Units to be handed back by city after 20 years if deal approved

Frances Bula
Sun

The small amount of middle-income housing in the Olympic

Village will revert back to the developer after 20 years if Vancouver councillors approve the deal recommended by its housing staff.

The city could have held on to the 107 units forever if it had been prepared to invest $11 million in cash and $4 million in equity, says the report.

But staff say the property endowment fund is already stretched to pay for other priorities, so they are recommending that the developer, Millennium, build the units, rent them out at affordable rates for middle-income renters for 20 years, and then get them back to do whatever they want with them.

They have recommended that the unit sizes be restricted in the hope of keeping them as affordable units even after the 20 years are up.

That conclusion is disappointing to councillors from both Vision Vancouver, part of the council group that had originally tried to require that one-third of the village, or about 350 units, be built for middle-income renters and buyers, and the Non-Partisan Association, which killed that requirement but pushed for the developer to find a way to build middle-income housing voluntarily.

NPA Coun. Peter Ladner says it was the best deal the city could get and at least it means the city doesn’t get involved in trying to impose complicated rent-control or home-ownership plans.

But Vision Coun. Raymond Louie says it’s regrettable that the city is getting so little for the significant amount of bonus density the developer got to compensate for the cost of building the units.

And, he says, the city could have spent the $11 million on acquiring permanent housing stock for the benefit of its middle-income residents. Instead, it chose to spend that money on expensive initiatives like a new 311 phone system and the $20-million Olympic legacies fund.

But the project manager for Southeast False Creek says the city got a good deal with the 107 units of middle-income housing, which, with the 250 units of social housing that the province and federal government committed to, will create a good chunk of affordable housing.

“That’s a significant amount,” said Jody Foster. “This means that close to one in three units will not be market units in the Olympic Village. This is an important point for people to grasp. There is no other money. This is a Millennium endeavour, and what they are committing to is a provision of three buildings providing rental housing for 20 years.”

According to the report, the units will rent out for slightly more than the average market rent in the city. A studio will rent for about $800 a month, $100 more than the average city rent for a studio; a one-bedroom for $1,200, compared to the $1,100 average.

By standard estimates of affordability, which say that people should pay no more than 30 per cent of their income for rent, it’s estimated that a middle-income household with one salary, with earnings between $23,000 and $47,000, can afford $550-$1,180 a month in rent.

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

 

VANCOUVER I City will need 2,200 units for addicts and the mentally ill

Frances Bula
Sun

Vancouver will need 2,200 units of housing in the next 10 years for people who are mentally ill and addicted to drugs, and most of those units should be outside the downtown core, says a staff report.

This, said one councillor, is a challenge to Vancouverites to show they are willing to accept these residents.

“There’s a widely held opinion throughout the city that we need to do more for the homeless,” said Coun. Peter Ladner. “Our challenge now is going to be ‘Are you willing to help people who are out on the street?’ Anybody who wants to deal with homelessness should be willing to have this in their neighbourhood.”

Ladner said it will be a problem if neighbourhoods decide to oppose supportive housing.

“If we don’t do this, we will not have a livable city.”

The report, written by housing planner Jill Davidson, spells out exactly what Vancouver has to be prepared for over the next 10 years when it comes to accommodating supportive housing. By that, she means housing that includes live-in or day staff who help the mentally ill and addicted stay on track, take needed medications, develop living skills, and integrate into their neighbourhoods.

Davidson’s report is intended to give residents as clear a picture as possible of what they’ll be asked to accept in the future, so they don’t feel that housing projects have been sprung on them, that the city is operating secretly, or that they are the victims of experimental projects.

Those were the accusations that surrounded a supportive-housing project eventually approved for 39th and Fraser over a site at 16th and Dunbar, which the city owns and could potentially develop for supportive housing.

The Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, which funds supportive housing in the city, provided Davidson with the estimate of units that will be needed over the next 10 years.

“Our piece at the city is to figure out where these are going to land and to talk about how we can successfully integrate this housing,” she said.

About 1,500 units will probably never be noticed. They’ll be provided through private rentals, where residents will get supplements to pay their rent and receive support from visiting health-care workers.

Another 200 units are in the process of being built.

But the city will need to help health authorities and non-profits find sites to accommodate another 450 people in dedicated buildings. That will take city permits and meetings with local residents.

Over the next two months, city housing staff will be holding public forums to present their information on supportive housing and get feedback from residents about what the city can do to allay their fears about the potential impacts.

