The Metro Vancouver Real Estate Thread

[misher]

While sales may be slowing Kennedy Stewart seems to be the god of development as he will need to heavily push for development to afford the city’s capital plan. With markets slowing I’m guessing huge increases in zoning are going to be offered in return for CACs. He’s going to have an intersting time balancing the political push for developers to build rental/social while trying to collect the big CACs the government was getting from market strata.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/b...-stewart-says-city-is-open-for-business/

Vancouver’s incoming mayor says he wants the development industry to know the city is open for business on housing as the city banks on developer fees to support its capital plan.

Mayor-elect Kennedy Stewart inherits the challenge of tackling one of the continent’s most difficult housing crises when he takes office on Monday. With more than half of the city’s capital plan funding to come from developer fees, he will need to work with a divided council to realize the city’s ambitions while ensuring the development industry is motivated to participate.

[whatnext]

Nice to see some realtors calling bullshit on the lollipops and rainbows press releases put out by brokerages:

Vancouver condos’ price-per-square-foot survey sparks realtors debate

Century 21 also says in the release that it asked its franchisees “to help come up with the average price-per-square-foot in their market. However, calculating a precise number is not an exact science as every office and province tracks statistics slightly differently. As a result, some have used either the average or benchmark prices (depending on the market) and tracked average square footage in sales.”..

...other realtors like Ian Watt of Sutton Group West Coast Realty in Vancouver are focused on the change in more recent price-per-square-foot numbers as well as other indicators.

Looking at October figures crunched by SnapStats, Watt said median prices for downtown Vancouver condos “decreased 11 per cent from September 2018 and 21 per cent from the peak of the market in January 2018. The dollar per square foot also decreased from $1,043 (in September) to $979 (in October), which is a six-per-cent drop.”

“There were 143 sales (six per day) in downtown Vancouver in October, which was up 13 per cent from the previous month, but down 33 per cent from October 2017, and the units that are being sold are selling five per cent off the asking price.”


https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...quare-foot-survey-sparks-realtors-debate

[misher]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Nice to see some realtors calling bullshit on the lollipops and rainbows press releases put out by brokerages:

Vancouver condos’ price-per-square-foot survey sparks realtors debate

Century 21 also says in the release that it asked its franchisees “to help come up with the average price-per-square-foot in their market. However, calculating a precise number is not an exact science as every office and province tracks statistics slightly differently. As a result, some have used either the average or benchmark prices (depending on the market) and tracked average square footage in sales.”..

...other realtors like Ian Watt of Sutton Group West Coast Realty in Vancouver are focused on the change in more recent price-per-square-foot numbers as well as other indicators.

Looking at October figures crunched by SnapStats, Watt said median prices for downtown Vancouver condos “decreased 11 per cent from September 2018 and 21 per cent from the peak of the market in January 2018. The dollar per square foot also decreased from $1,043 (in September) to $979 (in October), which is a six-per-cent drop.”

“There were 143 sales (six per day) in downtown Vancouver in October, which was up 13 per cent from the previous month, but down 33 per cent from October 2017, and the units that are being sold are selling five per cent off the asking price.”


https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...quare-foot-survey-sparks-realtors-debate

Price per a square foot would get distorted if they are planning to develop those condos too as the square footage there looking at isn’t the one they bought.

[SpongeG]

Vancouver councillor Colleen Hardwick seeks to undo mass rezoning of single-family neighbourhoods

by Carlito Pablo on November 7th, 2018

Coun. Colleen Hardwick wants to overturn the last major and one of the most contentious decision by the previous Vision Vancouver-dominated city council.

It involved the mass rezoning of 99 percent of all 68,000 lots zoned as single-family properties to allow duplexes.

Hardwick has filed a motion to have the measure “referred to public hearing for reconsideration by Council at the earliest date possible”.

According to her, there was “no meaningful public consultation” before the rezoning was sent to public hearing.

Hardwick’s motion is included in the agenda of the first regular meeting of the new council on Tuesday (November 13).

When the matter was considered in a public hearing in September, Hardwick, then a candidate for council with the Non-Partisan Association (NPA), signed up to speak.

Addressing council, Hardwick said that the “sweeping” bylaw changes are being made without public consultation and community input.

Describing it a “fundamentally flawed public process”, Hardwick told councillors that what they are going to do is “unconscionable”.

...

https://www.straight.com/news/1161751/va...k-seeks-undo-mass-rezoning-single-family

[Migrant_Coconut]

Adriane Carr is also motioning to rescind Making Room. The Green Party should consider a rebranding: the "NPA That Recycles Party."

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by misher

Price per a square foot would get distorted if they are planning to develop those condos too as the square footage there looking at isn’t the one they bought.

I think you're suggesting that the numbers could get distorted because apartments bought by developers at above market prices for redevelopment would inflate the per square foot number? They would inflate the average unit price too, but as far as I know those sales aren't listed on MLS in the same way, so the average and per square foot numbers shouldn't include them,. That would suggest prices are really coming down - or at the very least only less expensive per square foot units are selling.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I think you're suggesting that the numbers could get distorted because apartments bought by developers at above market prices for redevelopment would inflate the per square foot number? They would inflate the average unit price too, but as far as I know those sales aren't listed on MLS in the same way, so the average and per square foot numbers shouldn't include them,. That would suggest prices are really coming down - or at the very least only less expensive per square foot units are selling.

I think prices are definitely coming down, but are also definitely being skewed by sales mix.

Not sure how this relates to price per square foot, but it definitely should reflect in averages.

If I was guessing - average sale is probably down from $1.3 to $700, sales mix of SFH being down, luxury condo being down, and mostly mid range units selling.

[s211]

Originally Posted by rofina

I think prices are definitely coming down, but are also definitely being skewed by sales mix.

