Real Estate in your city

[edale]

It's kind of amazing to me that there seemingly isn't much outcry from Canadians about the artificial, government imposed land constraints driving housing prices to absurd levels. Yes, it's great to want to limit sprawl and preserve rural areas, but when a tiny bungalow is going for $6million in Vancouver or $3million in Toronto, it seems like the greenbelt is due for an adjustment. Canadian metros already are pretty tightly contained. There's not nearly as much sprawl as US metros, and the sprawl that is built is pretty dense-- think LA or Vegas style rather than Detroit. The housing market is ridiculous in most Canadian metros and it's basically because the government says fields should remain as fields, all while accepting huge numbers of immigrants, many of whom basically buying their way into the country. I'm far from a MAGA type, but that dynamic would drive me crazy.

I can understand the greenbelt restrictions in Vancouver better than Toronto. As the only temperate region in Canada, southern BC does need to preserve land for agricultural use, and space is very limited due to the mountains. But Toronto could easily expand further into the vast Ontario countryside without much downside other than the ills of sprawl.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Crawford

LOL at the "NO TREES IN THE BACK". Chinese-Canadians apparently really don't like trees.

Actually it reads NO TREES AT THE BACK, which is how you know a real-live English-As-A-Second-Language person wrote it.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by edale

It's kind of amazing to me that there seemingly isn't much outcry from Canadians about the artificial, government imposed land constraints driving housing prices to absurd levels. Yes, it's great to want to limit sprawl and preserve rural areas, but when a tiny bungalow is going for $6million in Vancouver or $3million in Toronto, it seems like the greenbelt is due for an adjustment. Canadian metros already are pretty tightly contained. There's not nearly as much sprawl as US metros, and the sprawl that is built is pretty dense-- think LA or Vegas style rather than Detroit. The housing market is ridiculous in most Canadian metros and it's basically because the government says fields should remain as fields, all while accepting huge numbers of immigrants, many of whom basically buying their way into the country. I'm far from a MAGA type, but that dynamic would drive me crazy.

Yeah, I mean, the issue seems more solvable in Canada, bc it's more obvious and almost entirely due to govt. There are basically no rules on foreign money, even dirty money, and growth boundaries are extremely strict. Loosening up the boundaries and tightening up the investment rules should provide immediate relief.

Canadians, culturally, aren't that different from Americans, so I doubt their housing preferences are radically different. If new SFH are almost illegal in Vancouver, you have a ridiculous situation. And any developed, liberal democracy should have some rules on foreign funny money.

[TWAK]

Things are cheap in the micropolitan areas of California. I can buy a plot of land for 5k and get a manufactured home put on it for 90k, just one county north of the bay area...

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Sold 3 weeks ago:

1335 Shadybrook Dr,
Beverly Hills, CA 90210

$3,795,000
Sold Price

First celebrated in the pages of Architectural Digest in 1965, this midcentury A-frame masterpiece is now on the market and poised for its next chapter. This architectural refuge, in harmony with nature, was built in 1958 by the current owner and has been enjoyed by them since. Restore the residence to its former glory or reimagine and refurbish to create a modern paradise optimized for today's contemporary lifestyle. This very large flat pad is located on a cul-de-sac just outside of Beverly Hills city proper. Having traveled often to Hawaii, the owners "endeavored to recreate an atmosphere of island living, " wrote the AD staff writer. "Landscaping with volcanic rock and trickling waterfalls among lush foliage lends a tropical aura that continues inside the house as well. Natural materials of wood and stone are used as structural forms. The exposed forms become, at the same time, both the architecture and the decoration. " This is a rare opportunity to redevelop a unique and special property rich in provenance, sited on a desirable street and just moments to the iconic flats of Beverly Hills, famed Rodeo Drive, and the Westside.

Listed by Sally Forster Jones •DRE #00558939 • Compass
310-230-5478 (agent)
















Link: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Beverly-Hi...r_2MuEcNdZdrKs

What a beautiful house! It's a shame the average US house are so ugly and uninventive. This thread is an example of it. Full of hidious things.

And why is it so cheap, relatively speaking?

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by edale

I can understand the greenbelt restrictions in Vancouver better than Toronto. As the only temperate region in Canada, southern BC does need to preserve land for agricultural use, and space is very limited due to the mountains. But Toronto could easily expand further into the vast Ontario countryside without much downside other than the ills of sprawl.

Southern Ontario isn't really all that vast, and the best quality farmland does tend to be located near the GTA. I think given where the world is heading and the newfound sensitivity to global supply chains that is occuring, it is prudent to ensure some sort of long-term agricultural security.

Our highway infrastructure/connectivity also tends to lag behind similarly-sized U.S. metros and I don't really know that there's an appetite to build freeways going out to Georgetown, Stouffville, etc. and turn them into even bigger commuter satellite towns.

