t receive that, so they just removed it. But anyone wanting to develop something that violated covenants in Dean Park would likely face civil litigation from the Dean Park covenant holders , delaying or preventing the development from occurring.
Despite appearances I’m not actually dead. Just in and out + work. Will get a June post out before I’m off again for a bit.
If they removed all the covenants, maybe someone wants to build a 6 story apartment block (with no parking!) in Broadmead , because it’s zoned for that because it’s close to the royal oak transit exchange (aka “bus stop”). As I’ve said, I don’t see this happening, without significant legislative changes to laws regarding covenants, that would probably involve years of legal challenges too.
Yes, this is correct. It needs to be a civil lawsuit, with the developer waiting years and paying legal fees to get a decision.
And the municipalities of course do not enforce covenants, it is a civil matter between the parties to the covenant. This is nothing new. None of the cases we’ve seen cited here on HHV hinged on the legislative changes removing protections from covenants, cause there hasn’t been any. With upzoning there are of course more opportunities for multiunits dwellings, so that’s why we are seeing more of them now.
The few cases I’m familiar with saw the covenant enforced and the would-be developer losing. Those were about 5 years ago, but I don’t see why anything would be different today. Wake me up when someone can build a 4-plex in Broadmead. Not some one-off case in Squamish that was settled because the covenant holder company doesn’t exist, or a covenant in Nanaimo was (partially ) rejected because it was poorly worded.
Does anyone even have the desire to build a fourplex in Broadmead?
I believe as it stands now the broadmead and dean park covenants are private covenants that are not enforced by the municipality and the municipality should still issue a permit provided it meets their other requirements.
The article you linked was north saanich removing the municipal protection for dean park as previously the district aligned their zoning in recognition of the covenant. The residence association could try to sue and stop the building of a fourplex but I am unsure how successful they would be.
I would guess we haven’t seen this come to head as there is no guarantee they would win the lawsuit and that’s a lot of risk to take for the potential to build a fourplex in broadmead
Try taking a fir tree down in Broadmead. Even if its causing a serious upheaval on the house foundation. That whole area was just a really bad building scheme from the start, with all the fir trees pretty much being part of the house.
North Saanich already steamrolled the Dean Park covenant in regards to suites -> https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/dean-park-exemption-set-to-be-pulled-32649
not sure under the same principal why they won’t allow fourplexes in Dean Park/Broadmead either?
I also find the Dean Park/Broadmead covenants interesting as the “association” clearly does not enforce certain things, but they try to enforce other things like real estate signs.
I think it would depend on the wording of the broadmead covenant. It certainly would be stronger as I believe it is managed by the broadmead area residents association which is still operating. Even so it could easily get tossed for vague wording such as this covenant in Nanaimo which used the wording “private dwelling for not more than one family” which the judge stated makes it an “uncertain and unenforceable covenant.”
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2025/2025bcsc1202/2025bcsc1202.html
I think it unlikely that this case would have any implications for the Broadmead or Dean Park Covenants. In this Squamish case, it was the developer (GPEL) that controlled the restrictions, not the house owners. And since GPEL went out of business in 1983, the judge stated that it was unlikely that any of the restrictions could have been enforced after 1983. Which means the recent upzoning was not required to stop the restrictions. The Broadmead restrictions are different, and not dependent on approval by the original developer.
I thought this was already known when the Province made the changes to STR rules?
Interesting case -> https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2025/2025bcsc1239/2025bcsc1239.html
Looks like old covenants cannot be relied on to hault new developments in neighbourhoods.
Wonder what the implications are for Broadmead and Dean Park in Victoria.
https://cheknews.ca/victoria-greenlights-massive-roundhouse-development-at-historic-rail-site-1265371/
Haven’t seen this posted here yet, sounds like the plan is 2,000 residential units. Interesting to watch this one develop.
Yeah man. I can hear those registers ringing all they way out here in Langford. Buy now or be priced out forever!
Groot, good stuff , Canada has mega potential to hit it out of the economic park. Downtown Vic is slammed these days and the cash register‘s are a ringing .
Lmao how many of you went to the Saanich council meeting on Monday and started heckling?
It’s more to do with the front running of the proposed and delayed tariffs (which eventually may or may not happen – the TACO factor). If the tariffs end up at 20% more, there will be a lot of pain in the US stock market due to inflation and/or lower corporate earnings. Someone has to pay the piper, and is mostly the importing country.
Comforting to know that at this key time of economic threats our government is laser focused on key legislative priorities.
Since Trump’s tariff wars, I haven’t seen strawberries at $5 for 2 pounds (I thought we went metric?) consistently for a long time. It seems there are cheaper places to get our produce, thanks Mr.Trump. I guess our dollar buys a lot more pesos.
Here you go Thursty – positive news.
Canada appears to be successfully rebalancing its trade strategy. While our exports to the United States have declined sharply, exports to the rest of the world have surged—so much so that our overall trade deficit has narrowed. This pivot away from a U.S.-centric trade model is starting to pay off.
In contrast, the U.S. is seeing its trade deficit grow—ironically, the exact opposite of what President Trump aimed to achieve. His protectionist policies seem to have had limited impact, and it’s no surprise he may be feeling the pressure as their trade deficit has gotten larger not smaller.
There’s still much work ahead, but I’m cautiously optimistic about Canada’s economic outlook. We’re actively signing new trade agreements with partners across the globe (16 so far), and it’s clear that the world is eager to do business with a stable democratic country that honors trade agreements.
Yeah we had a big recession back in the eighties. I was just a kid but I seen it. That was mainly the collapse of the logging industry and the commercial fishing industry followed by the real estate industry. The financial industry was struggling with defaults resulting in the collapse of the construction industry.
This cascades down into the retail industry, restaurant industry, service sector industry.
It was very real, it happened, right here in the CRD.
Groot, yep would agree , and it’s looking like we have at least 1 flat quarter coming . Even as recessions go , it doesn’t look like it will be too much of a downer
Most often the cause of a decline in the real estate market is a recession.
Groot, would be fair to say that prices have already been trending up in Vic (sfd). What would be the catalyst for lower lower prices . The only stress in the Canadian real estate market is condo’s in Van and T.O and that’s s not a big deal
Thursty, positive news for me would be a slight decline in prices that would lead to an increase is sales activity.
Even with the decline in population, Victoria home prices have remained stable. Vancouver, and the Fraser Valley seem to be getting slapped harder.
Actually the slight fall in BC population is mostly from a sizable drop in foreign students, (down 11.4% or 18k over 12 months) (NPR, without working permits).
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/data/statistics/people-population-community/population/quarterly_population_highlights.pdf
“ The number of study permit holders in B.C. decreased by 11.4% in the last 12 months, changing from 154,511 to 136,877. Similarly, the percentage of NPRs holding a study permit in the province declined from 30.1% to 26.2% in the last 12 months. Individuals holding work and study permits decreased from 51,839 to 50,774 (-2.1%), with their share of the total NPRs in B.C. decreasing from 10.1% to 9.7% over the same period.
Groot, nothing to c here, I only want u to report positive news
Funny coincidence Thursty. Just looked at a condo that sold. The previous owner overpaid by $50,000 and that loss is magnified with time. They netted a hundred thousand less that if they had paid a fair value in the first place.
It’s already starting to happen. Moving from East to West – first Toronto and now Vancouver.
Month Jul Jul
Year 2025 2024
Net Unconditional Sales 107 650
New Listings 269 1,319
Active Listings 3,719 3,347
We might get to 3,800 listings end of this week and then should start trending down to the New Year.
Essentially nothing exciting to report.
Peter, I would agree, the thing younger folks don’t factor in is time. Buying a quality asset sooner than later (and who cares about the price) just means u will hold it longer and the power of inflation fix’s all your problems
British Columbia has recently experienced a population decline, marking the first quarterly population drop in nearly 75 years. This decline is primarily attributed to a slowdown in international migration and a net outflow of people moving to other provinces. While the province’s overall population remains above 5.7 million, the recent shift represents a significant change from recent years.
-From this morning’s AI news feed
I think there’s truth to this. And this is also one reason why over any longer term, owning real assets is necessary, and why owning RE anywhere in our desirable little corner of the world is a no-brainer if you have time on your side & don’t need to pick a “perfect” entry point. Plus which right now is probably a pretty good entry-point anyways.
Of course it’s easy to spout these platitudes. I’m just saying it b/c if someone on here has a strategy of being a longer-term renter waiting for some apocalypse, I think that’s a profoundly bad idea. Buy the best thing you can afford now while you can and figure the rest out later.
Don’t you mean Oak Island?
There is a Spanish leather boot filled with gold coins down a hidden stair case by the brass cannon out in Leechtown.
No shit…
https://thenav.ca/focus/the-legend-of-leechtowns-golden-boot/
There is no Chinese Jade on the island. Chinese Jade is beautiful. There’s some nice BC Jade along the Fraser River.. If you want to follow a prospector on you tube. Google Dan Hurd. He has a great selection of BC Ocean picture stone and does some placer mining along the Fraser. Or try Mount Baker Mining and Minerals or Black Opal Direct. If you like mining and gemstones they are pretty good to follow.
I never did run into any Chinese Jade while I was over there.
If your looking into Gems, you should look into Argillite.
