The BC Real Estate Discussion Thread

[Master 112]

Just now, Lillooet_Hillbilly said:

I'm all for affordable housing for those people but spending 1.7million per place is not reasonable.  Sea containers double stacked or more with modified elevators would be a wiser more durable and safer alternative then just renovating a old cheap hotel

Materials aren't the expensive part of housing in this city. It's the land. Why use sea containers?

[Lillooet_Hillbilly]

durable/ cheap/ and you can easily modify it and it isn't a eye sore if done right. Plus work experience for welders/ student contractors and easily erected in a fraction of time.  I just like things that are durable and practical

Edited September 20, 2016 by Lillooet_Hillbilly

[Master 112]

13 minutes ago, Lillooet_Hillbilly said:

durable/ cheap/ and you can easily modify it and it isn't a eye sore if done right. Plus work experience for welders/ student contractors and easily erected in a fraction of time.  I just like things that are durable and practical

Yes, but costs are going to be associated with land more than anything unless I don't know what I'm talking about. When property is so expensive and you're building for the long-term, better buildings with more capacity make sense, no?

Edited September 20, 2016 by One one two

[Lancaster]

4 hours ago, Lillooet_Hillbilly said:

so.............500 million for 2,900 places.............basically 1.7ish million per place to collect $1,000

I like to assume i'm some what intelligent but maybe I am a dumbass because I can not see how this is considered smart

$500,000,000 / 2900 = $172,413.79

[Lillooet_Hillbilly]

I was told and I wont quote who since I can't recall exactly but university has lots of land, build those for dorms to get rid of student demand for housing, rentals become more vacant releasing pressure in one area opens the door for more, I'm not saying build it in a park.  Its complicated yes I know but do what you can do in areas that can be done..................

In other words don't cure the symptom cure the problem

[Lillooet_Hillbilly]

5 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

$500,000,000 / 2900 = $172,413.79

thanks for the correction that seems more reasonable

(they don't give the commas on that google calculator)

[Master 112]

Regardless, it doesn't seem appropriate to place seniors and persons with developmental disabilities in shipping containers. I think one of the richest places in the world should be well above that.

[Lillooet_Hillbilly]

2 minutes ago, One one two said:

Regardless, it doesn't seem appropriate to place seniors and persons with developmental disabilities in shipping containers. I think one of the richest places in the world should be well above that.

so your saying what I'm thinking of doing myself isn't worth it for other people? 

[Master 112]

1 minute ago, Lillooet_Hillbilly said:

so your saying what I'm thinking of doing myself isn't worth it for other people? 

I actually think it's pretty cool and admire you for it. I just don't think it's suitable social housing.

[Harvey Spector]

There is over 3300 acres of land at UBC and only a fraction of it is being used for student housing. Christy needs to use some of that raw land and build more student housing, whether it's sea containers or low cost dorms it doesn't matter really. The land is already owned by the provincial government so land costs are already accounted for. Like Lillooet said if you use that area of land for students then you increase the vacancy rates and free up other areas for other renters. 

 

As for low income housing, seniors and people with disabilities you would need to work in conjunction with developers who can build the appropriate housing that pass city codes in terms of elevators, ramps, doorways, hallways and other areas of the buildings to meet the full requirements for people with disabilities and also for seniors. 

 

The City of Vancouver as well as other municipalities give developers perks all the time to build their 40 storey highrises, so in return these same developers should be able to work with the provincial government on this housing initiative. All those billions the government received from the PTT tax for the purchase and sale of real estate should be thrown right back into affordable housing to increase vacancies and lower rents for the average person. 

Edited September 20, 2016 by Harvey Spector

[Master 112]

22 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

There is over 3300 acres of land at UBC and only a fraction of it is being used for student housing. Christy needs to use some of that raw land and build more student housing, whether it's sea containers or low cost dorms it doesn't matter really. The land is already owned by the provincial government so land costs are already accounted for. Like Lillooet said if you use that area of land for students then you increase the vacancy rates and free up other areas for other renters. 

