Real estate in Calgary - another bubble?

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by rain_e

https://www.honestdoor.com/

I knew about that one, but it takes a long time for them to update and you can't see what the listing prices were. I stumbled across Calgary MLX though that functions almost exactly like realtor.ca, except you can see past listings and what they sold for

https://calgarymlx.com/

Panorama is even crazier than I thought. Two houses right next to us sold within the last couple of weeks for over 100k over asking, and when I zoom out to the rest of Panorama every recent sale is 50k-100k over asking. This is nuts, I knew houses around here were selling fast but I had no idea they were going so much higher than the listing prices

[cKy]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Where can you see what a house actually sold for?

We have a realtor that has a portal for us to see prices for some criteria we set. If it sold we can see the ask and sale price.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by troutman

Sunnyside might be different because of flood risk.

It's also where Bigtime lives, so there's that too.

[DoubleF]

My wife and I were discussing what you get for $800-850K vs what you get for $650K and put in $200K of work 2 years ago.

I started poking into $800K-1.1MM listings for fun.... WTF is going on in the 900K to 1.1 million range in Varsity? The new houses look nice. The older ones... some of those are bizarre.

[Calgary14]

Bode is showing a couple places selling for higher than 120% of list, there's a house in Copperfield that sold for 129% of list price last month

[dino7c]

Market is insane right now, someone came to the door begging to buy my house for about 100k more than what I would have asked a year ago

Problem is where would I go

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I started poking into $800K-1.1MM listings for fun.... WTF is going on in the 900K to 1.1 million range in Varsity? The new houses look nice. The older ones... some of those are bizarre.

Product of their time? The 1960s and 70s.

[topfiverecords]

A place in Elbow Park, listed for $1,085,000 went for $1,277,000.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Product of their time? The 1960s and 70s.

There's one that looks comically mismatched. I could maybe see the 60s and 70s influencing it, but it does look renovated multiple times over that span.

The red and lavender one though... that one was definitely newly renovated.

Unless you mean someone fried their brain in the 60s and 70s...

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

My wife and I were discussing what you get for $800-850K vs what you get for $650K and put in $200K of work 2 years ago.

I started poking into $800K-1.1MM listings for fun.... WTF is going on in the 900K to 1.1 million range in Varsity? The new houses look nice. The older ones... some of those are bizarre.

Older houses are better properties and built better. They have stood the test of time. Cosmetic things are easy to fix most of the time.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Older houses are better properties and built better. They have stood the test of time. Cosmetic things are easy to fix most of the time.

lol, oh yeah. The good old days of uninsulated walls, asbestos, lead paint, lack of building codes, creaky floors, 2x4 construction, etc. etc.

Give me a break. I mean, sure, some are good (survivorship bias), but old homes cost a fortune to keep up to snuff versus the years-long maintenance holiday you have with a new build.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

lol, oh yeah. The good old days of uninsulated walls, asbestos, lead paint, lack of building codes, creaky floors, 2x4 construction, etc. etc.

Give me a break. I mean, sure, some are good (survivorship bias), but old homes cost a fortune to keep up to snuff versus the years-long maintenance holiday you have with a new build.

That's really a question of how new you are talking. If something is under 10 years old, then yes, you are correct.

For houses 10-40 years old, you're really taking a gamble. All sorts of corners were cut in that period and the materials, often cheap plastics, rarely hold up. For example, a 50 year old copper pipe may be in much better shape than a 20 year old plastic one.

Generally, older houses did use much better materials for basic foundations and frames. Framing is a pretty big issue with new homes. The older houses will use very thick old growth lumber. While most modern homes are built with much thinner and newer growth lumber.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Sliver

lol, oh yeah. The good old days of uninsulated walls, asbestos, lead paint, lack of building codes, creaky floors, 2x4 construction, etc. etc.

Give me a break. I mean, sure, some are good (survivorship bias), but old homes cost a fortune to keep up to snuff versus the years-long maintenance holiday you have with a new build.

Also, it’s a near certainty that peach stucco is going to be in style again very soon, adding tens of thousands in value.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Sliver

lol, oh yeah. The good old days of uninsulated walls, asbestos, lead paint, lack of building codes, creaky floors, 2x4 construction, etc. etc.

Give me a break. I mean, sure, some are good (survivorship bias), but old homes cost a fortune to keep up to snuff versus the years-long maintenance holiday you have with a new build.

Plus the utility bills are so much higher. My house is 2006 and my buddy's is mid-80's, his gas bill ends up being almost double mine every month. I can only imagine how much worse it is in even older houses

[81MC]

1950 build.

This house is a ####ing monster. It helps that it’s constructed with probably some of the last real commercially available old growth Douglas Fir. The studs in this place are gorgeous. The rock and plaster walls are an inch thick. The original maple floors came back beautifully.

And it has 70+ years of proven ability to withstand Calgary weather. We don’t have water intrusion during storms, no bull#### ‘warranty’ repair for a leaking roof every year, no siding that gets blown off in the wind. I’ll take it any day of the week.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

My wife and I were discussing what you get for $800-850K vs what you get for $650K and put in $200K of work 2 years ago.

I started poking into $800K-1.1MM listings for fun.... WTF is going on in the 900K to 1.1 million range in Varsity? The new houses look nice. The older ones... some of those are bizarre.

I live in Varsity and there is definitely a lot of interesting homes here. When it comes original design/layout many homes are similar but there are quite a few that have really bizarre layouts which is probably associated with the modern design language in the 50s/60s. 80s renos can be absolutely hideous .