Be warned, it comes with a curse unless gifted to you by the locals. If they catch you they’ll kill you and feed you to the crabs.
Big time money and you can find it here…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argillite
Have you ever done the West coast trail?
Lol that guy’s been broke since 2016
The Island is very big. I don’t really have the need nor the desire to ever leave the Island. The last time I left the Island was a road trip over to Van back in 2017 for the last leg of the Guns N Roses tour at BC Place. We stayed at the River Rock Casino Hotel and Sky-trained to the event…It was a blast!
Groot, thanks man , positive thinking is contagious , now get out there and spend .
And Vancouver is also a gem, made from Chinese Jade.
It seems that way in the downtown condo market Thursty. A sale at the Pearl is encouraging. Listed for 108 days and sold only $25,000 under ask on a $1,100,000 property.
Maybe all your cartwheels are starting to pay off.
Vancouver Island is a Gem.
Where is Leo, I’m thinking he’s pouring over his charts trying to figure out what happened. I don’t think he was expecting a 16 point rise in sales last month
I have been hearing from a few realtor Good Buddies , July is starting where June left off, with a strong start to the month
It certainly doesn’t seem like it is ever going to reset. And it isn’t something to wish for either as it would likely be catastrophic.
The troubling part is that unlike a natural resource boom, real estate doesn’t create new value in the same way—it often just reallocates wealth and debt. Cities start to feel less like places to live and more like investment portfolios made of glass and concrete. And the longer that cycle runs, the harder and more painful any correction becomes. China’s real estate market is still in the throes of a prolonged and painful correction—and it’s not over yet. Their home prices have dropped 20% over the past four years and could fall another 10% by 2027, according to Goldman Sachs. Real estate was once the engine of China’s growth, but now it’s a drag on the economy, contributing to youth unemployment, deflation, and sluggish demand
The upper echelon will kick that can down the road forever. The alternative would result in complete anarchy and the upper echelon have to live on this planet too. They will just print, and it will all be relative because everyone across the globe will be printing in unison. Monetizing National debt is just the new normal.
Its never going to reset man.
Frank and Max, you’ve touched on a perspective that’s quietly, but increasingly, being voiced by people watching this situation unfold with both frustration and fatigue. It actually reflects a growing school of thought among economists and housing policy critics who argue that heavy government involvement, even if well-intentioned, has disrupted the natural self-correction of housing markets.
When government becomes a market participant, whether through tax incentives, ultra-low interest rates, insured mortgages, or subsidies for both buyers and developers, it ceases to be a neutral regulator. The result? A feedback loop where price appreciation becomes not just a side effect but an implicit policy goal—because so much political and economic capital is tied up in the perception of ever-rising home values.
But without a reset, we don’t get affordability—just stagnation. Aid programs become lifelines not for new homeowners, but for the system itself, to prevent collapse. And meanwhile, the dream of homeownership slips further out of reach, which reinforces generational inequality and erodes trust in institutions.
In my view, had governments at all levels refrained from entangling themselves financially in the housing market—and resisted the urge to interfere with the natural ebb and flow of market forces—we might not be facing the crisis we see today. The market would have likely reached a peak and then corrected itself, as it’s meant to.
Instead, we’ve ended up in the worst of all possible scenarios. Rather than allowing a necessary reset, we’ve propped up an inflated system that now requires billions upon billions in public funds just to sustain a deeply flawed status quo.
The trouble with raising these concerns is that, depending on who hears them, you risk being labeled either a leftist or a right-wing extremist. It’s as if nuance no longer has a seat at the table—and honest critique gets misread as partisan rhetoric.
To mute, or not to mute: that is the question:
Whether “tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of ourageous comments,
Or to take arms aganst a sea of troubles
and by opposing end them
Or for the contempory crowd
“Shake it off”
https://youtube.com/shorts/I6IcxpG6ipw?si=CLF9NJfeT4Nqqzva
What will happen is greedy pigs will get too fat, the people will finally have had enough of this inequality, and the greedy fat pigs will be lynched and hanging from lamp posts.
When I ran Totoro’s comment through AI – this is what I got
https://youtube.com/shorts/dPe3saieG2o?si=xKnsP82G63zBSQP-
I ran my previous comment through AI and here’s what it came up with.
Concept: Mixed-Use Multiplex Model under Unified Title
Core Idea:
Build medium-density multiplex developments where:
– A portion of units are tailored to investors seeking stable returns.
– The remaining units are designed for home occupiers, particularly first-time buyers or downsizers.
– All units exist under a single land title, easing financing and management complexities, especially for small-to-mid-size investors.
Benefits
– Investor Appeal:
Consolidated ownership across multiple rentable units improves ROI potential and operational efficiency (vs. scattered condo holdings).
– Homebuyer Fit:
Units designed with end-users in mind—larger floor plans, private entrances, outdoor space, maybe even co-housing or extended family use.
– Market Segmentation:
By intentionally separating the design purpose (investor vs. occupier), price escalations in one segment don’t inherently inflate the other.
– Financing for Developers:
Pre-sale incentives can still function for the investor units, while market need drives demand for occupier-friendly homes.
What Might Be Needed for This to Work
– Zoning Adjustments:
Municipalities may need to permit more flexible land use models, especially around ownership structure and density allowances.
– Innovative Financing Structures:
Perhaps a hybrid mortgage/investment product tailored to properties held under single title but with multiple rentable doors.
– Developer Buy-In:
Incentives for building this type of stock—either via tax breaks, increased floor space ratio, or expedited approvals.
– Marketing to End Users:
Positioning the occupier units not as traditional condos, but as high-functioning alternatives to detached homes or character conversions.
The groundwork for what could be a thoughtful response to housing demand diversity—and a practical pivot away from the “investor versus owner” tension.
If the general population will not be able to purchase their own home, the wealth disparity will only increase over time. Is this the type of country you want to live in, most people being subservient to the wealthy? Sounds like the Middle Ages to me.
Totoro is correct there have only been very few legal four-plexes or multiplexes built within the last hundred years. With Accessory Dwelling Units, properties with three self contained units are becoming more common. These fill a niche market that allows the home owner to live in one suite and rent the basement and ADU separetly. Today’s equivalent of purchassing a converted older character home.
But for an investor desiring a property as a stand alone investment they are less than ideal. The only option left for those investors is to purchase individual condominiums for their rental income that are most often in different buildings around the city. That is an expensive way to aquire and manage multi units. That market has also fallen off substantially lately because the return on the investment is not adequite.
Most of the rhetoric today is get investors back into the game so that pre-sales return and developers can obtain financing and more mid- and hi-rises can be built. The problem is that drives up prices for condominiums and we end up with condominiums that fit investors needs and not what first time home owners want to live in. When prices are driven higher then sales fall off.
I wanted to float the idea of a mixed use building. Where it is possible to build multiplex units under one Title that fits investors needs to obtain a return on investment and build other units that fit the physical needs of home occupiers. The two are not in competition with each other as they fit different needs and theorteically would not be driving up the prices for home occupiers.
If one of the goals is to encourage investors to return to the market and thereby increase pre-sales this might be something worth further exploration.
Economies of scale for pretty much everything especially if the layouts and finishings are the same.
Good call, gona mute also.
Multiplex homes built on single-family lots are simply too costly to construct to generate returns that attract private investors. As a result, they won’t be produced in the volume needed to meaningfully address the housing shortage. Homeowners in the neighborhoods that need them most are often adamantly opposed. The economics usually don’t work—and the politics can be even tougher.
These challenges don’t apply when incorporating small-scale rental investment properties within new condominium complexes. Multiplex-style rentals/flexible units that remain part of the resale market can attract future small-scale investors—people seeking an investment to fund their retirement. By being embedded in owner-occupied or mixed-use communities, these rental units are often better maintained, attract more stable tenants, and avoid the social pushback that accompanies larger, rental-only developments.
Yes, we have a missing middle problem. But by limiting new construction to individual condos and large, purpose-built rentals, we may be creating another issue: the slow disappearance of small-scale investors. The “mom-and-pop” landlords—those who want a unit for themselves and a couple to support extended family or supplement retirement—are being squeezed out of the market.
I’m surprised by your reaction to this mental exercise in thinking outside of the norm, especially given your support for co-operative and jointly owned multiplexes.
I can find many reasons why this may not workdo, but that doesn’t mean we should stop trying. Totoro, you should let past resentments go, as healing begins with self-awareness and willingness to change.
“You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.” – Navajo
I have seen many duplexes and (quad) fourplexes. The money is in the four-plex. One foundation, one roof, and four units.
There’s a collapse in SFH housing starts in Victoria. Almost net zero additional SFH in Core Victoria when teardowns are considered. So what’s left to build if not SFH? Obviously multi-units of some kind. 47% of all housing starts last year in Canada were PBR, and it’s higher in Victoria. Few homebuyers can buy new SFH, they are expensive and there aren’t that many new ones to go around. That leaves homebuyers to buy condos, so that market will still have lots of buyers. As well as investor/landlords wanting to own condos.
The disappearing dwelling type in core Victoria new construction is SFH.
Legal three units one roof with one title.
What do you mean by triplex? I get its a group of three.
converting the first three or four floors into multi-unit rental strata could offer a compelling alternative to the traditional triplex investment model
I’m getting tired of all the AI jibber jabber. It might as well be I-am-Grok. These little nuggets are a good example of why AI is not a substitute for real informed critical thought- at least not yet.
