The Metro Vancouver Real Estate Thread

[whatnext]

Oh yes please, I'll shell out $17 million for a suite in a near 60 year old building, that isn't even a condominium but a co-op

https://www.rew.ca/properties/R2312640/2...&search_type=property_search&sort=latest

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Oh yes please, I'll shell out $17 million for a suite in a near 60 year old building, that isn't even a condominium but a co-op

https://www.rew.ca/properties/R2312640/2...&search_type=property_search&sort=latest

That is one of my favorite buildings in the city. Not a big fan of the renovations though.



Interesting from the ad:

This property is a co-op property, so the purchaser is exempt from the FOREIGN BUYER TAX and the PROPERTY PURCHASE TAX.

Gotta expand that tax a bit more it seems. That's a potential big chunk of change to launder.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

That is one of my favorite buildings in the city. Not a big fan of the renovations though.



Interesting from the ad:

I like the building fine, though I'm glad Vancouver subsequently amended zoning so future buildings weren't so wide. We would have ended up looking like Toronto. But at best that should be a $5 million suite. What's the lifespan of such a building, 100-120 years? It's halfway there.

I didn't know that loophole about the Foreign Buyers or PPT though. Will they still have to pay the Speculator's Tax I wonder?

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I like the building fine, though I'm glad Vancouver subsequently amended zoning so future buildings weren't so wide. We would have ended up looking like Toronto. But at best that should be a $5 million suite. What's the lifespan of such a building, 100-120 years? It's halfway there.

I didn't know that loophole about the Foreign Buyers or PPT though. Will they still have to pay the Speculator's Tax I wonder?

Corporations that run as Coops sell shares in the company that owns the building so unless they expand it to stocks/corporations it wouldn’t apply. They are a relic from before the strata act. But there’s so few corporations run as coops now its not signifigant. They have much tighter rules, larger down payments required, are 19+ and usually don’t allow rentals so they tend to be much cheaper to buy into. They also require new Owner interviews so most foreign buyers are blocked. The average age is around 70 and they tend to be great for seniors who can't afford a regular place.

[GenWhy?]

Came out of an interesting meeting today that investment real estate is strong and pre-sales are selling out well (for investment-style units) and there is a waiting list for Oakridge to kick off and that single family homes are indeed in a slump with those in SF homes switching their clients and work to the condo market. Baby boomers and young(ish) adults are holding off, but since interest rates are still quite low there is still a strong investment market for buying units. Lots of 1 bed + den and smaller more "efficiently" designed formats. This will be good for re-sales down the road for new buyers being able to get some of the older stock.

This might not bode so well for land prices, however, and the rental market for new builds...

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Came out of an interesting meeting today that investment real estate is strong and pre-sales are selling out well (for investment-style units) and there is a waiting list for Oakridge to kick off and that single family homes are indeed in a slump with those in SF homes switching their clients and work to the condo market. Baby boomers and young(ish) adults are holding off, but since interest rates are still quite low there is still a strong investment market for buying units. Lots of 1 bed + den and smaller more "efficiently" designed formats. This will be good for re-sales down the road for new buyers being able to get some of the older stock.

This might not bode so well for land prices, however, and the rental market for new builds...

Was this a meeting with the end of goal of real estate sales? It seems at odds with reports:

...Greater Vancouver Condo Inventory Soars Over 92%
There’s a whole lot more condo inventory across Greater Vancouver. REBGV reported 2,417 new listings in September, up 39% from the month before. When compared to the same month last year, new listings were 10.92% higher. The rise in new listings helped to push new inventory to highs we haven’t quite seen in some time.

The total number of active listings for condos is higher – way higher. REBGV reported 4,613 active listings in September, up a massive 92.04% when compared to the same month last year. The decline in sales and a rise in active listings pushed the ratio to 17.6, the lowest seen since January 2015. A seller’s market is above 20, a buyer’s market is below 12, and between those numbers is “balanced.”..

https://betterdwelling.com/city/vancouve...ger-a-sellers-market-as-inventory-soars/

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Was this a meeting with the end of goal of real estate sales? It seems at odds with reports:

[I]...Greater Vancouver Condo Inventory Soars Over 92%

GenWhy? is referring to sales of new developments, I would assume, while the drop in sales of condos that you're referencing is MLS sales of everything but newly developed units. There appears to be - for the time being - a disconnect between the two markets.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Changing City

GenWhy? is referring to sales of new developments, I would assume, while the drop in sales of condos that you're referencing is MLS sales of everything but newly developed units. There appears to be - for the time being - a disconnect between the two markets.

Correct.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Changing City

GenWhy? is referring to sales of new developments, I would assume, while the drop in sales of condos that you're referencing is MLS sales of everything but newly developed units. There appears to be - for the time being - a disconnect between the two markets.