 

As for low income housing, seniors and people with disabilities you would need to work in conjunction with developers who can build the appropriate housing that pass city codes in terms of elevators, ramps, doorways, hallways and other areas of the buildings to meet the full requirements for people with disabilities and also for seniors. 

 

The City of Vancouver as well as other municipalities give developers perks all the time to build their 40 storey highrises, so in return these same developers should be able to work with the provincial government on this housing initiative. All those billions the government received from the PTT tax for the purchase and sale of real estate should be thrown right back into affordable housing to increase vacancies and lower rents for the average person. 

You're critical of the article posted, but what do you think they're going to be doing exactly if not working to build housing that is adequate and meets the needs of its more vulnerable tenants?

[Master 112]

Certainly I don't appreciate the Clark government and think its latency on these issues is appalling, but this seems like a big step forward and I really don't see why we're against it.

[Lillooet_Hillbilly]

31 minutes ago, One one two said:

Certainly I don't appreciate the Clark government and think its latency on these issues is appalling, but this seems like a big step forward and I really don't see why we're against it.

not against the idea just against the manipulation of it all by doing this right before the election while they had years and years to adress the issue but did NOTHING! 

I have to rant I really need to 

-They increased the spending at casino's (from 5k a hand up to 100k) really is that for us? wanna launder some money sure why not, but you have to lose a bunch to them first ok  

-you have the teachers union who are still fighting to get what the courts granted them..........STILL! it's over!

-carbon tax! you wanna know where your carbon tax went? 10 million went to our water treatment plant! IT"S DOWN HILL FROM TOWN! we have water sheds UP THE HILL from town! 290k spent on security guards alone! because of a protest! and built on disputed reserve land!

-foreign investors that launder their money in housing driving up insane rates pushing people out like cattle! look at surrey where people are relocating and portables instead of school 

 

I just hate it when common sense is lacking and stupid people are in charge is my big problem with the issue

 

[Warhippy]

Well, here it is.  The first class action of what could be many.  This one though under the grounds of "racism" won't stand a chance because it is hard to prove racism against EVERYONE based on them simply being foreign purchasers.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/class-action-lawsuit-launched-against-b-c-foreign-buyers-property-tax-1.3769751

 

 

It's taken just over six weeks, but B.C.'s controversial tax on foreign home buyers is now facing a major legal challenge.

A class-action lawsuit has been filed in B.C. Supreme Court on behalf of virtually all non-Canadians who have been forced to pay an extra 15 per cent under amendments to the Property Transfer tax act.

If the lawsuit is certified by the courts and succeeds, the province could be forced to repay hundreds of millions of dollars — much of the expected revenue now earmarked to pay for affordable housing for British Columbians.

• Record B.C. real estate revenue to fund affordable housing projects

The additional charge went into effect August 2, brought in by the B.C. government in an attempt to cool down Metro Vancouver's overheated real estate market.

Foreign investors, especially from mainland China, have been blamed by some for fuelling high home prices.

Lead plaintiff a university student

The lead plaintiff in the case is Jing Li, 29, a university student from the People's Republic of China, now living in Burnaby. 

In August, Jing told CBC News she was caught in a financial crunchby the imposition of the additional tax.

In mid-July, she cobbled together a 10 per cent deposit on a $560,000 townhouse in Langley by borrowing from her parents and friends in China.

Twelve days later, the new levy was imposed. 

The tax added $84,000 to the price of the property. If she backs out of the deal, she will lose her non-refundable deposit of $56,000.

"I can't go forward and also can't go back," she told the CBC at the time.

• University grad faces $84K foreign buyers tax on Langley, B.C., townhome

Now, in the notice of civil claim filed late Monday, Jing represents nearly all foreign buyers in the province who have been forced to pay the additional 15 per cent.

Up to 4,000 Metro Vancouver real estate deals were affected by the quick introduction of a 15% tax on real estate deals, and were not allowed to be 'grandfathered' to avoid the tax introduced before the deal formally closed. (Christer Waara/CBC)

Lawsuit alleges discrimination

The suit argues the provincial government has acted outside its jurisdiction, and that only the federal government has the exclusive power over "the conduct and regulation of foreign trade, aliens and the regulation of trade and commerce." 