Any owner can rent out their unit so its not like the first three floors will be rentals and the rest owner occupied. Not possible to restrict owned units from becoming rentals in BC. And you don’t have to attend Council meetings. Minutes are distributed. “Oh no… you can’t buy one – you have to take three”. There is a reason why you do not see this marketing strategy. And you need to understand the actual math of owning three units vs. ex. investing in the stock market. And how many actual triplexes are there on the market – not many – and those that do come on in Victoria are 100 years old.
Muted.
I’m trying to understand how this pivoting strategy works. Are the units actually registered with the LTSA as individual strata lots?
I spoke with a retired BC Assessor who shared that during a previous market downturn, many developers shifted from selling to renting. However, even though the buildings were operated as rentals, the units themselves had individual legal descriptions and could be sold separately—which meant they were assessed individually as strata lots, not as a single apartment building with one title.
That distinction had major implications for property taxes. Individually stratified units tend to be assessed at a much higher value than rental buildings held under a single title.
I would rather rent a condo in the core…Than buy a condo in the core. I don’t give a shit about the minuets or the strata corporation or the political bullshit that comes with it. I would rather just rent the condo.
Condominiums can be appealing because they’re generally lower maintenance and often located in desirable urban areas. But if rent controls are strict or market appreciation is stagnant, the upside narrows dramatically—especially once you factor in strata fees, insurance, and vacancy risks.
Here’s why investors might hold back:
– Limited rent growth: If they can’t increase rent over time, returns can stagnate or even shrink due to rising costs.
Regulatory risk: Cities like Victoria and others in BC have introduced or are discussing tighter rental regulations, which can spook investors.
High carrying costs: Condos often come with high monthly fees and special assessments, squeezing margins further.
The truth is, when market confidence isn’t there, little short of direct subsidy or co-investment will push a shovel into the ground.
Lots of pivoting right now. A number of projects have now cancelled pre-sale contracts and converted to purpose built rental. It’s happened to my clients on two pre-sale projects now.
I also had clients buy a brand new condo last week at City Gate in Langford and the building completes in August and pre-sales just recently started. When I talked to the sales team about why they started pre-sales only a few months prior to completion/occupancy they noted developer is building 1,300 units across BC right now and waiting until the last minute to decide whether to keep as purpose built rental or to sell. This project in Langford they decided to sell.
Sales have been much better than they anticipated, they sold 41 units in the first 30 days. They credit the brisk sale due to the federal GST rebate for first time buyers. Also, market is extremely price sensitive. The two bedroom two bathroom units they had around 500k on the 1st and 2nd floor all sold but once you get to the upper floors where the same units are 540-580ish (and the views are much better) those aren’t moving nearly as fast. .
Yeah.
Developers won’t touch it unless there’s money in it. For the needy… View towers is how they should be built.
While this is just a thought experiment, it’s likely that the government would need to offer incentives to developers to encourage the creation of small-scale Purpose-Built Rentals (PBRs) with three or four units in say a 50 unit condo building.
Over time, though, this approach could significantly expand the rental stock in Victoria and give small-scale investors a viable alternative to traditional triplexes and fourplexes.
There’s no quick fix to the housing crisis. The solution will almost certainly involve a combination of strategies—each contributing in its own way.
More like a old Trevor linden Canucks jersey and some beat up new balance runners…..
These were developer sold and developer rented. I was surprised , but needs must I suppose.
I understand that, but they are owned (even if rented).
Max, you can mix oil and water together using an emulsifier like egg yolk. It’s called mayonnaise.
Just like most of the downtown condos are a mixture of home occupiers and renters. The egg yolk are investors.
Not that one. 4030 Shelbourne the newest one next door.
Not like that at all Patrick.
Owning three or four separate condos across multiple buildings comes with the burden of attending several strata council meetings—not to mention the ongoing coordination and time commitments. In contrast, having three rental units under a single title significantly streamlines management.
A detached triplex is one way to achieve this, but it comes with full responsibility for exterior maintenance. What I’m proposing is a hybrid alternative: a property that offers multi-unit income potential while minimizing the hassle of strata complexity and upkeep.
Of course, this type of property won’t be inexpensive—just like a larger three-bedroom condo wouldn’t be. However, with three units, you not only increase gross rental income but also reduce the risk of complete vacancy. The probability of all three units being unoccupied simultaneously is far lower than relying on a single tenant.
And in a market like Victoria—where there’s a growing number of affluent buyers looking for strong, reliable cash flow—this hybrid model hits a sweet spot of income, efficiency, and risk management.
It won’t mix. Its like water and oil. Its one or the other.
>.> Repurposing of less desirable strata units into an attractive, low-fuss income property model.
That’s what happened in much of the USA after the 2008 GFC. Many apartment blocks in Seattle had just been built to sell condo units, but switched to all rentals when they were unable to sell the condo units at reasonable prices.
I don’t see that happening much here, since most of the recent multi-units are built as PBR to begin with.
Repurposing of less desirable strata units into an attractive, low-fuss income property model.
In most high-rise buildings, the lowest-floor condos—those facing busy roads, lacking views, or looking directly into other structures—typically sell at the lowest price points. These units also tend to be the most challenging to resell in flat or declining markets, though they still fetch decent rental income.
In a 20-storey high-rise, converting the first three or four floors into multi-unit rental strata could offer a compelling alternative to the traditional triplex investment model. These strata units would appeal to investors seeking low-maintenance rental properties, especially since structural upkeep would fall under the strata council’s responsibility—not the owner’s.
Access could be further optimized by programming key fobs to limit entry to specific floors, enhancing security and privacy for tenants. This setup could deliver solid rental yields with fewer headaches than owning a detached triplex, all within a managed building environment.
If the building you are thinking of was 4000 Shelbourne. The last one on the real estate board was listed for $899,000 and sold for $1,130,000. It wasn’t a multi-plex but a 2 bedroom condo with a small guest suite that had a kitchenette.
The multi-plex strata would be something I would be interested in rather than a traditional tri-plex revenue property. Could provide a nice retirment income with less maintenance issues.
There’s that newly built condo on Shelbourne that is partly owned units, partly rented. Presumably they were having a hard time selling them even once built.
I don’t think mixing would work. A tenant verses an owner would just be trouble in the same building. A commercial tenant(s) down below works well though.
Another Option for the Missing Middle?
A high-rise condominium with a mix of individually owned units and purpose-built rental clusters could offer both financial and social benefits, though it would come with some complexity.
Combining 3–4 rental units into a single strata title is feasible and would be considerably less costly than building a free-standing multiplex on a freehold residential lot. This form of vertical multiplexing would reduce the land cost per unit.
We already have comparable models—often under hotel brands such as Parkside Victoria. However, what I’m proposing differs in that there are currently no examples of a freehold strata building that includes clusters of individually owned rental units that investors can purchase.
Of course, these investor-owned clusters would not be managed as hotel suites or used for short-term rental. They would function similarly to a triplex or fourplex, operating as long-term rental housing within a shared strata framework.
Just a thought experiment.
Yeah, they probably have a cell phone contract, buy extended warranties and wear Patagonia.
Sounds like a government union drone.
For some people that’s not enough. When I was young building spec houses I almost lost my shirt…Twice. Back in 1994 if you approached a bank asking for financing to construct a spec house the answer was no. It was all through private lenders. They wanted 12% on their money drawn up by a lawyer in the form of an 18 month demand loan.
Back then it was the wild west, no builders license, no HPO#. I would build it out in four months and live in it for twelve months for the capital gains exception and the GST rebate (perfectly legal back then). It was perfect, this is great…until it isn’t.
Sometimes you get stuck. The fucking thing won’t sell…Bad timing!
I was lucky enough to wiggle out…And I made out like a bandit.
Those that have a crushing mortgage burden…Made their own bed.
I hit the send button by accident and too soon on that one Thursty.
What I wanted to express was that no one can be sure what is happening without deeper analysis.
Groot, lol ya nobody wants to see that.
Rah-rah real estate all you want, Thursty—just try not to flash the crowd while you’re cartwheeling.
Groot , or maybe another leg up . It’s tough for a lot of folks to admit it’s a balanced market with some legs. Waiting for the next shoe to drop is a tough way to go through life .
That’s a nuance that often gets lost in headline numbers. Median prices can be deceptively static, especially when the composition of what’s selling shifts. If newer, larger, or better-located units are trading hands for the same median price as smaller or older ones last year, it’s a clear sign of softening beneath the surface.
It’s like the value is eroding quietly before it gets loud enough to show up in the official stats. First you get better quality for the same money—then, if downward pressure keeps building, actual sticker prices start to fall. It’s a pattern that often precedes noticeable dips in market-wide indices.
And that’s what Patrick might also be seeing in the stats. With all of the price decreases this year in condos perhaps more people are willing to purchase over last year as they are getting more value for the same price?
Could this be a dead cat bounce? Increased activity from value-seeking buyers could absolutely create the illusion of renewed momentum, but if the fundamentals—like inventory build-up, buyer fatigue, or tighter lending—are still exerting downward pressure, then that bounce might just be gravity’s pause before another leg down.
.