Right but in effect aren’t there no statistics on presales because it is not recorded as a sale until complete? So one is reliant on those marketing presales for information? How likely are they to be transparent when they’re still selling units? I can’t help but wonder when I see frequent, expensive tv ads for the Foster Martin project in White Rock how well sales are going in some projects.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Was this a meeting with the end of goal of real estate sales? It seems at odds with reports:

...Greater Vancouver Condo Inventory Soars Over 92%
There’s a whole lot more condo inventory across Greater Vancouver. REBGV reported 2,417 new listings in September, up 39% from the month before. When compared to the same month last year, new listings were 10.92% higher. The rise in new listings helped to push new inventory to highs we haven’t quite seen in some time.

The total number of active listings for condos is higher – way higher. REBGV reported 4,613 active listings in September, up a massive 92.04% when compared to the same month last year. The decline in sales and a rise in active listings pushed the ratio to 17.6, the lowest seen since January 2015. A seller’s market is above 20, a buyer’s market is below 12, and between those numbers is “balanced.”..

https://betterdwelling.com/city/vancouve...ger-a-sellers-market-as-inventory-soars/

I'm in the market right now.

Its definitely slower - more time to think, more time to decide. But people are still quite firm on prices.

Lots of equity built up in the last few years, most people don't have a ton of incentive to get desperate.

Local economy is still humming, and while listings are much higher YoY were coming off listings lows that were absurd. There was effectively "no" product for sale last year. 10,000 listings in a region of 2.5 million?

Even now - not a ton of product on the market at "reasonable" prices.

I would say the big difference is time on market, and not going over asking.

I don't feel/see panicked sellers on the properties I'm looking at - so my guess is this will be a lot like the post Olympics slow down.

Not to say that things cant turn and crash - one of these times the doomsayers will be proven right.

[whatnext]

Greens agree to support NDP speculation tax legislation, with three changes:

...The key change to the legislation is the third amendment, that out-of-province Canadians who own B.C. homes in the affected areas pay the same 0.5 per cent rate as B.C.-resident owners, not the one per cent set out in the existing legislation.

Andrew Weaver, B.C. Green Party leader, said, “[A] key concern of mine was that Canadians should be treated equally. We are one country and even if they don’t pay income tax in B.C., Canadians pay federal taxes that benefit our communities. The third amendment was an area of compromise and I am pleased that it will lessen the impact for Canadian homeowners, while keeping other critical provisions of the bill intact.”

The first two changes, which the NDP said it agreed with, are:

• for there to be an annual review between the Ministry of Finance and the mayors in the affected municipalities to see how the tax has affected their regions; and

• for all revenues from the tax to be spent on affordable housing projects in the affected regions: Nanaimo-Lantzville, the Capital Regional District, Metro Vancouver, the Fraser Valley and Kelowna-West Kelowna. The statement said, “This will ensure residents of those areas will be able to see the benefits of the tax in their own communities.”

“While we strongly support the intent of the first two amendments, we are of the view that the third amendment lessens protections against out-of-province speculative investment,” said finance minister Carol James. “We believe it is fair to ask those who do not pay income tax in B.C. to pay their fair share. But in the spirit of compromise, we will support this amendment.”...

https://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/g...dp-on-speculation-tax-changes-1.23468781

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Greens agree to support NDP speculation tax legislation, with three changes:

...The key change to the legislation is the third amendment, that out-of-province Canadians who own B.C. homes in the affected areas pay the same 0.5 per cent rate as B.C.-resident owners, not the one per cent set out in the existing legislation.

Andrew Weaver, B.C. Green Party leader, said, “[A] key concern of mine was that Canadians should be treated equally. We are one country and even if they don’t pay income tax in B.C., Canadians pay federal taxes that benefit our communities. The third amendment was an area of compromise and I am pleased that it will lessen the impact for Canadian homeowners, while keeping other critical provisions of the bill intact.”

The first two changes, which the NDP said it agreed with, are:

• for there to be an annual review between the Ministry of Finance and the mayors in the affected municipalities to see how the tax has affected their regions; and

• for all revenues from the tax to be spent on affordable housing projects in the affected regions: Nanaimo-Lantzville, the Capital Regional District, Metro Vancouver, the Fraser Valley and Kelowna-West Kelowna. The statement said, “This will ensure residents of those areas will be able to see the benefits of the tax in their own communities.”

