Jump to content

      













Photo

How to build more awareness on the need for Abundant Housing in Victoria outside of VV?


  • Please log in to reply
214 replies to this topic

#21 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 12:22 PM

To be fair, rsn, you are a little too new around here to likely recruit a bunch of us to your cause, over on some other website, so soon.


<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#22 tjv

tjv
  • Member
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 02:24 PM

It's been said many times. What we need is to start replacing these 60/70s houses with row homes (3/4 bedroom). Council needs to make zoning amenable to doing so and ensure there are no barriers. There should be no requirement for stratas for row homes either.

But are people really interested in 3 or 4 bedroom townhomes?  Developers are catering to what sells and if it sold then they would be indeed be selling.  As VHF stated for a small amount more someone could get an older house with yard for 100k or so more I for one would take the yard in a second, especially with children



#23 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 02:27 PM

Well, row houses can have their own yard.  I've never quite understood townhouses with large green areas that nobody uses.


Edited by VicHockeyFan, 22 April 2018 - 02:27 PM.

  • tedward likes this
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#24 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 206 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:46 PM

Rsnxmt: what you are speaking to is something our development company has been working on for the last three months. We are launching a website in the next two weeks and it is picking up where Generation Squeeze leaves off and advocacy and lobbying picks up.

PM me for more info if you’d like.
  • RFS likes this

#25 PPPdev

PPPdev
  • Member
  • 206 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:48 PM

On a further note, we totally agree that urban townhouses are in very limited supply. In the next two years we will have 50+ townhouses to market in compact, walkable neighbourhoods of Victoria.
  • VicHockeyFan and Nparker like this

#26 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 3,402 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 06:34 PM

But are people really interested in 3 or 4 bedroom townhomes? Developers are catering to what sells and if it sold then they would be indeed be selling. As VHF stated for a small amount more someone could get an older house with yard for 100k or so more I for one would take the yard in a second, especially with children


Especially when you factor in that the townhouse will have strata fees that ive seen as high as $400+/mth
  • tjv likes this

#27 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 4,893 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 06:47 PM

Row houses wouldn’t have strata fees. The problem is this only really works if planed from the start. I was in Philadelphia recently and Benjamin Franklin built one of the first houses on his street. A row house designed for the next house to touch both sides. It looked odd at the start. We have to look to new areas for this and create the zoning and bylaws for it and let individual row houses get built. Everything else that is in existing hoods will be small lot subdivisions, condo conversions, duplexes, low rises and the odd townhouse development. It’s up the the West Shore for anything like row houses.

#28 Love the rock

Love the rock
  • Member
  • 510 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:33 PM

Families don't fit into the newly wed or nearly dead demographics of the downtown core!


Newly wed or walking dead .
  • Nparker likes this

#29 rambaldi

rambaldi
  • Member
  • 168 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:04 PM

There should be no requirement for stratas for row homes either.

 

Indeed. It's very rare to find a fee-simple townhome in the CRD 



#30 FirstTimeHomeCrier

FirstTimeHomeCrier
  • Member
  • 357 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:40 PM

But are people really interested in 3 or 4 bedroom townhomes?  Developers are catering to what sells and if it sold then they would be indeed be selling.  As VHF stated for a small amount more someone could get an older house with yard for 100k or so more I for one would take the yard in a second, especially with children

 

A couple things:

 

I hear a lot of people saying developers are catering to what sells, but I think it's way more complicated than that. For one thing, developments take years to complete. The market can shift between when a plan is drafted and when the building is ready for occupation. What's more, assuming demand based what sells neglects both buyers making decisions based on desperation and people priced out of the market. Not everyone who buys a particular home in a particular area actually got what they wanted. And if a particular home in a particular area doesn't sell, it doesn't mean nobody wanted to live there. It means that the people who wanted to live there weren't able to, probably because they couldn't offer the money the seller was looking for.

 

Developers can have all sorts of different motives when they're considering what to build and they can run into all sorts of different obstacles along the way. In my opinion, it's downright lazy to claim that supply and demand actually dictates what is built. It comes off as an attempt to avoid critical engagement about housing needs and the hard work required to find solutions.

