Chinese Investors Driving Up Metro Housing Prices

[st7860]

Originally Posted by Klazu

The place was underlisted to begin with, thus creating a bidding war. There is nothing wrong with tear downs as benefits everyone. This is something that has everything to do with the Province correctly refusing to intervene in the market just because of a few haters.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

If any Vancouver mayors were even slightly interested in bringing prices down to earth they could put a moratorium on teardowns. You know, actually living in the place you buy.

If they had done this the house that sold would have been lucky to get half that price. This is something that is 100% the responsibility of the cities and not the province as it has to do with local planning and has no input from the province. There is nothing the province could do to stop it even if they wanted to {which they definitely would} as the province knows how vital real estate speculation is to the BC economy and the massive amounts of revenue it brings into Victoria coffers.

This would require the cities putting their money where their mouths are and it won't happen.

That's about the dumbest thing I've heard since people starting talking about RE being overpriced in Vancouver, about 10 years ago. Do you want this place to look like Detroit?

[Klazu]

Oh no. First Chinese and now Amuricans!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...ticle23830066/

[Steveston]

A moratorium on teardowns? All teardowns?

That's no solution to housing unaffordability. If there's any positive impact, it will be negligible, and likely impossible to track the cause and effect.

If anything, stopping teardowns could have a negative impact on affordability, especially in the SFD market where subdivisions are allowed. In several places in Richmond, for example, an old house sitting on a 66' lot is torn down, and the lot subdivided to create two houses on 33' lots. While the houses are still expensive, they're certainly cheaper than a new house on that 66' lot, and the 'gentle densification' is what cities should aspire to in their unsustainable SF zoned areas.

[red-paladin]

I don't think the city can make it blanket illegal to tear down a house on a property. You don't even need a new house plan/zoning approved to get demolition permit. In the case of heritage homes/buildings, I agree, the city should do more. But in general? There are a lot of ugly houses that the city has no legal basis to prevent demolition of.

[casper]

You would expect that if the government banded teardowns then it would also be required to compensate the owner for the lost revenue. No?

I can understand the government restricting property rights for safety, to provide balance and reduce the impact one property owner has on the neighboring properties. To try and control the market price for housing is another story.

[TourOdeon]

Poor Burnaby residents are forced to move further, maybe they should try their luck in Surrey. Chinese investors have been buying up rental apartment buildings around Metrotown.

Burnaby residents protest shortage of rental housing http://globalnews.ca/news/2048392/bu...ental-housing/

[st7860]

There's lots of places to rent in Burnaby - check Kijiji and padmapper. There is another visible minority that buys up Surrey too.

[TourOdeon]

Originally Posted by st7860

There's lots of places to rent in Burnaby - check Kijiji and padmapper. There is another visible minority that buys up Surrey too.

Yeah, thats true. There are a ton of wealthy Indians living in Surrey.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by casper

You would expect that if the government banded teardowns then it would also be required to compensate the owner for the lost revenue. No? I can understand the government restricting property rights for safety, to provide balance and reduce the impact one property owner has on the neighboring properties. To try and control the market price for housing is another story.

Remember the Great Depression (of the 1930's) and recent Great Recession in the U.S. when government did nothing and allowed blind/callous/harsh market forces to do "their thing"????????

[st7860]

Originally Posted by casper

You would expect that if the government banded teardowns then it would also be required to compensate the owner for the lost revenue. No?

I can understand the government restricting property rights for safety, to provide balance and reduce the impact one property owner has on the neighboring properties. To try and control the market price for housing is another story.

Canada and the US are obviously friends but I always do a Head-Scratch(patent pending) when people try to compare the two countries as a reason to do or not do something.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by st7860

Canada and the US are obviously friends but I always do a Head-Scratch(patent pending) when people try to compare the two countries as a reason to do or not do something.

Both economies (Canada and the U.S.) are very much intertwined with the huge U.S. economy exerting enormous force/pressure on Canada's much smaller economy (and thus influencing attendant government policies) from time-to-time!

[st7860]

Yes the US could raise rates, then Canadian rates may rise. In that case get a 10 year locked in rate if that is a concern. If the US buys less exports yes that would cause problems but then in Vancouver/Toronto there aren't many industrial workers directly contributing towards exports to the US anyway.

[casper]

Originally Posted by st7860

Yes the US could raise rates, then Canadian rates may rise. In that case get a 10 year locked in rate if that is a concern. If the US buys less exports yes that would cause problems but then in Vancouver/Toronto there aren't many industrial workers directly contributing towards exports to the US anyway.

I normally don't watch US news program, but the TV was on from a previouse show and was distracted with other things so walked in on King TV (Seattle station) 6:00 news. There was a piece on how the Chinese are coming and driving up the cost of lake front homes and other high end property.

They identified one of the key reason for the up-swing as recent changes to Canadian immigration laws that were making in harder for business owners to relocate to Vancouver so they are now going to Seattle. The influx of money and investment was viewed as a positive. They interviewed a few of these immigrants and agents. It basically came down to we can't get anything as nice as this in China (given density etc.) for these low prices. We will buy now and eventually relocate.

Some of those vacant homes may be vacation or retirement homes and owners wanting to get in now when they have the money and it is cheap.

[st7860]

Originally Posted by casper

I normally don't watch US news program, but the TV was on from a previouse show and was distracted with other things so walked in on King TV (Seattle station) 6:00 news. There was a piece on how the Chinese are coming and driving up the cost of lake front homes and other high end property.

They identified one of the key reason for the up-swing as recent changes to Canadian immigration laws that were making in harder for business owners to relocate to Vancouver so they are now going to Seattle. The influx of money and investment was viewed as a positive. They interviewed a few of these immigrants and agents. It basically came down to we can't get anything as nice as this in China (given density etc.) for these low prices. We will buy now and eventually relocate.

Some of those vacant homes may be vacation or retirement homes and owners wanting to get in now when they have the money and it is cheap.

That's one of the key differences I've noticed between Canada and the US. In the US they don't care if a foreigner buys things you use or dont use including housing since they understand thats money for their city, but in Canada people would rather those buyers spend the money elsewhere.

[casper]

Originally Posted by st7860

Yes the US could raise rates, then Canadian rates may rise. In that case get a 10 year locked in rate if that is a concern. If the US buys less exports yes that would cause problems but then in Vancouver/Toronto there aren't many industrial workers directly contributing towards exports to the US anyway.

There are a lot of jobs in Vancouver and Toronto that are directly affected by lumber, mining and oil. Those sectors generate a significant amount of government revenue and government spending gets cut when those industries are hit. Most of the corporate offices and support industries (banking, equipment, engineering, etc.) are run out of those two cities.

[whatnext]

The Vancouver Sun reports today on the curious case of Richmond's Thompson neighbourhood, which has some of the Lower Mainland's priciest homes, yet income statistics show a level of "poverty" second only to the DTES:
http://www.vancouversun.com/business...169/story.html

By curious coincidence, 6 out of 10 residents in the area are from China.

[st7860]

A few people with low incomes don't get me all upset - They're paying for their home and property taxes and if they let their yard get disgusting the city can charge them for it.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by st7860

A few people with low incomes don't get me all upset - They're paying for their home and property taxes and if they let their yard get disgusting the city can charge them for it.

Perhaps your comprehension of the article was understandably a little cloudy. There's a difference between low incomes and low reported incomes.

[st7860]

For about a year or two the CRA has had a program that will pay you in cash a share of whatever they get from evidence you supply to them - I doubt that a random newspaper carries weight though