“While we strongly support the intent of the first two amendments, we are of the view that the third amendment lessens protections against out-of-province speculative investment,” said finance minister Carol James. “We believe it is fair to ask those who do not pay income tax in B.C. to pay their fair share. But in the spirit of compromise, we will support this amendment.”...

https://www.vancourier.com/real-estate/g...dp-on-speculation-tax-changes-1.23468781

I’m not arguing for or against the tax here but I think the Green Party is overstepping it’s bounds by getting involved in making non environmental policy. We vote Green to help the environment not so they can dictate welfare and tax law. They should be abstaining in non environment matters. There supposed to be the middle not the left. Kind of disappointed and I think they’ll lose a lot of votes now that voting Green=voting NDP.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by misher

I’m not arguing for or against the tax here but I think the Green Party is overstepping it’s bounds by getting involved in making non environmental policy. We vote Green to help the environment not so they can dictate welfare and tax law. They should be abstaining in non environment matters. There supposed to be the middle not the left. Kind of disappointed and I think they’ll lose a lot of votes now that voting Green=voting NDP.

I think that the more politicians we have on our side of the housing crisis, the better. People tend to forget that the city needs people to actually operate its expenditures such as hospitals and park maintenance projects. Or else what are we gonna do, hire everyone as temporary workers?

See misher, I found your environmental concern there. A little bit of a reach, but not far off .

Now I think that this speculation tax and taxing the hell out of "foreigners" isn't the proper approach to finding a legitimate solution but I won't go there today .

[misher]

Originally Posted by scryer

I think that the more politicians we have on our side of the housing crisis, the better. People tend to forget that the city needs people to actually operate its expenditures such as hospitals and park maintenance projects. Or else what are we gonna do, hire everyone as temporary workers?

See misher, I found your environmental concern there. A little bit of a reach, but not far off .

Now I think that this speculation tax and taxing the hell out of foreigners isn't the proper approach to finding a legitimate solution but I won't go there today .

I get that if they support what you want it’s a good thing. But it’s like having a feminist party decide whether to go to war. It’s sometbing that’s completely outside why you voted for them and had you known they’d do it you may not have. I’m just uncomfortable with it. I really think a law like this should have been a referendum in each municipality so they could have voted yes or no. Having a party who you elected decide things they never told you they’d do is not democratic.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by misher

I’m not arguing for or against the tax here but I think the Green Party is overstepping it’s bounds by getting involved in making non environmental policy. We vote Green to help the environment not so they can dictate welfare and tax law. They should be abstaining in non environment matters. There supposed to be the middle not the left. Kind of disappointed and I think they’ll lose a lot of votes now that voting Green=voting NDP.

What?

Do you think Green parties, which are around the world, only vote on legislation specifically about the environment? What an odd belief. You wouldn't be getting much value out of a Green MLA or MP or city councillor.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What?

Do you think Green parties, which are around the world, only vote on legislation specifically about the environment? What an odd belief. You wouldn't be getting much value out of a Green MLA or MP or city councillor.

Exactly

From the Wiki page on the Green Party of Canada (the BC Greens would be pretty similar):

Its broad and multi-issue political platform reflects its core values of ecological wisdom, social justice, grassroots democracy and non-violence.

Principles

The Green Party of Canada is founded on six key principles that were adopted at the 2002 convention of the Global Greens. These principles are:

• ecological wisdom
• non-violence
• social justice
• sustainability
• participatory democracy
• respect for diversity

[scryer]

Originally Posted by misher

Having a party who you elected decide things they never told you they’d do is not democratic.

Welcome to politics. Their public-agendas are advertisements to get in the door, then they execute their private agendas.

On a side note I think that all of the politicians know that Vancouver is going to be hurting very badly if we don't start doing something about the housing crisis so it's going to be on the table of discussion for everyone.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by scryer

On a side note I think that all of the politicians know that Metro Vancouver is going to be hurting very badly if we don't start doing something about the housing crisis so it's going to be on the table of discussion for everyone.

Fixed that for you

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Right but in effect aren’t there no statistics on presales because it is not recorded as a sale until complete? So one is reliant on those marketing presales for information? How likely are they to be transparent when they’re still selling units? I can’t help but wonder when I see frequent, expensive tv ads for the Foster Martin project in White Rock how well sales are going in some projects.

Well, there is some data on how well newly released projects are selling, although the detailed data sources are subscription services and not generally published. MLA Advisory have a fairly detailed publicly available report twice a year, and the most recent, covering the first six months of 2018, shows 74% of pre-sales released had been sold in Metro Vancouver as a whole.

There is, however, very significant variation across Metro Vancouver. 91% of the 1,573 units released for sale in 6 projects in North Burnaby sold, for example, but only 34% of the 146 units released in 2 projects in Downtown Vancouver. (Obviously there may be timing aspects to that, if they are offered closer to June than January). The reason you're seeing the White Rock project advertised may be a reflection of the fact that out of 126 units released for sale, in just one scheme - so presumably the one you referenced - only 20% had sold.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Fixed that for you

Thank you, boo.