The flip side is that if you do feel that these limits on supply are valid, the only other lever to pull is immigration, and that's handled at the federal level. I think most people in the know (at least I hope) at the top levels of government realize that Canada's economic growth is fueled by immigration, and the funneling of new immigrants into the real estate market. A ridiculous portion of Canada's economic activity is now tied to real estate or real estate-related activities. It has all the markers of a ponzi scheme that requires a continual feed to keep things from toppling over. It's a sensitive topic and very politically difficult to have a serious discussion about the potential downsides of immigration on the population who actually live there currently. At least tackling the money laundering/foreign investment issue would be a start. Things would look different if the people moving to Canada and buying real estate were not some of the wealthiest individuals in the world and were instead coming to Canada to work and partake in the local economy. Many levels of government have grown fat on development fees, taxes, etc. that have increased significantly with the ability to sell out a 50 story condo in months, and it's a hard drug to ween yourself off of. I don't really foresee things changing in any meaningful way over the next decade.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by lio45

If you own it free and clear, then by selling it you could get enough cash for a 10% downpayment on this beauty:

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...enue-vancouver

That is hilarious. $ 5,000,000.00 If they did not redo the inside that would be a teardown house. Where I am one would be lucky to sell that for 300k. I would not buy it for 250K.

So where do the workers who actually work for a living live in Vancouver ?

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Yuri

What a beautiful house! It's a shame the average US house are so ugly and uninventive. This thread is an example of it. Full of hidious things.

And why is it so cheap, relatively speaking?

Probably because it is such an unusual design (inside and out), which takes a certain type to appreciate its quirky MCM aesthetic. Plus, the bathrooms and kitchen are pretty dated. The ovens look like they were installed during the Nixon era.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Yuri

What a beautiful house! It's a shame the average US house are so ugly and uninventive. This thread is an example of it. Full of hidious things.

And why is it so cheap, relatively speaking?

Smallish, old home (for Bev Hills) that probably needs $1 million in work for a gut job. Just a pool remodel is 20k, large windows can be 40k, etc. Adds up real fast. 100k for professional appliances.

MCM usually doesn't sell that well in the U.S. Maybe in Palm Springs or the Hamptons. But most high-end homebuyers won't even look at MCM.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Smallish, old home (for Bev Hills) that probably needs $1 million in work for a gut job. Just a pool remodel is 20k, large windows can be 40k, etc. Adds up real fast. 100k for professional appliances.

MCM usually doesn't sell that well in the U.S. Maybe in Palm Springs or the Hamptons. But most high-end homebuyers won't even look at MCM.

Anyone buying a new home or apartment should expect to but at least 25% on a reform.

Yeah, it might be small, but it's Beverly Hills! It really surprised me as we either have those absurd overprice shacks on Silicon Valley or Vancouver or those horrible tacky cheap designs.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Anyone buying a new home or apartment should expect to but at least 25% on a reform.

Yeah, it might be small, but it's Beverly Hills! It really surprised me as we either have those absurd overprice shacks on Silicon Valley or Vancouver or those horrible tacky cheap designs.

Shacks in Silicon Valley or Vancouver are tear-downs where as this house is being sold as a viable house. Like Crawford mentioned, it will need a LOT of expensive work. Otherwise someone could feasibly tear this down redevelop the property.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by edale

It's kind of amazing to me that there seemingly isn't much outcry from Canadians about the artificial, government imposed land constraints driving housing prices to absurd levels. Yes, it's great to want to limit sprawl and preserve rural areas, but when a tiny bungalow is going for $6million in Vancouver or $3million in Toronto, it seems like the greenbelt is due for an adjustment. Canadian metros already are pretty tightly contained. There's not nearly as much sprawl as US metros, and the sprawl that is built is pretty dense-- think LA or Vegas style rather than Detroit. The housing market is ridiculous in most Canadian metros and it's basically because the government says fields should remain as fields, all while accepting huge numbers of immigrants, many of whom basically buying their way into the country. I'm far from a MAGA type, but that dynamic would drive me crazy.

I can understand the greenbelt restrictions in Vancouver better than Toronto. As the only temperate region in Canada, southern BC does need to preserve land for agricultural use, and space is very limited due to the mountains. But Toronto could easily expand further into the vast Ontario countryside without much downside other than the ills of sprawl.

Greenbelt restrictions are wildly popular in Canada. Like, wildly popular. Ontario's Premier let slip in 2018 during his first election campaign that he would consider modifying Toronto's Greenbelt and his polling numbers plummeted until he revised his position.

Yet 70% of Canadians would prefer to live in a detached house if they could, which is only slightly lower than American preferences. There is somehow some huge disconnect and misunderstanding of how anti-sprawl regulations drive up pricing for detached housing. Pro environmentalism and government intervention and a complete misunderstanding of the policy implications mix into this weird attitude of people constantly complaining about being unable to afford a house but also being opposed to building more of the damn things.

Toronto still allows new subdivision development, just on a restricted basis (compared to Vancouver which has basically banned it entirely). Even then, there is a huge push in politics in the GTA right now to implement a full freeze after currently approved growth areas are built out. The Conservative provincial government is having none of it, but a lot of local municipalities are voting to freeze their urban areas entirely (and the province is going to be overriding them).