..>.>… Condos are down substantially more than the numbers would indicate, but it takes a deeper level of market understand to clue into that.
Condo prices are remarkably stable and selling 3% above July 1, 2024 assessment. And sales robust, vreb:”Sales of condominiums increased by 23.3 per cent from June 2024 with 249 units sold”
Once again not reflective of what is really going on. The indexes don’t adjust for quality of product like a well run strata or a strata with a 100k special assessment coming up, and a ton of other factors. When the market is flooded with inventory what are buyers going to buy into when they have options?
Condos are down substantially more than the numbers would indicate, but it takes a deeper level of market understand to clue into that.
Ya sure unless if they are trying to unload something downtown…….
Burdensome is not the same as delinquent. Neither is burdensome the same as crushing.
Only 1 in 1,000 Victoria mortgages is delinquent by more than 3 months (source:CMHC) . Close to an all-time low. Despite this described crushing mortgage burden. Seems to me that 999/1000 Victoria homeowners are “living the life”, and packing on equity each month.
Victoria (vreb) condo benchmark does that, so does teranet, and so does bc assessment. And none of them are broadly down 20%. Sure “some market segments” may be, and other market segments could be up too. But the overall priced are down small – teranet down 6%. Vreb down 9%.
Homeownership was once the dream—now, for many, it feels more like a gilded cage. Homeowners are finding themselves financialy stuck—not because they love their homes, but because their mortgage has become too burdensome to sell or rent out. They’re locked in by high monthly payments and falling short on options.
The consequences go beyond the house. Carreer opportunities are slipping away, not from lack of ambition or ability, but because relocating isn’t financially feasible. Meanwhile, others who can move—like that former office assistant—are rising through the ranks, untethered by the weight of ownership and is now your boss.
The irony is crushing. The asset that once symbolized freedom is now the very thing holding people back.
Condo prices really are not reflective in the Teranet or median or average. Buyers are buying much better product for similar or slightly lower price. If you could accurately adjust for quality of product you would see some market segments are down 20% in Victoria.
.> and not be able to buy a place over there
To me, this is the key part of what your acquaintance said “and not be able to buy a place over there“.
He simply can’t afford to buy in Vancouver. And Vancouver condo prices have fallen farther than Victoria. So he likely couldn’t afford years ago either. If condo prices had risen in Victoria and Vancouver, they likely would be even further out of reach and your friend would also stay put in Victoria.
The test of this would be to ask your friend if he would have moved to Calgary (assuming hypothetically he likes it as much as Vancouver) , despite the fall in price of his Victoria condo. If he would turn down that move too, then I would accept your premise that he’s staying put because of the fall in Vic condo price. Until then , he sounds like millions of other Canadians that would love to move to own in Vancouver, but are priced out of buying, even a condo.
Whatever you want to dream of…lol.. but the conversation was pretty straightforward.. “pulled my place of the market and staying here because it makes no sense to sell it at such loss and not be able to buy a place over there. If I rent it, with taxes and strata the loss would be too much to make sense to move and live over there with the new job”.
Likely is short sighted, but people tend to count the dollars that are in front of them and not down the road.
June 2025 benchmark condo price for city of Victoria is $526k. That’s down 9% from June 2022 (around the peak) when it was $580k. But current COV condo prices are also up 24% from 5 years ago ($426k)
https://www.vreb.org/media/attachments/view/doc/stats_release_2025_06/pdf/stats_release_2025_06.pdf
Downtown condos are a lot worse than that. If sellers can get 5.2% off peak then there would be a lot more sales and not much inventory left.
.>>>… Just had an acquaintance pull their condo off the market here in Victoria. They had a job offer over in Vancouver and wanted to sell and move; however, they won’t be taking job and moving now because of the loss they would have to take on selling.
Victoria market price (Teranet) is only down 5.3% from peak (May 2022).
There may be additional factors at play in their decision to stay in Victoria, that they didn’t choose to share with an “acquaintance”.
Good point.
Because they probably can’t. Underwater, they owe more to the bank than the condo is worth…Likely stuck in that unit until the day they die.
Yeah, Vancouver is a worse market right now. Don’t understand why they would be unwilling to sell here and buy there.
Or sell , you’re really not losing much if you’re buying too . You might do better considering Vancouver has had a tougher go at, maybe some better deals to be had over there
Okay, so don’t sell. Keep the job in Victoria, without realizing any losses…and live happily ever after.
Sounds pretty short sighted.
I could appreciate that a Solar energy system and an electric vehicle charging Infrastructure sounds good.
Single? no family? They’ll regret it.
Just had an acquaintance pull their condo off the market here in Victoria. They had a job offer over in Vancouver and wanted to sell and move; however, they won’t be taking job and moving now because of the loss they would have to take on selling.
We’ll have to wait for the real estate board’s official June summary, but for now, house sales in the core were 189 in May and 168 in June—an 11% drop month over month.
That differs from what MJ posted, as his numbers include all property types across all regions covered by the real estate board, excluding the Up-Island area.
No need to read too much into the monthly shift—sales volumes often fluctuate from one month to the next.
What’s interesting is that house sales in the core continue to mirror 2024’s pattern. If that trend holds, we can expect around 129 house sales in the core for July.
.
Thursty using calculus with second order stochastics to predict future movements in real estate 🙂
Joe , may was down close to 20 points and June only 9.85 points , so u see things are getting a whole lot better . I think Vancouver will follow Victoria’s strong performance. I’m guessing that folks who have been sitting on the sidelines have already missed the bottom of the market here and will now have to hang they’re heads and pay up
What are you reading Thursty? Vancouver just posted its slowest June for home sales in 20 years.
Lmao this AI posting is hilarious. Just be really shitty at his day job.
Vancouver seems to be clawing it’s way back , might even post a modest gain in sales yoy in july
Max solar panels represent a superadequacy, also known as a type of functional obsolescence in real estate. This term refers to an improvement or feature that exceeds what the market typically demands—often leading to diminishing returns on investment.
While solar panels may be a smart upgrade in some areas, their value isn’t always recognized equally across all markets. In regions where buyers don’t prioritize or understand their long-term benefits, solar panels can end up being an over-improvement—costing more than they contribute to resale value.
Common Superadequacy Examples:
– A 12-car garage in a neighborhood where 2- or 3-car garages are the standard
– A $50,000 custom fireplace in a region where fireplaces aren’t in high demand
– A luxury kitchen in a modest home where buyers won’t pay a premium for top-tier finishes
This is a conversation I expect to encounter more frequently as homeowners continue to advocate for the added value of solar panels. Interestingly, major lenders have already adjusted appraisal reporting standards in response. Today’s appraisals now include dedicated sections for solar energy systems and electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, reflecting a shift in how these features are evaluated.
On the plus side, when we had a pool, it was easy to maintain, and we used it all the time in the summer & those 4 months often felt like living at a resort. What I really don’t much like is the hot tub we now have (came with the house) – I’m proving not to be very good at keeping it chemically balanced, and we don’t use it all that much, and the work is the same or more than a pool. It’s our 2nd hot tub & hopefully our last…I know lots of people swear by using their hot tubs during the winter, but that has no appeal for me
Like a professionally installed in ground swimming pool that requires around $3200 per year in maintenance costs that you can only comfortably use for around four months per year.
Solar panels generally have a lifespan of about 25 to 30 years, and while they can significantly boost a home’s energy efficiency and reduce utility bills, their condition at the time of purchase can flip them from perk to potential problem.
On the flip side, newer panels still under warranty can be a major asset. While they may not add value to your home, the panels would likely increase the saleability of your home.
And then there are the agrements. Are they transferable or does the vendor have to pay out any remaining costs of the original instalation.
Even if I were offered a grant that would cover 100% of the costs to have the latest and greatest solar array installed on my roof, have it all connected to a super battery, and redirected throughout my house some how…I still wouldn’t want it.
Does adding a solar array to the roof of your house add value to your house? I don’t think it does. In fact, I think its just another fad like those great big 6′ satellite dishes people would have installed on their roofs back in the day.
Thanks. We did the math, hassle, and maintenance calculations and solar is not worth it for us at the moment. We use way less than average hydro already. Good tip for others.
totoro, if you haven’t checked yet it would be good to check with your insurance provider and get in writing what the impact on your insurance will be from installing rooftop solar, and if they have any requirements. For example, the insurer might have requirements for the install, for proof of maintenance/inspections after the install is done. This info can help when negotiating with an installer to make sure you get a setup that is insurable and doesn’t negatively impact your premiums, and if the installer makes a mistake you will be able to resolve it more effectively.
https://www.ratehub.ca/blog/how-installing-solar-panels-can-impact-your-home-insurance/
I’m impressed with the 36% increase in downtown condo sales . A 36% uptick in condo sales is definitely noteworthy—especially in a downtown market where shifts can ripple through the broader housing landscape.
It does sound like sellers are becoming more pragmatic, meeting buyers where they are instead of holding firm on aspirational pricing.
The drop in months-of-inventory from 7.1 to 4.8 is a big signal, too. That kind of contraction suggests demand is catching up—maybe even heating up—and if the trend keeps up, we could start seeing upward pressure on prices despite the current steadiness.
Taking a closer look at the number 1,547 new listings to market is an all time high for the month of June since we started keeping the stat in 1989.
