5833 replies to this topic

[lanforod]

Plus you need a place to live.

[Mike K.]

There’s that, too. $200k every ten years, conservatively.

[UDeMan]

Don't forget property tax, insurance, utilities, garbage collection. Total costs at least 10k a year on the average house now.

The cost of ownership is more than just the mortgage payment.

Edited by UDeMan, 21 April 2021 - 12:28 PM.

[Citified.ca]

What a difference a year makes. From 287 sales last April to 1,116 this April, and that's despite a record-low level of re-sale inventory of only 1,456. That's nearly a 1:1 ratio of listings to sales, which is unheard of.

 

Condos and townhomes deliver new price records in April as Victoria real-estate hums along

https://victoria.cit...ate-hums-along/

[Citified.ca]

Adam Cooper of Abstract Developments discusses local efforts to boost the housing supply and keep housing prices attainable.

 

Adam Cooper of Victoria-based real-estate development firm Abstract Developments talks about the challenges of delivering affordable housing in Greater Victoria, and what's being done about it, in May's Ten on the 10th.

 

Victoria housing delivery and affordability Q&A with Adam Cooper of Abstract Developments

https://victoria.cit...t-developments/

[Mike K.]

And just like that, the cost of providing new housing in Victoria has increased. A 20-unit townhome development on a six-home development parcel will face an additional cost burden passed on to homeowners by $150,000, reasonably, in addition to what current costs have been.

The City will require demolitions to be by hand, raising the cost by as much as $30,000 (their estimate) -after- materials recovered are sold.

We know this will end with a $50,000 cost to homeowners once put into action.

[Jackerbie]

Sounds like cost offsetting in the form of reduced or eliminated zoning and development permit requirements are in order

[VIResident]

"Mayor Lisa Helps said the “bold” changes would depoliticize the housing process and substantially increase the number of affordable units that can be opened quickly. “Basically, it will mean, if all goes well, an explosion of affordable housing for low-income people, including low-income workers and low-income families in our city,” she said."

 

Victoria council eyes expedited process for affordable housing development  

Roxanne Egan-Elliott / Times Colonist

MAY 15, 2021 04:50 AM

https://www.timescol...ment-1.24319499

Edited by VIResident, 15 May 2021 - 07:11 AM.

[A Girl is No one]

"Mayor Lisa Helps said the “bold” changes would depoliticize the housing process and substantially increase the number of affordable units that can be opened quickly. “Basically, it will mean, if all goes well, an explosion of affordable housing for low-income people, including low-income workers and low-income families in our city,” she said."

Victoria council eyes expedited process for affordable housing development


Roxanne Egan-Elliott / Times Colonist
MAY 15, 2021 04:50 AM
https://www.timescol...ment-1.24319499

« Kathy Stinson, CEO of Victoria Cool Aid Society, said there is a dearth of affordable housing in the city and anything that can speed up the process to open more is welcome« 

So if this housing of for working families, why does a service provider like Coolaid (aka poverty pimp) need to manage them?

And I’d reply to Ms. Stinson that no, there isn’t a shortage of free homes in Victoria compared to Saanich where she lives. Maybe she should advocate for some Coolaid housing where she lives?

[Victoria Watcher]

And I’d reply to Ms. Stinson that no, there isn’t a shortage of free homes in Victoria compared to Saanich where she lives. Maybe she should advocate for some Coolaid housing where she lives?

 

not going to happen.  even dogs know you don't sh*t where you sleep.

[Mike K.]

You can’t get any more expedited than the province swooping in and dictating what they will build and where.

The major problem for Victoria is new housing units are slowing down. This will pose a massive tax burden on existing properties which are also eyed for absorbing some of the commercial taxation that commercial land owners say is getting to be such a burden that it is unsustainable.

Consider that despite significant new housing built since 2010 taxes have continued to elevate at an unsustainable rate over the long term. This means, a slowdown will be felt very hard, and fast, and the saving grace may have to be a mass infusion of government-built or sponsored units to keep the taxation rolling in.

[rjag]

Government fees and taxes account for 26% of Vancouver home price: study | Urbanized (dailyhive.com)

 

How come a study like this isnt done for the region?