Not sure how this relates to price per square foot, but it definitely should reflect in averages.

If I was guessing - average sale is probably down from $1.3 to $700, sales mix of SFH being down, luxury condo being down, and mostly mid range units selling.

Paired sales analysis would/should provide the evidence to indicate direction of pricing.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by s211

Paired sales analysis would/should provide the evidence to indicate direction of pricing.

The Teranet House Price Index does that. They show Vancouver (Metro) having a drop of 0.4% in a month - and the first drop they record. In other words, prices that they monitor had shown increases until July 2018 - and now a drop. (Toronto saw a 3.3% drop in a month, and the peak in that market was a year earlier).

The Pink Snow Blog looks at individual examples of houses and condos across the lower mainland where achieved prices are way below asking, and in many cases now, below the price paid by the seller. Although the plural of anecdote isn't data, there are plenty of anecdotal records there to suggest a trend. For example, an apartment in Yaletown was bought last year for $1.38m. Initially it was being offered as a flip at $1.45m. Now, after three price reductions it's down to $1,318,800, with a $60,000 reduction in the price they were trying to get only two weeks earlier. It still hasn't sold yet.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Adriane Carr is also motioning to rescind Making Room. The Green Party should consider a rebranding: the "NPA That Recycles Party."

I wouldn't get too worked up about that. The "Let's Duplex Everything" plan was desperate attempt by the dead-and-buried Vision Vancouver to look like they were doing something about affordability. It certainly wouldn't have created any meaningful amount of affordable homes, it was pure political theatre.

[s211]

Originally Posted by whatnext

i wouldn't get too worked up about that. The "let's duplex everything" plan was desperate attempt by the dead-and-buried vision vancouver to look like they were doing something about affordability. It certainly wouldn't have created any meaningful amount of affordable homes, it was pure political theatre.

qft

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I wouldn't get too worked up about that. The "Let's Duplex Everything" plan was desperate attempt by the dead-and-buried Vision Vancouver to look like they were doing something about affordability. It certainly wouldn't have created any meaningful amount of affordable homes, it was pure political theatre.

So long as it gets replaced with something. The Greens and NPA have consistently voted in favour of the "Nothing But Basement Suites And Laneways" plan, which is practically useless.

[misher]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So long as it gets replaced with something. The Greens and NPA have consistently voted in favour of the "Nothing But Basement Suites And Laneways" plan, which is practically useless.

From arguments I've seen the duplex plan didn't create any additional square footage so it was a formality. The NPA and Green's plan is discussing additional space which may be useful.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by misher

From arguments I've seen the duplex plan didn't create any additional square footage so it was a formality. The NPA and Green's plan is discussing additional space which may be useful.

Carr opposed about a third of the 15,000 housing projects proposed in her last two terms, and Fry's backing her up on rescinding Making Room, so I'm not holding my breath for a triplex/fourplex plan.

If she wanted more space, all she'd have to do is vote yes to legalize basement suites in duplexes.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I wouldn't get too worked up about that. The "Let's Duplex Everything" plan was desperate attempt by the dead-and-buried Vision Vancouver to look like they were doing something about affordability. It certainly wouldn't have created any meaningful amount of affordable homes, it was pure political theatre.

It should provide additional home ownership at lesser prices to a full SF home (existing and new build). It'll also allow easier conversion of older homes that are not deemed heritage or character to have 2 primary residences and a secondary. Should also allow more primary residences to be converted or constructed in areas that limit the number of primary residences (most RS zoned areas). Tool in the tool box. Makes renovating homes more interesting and allowing more ownership.

Will be interesting for Vancouver Specials to be renovated and converted.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Carr opposed about a third of the 15,000 housing projects proposed in her last two terms, and Fry's backing her up on rescinding Making Room, so I'm not holding my breath for a triplex/fourplex plan.

If she wanted more space, all she'd have to do is vote yes to legalize basement suites in duplexes.

Are you saying duplexes cannot have a basement suite?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Are you saying duplexes cannot have a basement suite?

Physically, there shouldn't be a problem. Legally, apparently there is.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Physically, there shouldn't be a problem. Legally, apparently there is.

In the existing or updated zoning?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

In the existing or updated zoning?

Making Room, if I understand correctly, allows for duplexes with secondary suites rather than one or the other.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Making Room, if I understand correctly, allows for duplexes with secondary suites rather than one or the other.

Well yes, and no. I'm just looking at the policy report, and it differentiates between secondary suites, and lock-off suites. "This report also recommends introducing a maximum unit size for lock-off units. Lock-off units are small, self-contained units that enable households to expand or contract their space needs over time. The maximum unit size will help to distinguish lock-off units from secondary suites, which are intended to be larger and provide longer term rental housing." It gets complicated, because this was proposed as an interim move, with the possibility of greater density after further study. So on a 33' lot you could have a duplex with lock-off suites - which would have a maximum size of 320 sq. ft. Total development was still limited to 0.7 FSR, and there would be no provision for a laneway house with a duplex project.

Proposed Duplex Regulations

"The proposed zoning by-law amendments are an interim measure to allow duplexes at 0.7 FSR (equal to FSR in most RS zones), and each duplex unit may include a secondary suite or lock-off unit. The floor area on a standard 10 m (33 ft.) lot is not sufficient to include secondary suites in a duplex development, so allowing smaller lock-off units provides an alternative secondary rental opportunity. Duplexes on lots greater than 511 sq. m. (5,500 sq. ft.) in area would be required to include a secondary suite for each unit as sufficient floor area (approximately 3,850 sq. ft.) is permitted on these sites to accommodate two duplex units of a reasonable size for a family and a secondary suite within each duplex. Staff are recommending this approach for larger lots as a performance measure to ensure larger lots provide four dwellings units if new duplex is built under these interim provisions."