Jump to content

      



























Photo

Victoria Construction Rumour Thread + Info on Projects With No Dedicated Thread


  • Please log in to reply
3791 replies to this topic

#2581 Victoria Watcher

Victoria Watcher

    Old White Man On A Canadian Island

  • Member
  • 52,294 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 11:46 AM


Drive through Fairfield, James Bay, Fernwood, North Park, Rockland, etc., and look at the number of mail boxes in front of a large portion of the homes that on first glance appear to be older single family heritage homes. These are all examples of successful conversions. Abstract converted 710 and 720 to multi family, Stacy Dewhurst converted 1145 Mcclure and is in the process of trying to rezone and convert the property at the corner of Brighton and Foul Bay, 727 Linden, 580, 584 & 588 Michigan, etc etc. All examples of recent successful conversion.

.

recent successful conversions are few and far between. all the prior ones were done under much simpler regulations.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 16 October 2020 - 11:47 AM.


#2582 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 3,539 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:10 PM

Built without permitting, some of them, and at a time when material costs, labour and building code requirements were much, much lower.

And it’s not about an economic outcome, it’s about something that is viable and something that is not viable.

IPH, when you go to work you expect to get paid. When a developer goes to work, they too expect to get paid. You won’t work where you don’t get paid, and developers are no different. But what you’re saying to developers is you don’t care if they get paid as long as you get what you think is best for you. If your boss told you that, you’d be gone from your job and looking for better work elsewhere, wouldn’t you?

Conversions don’t happen like you are saying they should happen because they’re fraught with difficulty, serious risk and impediments to viability. And because of that lenders are not keen to lend money for those projects unless there is other collateral to make the whole thing viable. And if it were so easy, as you might assume, everyone would be converting their Fairfield homes and making out like bandits.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to come across as rude, but everyone thinks they’re an expert development risk assessor when it’s not their money on the table.

I'm a resident of a unit within a Fairfield house conversion that was done in 2006 (the house was originally built in 1915).  There are quite a few house conversions that have been done in Fairfield, James Bay, Gonzales, and Rockland; a smaller number exist in North Jubilee, Vic West, Fernwood, and other locations.  My suspicion is that House Conversions are most economically viable in the 'southern' sections of the city proper; for example, the newest house conversion on the market (the old Albion Manor B&B in James Bay on Superior Street) has units for sale between $799k - $950k plus GST (see https://www.greaterv...roperty/856414/ ).  What I'm saying is that house conversions in the 'south' neighbourhoods can command almost as much as entire single family homes in 'north' neighbourhoods.

 

That said, certain other market factors might increase the popularity of conversions everywhere in the city.  For one thing, most conversions result in units that are legally *townhouses*, so every unit has an outside-facing door (this has become popular in the pandemic and may maintain popularity post-pandemic).  Also, conversions generally have much lower strata fees than many similar units in larger buildings, and with the ongoing strata insurance issues they are generally maintaining this advantage (i.e. conversions have generally seen lower increases in insurance premiums this year vs. the increases in larger buildings).  


Edited by Kapten Kapsell, 16 October 2020 - 12:17 PM.

  • johnk2 likes this

#2583 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:19 PM

Yes, excellent points.

So I just ran 1120 Burdett through BC Assessment. Not surprisingly, the land is valued at $1.35 million.

The home? $5,500.00. It’s a literal tear down.

Next door 1124 Burdett has a home valued at $11,700.00, down $200 from the previous year. Economically speaking it’s also a tear down.

1128 is valued at $5,600.00, down from $6,000.00 a year ago.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2584 IPH

IPH
  • Member
  • 271 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:24 PM

recent successful conversions are few and far between. all the prior ones were done under much simpler regulations.

 Yes a lot of the older conversions were done under simpler regulations but you can say the same about the majority of all housing in Victoria, period.   710 and 720 Linden, 727/29 Linden, 1145 Mcclure, 580, 584 & 588 Michigan, 1004, 1016, 1022 and 1026 Pemberton were all done or redone within the last 10 years or so.  1139 Burdett is underway now so its too early to tell if it will be a success or not. 



#2585 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:32 PM

The three Michigan homes benefitted from the over-arching Capital Park project, which is another ballgame.

These conversions have always been and will continue to be boutique, limited supply housing. It’s too small to have a meaningful impact on housing and due to that limited impact it doesn’t dissuade development pressures in the immediate area (ie, so an apartment won’t go at 1120-1128 Burdett, but it’ll go in at 950-970 Burdett [that’s a fake address for conversation]) nor impact (lower, or stabilize) the cost of housing.

In fact, the conversions can even have a negative impact on housing as some land sales will occur with some conversion potential priced in, meaning the developer has to pay more for a home that will be replaced with higher density new-build housing.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2586 IPH

IPH
  • Member
  • 271 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:47 PM

Yes, excellent points.

So I just ran 1120 Burdett through BC Assessment. Not surprisingly, the land is valued at $1.35 million.

The home? $5,500.00. It’s a literal tear down.

Next door 1124 Burdett has a home valued at $11,700.00, down $200 from the previous year. Economically speaking it’s also a tear down.

1128 is valued at $5,600.00, down from $6,000.00 a year ago.

That's only because BC Assessment know the property is in the rezoning stage and the developer plans to demolish the house so they transfer all the value to the land.  According to Vic Map the assessed value of the home at 1124 Burdett was $197,000 in 2017 and the land was $691,000.  Its not possible for the building to have deteriorated from $197K to $11K over 3 years unless a dozer ran over it!  The developer spent more that $11K installing new electrical services to the building in 2018.  My niece knows one of the tenants in 1124 and the house is in quite decent shape.  All of which would suggest that the building is worth far more than $11K

 

BC Assessment pegged the building value of 1139 Burdett at $157K in 2017 and $218K in 2018 when absolutely nothing was done to the building to repair, maintain or improve it.   

