Jump to content

      













BUILT
1011 Burdett
Uses: condo, townhome
Address: 1011 Burdett Avenue
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Urban core
Storeys: 4
Condo units: 32 (1BR, 2BR)
Sales status: sold out / resales only
1011 Burdett (formerly known as The 1011) is a four storey, 32 condo and four townhome development situated in... (view full profile)
Learn more about 1011 Burdett on Citified.ca
Photo

[Fairfield] 1011 Burdett | 32 condos; 4 townhomes | Completed - built in 2015

Condo

  • Please log in to reply
151 replies to this topic

#141 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,878 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 08:51 AM

A row house sits on its own property. A town house is part of a strata. 


Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#142 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,816 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 02:22 PM

Province just changed the rules to allow wall-sharing fee simple. Now we just need to fix our zoning to allow them to built in all the "single family only" zones in the city.



#143 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,493 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 06:51 AM

Kinda like a duplex?

The construction is the same. Density is the same. So yeah, what's the problem?

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


#144 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 7,199 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 29 January 2016 - 08:20 AM

Just need someone to buy up a bunch of sfh lots and put in a proposal. It probably would require some subdividing, as many lots here are too wide for typical rowhomes.

 

I propose Mason street!


  • Nparker likes this

#145 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 23,662 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 08:49 AM

Just need someone to buy up a bunch of SFH lots and put in a proposal. It probably would require some subdividing, as many lots here are too wide for typical row homes.

 

I propose Mason street!

I second that proposal. :banana:



#146 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,493 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 09:42 AM

With the City of Victoria's 75% fee of the uplift value on rezoned or amended properties, SFH lots, with side yards or not, are far more valuable and would therefore necessitate a much higher premium paid back to the City.

So for what is effectively a townhome other than the strata fee you'll be paying more for the product, higher taxes, and your own maintenance on top of it all. So my sense is it's simply not doable.

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


#147 lanforod

lanforod
  • Member
  • 7,199 posts
  • LocationSaanich

Posted 29 January 2016 - 11:42 AM

With the City of Victoria's 75% fee of the uplift value on rezoned or amended properties, SFH lots, with side yards or not, are far more valuable and would therefore necessitate a much higher premium paid back to the City.

So for what is effectively a townhome other than the strata fee you'll be paying more for the product, higher taxes, and your own maintenance on top of it all. So my sense is it's simply not doable.

 

Yes, the problem is that row-homes are not the intended target of that fee. There probably should be a fee, somewhat, as the developer shouldn't necessarily be the only one to profit from increased density. However, the city should be looking at ways to encourage this type of higher density. It would allow for the types of homes that are family friendly, good eye candy, and a better use of space in a city with little to spare and adversity to height.


  • Nparker likes this

#148 attica

attica
  • Member
  • 39 posts

Posted 01 February 2016 - 04:48 PM

A row house sits on its own property. A town house is part of a strata. 

 

Most differentiate row homes as not having shared party walls. For example in Montreal you could knock down an old brownstone row home in the middle of a row, and the rest would still function just fine. Though there is no set in stone definition

In the current legislature, the difference you are referring to is just called fee simple. So you could have fee simple townhomes, or row homes.

 

Province just changed the rules to allow wall-sharing fee simple. Now we just need to fix our zoning to allow them to built in all the "single family only" zones in the city.

 

They were actually previously allowed, but the legal hurdles particularly related to fires were very onerous so there was very little desire to go down that road. Recently, as you have alluded to, the government has taken steps to make that process much easier for those interested in pursuing fee simple town homes. (or any 0 lot line fee simple residential units which would also include row homes)
 

With the City of Victoria's 75% fee of the uplift value on rezoned or amended properties, SFH lots, with side yards or not, are far more valuable and would therefore necessitate a much higher premium paid back to the City.

So for what is effectively a townhome other than the strata fee you'll be paying more for the product, higher taxes, and your own maintenance on top of it all. So my sense is it's simply not doable.

Im not sure I follow you here, the land lift would be very similar to a developer picking up 4 lots and then building a series of strata titled townhomes like they currently do. In both cases the developer will be rezoning the land and paying the CAC


  • Coreyburger likes this

#149 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,493 posts

Posted 01 February 2016 - 05:37 PM

A fee-simple property (referring literally to fully unrestricted usage of the property and the structure by the occupant [i.e. equal to a single-family-dwelling and its property]) is more valuable than a townhome, therefore the kick-back to the City of Victoria would be higher, wouldn't it? I might be wrong here.

 

Fee-simple is more expensive to construct, btw, mostly due to individual hook-ups to utilities, thicker walls between units, etc.


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


#150 attica

attica
  • Member
  • 39 posts

Posted 01 February 2016 - 05:54 PM

A fee-simple property (referring literally to fully unrestricted usage of the property and the structure by the occupant [i.e. equal to a single-family-dwelling and its property]) is more valuable than a townhome, therefore the kick-back to the City of Victoria would be higher, wouldn't it? I might be wrong here.

 

Fee-simple is more expensive to construct, btw, mostly due to individual hook-ups to utilities, thicker walls between units, etc.

There isn't a lot of evidence yet on what premium people are willing to pay for fee simple ownership of townhomes locally yet. Some value the freedom, while other are burdened by the responsibility. As you mention though higher costs may offset the higher sale price. Land lift is calculated from the land residual, so it would take into account revenue and costs of a potential project. So its hard to say if the land lift would be much different in the end. Personally I don't think it would be much.

In regards to your second comment, yes there are some additional costs. However the need for individual hookups was one of the issues recently addressed by the provincial government, and it can now be avoided through different agreements (i apologize i don't remember the specifics).

But, stratifying units as well is not without its costs as well. Lawyers and surveyors make a good chunk of change throughout the process 


Edited by attica, 01 February 2016 - 05:57 PM.


#151 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,493 posts

Posted 01 February 2016 - 06:01 PM

That's attica, that sheds a lot of light on this issue.


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


#152 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 2,266 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 12:20 PM

This development can be marked 'completed'.


  • Mike K. and Nparker like this

 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users