|
melon cat posted:Every new townhouse build under construction in my area has realtor signs on it before the sod is laid down so building more housing won't do anything to resolve the Canadian housing crisis as long as realtors are allowed to using their inside access to snatch up properties for a quick flip Unfortunately, I don't even really blame realtors for that one. It is frequently a requirement if you want to sell units for the new development. Why yes, that does sound like a problem all on it's own.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
melon cat posted:Every new townhouse build under construction in my area has realtor signs on it before the sod is laid down so building more housing won't do anything to resolve the Canadian housing crisis as long as realtors are allowed to using their inside access to snatch up properties for a quick flip I don't think this anything unusual or a "quick flip" unless we're classifying simple building creation as a flip. Builders buying some piece of poo poo end of life derelict building, then subdividing the property, building two homes, or building a duplex or possibly assembling the property with another and building a townhouse, this is all just standard builder stuff. Their basic business model. And at the end of this they put up the property for sale, so we'll always see a realtor sign outside a new building they just built. It is enormously more rare for an individual home owner to buy a home, demolish it themselves and build a new home themselves. This is like a rich person activity, not a typical thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
You realize realtors have to purchase pre-sales from the developer if they want to sell from that development right? Some duplex build no, but larger poo poo yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
maybe...? I dunno I think it's been becoming pretty common for a developer to hold units back for sale even in a pre-sale environment (was becoming very popular when market was hot), and also, alternatively, we're assuming here that all pre-sales are actually selling before completion! Not necessarily true as things have started slowing down. It's possible that pre-sales are having trouble moving. Consider for example this condo under development in Chinatown. Possibly related to spiking interest rates and anxieties around the perceived increase of crime in Chinatown, but even while this condo is well, well under construction and finishing soon, there remain 10 pre-sale units for sale. Not too long until completion is over and in such case they'll be for sale as the building opens. Possible that these are owned by the developer. Also very well possible that these are pre-sale contracts that people are badly trying to get out of, because they can no longer afford them and they're trying to bail and not complete. (These people even could be taking a loss here) Developers only need to sell a percentage of pre-sales to get lending approved to build the building. Not all. So we don't know why these units are for sale. 
Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Mar 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Jesus Christ $1.1 million for 880 sq. ft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:I don't think this anything unusual or a "quick flip" unless we're classifying simple building creation as a flip. I don't think you're understanding how the process goes. Realtors are given privileged access to real estate data- they literally pay for this access. For many years realtors have been getting advance notice of sales opportunities that the general buying public does not have. This has been putting realtors at the front of the line before a showroom even goes up. Femtosecond posted:alternatively, we're assuming here that all pre-sales are actually selling before completion! Not necessarily true as things have started slowing down. It's possible that pre-sales are having trouble moving. And the only reason why things appear to be "slowing down" is because developers are starting to build more rental developments than they are freehold developments since they can get government grants for "adding to the local rental stock" and in Ontario they can charge high rents without rent control. This is further constraining the supply of freehold housing and could explain why you've been seeing less realtor signs on new subdivisions. melon cat fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Mar 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
melon cat posted:I don't think you're understanding how the process goes. Realtors are given privileged access to real estate data- they literally pay for this access. For many years realtors have been getting advance notice of sales opportunities that the general buying public does not have. This has been putting realtors at the front of the line before a showroom even goes up. Yeah ok. Totally true that realtors have privileged access and they see all these developments early. Because realtors are such turbo real estate bulls they of course are going all in investing in real estate themselves. I guess what I'm getting at is that at the moment from a glance we have no way of knowing what these realtor signs actually mean. Whether a realtor sign outside a development represents a realtor smugly flipping a pre-sale and making an easy gain, or in contrast a realtor helping someone dump their underwater pre-sale contract they can't close on due to near 7% interest rates. Back in 2016 it was almost certain it was the former, you're right, and that was the environment when developers were actually putting details in their contracts to claw back capital gains if people flipped presale contracts because it was becoming so common. However things are quite a bit different right now and I'm not so sure there's any money in flipping a property in this environment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