Sweet lord jesus, those are some good numbers for June . No reason sales won’t pick up steam in July ( except it seems for bobby k neighborhood)
Selling at the “right price” carries a lot nuance.
Month Jun Jun
Year 2025 2024
New Unconditional Sales 761 661
New Listings 1,547 1,495
Active Listings 3,778 3,459
June 2022 – 612
2023 – 705
2024 – 661
2025 – 761
Looks like we also may have peaked in terms of inventory.
Vicre, I’m not wanting to take money off the table , but I do have a house to move along at the right price . I’m much to young to downsize and I don’t need the cash in the bank
You have had that unload and downsize narrative for awhile now.
Groot, ya I have many friends in their early 60’s and with many retiring struggle with downsizing and boredom. I myself still luv being in the game and can’t see that ever changing , I still want more of everything. Grandparents checked out early, yikes
When did your grand-parents die?
I worked with a collegue and all of his grand-parents died by the time they were in their mid 60’s. The thought of retirement for him was a death sentence.
Vicre , sorry man but I’m fattening up the bottom line. I like to think I’m just heading into my prime and have another 20 years
Groot, lol yep dead would do it
Thursty is trying to unload and downsize.
It’s your perrsonal residence then? And you never intend to sell? Then market peak is irrelevant to you. Your personal peak price will be your date of death. Peak price is the day you exit the market forever.
The homes’ value doesn’t matter if you’re never converting it back into cash.
Groot I’m guessing we both we both understand it , but yes I am seeing it different in the sense as I don’t see it as revelant or important in long term investing
Thirsty for clarity here — how would you define ‘peak market’? The way I understand it might be different from how you’re thinking about it.
The end game here is people will own nothing and be happy. This could take another entire generation for all the stones to be put in their place, but that’s where its going. This buy a house and fill it with as much shit as you possibly can level of consumption has to end sooner or later.
Groot, I hear u , but I was not getting at market timing , but rather is there such thing as peak market .
We’ve been through this countless times before Thursty.
If you’re investing for growth, buying near a peak can mean a long wait before seeing real gains—especially with something like gold, which doesn’t generate income.
For income-generating assets (like dividend stocks or rental properties), value isn’t just about the price tag—it’s about yield and cash flow, which can tighten in overheated markets.
Groot, good stuff , but when it comes to real estate or gold or blue chip stocks etc , is there really such a thing as peak market . Unless u live under rock things will continue to go up and that’s just inflation . I’m sure I will pay 20 bucks for a big Mack some day lol
Perhaps, but there is a still quite a bit of dumb money around.
Investors or home occupiers who got swept up by hype, often buying at inflated prices near a market peak. They’re not necessarily “dumb” in intellect, but might lack access to deeper insights or get swayed by emotion. After interest rates hit rock bottom in 2020–2021, a wave of Canadian homeowners locked in 3- and 5-year terms. Fast-forward to 2025–2026, and those renewals are coming due in a very different rate environment.
My view: we’re not close to the end of the “dumb money” phase just yet. When exuberance overrides fundamentals, it can take years for reality to fully sink in.
The Stress Test among A lenders will mitigate some of the downside. But B lenders (like trust companies and some credit unions) aren’t federally regulated, so they’re not bound by the OSFI stress test rules that apply to big banks. The Stress Test seemed like a good idea at the time, but wannabee owners could easily get around the test by obtaining mortgages through “B” lenders.
A lenders—major banks and federally regulated institutions—are now holding less volatile debt, thanks to the stress test filtering out borrowers with thinner financial cushions.
B lenders, on the other hand, have absorbed many of the riskier loans: self-employed individuals, buyers with irregular income, or those carrying more debt.
Groot , early days still , things will continue to heat up as we go into fall . The smart money is back buying again . I’m guessing she’s will be up 12 points or so for the month , not too shabby
June was a good month for downtown condo sales. The typical condo being a median price of $530,000. The increase in sales drove the Months-of-Inventory down to 5.1 which is back in the balance range of 3 to 6 months. Average asking rent $25,200 per year. GIM is therefore 21 (530,000/25,200) which has been bouncing between 20 to 22 for the past several years.
-During economic booms, rental income tends to rise, pushing GIMs higher.
-In downturns, GIMs may fall as income stagnates or declines
-If GIMs increase while rents stay flat, it may point to speculative buying.
-Rising GIMs can signal investor optimism and strong demand for rental properties.
I’m not seeing any of these happening.
Westshore’s got that tricky blend of sprawling potential and growing demand, but affordability in single-family homes (SFHs) is becoming more of a pipe dream unless density steps in.
Meanwhile, those new purpose-built rentals (PBRs) are often better designed, professionally managed, and tailored to how people actually live today. They’re usually close to transit or amenities, and you skip the headaches of homeownership while still enjoying modern living.
If “they” in Max’s post refers to prospective buyers and renters, then the growing wave of purpose-built rentals (PBRs) is set to reshape the market for small single-family homes like those in Kettle Creek. Both resale homes and PBRs are courting the same middle-income demographic.
My buddy is building his retirement house over on Dufferen right now. He is currently on Landsdown and tidying it up for market. I would wish him luck on the sale, but he’s a trust fund kid so I won’t waste the wish…This guy doesn’t need any wishes.
Lol
I can confirm over here in Oak Bay?Uplands sales of properties in the 2MM + range still seem very slow.
The thing with the Westshore is people want a SFH and they want it to be affordable. The Westshore has the available land to make that happen but it has to be very dense for the numbers to work. Like kettle creek for example. I would rather rent one of these new PBR’s than buy a SFH in Kettle creek.
I don’t think Saanich East and Oak Bay are proper comparables. SE is a MUCH bigger area geographically and by population and by the number of neighbourhoods. The variety of neighbourhoods is also MUCH higher in SE than Oak Bay. There are neighbourhoods in SE are very similar to Oak Bay neighbourhoods and many more that are completely different. I mean Oak Bay will be South Oak, Uplands, Henderson/Lansdowne Slope, Estevan, Gonzales and that’s really it. SE will include places as diverse as Maplewood, Broadmead, High Quadra, Mount Tolmie, Cordova Bay, Reynolds, Ten Mile Point, Cedar Hill, Cadboro Bay and many many more.
Appreciate the thoughts—definitely didn’t mean to imply Oak Bay is in a standstill, just observing how different the pace looks across neighborhoods. The intent wasn’t to dwell on the luxury segment specifically, but to highlight how pricing tiers and absorption rates shape what buyers and sellers are experiencing right now.
I assume you live in Oak Bay. Oak Bay is doing fine, with 5.3 months of inventory your neighborhood is still well within the boundaries of a balanced market.
The point of the post was that one’s perspective on the market depends a lot on where they live. Are you disagreeing with that?
Groot, Oak Bay doesn’t feel that sluggish to me. Remove luxury properties and the sales between the two would be much closer. Or was the point of your long post that luxury properties take longer to sell? Yeah huge surprise. Glad you took the time to have AI write a post about how Saanich East had 25% of single family inventory sell in the last 30 days while Oak Bay sold 19%.
Have heard that some buyers who were originally targeting oak bay have decided on Saanich East instead, especially the broadmead/Cordova bay area.
Different but relates topic. Someone was saying navigators rose is an exclusive area of the Westshore. The older homes expensive homes debate in the Westshore has already concluded.
In Oak Bay, there are currently 106 homes listed for sale, ranging from $945,000 to a striking $10,499,000. Over the past 30 days, only 20 sales have closed, with a median sale price of $1.8 million. With prices at this level and limited movement, it’s no surprise the market here is feeling sluggish.
Contrast that with Saanich East, where things are moving at a brisker pace: 252 active listings and 63 sales in the last month. The median sale price there sits at $1.37 million, making it significantly more accessible to buyers compared to Oak Bay.
At the end of the day, your perspective on the market depends a lot on your postal code.
Marko, nice to c the market has been picking up, a strong July market in the making . With inventory trending down prices should start ticking up . This Canada Day will be extra special this year
Re: Navigator’s Rise… the assertion made was that there aren’t “multiple neighborhoods of 30/40+ year old homes starting at $1.5M out in the Westshore”. I think the oldest homes up there are pushing 20 years at this point, so I don’t think it really fits.
Month Jun Jun
Year 2025 2024
Net Unconditional Sales 731 661
New Listings 1,514 1,495
Active Listings 3,806 3,459
Strongest June we’ve seen since 2021. Might exceed 2025 May sales and you rarely see sales better in June in relation to May (of the same year). I thought market would be dead in the water after the BoC rate hold but it has improved….strange.
Don’t see many sales there, one in the past 90 days after being on the mkt for close to 2 years.
The Spring market is over and 2025 is not the robust rebound many hoped for—rather, it’s a year where buyers tread carefully, and sellers increasingly contend with a market that no longer guarantees returns. In Victoria, “stability” may simply be a nicer word for stagnation.
The sub-markets reflect fragmentation with downtown condos having some price erosion while suburban homes remain expensive. Buyer fatique, stagnant confidence, and over suplly in some sectors are all indications of a soft market.
Bear mountain gets extremely hot. The entire Highlands area is a tinderbox right now. You need to be down in the valley at the Lakes.
