Affordable housing in Victoria
Posted 25 October 2006 - 05:59 PM
Also many people buy condos and than rent them out another often missed source of lower income housing.
Yes we need some stand alone housing projects but we also need to make it easier to increase the stock.
Posted 25 October 2006 - 06:10 PM
The best I have seen recently is a bachelor on Cloverdale for $85,000. That's an affordable price in my opinion. It sold after about a month on the market. Here's the link - http://www.aprilprin... ... num=218904
There's a similar unit in the same building for $110,000, I don't know what makes the price so much more - http://www.aprilprin... ... num=221072
I would be interested in seeing more units like this on the market, something under $100,000. Not everyone wants fancy finishings, they just need a room they can buy to live in and build equity.
Posted 25 October 2006 - 07:00 PM
I did a search on Fairfield and James Bay, where there are a lot of 60's condo's and I found 9 properties listed under $200K. 1 was a care-a-minimum, 1 was a float home, 6 were leaseholds and 1 was a freehold.
I wish I was more optimistic about the future of affordability in Victoria but I'm afraid I'm not. The current wave of development is doing nothing to directly address the problem.
Posted 25 October 2006 - 07:04 PM
In the mid 1990s there was a four storey building put up on North Park street that was advertising itself as the cheapest condos in the city. I think a forumer here actually lives in the building. That is a far cry from today where each new development is outdoing the last one in price. I haven't seen any units in that building listed on MLS, I would like to see what the prices are now and compared to other low price range buildings in the city.
Posted 25 October 2006 - 07:54 PM
It's dependant on whether the condominium association owns the land the condo is built on or not.
What's the difference between leasehold and freehold?
How much would you spend on a property when you know that in 99 years it will revert to the land owners when the lease ends? How about in 75 years?
Posted 25 October 2006 - 08:05 PM
Most leases run for 99 years. The leaseholder could be the city or it could be privately held. In theory when the lease runs out the leaseholder could knock down the building and you walk away with nothing. This means that as the lease gets nearer to expiring your asset will begin to lose value.
The benefit's are that you can effectively get into the market for a bit cheaper than buying a freehold (the discount is around 20% in Fairfield at the moment). It also gives you a bit more price certainty than rent (as rents will continue to rise). The downside is that your asset will eventually lose value and also that maintenance fees are often quite high. One I enquired about was well over $400/month (but did include the property taxes).
Posted 25 October 2006 - 08:43 PM
Posted 25 October 2006 - 09:01 PM
I'm not sure how many leaseholds there are in Victoria ... there's at least two large buildings in Fairfiled and I'm pretty sure one or two of the tall towers in James Bay are as well.
BTW, after finishing my first "affordability" rant earlier this evening I saw a tv show about a first-timer trying to buy his first place in Sao Paulo, Brazil. There are a lot of tall towers going up in S.P and it's common practice to sell condo's unfinished. So when you move in you have the basics in place but no appliances, cupboards, flooring, paint on the walls, etc. I think this is a fantastic idea ... let the owner finish the unit at the level and rate that they can afford.
Posted 25 October 2006 - 09:06 PM
Posted 25 October 2006 - 09:15 PM
Vibrant Sao Paulo anyone?
Posted 25 October 2006 - 11:06 PM
-City of Victoria website, 2009
Posted 26 October 2006 - 04:44 AM
Posted 26 October 2006 - 07:31 AM
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891
Posted 26 October 2006 - 09:22 AM
Sounds good. I wonder how large the building is? Four floors or 10?
closer to 10.
-City of Victoria website, 2009
Posted 26 October 2006 - 09:34 AM
Corazon should have been 20 floors instead of 12
The Wave should have been 20 floors instead of 13
Juliet should have been 20 floors instead of 14
Cook & Johnson should be 20 floors instead of 10
If they were, that would have added 31 floors of living space to the downtown area. Assuming just 6 units per floor = 186 more units. Assuming 1.5 people per unit = 279 more people living in the downtown area.
and that's just from 4 recent developments around downtown, there are others like those townhouses in James Bay which will probably end up costing over $800,000 because the land is so valuable and they're only building a few units there even though there are bigger buildings on both sides of the property.
Victoria has been underbuilding and restricting supply, especially in certain areas where more height would have been perfectly acceptable because it's expected in those areas, like downtown and Harris Green.
Posted 26 October 2006 - 09:43 AM
This was a point pounded home at the Falls Hearing and it need to be said over and over again until council and planning dept gets it.
Constricting supply raises prices.
Posted 26 October 2006 - 10:46 AM
I can also understand the level of frustration there is for all new development, and their higher price tag.
But as others have pointed out on this forum, these fancy new condo's will one day be the everypersons condo, as other newer, fancier condo towers are built.
Developers have to cover their costs - allow them to build higher, as Ox said, and prices will reflect the increase of supply - simple economics.
People whom want to see Victoria remain within the realm of the "small-town" feel and want to demonise the highrise are either not thinking of the big picture, living in the past, or are selfish - or all of the above.
Posted 26 October 2006 - 10:58 AM
From what G-Man said it sounds like this might be happening with at least one development. But hopefully everyone can agree that the buildings proposed in the last few years have gone after the affluent end of the market.
And the city and developers need to be more creative and try approaches adopted in other cities, ie. allowing buyers to purchase a shell and finish a unit at their own cost and pace.
I guess it means having a real vision and as someone else said in another thread, we need to start telling developers what we want rather than what they can't do.
Posted 26 October 2006 - 02:20 PM
We're on an island, we've run out of ways to build out and we need to build up as much as is practical.
I like the theory of the Thrifty Food/apartment buildings in James Bay: retail on the first level and housing above. I still miss the grocery store on Fort St. giving you a chance to work and live downtown (I guess upper Yates lives up to that role).
By insulating the residential floors from the ground traffic with levels of retail and office there can be a semblance of peace and quiet. I'd go one step further: several levels of sub-surface parking and maybe even stuff like long-term storage down there too.
Web developer & Internet Marketer
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users