I wonder if realtors have been particularly bullish to carry them over their flip-cons in the next year on top of the obvious paycheque they get from a sale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
Can also say our eternally nonexistant to lovely soundproofing adds to people hating apartment living. Nobody wants to hear everything you do in semi muffled detail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 12:30
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:A lot of the people hired as experts are evidently not experts, either. That's how you get policymakers floating the idea of replacing the Scarborough RT with something that follows the same failure of a route, insisting they can make Sure, but that's a separate problem. My issue is how this happens over and over again https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/residents-oppose-social-housing-project-1.6782918 quote:Yet some residents of the West Island suburb have come out in strong opposition, and that outcry has been powerful enough to delay the council's zoning amendment vote last Monday. Residents brought forward a petition signed by more than 160 people, citing concerns about crime, drugs and property value. These pieces of poo poo will not accept even the most mundane of housing for the dastardly poors, so you have to stop asking them, stop letting them have input, and stop providing routes for them to hold up anything to do with housing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 12:40
|
|
|
Also, densifying the Danforth, particularly at the planned intersection of two multi-billion dollar subway lines, is the complete opposite of insane. The real policy failure was letting the Danforth/Greektown preserve its built form in amber amid slow population decline for the past 70 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
Fidelitious posted:Sure, but that's a separate problem. My issue is how this happens over and over again it's almost as if citizen voice oriented systems end up heavily rigged towards the preservation of the status quo where unrepresentative interests use coded dog-whistle language that is unquantifiable or measurable (such as "community character") and can therefore deliberately make the whole system more risky and costly for anyone who seeks to get approval through it  COPE 27 posted:Lmao our leaders literally hate us Hubbert fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Mar 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 16:50
|
|
|
Health Services posted:Also, densifying the Danforth, particularly at the planned intersection of two multi-billion dollar subway lines, is the complete opposite of insane. Not all densification is created equal. There's nothing wrong with adding that many units in midrise units stretching out for half a kilometer in every direction. Treating a skyscraper as a suitable equivalent, just because it's easier than acquiring the land required to build the midrises, is mind-bogglingly stupid. It's fine to aspire to the land use patterns you see in European cities, but building skyscrapers wherever you can does absolutely nothing to achieve that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
There's not anything wrong with building high rises to densify transit cores. In any case, the Danforth had their chance to have a midrise city and they collectively turned it down. If, at any point during the last 70 years they had decided to build anything and not preserve a 1950s time capsule, maybe there would be an argument against tall buildings. But they didn't, and there isn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
Health Services posted:There's not anything wrong with building high rises to densify transit cores. There's nothing wrong with planning six-story buildings with one twice as tall here and there in that area. There's no good reason to plop down a building that's going to be a vertical slum in 50 years. "They're responsible for their area not being dense enough, so it's fine if we just say 'YOLO' and gently caress it up even worse" is not a solid argument.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
Effectively regardless of whatever city building political system we were operating under, it has always been instantly been taken over by the interests of the established, wealthy, landowning elite. Prior to the 1970s the system was dominated by wealthy business elite and they leveraged the bureaucracy to impose with top down efficiency the big projects they wanted on the city's citizens. Because they were the wealthy business elite, these projects never impacted the wealthy single family home areas where they lived and so instead we had notions like "let's raze all of Chinatown to build a highway" and such. Then in the 70s across North America you had a revolution and push back against this sort of top down bureaucratic driven planning and a switch to grass roots consultation driven community planning. While a noble idea, the problem was that this community planning process was instantly hijacked by those with the most time and effort to be able to pour into the process, which just so happened to be the wealthy landowning elite. And so accordingly any attempt whatsoever to change the existing wealthy neighbourhoods has run up against a small group of the population that effectively welds power through the system to block anything and everything. The end result is that development is only easy and viable in areas this small group of privileged homeowners doesn't care about, and so we end up with new apartment buildings being suggested and approved in neighbourhoods dominated by renters and marginalized ethnic groups (eg Chinatown) or obscure old industrial areas. I've seen come comments from YIMBYs that everything went wrong in the 70s and we simply need to go back to the way it once was, but I suspect it's no real solution. It seems like development was easier back then, but I think it was still focused on marginal areas away from the rich. The challenge now is that with ultra low vacancy we need to build