Re: Westshore areas that are “exclusive”. Wouldn’t Navigator’s Rise on Bear Mountain count? I mean it’s not to my taste for an exclusive part of town but I think it would qualify as a suburban “new money” area with homes consistently in the seven figures and a few in multiples of seven figures.
Back in the 2008 GFC when I thought the world was going to end and we were all going to die. I went up to Costco and purchased a four panel solar array with a two plug inverter. I adhered the four panels to my roofing shingles above my garage using 100% silicone since that area has full southern exposure. I then ran all the cabling through the roof vent just above the four panels. It looked visually pleasing from the road.
I hooked all the cables up to a deep cycle battery I pulled from an old Bobcat skid steer and installed the inverter directly bellow the panels in my garage creating a power hub. When the power goes out I just flip a switch and it turns on a 48″ two tube led light that illuminates the entire garage, turns on a radio dialed to C-fax, and energizes a four port usb c hub for cell phone charging. That setup is still going to this day and I use it atleast once a year.
That year I also had a woodstove installed and went out and got my PAL licence.
Interesting post! I had no idea.
Fair enough…You win!
I wouldn’t called that entire neighborhoods…. These are just selected exclusive properties.
That’s what I meant. I live directly across the street from the lake. I never suggested my house. I have lived here so long and know everyone on the road with lake front and they will likely die in that house they love it so much.
Nope, not unless you are directly on the lake with a dock. Go have a look yourself, lots around the lakes going for under $1M in the last 90 days, for example 3188 Glen lake road 890k, 985 haslam 899k, 973 Glen Willow 1.016, 2777 hartside 850k. 1194 Kathryn lane is the most expensive at 1.338, and that thing is 97 built and pretty damn well renovated.
I would rather just take my chances with the fiery ones. These batteries are not at all environmentally friendly and they most certainly are not go-green technology.
There are different kinds of lithium batteries. The non-fiery ones cost more.
These lakes.
The lakes.
Where?
If the storage batteries are packing lithium, I wouldn’t want them near my house.
Yes you do. Its the mature subdivisions that hold the most value.
Sure there are selected properties out in the Westshore that are very exclusive. However, you don’t have multiple neighborhoods of 30/40+ year old homes starting at $1.5M out in the Westshore.
Would you consider that to be connected to affordability between the two areas? There are some very desirable areas in the westshore just the same as anywhere in the crd. Former Mayor Stew Young lives like 8 doors down the road from me…He’s a self made multi millionaire icon. He started out as a manager at Dairy Queen.
From what I’ve seen shit homes or stuff out in the west shore are still selling at a decent discount compared to peak prices. Nice stuff in diserable neighborhoods in the core have barely budged.
Gh boxes are usually on 6000sft lots. 1.1 in decent shape with a suite would be affordable imo. 900k mortgage with 20% down that’s roughly 4500 for the mortgage and 1500 to 2000 rental income for the suite. Iot’s of people would be bidding on those given current local incomes and general attitudes towards SFHs.
If it were me I’d just put them in the back yard like this dude did.
The subsidy is up to 5k on the panels and 5k on battery storage including labour. You pay the balance.
This subsidy? https://www.bchydro.com/powersmart/residential/rebates-programs/solar-battery.html
We are about to put a new roof on. Anyone have recommendations for an installer – not something we could DIY.
Max, my understanding is that with the current subsidies it does make sense to have solar panels, but not batteries.
If and when the subsidies end, then the picture changes.
What would be considered affordable again for a Gordon Head box on a 10,000 sq/ft lot? I’m just asking this as an example so I can gauge what is considered affordable again.
Wind Turbines are another way of producing power. And they can be quite beautiful. The noise level on these type are not an issue.
One large can produce enough power for a commercial site such as a large lodge. The smaller versions, in my opinion, do not produce enough power for a house unless you group them together in groups of five.
My son and I have incorporated these into our sculpture designs for clients.
By incorporating the wind turbines into a work of art, the client gets a piece of art as well as the power. But it is still an expensive project.
We looked at solar for our house more than once and each time….the price was higher instead of lower. It’s the cost of the installation that is the barrier. And the low cost of electricity in BC. It’s hard to compete with the cost of our cheap electricity. (For now anyway.) It is still very tempting though and something we might consider. I like the idea of doing both Solar and wind turbine, instead of one or the other.
Vicre, I agree I don’t think folks with lots of money are in short supply . Like Patrick has pointed out maybe homes are becoming affordable again but at these prices .
That’s what I’m wondering. Metal roofs only last 40 years. If its a standing seam metal roof only 30 years.
What is the longevity of these solar arrays? How much do they cost? What can they run? Given 8 months of the year are pretty dismal weather conditions for this region, I really can’t see them running very much other than a trickle charge, deep cell battery storage for when the power goes out.
Please don’t just post a link to some website. I want to know individuals experience with this setup.
Another strong sale at Gulf View place in Cordova bay. This time it’s 600k over assessed. Previous two were 100k and 500k over assessed. Three strong sales on a small cul-de-sac in 2 month. No shortage of well resourced buyers for quality homes in diserable neighborhoods.
10% annually? Whats your before and after set up?
Careful, last time he threatened to blow up some of your deals via low assessments lol.
Fair enough.
Finding comparable recent sales in the same complex would be better, prices may be well below assessed values.
There’s nothing “illegal” about it so long as the $ number you’re reporting is at least a defensible approximation of fair market value, nor do you have to disclose the basis of your $ number in our self-reporting system, unless the CRA decides to challenge you, in which case the onus shifts onto you.
So in terms of really avoiding a problem, the question is what would trigger their algorithm to red-flag this.
I would think you’re in ok shape going with assessed value, but it’s not a carved-in-stone number for CRA nor for the taxpayer. I would also feel reasonably comfortable going with an appraised value that is the lowest of the 3 as per your example, so long as that appraisal is at least defensible and not nuts, and so long as one is somewhat prepared to roll the dice. As I would be in this scenario described by the OP.
Is there anything illegal about getting three different appraisals and submitting the one that is most in your favor? and not disclosing the other two.
Off market appraisals are so wildly bad you could definitively obtain one that is substantially in your favor . I have property listed right now at $799,900 and the appraisal came in over $1.2 million the week before we listed. Luckily sellers thought my arguments to list at $995,000 despite having a $1.2 million appraisal in hand made sense so we started at $995,000 but even that was way too high.
In the last couple of years I’ve had condos I own appraised at 100k below and 100k above market value and these should be properties that are easy to appraise.
A near guaranteed investment yielding north of 10%. No need to care about the environment
I believe the base is BC assessment with the onus on you to argue a different number with evidence if you need it to be different
Since we are talking capital gains. I just moved into my rental condo in March and will have to declare a change of use. Wondering if anyone knows how the value of the condo is determined at the time of use change for Capital gains calculations. In my case it will be a loss. Does CRA use BC assessment data or does it need to have a bank assessment done?
There is in every industry thought. When I go book my flights it’s always “only 3 seats left at this price” for months on end. Do I think strategies such as “two months free” should be banned? Yes I do as that gets around the RTA. However, if a building is advertising two units available when they have 11 units available to try and create a feeling of scarcity I don’t view that as a big deal as 50 other buildings are advertising two out of 11 available as well plus you have 100s of non-purpose built units available for rent. Too much competition in the marketplace for that strategy to be truly effective.
I personally have a unit coming up for rent downtown as do many other owners of non-purpose built units. The rental market is soft right now and most small landlords myself included are not going to let their unit sit vacant for multiple months. We lower our prices to market or slightly below to attract the limited numbers of potential tenants out there, while the big players continue collude and leave their empty? I don’t think so.
Also, why are rents so much cheaper in other markets in Canada were salaries are higher than Victoria? Obviously the population in those places has the financial capacity to pay higher rents. I wonder if it could have something to do with supply and demand (aka people want to live in Victoria)?
This person has posted so much 100% misinformation over the years on this topic I don’t understand how anyone would not have them on mute. For example, he claimed individual investor owners were colluding to set prices on rents in a building in Colwood at the Belmont development when in fact the building is a purpose built rental owned by one identity and managed by a property management company.
What’s the difference? Hydro electricity is clean energy. I would rather just pay for it…Its way easier than what you did.
Near zero real world risk
Financially it was a no brainer for us even before the grant. Granted I DIY most of the install
The next time around will the solar grant still be a thing? If not, what’s the replacement cost of a solar array? Its the same thing with all these heat pumps. When grants are no longer in place, the replacement costs are on your dime. When they install these ductless heat pumps they pretty much butcher your house just to get them in there, at the same time they make the exterior of your house look really ugly with that pipe cladding they install.
Electric baseboard heat is no maintenance with no replacement costs, its tried, tested, and true, its safe, and its very reasonably priced through BCHydro.
I believe the panel lifetime is approximately the same as for shingles, so yes, replace together.
Sounds way too risky for me for any roof surface, I think I’d rather just pay the hydro bill.
I put on a metal roof before doing solar. No roof penetrations that way and should not have to worry about replacing the roof.
I wouldn’t recommend putting solar on to asphalt shingle unless it was new or nearly new. Would not be fun to take the panels down
When you need a roof replacement the solar array is replaced at the same time? Is that how it works?
I would bet a large sum of money that Groot uses AI to write his posts.