The lawsuit also claims the additional tax has the "sole effect of discriminating against [foreign buyers] because of their status as foreign nationals."

And that, her lawyer argues, violates more than two dozen international treaties that Canada has signed with nations ranging from Argentina and China, to Russia and the United States — the latter covered by NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Lawyer Luciana Brasil, representing Jing and most foreign home buyers in B.C., says the province "used the wrong tool for the job." (Colin Fode/ CBC)

 

"The problem here is that the province has intruded into an area of federal jurisdiction" says Luciana Brasil, a partner with Branch MacMaster Barristers and Solicitors, the law firm that has filed the class-action suit on behalf of Jing.

"Because the province chose to use nationality as the basis for the tax, they're intruding into an area of federal jurisdiction. ... They're violating over 30 international treaties that guarantee equal treatment to these citizens and residents of other countries."

'We say they used the wrong tool'

Brasil says there's no denying there's a real estate problem in Metro Vancouver — it's just that the province made a mistake when it imposed the additional 15 per cent tax on foreign buyers.

"The case is not really about whether there's a housing crisis or whether or not there is a vacancy issue ... what we take issue with here is the tool that the province chose to use," says Brasil.

"We say they used the wrong tool for the job. It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."

"It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."- Lawyer Luciana Brasil, on the provincial government's foreign buyer tax

None of the allegations has been proven in court. The B.C. government has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.

In order to proceed, the claim will have to be certified as a class action by the B.C. Supreme Court, a process that could take months if not years.

In the meantime, it's expected the province will continue to collect the extra 15 per cent tax.

[riffraff]

.

Edited September 20, 2016 by riffraff

[riffraff]

8 hours ago, Lillooet_Hillbilly said:

so your saying what I'm thinking of doing myself isn't worth it for other people? 

I've refitted a container before.

 

it was fun.

 

a winery wanted a temporary tasting and greeting area.  Myself and another roofed, and sided try container.  We removed one wall and installed a double bifold glass door.  Inside was wired for sound, completely finished with wood and glass and painted.  

 

Certainly on the inside you would never know it was a shipping constrainer.  It was as nice as most lounges only smaller of course.

[Realtor Rod]

9 minutes ago, riffraff said:

I've refitted a container before.

 

it was fun.

 

a winery wanted a temporary tasting and greeting area.  Myself and another roofed, and sided try container.  We removed one wall and installed a double bifold glass door.  Inside was wired for sound, completely finished with wood and glass and painted.  

 

Certainly on the inside you would never know it was a shipping constrainer.  It was as nice as most lounges only smaller of course.

Are they hard to insulate? We were looking at a project like this but the insulation was a problem. 

[riffraff]

35 minutes ago, Realtor Rod said:

Are they hard to insulate? We were looking at a project like this but the insulation was a problem. 

if you build out "fur out" the inside with 2x6 you could insulate with batts like any home.  Of course this reduces the interior space all around by nearly 1'.

 

2x4 furring would still allow for a thinner batt (insul) but possibly a lower rate of insul.

 

im not totally up to knowledge on the R ratings of various spray foam insulation a but generally they allow for the least furring.  You could get way with 1-1/2" furring and spray the spaces between.  Spray foam is more expensive but is used for the purpose of minimizing any extra framing and where spaces don't allow for the volume and or installation of regular batt insulation.

 

obviously, like any building there will be some heat transfer through the wood framing.

 

perhaps reviewing a cross action detail of a steel classes was assembly would help you.

 

if you are heating the unit I would make sure that you install a poly barrier on the warm side to prevent condensation build up on the inside of the steel wall.  

 

But as I said, review a detail and a small amount of research for wall assemblies in our climate and your gold.

 

the unit I fitted was in New Zealand so in this instance there was no need for insulation.

 

Edit

 

i should clarify: the furring is easy. You could use wood or steel stud.  Simply attach a stud(s) along the perimiter of  the floor and ceiling and infill at 16" or 24" on centre.  

 

Since the wall will not be structural you can get away with 24" spacing.