more housing equitably all over and that runs against that wealthy single family home owning class that have effectively exerted power both before and after the community planning revolutions of the 1970s. The big problem with grass roots community consultation driven planning is that the people who do not currently live in the neighbourhood but who would like to are not and cannot be represented. The result is that it's all too easy for the community to plan for zero growth. The solution as it seems to me is that some higher order of government, whether it be some broader metropolitan regional government, or provincial government, needs to step in to exert power to represent these groups that would otherwise receive no "vote" on affairs. Possibly this could take the form of mandated minimum growth targets, which is something that the BC government seems to be interested in and has said they're going to do (still unclear how much they'll be wielding a stick here). The notion here being that municipalities have to plan for some amount of growth, that No cannot be an option, but cities can use community planning to figure out where and how they would like that growth to occur. This seems like an improvement but it seems to me there remains a way that wealthy elite could again hijack the process and funnel all mandated growth into tiny slices of cities, far from their lush, rich low density single family neighbourhoods. Another approach could be growth is accommodated and the vetos on new housing is avoided by broadly mandating some basic minimums to zoning and home sizes and types. For example this could mean that on some set size of lot one must be allowed to build a fourplex as a minimum. Or that within certain areas around planned transit corridors, there is some mandated minimum apartment size that is allowed by right. The upside of this approach could be that one could see a broader amount of homes types more equitably distributed as finally now, even in established rich neighbourhoods, no one could prevent someone from building new housing. A possible downside of this approach is is that if housing is so directly tied to transit, we could see established wealthy groups that want to keep their neighbourhoods exclusive mobilize against transit expansion. I suppose we've already seen some feeble attempts at this with the new TEAM Vancouver municipal party, locally strong in the west side of Vancouver, pushing back against the UBC Skytrain expansion. (Fortunately TEAM ate poo poo in the election and got zero traction). Additionally I suppose this could rob cities of some of their planning power which could arguably be bad in some cases. For example it could become harder for cities to fiddle with zoning to encourage protection of some heritage buildings or something else they want to do yada yada. This all seems addressable to me though. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Mar 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
Fidelitious posted:Sure, but that's a separate problem. My issue is how this happens over and over again Its a shame this opposition exists, because Ste-anne-de bellevue has a fairly nice walkeable "downtown" along lakeshore drive, with many shops, restaurants, boardwalks, etc. Heck - students from John Abbott college, McGill, and the local highschool all frequent the downtown as well. It can certainly benefit from more densification and a better mix. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if these signatures came from residents in next-door Senneville, or upscale Baie D'Urfe (An odd area on Montreal island's west side, that has houses which would make a Westmounter green with envy). I think these people will never be happy - even if Annies catches fire a fourth time. Guigui fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Mar 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
One of the Globe's real estate articles covers a few things recently discussed, builders holding units back and investors bailing on units they bought to rent out because of money trouble.quote:Investor selloff drags down resale price for Kelowna condo Before you get too excited about that article, here's another one about a North Van house selling well over asking. quote:Enticing closing date helps buyers overcome twelve other bids for North Vancouver bungalow
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 04:46
|
|
|
That's my take. There are so few people wanting to sell that inventory is rock bottom. So even if there aren't that many buyers it's still a big competition. There's maybe a dozen active listing in the core-ish region of Ottawa for detached houses with 2+ bedrooms, there's nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 13:22
|
|
|
yeah new listings in February were at 20 year lows. In other news, inflation is over, time to lower rates. https://twitter.com/stephenfgordon/status/1638158686915837957?t=_PIya0bp4HjXt94Urp7QXw&s=19
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:yeah new listings in February were at 20 year lows. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Things seem increasingly very bad It's boiling the frog. It only becomes a personal crisis when someone absolutely has to move out and find a new place. So 95% or more of the population can just ignore it at any given time. It's like schools or daycare in the way. Both of those have been in a state of increasing crisis in places like inner Vancouver for 15+ years, with only the most minimal steps having been taken at the governmental level to address that. Ceterum censeo delendos esse dominaedium. Lead out in cuffs fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Mar 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
Finally, maybe now I'll be able to convince my landlord to invest in those power blinds and stone countertops I've always wanted. Next will be kitchen cabinets that can fit a regular sized plate without having to tilt it 45 degrees.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