Also it is not collusion if AI is using publicly available data to determine rent prices. Where companies get into trouble is when multiple large corporate rental companies use the same software and that software uses non publicly available data to set prices high and keep them high. I believe that is what was alleged in the antitrust lawsuit steming from Arizona rental companies last year but that lawsuit had a lot more teeth to it than this warning from the competition bureau
Totoro that’s an argument from incredulity. This fallacy is common in debates about science, religion, or complex systems—where someone’s lack of understanding is mistaken for evidence against a claim.
Just because something feels implausible doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. It wasn’t that long ago that people would say
“I don’t understand how AI can write essays or create art. It must be fake or rigged.”
Leo – in your view is the solar array worth it? I was wondering if you had one.
I have a small solar array, so that was the net usage.
You already have the information on prices on comparables, it is publicly available as they are publicly listed rentals and price features predominately. You have this at your fingertips today as a building manager.
At this point, I don’t think AI is capable of comparing unit prices accurately given the variance in units that is not entirely obvious from a listing description and no AI program can guarantee an increase. Your listing will only be as competitive as long as it meets the market price.
Again, in order to effectively have collusion you need to have a market share that can actually impact the market prices – like big supermarkets do. You also need to have evidence of illegal agreements that reduce competitiveness.
Totoro I mentioned all of that in my post. Stop thinking you are the center of the universe. This isn’t about you.
When I was managing apartment buildings, I wish I had this kind of information, and I would have subscribed to the service.
I would have talked mself into thinking I was helping renters. Afterall I’m not personally colluding and how the AI program works is not my business. I just want to maximize gross revenue and if an AI service can guarantee an increase – I would take it.
In today’s world you no longer have to get together with other owners of companies and come to an agreement on prices which is definitely collusion. You can have an AI service do it for you. And that’s not collusion?
These AI management companies are getting bigger and not just in property managment. The digital economy has opened up new frontiers for innovation—but it’s also introduced fresh challenges for competition, especially around price collusion through algorithms.
My post isn’t about you or any person renting out a suite or a condo. Its recognizing what we are all going to have to face now and in the future.
> For the little mom and pop operation , like yourself, I can understand why you find it difficult to understand. But when you are a company that controls hundreds or even thousand of rental units and getting together with other companies to share information then that is collusion.
I seem to recall that you are not a company landlord or a landlord at all. It is just amazing that you have this insider info.
>getting together with other companies to share information then that is collusion
It is not collusion to share information in general. What is illegal is for competitors to come to an agreement on and implement:
Specific coordinated rental prices.
Specific coordinated terms of their leases.
Restricting the housing supply by artificially reducing the availability of rental units.
https://competition-bureau.canada.ca/en/bid-rigging-price-fixing-and-other-agreements-between-competitors/bid-rigging-price-fixing-and-other-agreements-between-competitors-common-types-illegal-agreements
Given that it is likely that 50% or more of our rentals are not purpose built and another large percent are not new builds and are already tenanted, it is going to be very hard for landlords to collude on pricing and have any actual impact on pricing. They’ll be shooting themselves in the foot especially in a market with rising vacancy. Not to mention that the residential tenancy legislation sets standards for new and existing leases which would generally render any unusual or onerous terms unenforceable in BC.
Some developers of new product may stagger rental listings in new builds or offer a month of rent free rather than reduced rents, but pricing over current market is going to generally lead to empty units. Doesn’t take many months of vacancy to erode any gain from a potentially higher rent.
As far as I can tell, the only segment which might be able to collude somewhat is on when units become available is new build purpose built rentals.
I’ve been out here adjusting rent based on market data like a fool. Very generous of the members to agree to drop rents.
I wouldn’t say it’s colluding but there’s definitely pricing strategies at play. However at the end of the day each developer will need to do what’s best for them. Keep in mind lots of developers will sell the building after a few years to other more passive investors and they want a optimal balance of rent vs vacancy to get the best price at exit.
Wow 73kWH like 2-3 days of use for my house right now.
Obviously you aren’t in the loop totoro, we landlord meets in a secret location once a month and set rents. At recent meetings we’ve decided to drop them a bit to give back to the community.
For the little mom and pop operation , like yourself, I can understand why you find it difficult to understand. But when you are a company that controls hundreds or even thousand of rental units and getting together with other companies to share information then that is collusion. This isn’t the same as looking up rentals on Facebook. This is having advance knowledge of what is going to be coming onto the market and at what price.
If this was being done by grocery store chains then you would have a different opinion.
The Competition Bureau issued a warning to Canadian property managers and landlords on Wednesday about engaging in illegal agreements with competitors.
What collusion? Rents are supply and demand and correlated with vacancy rates. There is no monopoly on rentals in Victoria and the secondary rental market (non-purpose built) is a large part of the market. I find it highly unlikely that there is some conspiracy among the disparate landlords going that effectively keeps rents high. People go on FB marketplace and choose based on amenities vs. price. As the vacancy rate has increased lately, the rents have dropped somewhat.
Peter, I don’t expect the government to actively clamp down on collusion in the rental market, as high(er) rents encourage more investing in condo and rental buildings. Tamping down on high rents might protect tenants in the short term, but could also spook investors and slow new housing supply, making things worse over time.
At the same time, unchecked collusion or monopolistic behavior doesn’t just tilt the playing field—it can hollow it out entirely. The challenge is in threading that needle: ensuring fair competition and tenant protections without grinding the gears of investment to a halt.
There may be a mismatch —new units are coming online, but they’re priced at a level that many renters simply can’t afford. So while supply is technically increasing, accessibility isn’t. It’s like building more bridges but charging a toll too steep for most people to cross.
Victoria’s vacancy rate has climbed to the highest it’s been since 2013, even as the number of purpose-built rentals has grown. That’s a significant shift in a city where vacancy rates have hovered near crisis levels for years. This could be a sign of a market correction in slow motion. If these high-end units continue to sit empty, developers might be forced to adjust rents or pivot their strategies.
Bc Hydro paid me $2 to use 73kWh of electricity last month
Time of use rates for the win
Illegal agreements could involve rental prices, lease terms (including amenities and services) and artificiallly reducing the availabilty of rental units to restrict housing supply, the Bureau said.
Price-fixing, market allocation, restricting supply, or wage-fixing, and no-poaching agreements is a criminal offence under the Competition Act
Good luck with that. We can’t even deal with gas station ‘collusion’.
The nicer larger ones in the core all go for over 1M.
It didn’t matter how nice the tenants were. I was just a really bad landlord and didn’t want them in my house because I found them to be very invasive. I lasted approximately 22 months of being an amateur landlord before I finally pulled the plug…That was over 20 years ago now.
If you never took a permit out on the suite and were paid in cash (folding money) I’m sure you would be fine. Worse case, pull the kitchen and safely bury the range cable behind the drywall before you sell. You should also have the range cable disconnected from the panel so the cable is still there, its just not hot until you want to have it reconnected, making the range cable hot again. If the tenants are getting some kind of rent tax deduction off their income…Your pooched.
Yeah, were starting to go through this now with my mother inlaw. Hollow, what was once there, is just not there anymore. Its a good thing she has lots of money, because shes going to need it moving forward.
townhomes are good alternatives to expensive single-family homes these days. However, I noticed that their floor size, layout, and lack of backyard space deter many families.
Another good option is a half-duplex. After observing some being built and sold, I noticed there aren’t many available yet. Lots of them are in planning after a simple search on city’s websites.
Interesting time we are in as more and more young families unfortunately out of affordability range at 900-950k.
What if you change use back to all principle residence say a year before you sell? Then, say if you’re at 40% (in grey zone) – you can argue it was ancillary since you used it to live there afterwards.
The Competition Bureau issued a warning to Canadian property managers and landlords on Wednesday about engaging in illegal agreements with competitors.
Illegal agreements could involve rental prices, lease terms (including amenities and services) and artificiallly reducing the availabilty of rental units to restrict housing supply, the Bureau said.
Price-fixing, market allocation, restricting supply, or wage-fixing, and no-poaching agreements is a criminal offence under the Competition Act
992 ambassador looks like decent value for 975k.
Frank, I agree , if one want to be a broke senior start buying down after retirement. Funny thing is it’s going to be a lot worse for younger generations even if boomers leave them an inheritance. I really don’t think boomers are dying super wealthy
Staying in your home as a senior is by far the most affordable. Rents are high, personal care homes are sky high. Yes, selling your house will give you a pile of cash, but you can burn through it quickly. Owning after you’re over 85, even 80, should not be encouraged, but if one is able, they are better off. They also have to be mentally stable, can see and hear adequately, and be able to maintain personal hygiene. That all diminishes after 80. I went through it all with my mother, without me she would have been almost helpless.
People have suites because it’s the only way they can afford to buy a house. The possibility of having to pay capital gains on a portion of appreciation at some unknown future date isn’t going to change that.
After all, the certainty of having to pay capital gains on all the appreciation hasn’t stopped people from buying investment properties, and that’s purely discretionary.
There is no shortage of middle income houses in Greater Victoria. They are everywhere you look.
The problem is that they are not for sale.
A survey by Redfin found that over one-third of baby boomers who own their homes claim the will never sell them. The survey also found than an additional 30% say they will at least hold on to their home for a decade, but are willing to sell. Those who are older (the Silent Generation) are even less likely to sell their homes, with 44.6% saying they never would.