 

Another thing to remember is that 100k is a lot of money for many home buyers. There's always an upper limit to what the banks will lend you based on your down payment and family income. If a family has an upper limit of $700k, they can't just decide to buy an $800k single family home instead. I do have a hunch that most buyers, when confronted with a SFH and a townhouse that are exactly the same in price and location, would choose the single family home, even if the townhouse was newer and swankier. But unfortunately, there are not enough older SFHs available, and building more SFHs isn't going to create affordable housing.


  • rsnxmt likes this

#31 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 3,402 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:47 PM

building more SFHs isn't going to create affordable housing.


Ehh housing markets across canada would beg to differ

#32 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 12:49 PM

Developers can have all sorts of different motives when they're considering what to build and they can run into all sorts of different obstacles along the way. In my opinion, it's downright lazy to claim that supply and demand actually dictates what is built. It comes off as an attempt to avoid critical engagement about housing needs and the hard work required to find solutions.


Huh? Developers like to sell what they build. And their bankers are also generally in favour of same. So they build what sells.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 23 April 2018 - 12:49 PM.

<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#33 Love the rock

Love the rock
  • Member
  • 510 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 01:17 PM

A couple things:
 
I hear a lot of people saying developers are catering to what sells, but I think it's way more complicated than that. For one thing, developments take years to complete. The market can shift between when a plan is drafted and when the building is ready for occupation. What's more, assuming demand based what sells neglects both buyers making decisions based on desperation and people priced out of the market. Not everyone who buys a particular home in a particular area actually got what they wanted. And if a particular home in a particular area doesn't sell, it doesn't mean nobody wanted to live there. It means that the people who wanted to live there weren't able to, probably because they couldn't offer the money the seller was looking for .
 
Another thing to remember is that 100k is a lot of money for many home buyers. There's always an upper limit to what the banks will lend you based on your down payment and family income. If a family has an upper limit of $700k, they can't just decide to buy an $800k single family home instead. I do have a hunch that most buyers, when confronted with a SFH and a townhouse that are exactly the same in price and location, would choose the single family home, even if the townhouse was newer and swankier. But unfortunately, there are not enough older SFHs available, and building more SFHs isn't going to create affordable housing.

I’d like to speak on a few points .
You say that if a house doesn’t sell it doesn’t mean no one wants to live there just they can’t afford it .
That can be said of any property really ,there’s always some who can’t afford and some who can .
I don’t look for housing in Kitsilano but plenty of people do .
The way of the world .
And l feel all housing SFH’s included in some ways creates affordable housing direct or indirect.
People who are smart with their money and want to move into a bigger/more expensive home move up leaving the more affordable rental stock .
Indirectly freeing up more affordable housing.
This may not be the quickest, fastest way to affordable housing but it also works .

#34 Mattjvd

Mattjvd
  • Member
  • 858 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:37 PM

A couple things:

For one thing, developments take years to complete. The market can shift between when a plan is drafted and when the building is ready for occupation


Absolutely agree on this point. The entire region needs massive changes to zoning bylaws and the building permit process to help shorten the time.
  • Nparker likes this

#35 Greg

Greg
  • Member
  • 1,704 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 02:59 PM

A couple things:

 

I hear a lot of people saying developers are catering to what sells, but I think it's way more complicated than that. For one thing, developments take years to complete. The market can shift between when a plan is drafted and when the building is ready for occupation. What's more, assuming demand based what sells neglects both buyers making decisions based on desperation and people priced out of the market. Not everyone who buys a particular home in a particular area actually got what they wanted. And if a particular home in a particular area doesn't sell, it doesn't mean nobody wanted to live there. It means that the people who wanted to live there weren't able to, probably because they couldn't offer the money the seller was looking for.

 

Developers can have all sorts of different motives when they're considering what to build and they can run into all sorts of different obstacles along the way. In my opinion, it's downright lazy to claim that supply and demand actually dictates what is built. It comes off as an attempt to avoid critical engagement about housing needs and the hard work required to find solutions.

 

Another thing to remember is that 100k is a lot of money for many home buyers. There's always an upper limit to what the banks will lend you based on your down payment and family income. If a family has an upper limit of $700k, they can't just decide to buy an $800k single family home instead. I do have a hunch that most buyers, when confronted with a SFH and a townhouse that are exactly the same in price and location, would choose the single family home, even if the townhouse was newer and swankier. But unfortunately, there are not enough older SFHs available, and building more SFHs isn't going to create affordable housing.