Edited September 20, 2016 by riffraff

[Tre Mac]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Well, here it is.  The first class action of what could be many.  This one though under the grounds of "racism" won't stand a chance because it is hard to prove racism against EVERYONE based on them simply being foreign purchasers.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/class-action-lawsuit-launched-against-b-c-foreign-buyers-property-tax-1.3769751

 

 

It's taken just over six weeks, but B.C.'s controversial tax on foreign home buyers is now facing a major legal challenge.

A class-action lawsuit has been filed in B.C. Supreme Court on behalf of virtually all non-Canadians who have been forced to pay an extra 15 per cent under amendments to the Property Transfer tax act.

If the lawsuit is certified by the courts and succeeds, the province could be forced to repay hundreds of millions of dollars — much of the expected revenue now earmarked to pay for affordable housing for British Columbians.

• Record B.C. real estate revenue to fund affordable housing projects

The additional charge went into effect August 2, brought in by the B.C. government in an attempt to cool down Metro Vancouver's overheated real estate market.

Foreign investors, especially from mainland China, have been blamed by some for fuelling high home prices.

Lead plaintiff a university student

The lead plaintiff in the case is Jing Li, 29, a university student from the People's Republic of China, now living in Burnaby. 

In August, Jing told CBC News she was caught in a financial crunchby the imposition of the additional tax.

In mid-July, she cobbled together a 10 per cent deposit on a $560,000 townhouse in Langley by borrowing from her parents and friends in China.

Twelve days later, the new levy was imposed. 

The tax added $84,000 to the price of the property. If she backs out of the deal, she will lose her non-refundable deposit of $56,000.

"I can't go forward and also can't go back," she told the CBC at the time.

• University grad faces $84K foreign buyers tax on Langley, B.C., townhome

Now, in the notice of civil claim filed late Monday, Jing represents nearly all foreign buyers in the province who have been forced to pay the additional 15 per cent.

Up to 4,000 Metro Vancouver real estate deals were affected by the quick introduction of a 15% tax on real estate deals, and were not allowed to be 'grandfathered' to avoid the tax introduced before the deal formally closed. (Christer Waara/CBC)

Lawsuit alleges discrimination

The suit argues the provincial government has acted outside its jurisdiction, and that only the federal government has the exclusive power over "the conduct and regulation of foreign trade, aliens and the regulation of trade and commerce." 

The lawsuit also claims the additional tax has the "sole effect of discriminating against [foreign buyers] because of their status as foreign nationals."

And that, her lawyer argues, violates more than two dozen international treaties that Canada has signed with nations ranging from Argentina and China, to Russia and the United States — the latter covered by NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Lawyer Luciana Brasil, representing Jing and most foreign home buyers in B.C., says the province "used the wrong tool for the job." (Colin Fode/ CBC)

 

"The problem here is that the province has intruded into an area of federal jurisdiction" says Luciana Brasil, a partner with Branch MacMaster Barristers and Solicitors, the law firm that has filed the class-action suit on behalf of Jing.

"Because the province chose to use nationality as the basis for the tax, they're intruding into an area of federal jurisdiction. ... They're violating over 30 international treaties that guarantee equal treatment to these citizens and residents of other countries."

'We say they used the wrong tool'

Brasil says there's no denying there's a real estate problem in Metro Vancouver — it's just that the province made a mistake when it imposed the additional 15 per cent tax on foreign buyers.

"The case is not really about whether there's a housing crisis or whether or not there is a vacancy issue ... what we take issue with here is the tool that the province chose to use," says Brasil.

"We say they used the wrong tool for the job. It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."

"It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."- Lawyer Luciana Brasil, on the provincial government's foreign buyer tax

None of the allegations has been proven in court. The B.C. government has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.

In order to proceed, the claim will have to be certified as a class action by the B.C. Supreme Court, a process that could take months if not years.

In the meantime, it's expected the province will continue to collect the extra 15 per cent tax.

I want to punch my computer screen.

[taxi]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Well, here it is.  The first class action of what could be many.  This one though under the grounds of "racism" won't stand a chance because it is hard to prove racism against EVERYONE based on them simply being foreign purchasers.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/class-action-lawsuit-launched-against-b-c-foreign-buyers-property-tax-1.3769751

 

 

It's taken just over six weeks, but B.C.'s controversial tax on foreign home buyers is now facing a major legal challenge.