 

Imagine if SIPP or similar did a study to show the differences in new home construction between all 13 muni's....

[Mike K.]

Yes, they ought to pick them all apart.

[Rex Waverly]

Government fees and taxes account for 26% of Vancouver home price: study | Urbanized (dailyhive.com)

 

How come a study like this isnt done for the region?

 

Imagine if SIPP or similar did a study to show the differences in new home construction between all 13 muni's....

 

I'm wondering, how much do these taxes actually change the price of buying a new house?  I mean, isn't the sale price set by how much a buyer is willing to pay?

For example, if these taxes were cut in half, would the developer sell for less, or just pocket the difference (or somewhere in between)? It seems like the zoning / permits / red tape is the real hinderance to development right now. 

 

Also, I'm glad that article provides a breakdown of the taxes, to really show what is and by whom. I am curious about a couple of the fees though; maybe someone more familiar can provide clarification:

- Why would the breakdown include vacant home tax and speculation tax? Do these taxes really apply to buildings under construction?

- Why would the study include residential property taxes in the total? Wouldn't that be more of a household operating cost (i.e. a yearly cost) rather than a cost of buying a home?

- They've got Property Transfer Tax on there twice (at two different rates).... why would this need to be on there twice?

[Victoria Watcher]

I'm wondering, how much do these taxes actually change the price of buying a new house?  I mean, isn't the sale price set by how much a buyer is willing to pay?

For example, if these taxes were cut in half, would the developer sell for less, or just pocket the difference (or somewhere in between)? 

 

 

a bit of both.  you might not see an immediate impact.  for example, consider this, all numbers just made up for this example.

 

 

 

TODAY

 

Cost to build including taxes and fees:   $300,000

Selling price:  $375,000

Developer profit:  $75,000

 

After FEES/taxes SLASHED

 

Cost to build including taxes and fees:   $250,000

Selling price:  $375,000

Developer profit:  $125,000

 

This year we have 10 developers.  But what happens is next year we have 15 developers.  5 more enter the picture when they hear about big profits.  More built, prices drop.  

 

 

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 17 May 2021 - 04:43 PM.

[Rex Waverly]

a bit of both.  you might not see an immediate impact.  for example, consider this, all numbers just made up for this example.

 

 

 

TODAY

 

Cost to build including taxes and fees:   $300,000

Selling price:  $375,000

Developer profit:  $75,000

 

After FEES/taxes SLASHED

 

Cost to build including taxes and fees:   $250,000

Selling price:  $375,000

Developer profit:  $125,000

 

This year we have 10 developers.  But what happens is next year we have 15 developers.  5 more enter the picture when they hear about big profits.  More built, prices drop.  

 

 

 

In your example above, this would require 50% more successful rezoning applications, permits, etc.....    I was under the impression that the primary obstacle for developers is simply getting the approvals to build (rezoning, etc). 

 

Also, there would also be the loss of $500,000 in taxes that the government would have to get from somewhere else.  So it's incumbent on the government to set taxes at such a level as to maximize revenue while still allowing for the developer to be successful.  I'm not saying they've hit that sweet spot but if it's not going to result in more affordable housing, i'd rather the money stay with the public where it can (ideally) do some good. 

[Rob Randall]

Poor schmuck could have doubled his money.

 

[Mike K.]

That fellow convinced a legion of people his new arrival from wherever he came from, and then a couple of years later returned to, made him an expert in telling people not to buy in Victoria when homes were at $500k. People bought into his fear and got priced out of the market, or ended up paying a fortune to eventually get in. It was an epic tragedy, but fear sells.

[Rob Randall]

 

city of victoria | Housing Report 2012
source: victoria real estate board

Edited by Rob Randall, 30 May 2021 - 08:54 AM.

[Mike K.]

The people who bought when Househunt was at his peak of influence knew what prices were in 2000, and were trying to understand how someone expected them to collapse to those levels. They also knew what prices were in 1990. And in 1980. Househunt knew what prices were in Regina (or wherever).

Now that $500k home in Fairfield will sell for $1.2-$1.5M.