I don't agree that Toronto's farmland surroundings are particularly sensitive or that Ontario "isn't actually that large" - the issue is more so the car dependency of any suburbs that get developed than land use in my opinion, but even then there is a lot of progress getting made on that front on the newest suburban areas around the GTA. The best farmland in Ontario is generally in Niagara and along the north shores of Lake Erie, which are areas which are already highly protected under the Niagara Escarpment act or are not subject to really any development pressure. Most farmland that would get eaten up by relaxed development regulations in Toronto is north and northwest of Toronto, which is getting into a significantly colder belt of land which isn't as fertile.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by bnk

That is hilarious. $ 5,000,000.00 If they did not redo the inside that would be a teardown house. Where I am one would be lucky to sell that for 300k. I would not buy it for 250K.

So where do the workers who actually work for a living live in Vancouver ?

as I've said elsewhere in this thread, not in houses. In condos.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

this weird attitude of people constantly complaining about being unable to afford a house but also being opposed to building more of the damn things.

what do we want?

affordable detached single family housing!


who do we want it for?

"for me, but not for thee!"

Originally Posted by JManc

Steely has a much better deal right where he is and his area is pretty desirable.

i don't know if it's a better "deal" or not (that word really triggers some people around here), but i do know with 100% certainty that i'd much rather live on a regular old chicago neighborhood block with a mixture of 7-figure SFH's all the way down to studio apartments that rent for $1,000/month, and everything in-between, than on some vancouver neighborhood block where every lot on the street is worth at least $5M just for the freaking land alone!

i guess i just like regular people too much.

[SignalHillHiker]

The real estate industry here follows the price of oil, so currently we are starting to lose value again after spending a short time recovering from our lowest prices in ages.

That said, we are one of the few Canadian capitals left with truly affordable real estate.

If you don't mind a working class rowhouse downtown, you can get a decent home for less than a down payment in many parts of the world:







I own one like the above (paid $167K, October 2021). You can fix them up well enough (mine was all white):

If you want SFD out in the suburban hellscape, you can find just about anything between $250-$500K.

If you want something upper class and still (more or less) downtown, you'll need a bit more cash but still perfectly reasonable compared to prices elsewhere. There's even some infill if you want modern.

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I don't agree that Toronto's farmland surroundings are particularly sensitive or that Ontario "isn't actually that large" - the issue is more so the car dependency of any suburbs that get developed than land use in my opinion, but even then there is a lot of progress getting made on that front on the newest suburban areas around the GTA. The best farmland in Ontario is generally in Niagara and along the north shores of Lake Erie, which are areas which are already highly protected under the Niagara Escarpment act or are not subject to really any development pressure. Most farmland that would get eaten up by relaxed development regulations in Toronto is north and northwest of Toronto, which is getting into a significantly colder belt of land which isn't as fertile.

Sensitive in terms of environmentally sensitive like the Oak Ridge Moraine, or sensitive as in too valuable to lose? You could make an argument for both.




That's a lot of dark red north and northwest of the GTA. All Class 1 soil of which the source of that map states only 0.5% of all Canadian land can be classified as. Not saying it should be untouchable, but it is an irreversible decision which shouldn't be taken lightly. At least we do tend to promote density in new development at the edge of the burbs, and we can pack in more people in that area than we would under more traditional North American development patterns.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i don't know if it's a better "deal" or not (that word really triggers some people around here)

We can all agree that your condo offers a much better brick-and-mortar-for-the-buck ratio than that Vancouver house; let's phrase it that way

We can't know which is the better deal; if some sucker offers $6M for that house next year, then the house will have turned out to be the better deal of the two.

Similarly, a bitcoin at $10,000 is "a deal" right now, even though it's also a crazy high price for something that has zero inherent value.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by bnk

That is hilarious. $ 5,000,000.00 If they did not redo the inside that would be a teardown house. Where I am one would be lucky to sell that for 300k. I would not buy it for 250K.

So where do the workers who actually work for a living live in Vancouver ?

In rooms like this one, in apartments shared with strangers:

Originally Posted by whatnext

A lot of people looking to rent in Vancouver would be happy to get what you describe, given the alternatives:

Photos: This tiny, windowless room is what $750 will rent you in downtown Vancouver

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

what do we want?

affordable detached single family housing!


who do we want it for?

"for me, but not for thee!"






i don't know if it's a better "deal" or not (that word really triggers some people around here), but i do know with 100% certainty that i'd much rather live on a regular old chicago neighborhood block with a mixture of 7-figure SFH's all the way down to studio apartments that rent for $1,000/month, and everything in-between, than on some vancouver neighborhood block where every lot on the street is worth at least $5M just for the freaking land alone!

i guess i just like regular people too much.

Those 5-figure neighborhoods in rural CA....a "steal"?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by JManc

Probably because it is such an unusual design (inside and out), which takes a certain type to appreciate its quirky MCM aesthetic. Plus, the bathrooms and kitchen are pretty dated. The ovens look like they were installed during the Nixon era.

For the record, I absolutely love that house. It's near architectural perfection, and fits its SoCal setting so well to boot.