After some post processing which excluded properties that were either parks, right of ways, railways, side yards or boulevard medians as well as SPLOT properties (Spaces Planners Left Over Time), this posting will highlight some of the specific features from the recently published map of property values of single family home districts in the City of Vancouver.
We were able to isolate and find properties in the City’s RS Districts for less than $500,000 – all 182 of them which, out of the 71,000 study properties, which equates to about 0.3 percent of the study base. To respect the privacy of individual homeowners, we won’t publish a map on their specific locations, but highlight the characteristics of this population. The characteristics include:
- All properties were east of Main
- Being built between 1905 and 1996
- Generally along major arterials or next to mass transit right of ways like the Expo line.
- Valuations for land value far exceeded “improvement” values which is term that refers to buildings well beyond the overall patterns for the overall SFH population
Other details in this map include:
Overall Patterns
42 percent of overall properties in the study population were over $1 million; however, as earlier, identified; this pattern is highly geographically uneven with Main Street (and specifically Ontario Street) being the principal dividing line with value shifts depending where a property falls either west or east of Ontario Street. In one sample block with similar housing stock on either side, properties west of Ontario were worth between $100,000 to $300,000 more than their counterparts east of it.
East of Main Patterns
7 percent of our study parcels east of Main were equal or more than $1 million in the 2011 BC Assessment or conversely, 93 percent of our study parcels were under $1 million.
West of Main Patterns
89 percent of our study parcels west of Main were equal or more than $1 million in the 2011 BC Assessment or conversely, 11 percent of parcels were under $1 million.
This Study in the News
An interesting web dialogue has occured with the publication of this map and two subsequent analysis are of particular note: one written by Pete McMartin in the Vancouver Sun and another by Gordon Price on his blog: Price Tags. Thank you, Pete and Gordon for sharing your insights on these patterns.
Comments are closed.
A major consieration is lot size.
A medieval measurement of 50 feet ["} [ 15.24 m. ] on the CPR lands (west side) and 33 “feet” [ 10.06 m ] on the east (City) side.
Lots are longer, streets are wider on the CPR side.
All this means that the developable land is greater so value on the west (CPR) side.
You can build a bigger house (on the area) that what may occupy it now, based on current rules.
See superhouses and the new Vancouver specials around 49th and Granville and 49th and Main.
There is also the formerly vaunted value of living on the West Side, but in the modern era it doesn’t have as much value as no one vistts neighbourds or gets out their houses anymore.
I live in the Commercial Drive area (have for 11 years) and a big trend in this area is the replacement of a small house on a 33 X 122 lot, or 25 X 90 lot with a duplex. The zoning allows for this here. Once each new duplex is complete, the value of the lot+improvements is about $1.4 to $1.6 Million (based on sale prices). But each family bought for about $700K to $800K. Try buying a 3 bedroom ground oriented home on the west side for that. Even in this area, a renovated detached home on it’s own 33X122 will often sell for over $1.2M.
So, your map could be used to demonstrate how some areas have kept ownership costs lower (using duplexes and rowhouses to replace older dwellings on s.f. lots), while another area has not.
Thanks Bill for your insights and comments! We wanted to open up a discussion on why some of these patterns exist in the City to our audience and comments from such learnt readers like yourself have not disappointed. ^AY
Hello, Wendy…thank you for your comments and observations. Do you think converting SFHs in duplexes is enough to keep (young or established) families with children in your neighbourhood? ^AY
I would love to see maps made with assessment data from previous years as well. How quickly or recently did this line emerge?
Thanks for your comment, Mike. It would be an interesting map series, but one has to, of course, account for inflation. We’re hoping that we can someday offer a longituditual view on assessment values.