When we moved into our house almost ten years ago our neighbor was a senior in his 80s and he was the original owner of his home and had never done any upgrades or renos. We checked it out when he was moved into a home and his kid's listed the house and it was so unique. Obviously the wall paper and finishings were really crazy and vintage but it was a 1500 sq ft bungalow with a really closed off floor plan. It had a lot of separate different rooms and no real hallway to speak of and you had to walk through some rooms to access other rooms. I couldn't really figure something it what was going on.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Plus the utility bills are so much higher. My house is 2006 and my buddy's is mid-80's, his gas bill ends up being almost double mine every month. I can only imagine how much worse it is in even older houses

A $2-5K per year in extra cost perhaps? Someone ball parked it for me like this once: If you're spending $20-50K plus to address this for a couple thousand per year in savings (ie: high efficiency HVAC, windows and improved insulation), ignoring potential differences like condensation issues or unaddressed issues that cause premature deterioration of the home, I think the break even is around 5-15 years.

Another way explained to me was like this: If most specs are around the same, but old vs new is $150K. $5K a year in utilities savings ($400 a month) is 30 years+ to break even. We might be sold on efficiencies, but in reality, we're being sold significantly more on curb appeal than real efficiency savings.

This is why old home demand vs new home demand isn't dead. The efficiency difference is significant enough to pay attention to, but not so significant that it cripples you in owning that less efficient home vs a significantly more efficient new home. This is perhaps similar in continuing to drive that 10-15 year old car vs buying a brand new car. It'll cost you less to run, but it'll cost you a significant chunk upfront to acquire it. By the time you break even, you're almost at the same point of deciding on replacing again. Most people slap on the cheapest option (ie: Shakes/asphalt vs rubber, tin or clay for roofs) and are OK with replacing slightly earlier. That's fine and normal. The sole exception I personally would go with going forward is fibre cement siding over vinyl siding. Slightly fire resistant, less prone to fading and more likely to withstand hail.

I've been on the fence for doing some efficiency upgrades in my home after this discussion with a friend. It seems that rather than focus on efficiency decisions first (ie: HVAC and windows and roof) I can consider doing some reno work first (ie: Modernize certain rooms/things/curb appeal, seal obvious spaces with potentials of leaks, landscaping etc.) instead.

There's also a curiosity whether efficiency rebates amounts and percentages will go up again (ie: NDP era). If I hold out on these things until the absolute latest vs considering doing them a few years early, it might benefit me to wait it out vs being proactive on some of these things.

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I live in Varsity and there is definitely a lot of interesting homes here. When it comes original design/layout many homes are similar but there are quite a few that have really bizarre layouts which is probably associated with the modern design language in the 50s/60s. 80s renos can be absolutely hideous .

When we moved into our house almost ten years ago our neighbor was a senior in his 80s and he was the original owner of his home and had never done any upgrades or renos. We checked it out when he was moved into a home and his kid's listed the house and it was so unique. Obviously the wall paper and finishings were really crazy and vintage but it was a 1500 sq ft bungalow with a really closed off floor plan. It had a lot of separate different rooms and no real hallway to speak of and you had to walk through some rooms to access other rooms. I couldn't really figure something it what was going on.

These two were a bit of an adventure pictures wise.

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...algary-varsity


https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...algary-varsity

I get the unique floor plan and stuff. I saw a few Million+ homes in different neighborhoods where some of it wasn't my thing, but I could see why the owners like it, or certain things were IMO unpractical, but undeniably kinda cool. I'm not the type that loves complete cookie cutter either.

But these two were reminiscent of getting lost in the old engineering building at the U of C. One was like stitching 3 houses from different eras together. The other was like someone went to Canadian tire... then Mastercraft and Party city got into a fight, then decided on the worst compromise ever.

Originally Posted by Sliver

lol, oh yeah. The good old days of uninsulated walls, asbestos, lead paint, lack of building codes, creaky floors, 2x4 construction, etc. etc.

Give me a break. I mean, sure, some are good (survivorship bias), but old homes cost a fortune to keep up to snuff versus the years-long maintenance holiday you have with a new build.

No worse than a car though IMO. Sure, there's like water heaters and stuff like that that might go a few years earlier because they're older. Maybe the roof, garage door, deck rebuild, cracked concrete, landscaping etc. but if you're proactive and budget those in and carpet bomb those projects into groups over a single summer or two (vs spread out), they're no big deal.

[bizaro86]

Lol. The people with the purple house with red accents are all in. The doors are painted purple, the towels in the bathroom are purple, etc.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Plus the utility bills are so much higher. My house is 2006 and my buddy's is mid-80's, his gas bill ends up being almost double mine every month. I can only imagine how much worse it is in even older houses

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Also, it’s a near certainty that peach stucco is going to be in style again very soon, adding tens of thousands in value.

No one has ever said houses from the 80s are well built. That's probably exactly what you want to avoid. The worst of both worlds. A cheaply made house, without character, that will cost a lot of money to fix up. Additionally, the fixing a 30ish year old house may be far more fundamental and costly than the fixing a 70ish year old house requires. For example, there could be major issues with the foundation, frame, or leaks in a house from that 1980s era.

Builders were using all sorts of plastics and composite wood that had not been tested for time. For example, a lot of the PVC piping from the 80-early 2000s degraded under UV light, but people didn't know about it. They would store the piping in areas exposed to UV light, and then install it.

When people talk about solid older houses, they are talking about 1960 or earlier.

[Table 5]

We currently live in a 1930 house that had an addition built in the 80s. The 30s section is built really well...the 80s section is a pretty big step-down in terms of quality (including a wood foundation). We're about to undergo a fairly extensive renovation, and pretty much everything that is going is from the 80s side of things, as the original elements are just too nice to mess with. Having said that, I do think a lot of the 80s elements (ie. the solid oak built-ins) are still better quality than what you typically get today.