A class-action lawsuit has been filed in B.C. Supreme Court on behalf of virtually all non-Canadians who have been forced to pay an extra 15 per cent under amendments to the Property Transfer tax act.

If the lawsuit is certified by the courts and succeeds, the province could be forced to repay hundreds of millions of dollars — much of the expected revenue now earmarked to pay for affordable housing for British Columbians.

• Record B.C. real estate revenue to fund affordable housing projects

The additional charge went into effect August 2, brought in by the B.C. government in an attempt to cool down Metro Vancouver's overheated real estate market.

Foreign investors, especially from mainland China, have been blamed by some for fuelling high home prices.

Lead plaintiff a university student

The lead plaintiff in the case is Jing Li, 29, a university student from the People's Republic of China, now living in Burnaby. 

In August, Jing told CBC News she was caught in a financial crunchby the imposition of the additional tax.

In mid-July, she cobbled together a 10 per cent deposit on a $560,000 townhouse in Langley by borrowing from her parents and friends in China.

Twelve days later, the new levy was imposed. 

The tax added $84,000 to the price of the property. If she backs out of the deal, she will lose her non-refundable deposit of $56,000.

"I can't go forward and also can't go back," she told the CBC at the time.

• University grad faces $84K foreign buyers tax on Langley, B.C., townhome

Now, in the notice of civil claim filed late Monday, Jing represents nearly all foreign buyers in the province who have been forced to pay the additional 15 per cent.

Up to 4,000 Metro Vancouver real estate deals were affected by the quick introduction of a 15% tax on real estate deals, and were not allowed to be 'grandfathered' to avoid the tax introduced before the deal formally closed. (Christer Waara/CBC)

Lawsuit alleges discrimination

The suit argues the provincial government has acted outside its jurisdiction, and that only the federal government has the exclusive power over "the conduct and regulation of foreign trade, aliens and the regulation of trade and commerce." 

The lawsuit also claims the additional tax has the "sole effect of discriminating against [foreign buyers] because of their status as foreign nationals."

And that, her lawyer argues, violates more than two dozen international treaties that Canada has signed with nations ranging from Argentina and China, to Russia and the United States — the latter covered by NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Lawyer Luciana Brasil, representing Jing and most foreign home buyers in B.C., says the province "used the wrong tool for the job." (Colin Fode/ CBC)

 

"The problem here is that the province has intruded into an area of federal jurisdiction" says Luciana Brasil, a partner with Branch MacMaster Barristers and Solicitors, the law firm that has filed the class-action suit on behalf of Jing.

"Because the province chose to use nationality as the basis for the tax, they're intruding into an area of federal jurisdiction. ... They're violating over 30 international treaties that guarantee equal treatment to these citizens and residents of other countries."

'We say they used the wrong tool'

Brasil says there's no denying there's a real estate problem in Metro Vancouver — it's just that the province made a mistake when it imposed the additional 15 per cent tax on foreign buyers.

"The case is not really about whether there's a housing crisis or whether or not there is a vacancy issue ... what we take issue with here is the tool that the province chose to use," says Brasil.

"We say they used the wrong tool for the job. It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."

"It's like trying to use a screwdriver to put a nail on the wall. It just doesn't work."- Lawyer Luciana Brasil, on the provincial government's foreign buyer tax

None of the allegations has been proven in court. The B.C. government has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.

In order to proceed, the claim will have to be certified as a class action by the B.C. Supreme Court, a process that could take months if not years.

In the meantime, it's expected the province will continue to collect the extra 15 per cent tax.

I know we are meant to feel sorry for the student, but what was a student doing buying a $500k+ home with a $3000+/month mortgage? Particularly in a country where you are not a resident. This student may actually come out ahead walking away from their deposit. If prices continue to dip, the dip may far exceed the 10% down payment.

 

I'm also curious what school this person was attending that necessitated buying a property in Langley. Trinity Western is getting a lot of exchange students from China  now?