 

I think most developments get built when the developer has enough pre-sold units to trigger his financing, so the connection between "developers building what sells" is a lot more explicit than you are implying.

 

/I'd also take the newer and swankier townhouse (with presumably fewer maintenance responsibilities) over the SFH, but I agree I might be in the minority on that one.



#36 Casual Kev

Casual Kev
  • Member
  • 498 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 03:29 PM

More precisely, developers build whatever they believe will sell, provided they can cover their costs at a given price point. No one would have any trouble filling up a rental building full of 1-beds going for $1,000 a pop, except current real estate prices would make such a proposition unprofitable, and demand from consumers with higher purchasing power would drive prices up anyways.

 

If you will, what sells isn't necessarily what is wanted or "needed" for many if not most people looking for housing. If we suddenly had massive land use and housing regulations changes that spurred a huge rental boom, odds are the price point would reduce significantly as demand for housing is satisfied and pressure on the existing stock is reduced. More units would sell at a wider price range, even though people's preferences might not have changed at all.



#37 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,424 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 04:11 PM

Developers build for real-world demand, not anecdotal demand.

Developers also know that the smaller units will have to subsidize the larger units (i.e. a 550 sq ft 1BR condo will sell for $450k, but a 1,250 sq ft 3BR won’t easily sell at $1.1M for the same square footage cost). So the folks buying studio, one bed and two bed units are subsidizing the three bed units, BUT due to their sheer size relative to smaller units, they still remain out of reach for many.

Knowing this, most projects will cater three bedroom units to penthouse buyers who can afford the higher price and are also likely to want higher end finishings, which means the price can be higher and smaller units are not subsidizing the larger units to the same degree. But the 3BR buyer represents 2%* of the new-build market, making those units tougher to sell.

And then there’s the strata fee equation. Strata fees are assessed on a per square foot basis. Your buyer with a family who wants to stretch and will make the purchase work, may not actually be able to afford the monthly strata fee as there’s no subsidy there.

Now all of that being said there are seven three bedroom condos on the market right now. The cheapest is $390k in a building built in 1972, 1,162 square feet. The next cheapest is $840k, 2,000 square feet and built in 2007. The cheaper one is entry level in the core, the more expensive one is higher end and on Bear Mountain.

*the usual.
  • tjv likes this

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


#38 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,793 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 23 April 2018 - 04:27 PM

Nowadays there's actually a decent amount of townhouses being built, but the "family condo" so to speak is still lacking due to reasons Mike pointed out. I see the Lyra condos going for $780K minimum, but literally two blocks east you throw in a few extra bucks and get a brand new townhouse twice the size (https://www.rew.ca/p...enue-saanich-bc). Even when compared to a more "budget" project like Vivid at Yates the square footage is still a lot cheaper. I have little knowledge about construction costs so I'm not sure why the $/sqft differs so much (materials? zoning premium? amenities?).

 

Last year I bought a 1,214 sq/ft unit with 400 sq/ft balcony at Lyra for $564,900+GST. You could still get a similar unit for around $620-630ish I believe.

 

Mike is right......if Lyra had one bedrooms at 600 sq/ft at $349,900 it would be sold out now.


Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#39 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,793 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 23 April 2018 - 04:31 PM

Problem with three-bedroom condos is most people rather just buy in Happy Valley so they can have 400 sq/ft of yard for their dog to run around in and they can fill their garage with useless crap.

 

I just don't think there is a market for three-bed condo units. For example, half the building(s) at Lyra is 1,214 sq/ft corner units 2 bed/2bath. Obviously they are catering towards retires/childless professionals with large living spaces as they could have easily done 3 bed units at 1,214 sq/ft but my guess is no such market exists.


Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#40 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,424 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 04:35 PM

One project in downtown Victoria actually redesigned its three-bedroom layouts into two-bedroom+den layouts. Buyers asked for two larger bedrooms and an average-sized den rather than three bedrooms, one of which was very small. 


  • VicHockeyFan and van-island like this

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


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