 

BC Assessment doesn't appear to accurately reflect the value or condition of a building.


Edited by IPH, 16 October 2020 - 12:59 PM.

  • aastra likes this

#2587 IPH

IPH
  • Member
  • 271 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 12:57 PM

The three Michigan homes benefitted from the over-arching Capital Park project, which is another ballgame.

 

Totally agree, that's why I said you could preserve two of the three houses and add some density on the 1120 Burdett site to support the cost.  Its not the same scale as Capital park but could help make the economics work.

 

There were also two other houses on the property capital park site that Aryze moved to Ogden Point.  Does anyone know if there was any subsidies or tax breaks provided to help support that move and restoration? 



#2588 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 20,649 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 01:02 PM

For me it all boils down to this: if Victorians balk and make excuses whenever something like the JSB or Vic High or Bank Street school or the Fairfield church or etc. comes under fire then it means Victoria doesn't have a heritage preservation program. If Bank Street school is immediately dismissed for being too challenging, too expensive, not worth it, then the war to preserve heritage is as big a fraud as the war against homelessness. It's just lip service and hot air, a political ploy for purposes other than the avowed purpose.

 

Somebody on here (might have been Rob Randall) once observed how nutty the process was for identifying what should be saved and what shouldn't. Back in the day you might have had a street full of fine old houses, and thus hardly anyone cared when they were getting knocked down one by one. But when the last one or two houses are left (and they're typically the least special of the bunch) now you feel like you should do something. To use a "musical chairs" analogy, you allow random destructive tendencies to flourish for a long while, but then at some point you lift the needle and stop the music. Victoria has already knocked down quite a few of its old brick school buildings. Maybe after Bank Street and the next five or six of them are gone we'll start thinking we should be more committed about preserving them? There's no need for action until you've really made a mess of things through inaction?

 


  • IPH and johnk2 like this

#2589 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 01:12 PM

If that’s the case that’s very interesting. I’ve never knew BCA would actively do that!

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2590 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 01:16 PM

Totally agree, that's why I said you could preserve two of the three houses and add some density on the 1120 Burdett site to support the cost. Its not the same scale as Capital park but could help make the economics work.


I just don’t know if they would generate sufficient density on only one property. It would have to be quite tall to have the same number of homes, and height also comes with its own cost pressures.

Even on two properties it might be tough.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2591 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 01:23 PM

...and I mean density split across the older home(s) and the new build.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2592 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 3,539 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 04:21 PM

Ironically this Thursday (October 22) council is going to consider changes to house conversion regulations in order to make them more feasible for developers.

See https://pub-victoria...ocumentId=59693

#2593 IPH

IPH
  • Member
  • 271 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 06:00 PM

Its great to see that they are proposing relaxations to the required total building floor area per suite allowed.  Especially where the building is heritage designated, or rental in perpetuity, or affordable below market, or a combination of these.  But the key to really encouraging enough of these to happen would have been to allow some modest additions, especially to the rear of a building to allow one or two additional units.  



#2594 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 3,539 posts

Posted 16 October 2020 - 06:19 PM

Keep in mind that most house conversions do gain substantial square footage when the house is lifted and the former under-height basements attain 8-9 foot ceilings...

#2595 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 23 October 2020 - 08:52 PM

Dev Tracker now has an official application for development permit for 330 Michigan.

This has been previously discussed on the forum as it is the redevelopment of an existing 1980s CRH, housing complex with a new affordable housing development.

Previous (low quality) rendering:


New details:
Unit count has increased from 98 to 106.
Architect is dHK.

Hopefully new renderings will be available soon.


Approved at the public hearing last night
  • Mike K. likes this

#2596 Matt R.

Matt R.

    Randy Diamond

  • Member
  • 7,861 posts

Posted 23 October 2020 - 11:27 PM

As an aside, I’m estimating an addition to my place as we speak. The costs are stratospheric and it’s as straight forward a job as one could imagine.

I don’t even want to think what a re-wiring of a 90-year-old home would cost, re-plumbing, foundation improvements, adjusting load bearing walls, converting windows to efficient panes, running gas throughout, bathroom and kitchen venting, etc. It’s all monstrously complicated and expensive.


We looked at moving a Nickel Bros home, but unless they can barge it right to your beach forget about it. Many or most of the homes need to brought to code, and it’s not worth it. Some people get lucky, of course.

Mike, what sort of sq. ft. costs are you getting? I’m hearing $350 here for a basic 2400 sq ft home, plus land development costs.

Matt.

#2597 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,155 posts

Posted 24 October 2020 - 06:19 AM

I’m only going for a garage, so no perks, no plumbing, and very basic construction which may not even have insulation.

$350 a square foot sounds about right for what you’re looking at. I’d probably peg it closer to $400 considering where material costs are going. So pretty much a million bucks.

A friend down the road who’s building a garage right now said just the windows are costing him $21,000, but he’s going a bit fancier than the average bear would.
  • Matt R. likes this

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#2598 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 3,776 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 28 October 2020 - 08:54 AM

As mentioned in another thread, looks like the owner of Ming's is prepping for demolition. They have permits to cap the services and electrical, and there is a demo permit under review. Temporary surface parking lot, perhaps?


  • Kapten Kapsell, Nparker and Brantastic like this

#2599 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 28 October 2020 - 09:19 AM

^Perhaps the jackhammering I heard last month was for soil testing prior to a sale?



#2600 Brantastic

Brantastic
  • Member
  • 924 posts

Posted 28 October 2020 - 09:22 AM

Makes sense. I saw a few guys in hi-vis vests and hardhats on the roof of Ming's a few days ago, throwing some material from the roof into a dumpster down below.



You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users