The survey results could reflct the fact that many boomers don’t have the financial incentive that is typicallly needed to sell a home.
55% said they like their homes and have no reason to move, which is the most common reason. Other reasons:
Their home is almost or completely paid off 30%
Today’s home prices are too high 16%
They don’t want to give up a low mortage rate 8%
It’s a classic case of supply existing in theory, but not in practice. Here are some things to explore to break the gridlock.
Tax Incentives for Selling Primary Residences
While Canada already exempts capital gains on primary residences, additional temporary tax credits could be offered to older homeowners who downsize or sell to first-time buyers. This could nudge those on the fence by sweetening the deal financially.
“Right-Sizing” Support Programs
Many boomers stay put because moving is a hassle. Governments could fund relocation assistance programs—covering moving costs, legal fees, or even offering concierge-style services to help seniors transition to smaller homes or retirement communities.
Property Tax Relief for Downsizers
Some provinces have explored property tax deferrals or reductions for seniors who move into smaller, more efficient homes. This could reduce the financial sting of giving up a paid-off home for one with higher ongoing costs.
Zoning Reform and Gentle Density
Encouraging multi-generational housing or allowing homeowners to convert part of their home into a rental suite (or build a garden suite) gives them income without needing to sell. It also adds supply without new land.
Public Awareness Campaigns
Sometimes it’s not about money—it’s about mindset. Campaigns that highlight the benefits of downsizing (less maintenance, more freedom, community living) could shift perceptions, especially if paired with real-life stories.
Interestingly, recent Canadian policy shifts have focused more on stimulating demand—like eliminating GST on new homes for first-time buyers—but less on unlocking existing supply.
Exactly so not sure why 3+1.5 is still a thing especially over $1 million.
Makes sense on both points Marko, thanks. I would say the difference between a flat 1.5% and the typical half of 6%+3% is pretty modest, on a million dollar sale the buyers agent takes a mere $15,000 instead of $16,500. Not exactly something for anyone to lose sleep over either way in the grand scheme of things.
I’ve passed on five listings in the last two weeks….two sellers want me to come over and bring the listing paperwork at their asking price.
One was a 420kish condo I noted should be priced at 419k but we could try 439k to start and now listed with a different agent north of 500k. Another one just last night is a unit in a building that is identical to a rental unit I own in the same building so I know it inside and out. I told seller 499k to have a chance but seller wanted 550k and I told her maybe best if she tried the listing with someone else.
Passing on these I am taking a risk the sellers lower the price; however, just don’t want to battle it out with seller to have them eventually adjust to market value and then even when you get to market value no guarantees it sells if the market corrects even further. So far no condo that I’ve declined listing this year has sold.
On SFHs I am typically willing to list a little higher as determining exact market value is a little more tricky; however, a one bedroom condo when the market is flooded with one bedroom condos you really need to be sharp on the price otherwise waste of time.
Buyers really really don’t like assuming tenants even if that tenants are ideal (difficult for the buyer to determine this when purchasing) and the rent amount is good. For some reason most people like to pick their own tenants.
On my full service listings I typically offer a 1.5% cooperating commission. 10 years ago I was the only person doing 1.5% cooperating commission but it is slowly catching on! Maybe Leo can pull the stats but I am seeing 1.5% cooperating on 5 to 10% of the listings now, and growing every year.
That condo sold not because I am smart or good at marketing or anything like that. It was the best priced unit in the building and it sold, the other three have not sold and continue to sit on the market.
Put yourself in the shoes of the buyer. You are going to view four units in a building….are you going to buy the one you see the best value in or the one with the highest cooperating commission?
Not if they are at below market rents.
He is pricing the unit at market instead of some high price the seller wants, that’s why he was able to sell faster. You can make the cooperating commission whatever you want and you can negotiate his commission with him. A buyer’s agent isn’t going to turn down 8.5k of commission because it’s less than the $10k they would have gotten with the standard 3+1.5, they just want the deal to close so they can move on to the next one. So unless there’s two identical units priced exactly the same with the only difference being the cooperating commission, then it’s unlikely the commission alone would influence the agent. Pricing your home to market is key to getting a quick sale.
@Marko – this might sound naive, but wouldn’t lots of potential buyers be happy to have a basement suite that’s already tenanted and providing revenue if it allows them to afford the property more easily? Assuming good tenants + rent amount.
Also @Marko – you mentioned in the previous post your experience selling a condo unit in a building with a couple other listings and you offered a smaller buyers agent commission. Can you tell me more of your thoughts on this – I’ve been told by agents over the years that if you offer less than the “standard” 3+1.5% for buyers agent then your listing will be at a disadvantage. What’s your approach, do you have a different % you like to use, or a flat rate or or?
The world is what we make it.
Well maybe Canada can meet its target by just building military housing , I wonder if that would fly lol
., >. So yes, I agree it’s absolutely maddening that this now necessitates everyone spending insane amounts on defense that could be much more usefully focused on social needs, but necessary it is.
Great post Peter, and I agree 100%.
>>>… If you wrote an offer on a property today (June 25th) by the time you remove conditions and the 3 months’ notice kicks in you aren’t getting vacant possession until November!
OK, but the previous system was two months notice instead of three, so possession would have been October 1. Hardly a game changer that has now made it “incredibly difficult” to sell a tenanted home. Other jurisdictions have longer notice periods (e.g. Winnipeg up to 4 months), and they manage to sell homes. Remember the tenant who got evicted needs to find a new place, let’s not forget them. Insecure rentals where tenants can easily get evicted are a big part of the housing crisis, because for many renters the only way to secure their situation is to buy and not rent.
Is the BOC done with cutting interest rates? Who knows but doesn’t look like we will get another 50bps this year.
I don’t think anyone really “wants” all this military stuff, it’s just something we probably need to do if we value being part of an alliance where the others are correctly calling us out for not pulling our weight.
I’d far rather live in a post-nationalist world but unfortunately, one day one man decided to restore the Russian empire and so slapped everyone in the face with the need to actually be able to defend ourselves. Here in Canada, our Arctic in particular is a significantly under-defended open target that the Russians and even China have appetite for, and it makes sense to focus on this in conjunction with the US. So yes, I agree it’s absolutely maddening that this now necessitates everyone spending insane amounts on defense that could be much more usefully focused on social needs, but necessary it is. And if we just say, sorry we’re not playing, it’s also been made clear to us by the US that we will be economically punished disproportionately.
I don’t have a better solution than to be part of the group on this.
Does that mean Carney is going to start taxing principal residences? I doubt it; that’s kind of a third-rail. Easier fish to fry I’m guessing. I’d be more worried about a wealth tax personally, as that’s an easy sell. But if they really want to raise $, a GST increase could do it. Luckily, for the time being, Canada appears to still have some fiscal room, everything being relative.
In this environment, it’s difficult to protect your finances. RE is in the doldrums, the stock market is near all-time highs, and it seems pretty late in the day to pile on Gold. Overall, I’d say just stick with a diversified approach. And in all that, owning your own home still seems like a good idea. In a place like greater Victoria, I think it’s a good bet and continues to be a good corner-stone to building one’s future.
Small tangent I have a YT video I’ll post in the next week or so about selling tenanted property but it has become incredibly difficult and one small change that is having a big impact I am finding is the tweak to three months’ notice to tenants. If you wrote an offer on a property today (June 25th) by the time you remove conditions and the 3 months’ notice kicks in you aren’t getting vacant possession until November! With lots of inventory of owner-occupied and vacant homes a lot of buyers are just not wanting to deal with process/wait.
(also no investors in the marketplace so if you are selling a tenant property the vast majority of your buyers are owner-occupiers that want vacant possession).
On a rare occasion, I have to agree with Deryk. Between the changes in the residential tenancy act favoring tenants and increased potential for capital gains taxes having a basement suite is less and less attractive which is counter-productive when it comes to solving our housing issues.
I’ve brought this up many times during this discussion over the last 15 years….a couple with no kids buys a 5,000 sq.ft. home in the Uplands and they sell it 10-20 years later for a $2 million dollar profit and they pocket that uplift tax free.
You buy an entry level SFH with a suite in the Tillicum area, you rent the suite, and in 10-20 years you sell for a profit and you get hit with capital gains. Makes sense.
Not just from a financial standpoint, but also environmental (I would think more people under one roof is advantageous versus two people heating/cooling a 5,000 sq.ft. home they roam around in).
Definitely not worth the cost of having a suite in your Principle residence anymore….. in my opinion.
The government will be desperate for extra money to fund the American multi billion dollar fighter jets it has purchased, several submarines, and other high cost military machines that Canadians, in survey polls, say they want.
People are funny. One day they say they want to increase military spending and the next day they will stand in the street waving their sign saying no more pipelines.
Where else do they think the government is going to get the money to buy all that military shit?
The money will come from increased Oil and gas sales and new taxes, including a big shift into stealing taxes from our principle residences.
This is what the people want apparently. (70% say they agree to increased military spending.)
I’m guessing that we are under the delusion that we will have the chance to defend ourselves from America if it came down to it….or save Europe after it keeps shooting itself in the foot over and over again.
We took the suit in our principle residence off the market years ago for this reason.
The question mark hanging over the capital gains tax issue just kept getting bigger and bigger and the possible financial hit was the straw that broke the camels back for us.