rate cuts rate cuts rate cuts https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1638233489098022947?s=20
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
Unless there's consistent upward value in the Canadian dollar versus the American dollar what happens if the interest rate gap between the US and Canadian central banks widens?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 19:26
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Things seem increasingly very bad things aren't that bad yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:rate cuts rate cuts rate cuts There's been no significant change to that yield curve from a week ago (when Silicon Valley Bank imploded), mortgage rates won't drop as quickly or as much as the overnight rate (hello, risk premium!), and the overnight rates we saw last summer are not coming back for another three years. Everybody with a fixed rate will be paying more at renewal for the next two years, still. None of that leads to the conclusion that number go back up. Imagine thinking a yield-curve inversion is bullish for anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
T.C. posted:Unless there's consistent upward value in the Canadian dollar versus the American dollar what happens if the interest rate gap between the US and Canadian central banks widens? :cauliflower: :moon:
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
T.C. posted:Unless there's consistent upward value in the Canadian dollar versus the American dollar what happens if the interest rate gap between the US and Canadian central banks widens? It's really cool
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
There's no way the BoC is insane enough to drop rates so soon right? Right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
They're probably going to keep them as-is until inflation is back around 2%, unless it starts rising again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 23:44
|
|
|
The predictions I've been reading around rate cuts is "summer" and I suppose those predicting that are assuming several months of stagnation around 2% will give the BoC confidence to lower rates. If we've already been within the 2% zone for several months, maybe people are bullishly thinking June instead of August? I dunno. https://twitter.com/trevortombe/status/1638193544220524546?s=20 But lets say the BoC cuts 25bp twice before September. 50 bp is nothing remarkable given the rapid acceleration we have experienced recently. It's "relief" but still a long way to go to where we once were and no certainty that BoC is going to be in any rush to get there. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Mar 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 01:26
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:The predictions I've been reading around rate cuts is "summer" and I suppose those predicting that are assuming several months of stagnation around 2% will give the BoC confidence to lower rates. If we've already been within the 2% zone for several months, maybe people are bullishly thinking June instead of August? I dunno. If they lower them once then they must be on a path to just keep lowering and lowering. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
Why would anyone think that inflation coming in at target would mean we actually lower rates? I bet they stay just the same.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 06:28
|
|
|
qhat posted:Why would anyone think that inflation coming in at target would mean we actually lower rates? I bet they stay just the same. Wishful thinking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 06:41
|
|
|
Their target range is 1-3% with a 'true' target of 2%. A moving average of 1.8%-ish or whatever is pretty exactly what they want so why would they change anything? Makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 13:39
|
|
|
quote:Canada’s Population Grows by Over 1 Million for First Time Are we going to continue on asleep at the wheel as apartment vacancy sinks lower and lower? What the gently caress is the plan here? You'd think that given that we're absolutely shattering 1970s era growth our housing development would be somewhere above 1970s era norms, but lol, lmao not even loving close.  https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2022/04/22/Why-Cant-We-Build-Like-1970s/ I really haven't seen any remarkable recent uptick in building or even approvals to even start to acknowledge the amount of people that have been arriving. Things are going to be hosed for decades.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
This might be the most goofy NIMBY boomer poo poo I’ve ever readquote:Langford, who designed and built his home on Hamilton with his wife and father-in-law in 1956, is upset with the prospect of smoke from Friday and Saturday night “pot parties” in the play area adjacent to his house wafting into his home. My favourite part is the idea that people will absolutely ruin his life partying but never on work/school nights for some reason??? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Parks and Recreation was a documentary,
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:This might be the most goofy NIMBY boomer poo poo I’ve ever read I do enjoy how the newspaper clearly hates this guy with their disdainful treatment of his quotes, but still, just don't print his nonsense guys. quote:Resident Glen Langford, who said he’s shocked councillors agreed to the project, said he and his neighbours are upset the development will see the existing single-family homes worth about $2 million each and housing about 16 residents replaced with higher density housing for more than 100 people. Dude built a nice house for peanuts almost 70 years ago when he was probably something like 22 years old and now just can't contemplate having to be near the poors who didn't have the foresight to be born before WW2. You cannot get more FYGM than this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2023 13:31
|
|