Ladner said those meetings will be important “to demonstrate to the neighbourhood that there are many fears about this kind of housing that, as far as I know, are ill-founded.”

Some of the information city staff will be including is the location of the city’s 37 existing supportive-housing sites; which areas in the city are zoned for apartments and are potentially the sites for future supportive housing; a list of the sites the city currently owns, which might be developed for supportive housing; crime statistics around the existing sites; and an explanation of the process for approving sites.

Although the city sites may be used for other purposes — seniors or regular social housing — Davidson said staff included the locations of those sites so no one would think the city was trying to hide them.

Davidson said city staff have culled police crime statistics and examined the impact on property values to see whether there is anything noticeable around existing supportive-housing sites. That research has found no correlation, she said.

It’s estimated that the 2,200 units needed will have to be accommodated in about 10 to 15 buildings over the next 10 years. Only three of those should go into the downtown area, which already has most of the city’s supportive housing, the report says.

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

Sun

Download Document

USA Today

WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Sales of new homes rose 4.8% in December and prices climbed 1.2% as the number of homes on the market decreased, but for the year, the Commerce Department said 1.061 million new homes were sold, down 17.3% from 2005.

While Friday’s report showed some firming in the weakened housing sector in December. The year’s drop was the biggest in 16 years and the first annual decline after a five-year rally.

In December, sales of new single-family homes rose to a 1.120 million unit annual rate after climbing sharply the previous month. The department revised November ‘s sales pace up to a 1.069 million pace from an originally reported 1.047 million unit rate.

While those increases were better than expected, analysts cautioned that they were influenced by unusually warm weather in those two months.

The number of new homes on the market at the end of December fell to 537,000 from 542,000 a month earlier. At the current sales pace, that represented 5.9 months’ supply.

The median home price — half sold for more, half for less — rose to $235,000 in December from a downwardly revised $232,200 in November, the Commerce Department said.

New-home sales in December rose 27.3% in the Northeast, 26.6% in the Midwest and 0.3% in the South. In the West, sales fell 4.4%.

The Commerce Department’s latest take on the housing market adds to data released a day earlier that showed a 0.8% decline in December sales of existing homes, which represent 85% of the housing market.

According to that National Association of Realtors, existing home sales dropped 8.4% in 2006, sharpest decline since 1989, when they fell 14.8%.

Crunching affordability numbers only part of the equation for the single woman

Sun

The number of single women buying homes is on the rise across Canada. Royal LePage predicts 55 per cent of first-time homebuyers will be single women by 2008, compared to 45 per cent of men. Single women have had a huge impact on the real estate market, with both builders and home renovation chains catering more to these independent female buyers. The Vancouver Sun’s Brenda Bouw has written a book targeting this group, titled: “Home Girl: The Single Woman’s Guide To Buying Real Estate in Canada.” Below is an excerpt:

Angela Nolan was 29 years old when she announced to friends and colleagues she was buying a house — by herself.

“People looked at me like I had three heads. It was kind of like the look my guidance counsellor gave me in high school when I said I wanted to be an air-traffic controller. He said ‘You mean an airline stewardess?’ ” recalls Angela, now in her 40s — and a real estate agent in Hamilton, Ont., not an air-traffic controller. “People didn’t take me seriously about the house at the time. My co-workers didn’t think it was viable.”

She did it anyway. Angela says her decision to buy solo was a smart investment, both personally and financially.

“Having a house makes you a more attractive single girl. The alternative is that you sit back and say, ‘Oh, I’m just waiting for someone to help me and save me and take care of me.’ I’m not the damsel-in-distress type.”

Christiane, a manager for a Toronto-based book publisher, bought a house at age 33, after 13 years of paying rent in downtown Toronto and realizing the white picket fence and 1950s “June Cleaver waiting-for-a-man lifestyle” was a thing of the past. “Too many women think that’s what you have to do — find a boy, get engaged, blah, blah, blah. Ditch that idea. If you have a decent job, go for it,” Christiane advises. “For me, there was always a good reason to put it off. But looking back at all the money I threw away in rent, I regret waiting so long to buy on my own. You’re never too young to do it.”

Are you ready?

How do you know when the time is right for you? The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) suggests that potential buyers ask themselves the following three questions:

– Do you enjoy moving often?

– Do you prefer using your savings for such things as vacations, retirement, or starting your own business?

– Do you enjoy not having to worry about regular maintenance and repairs?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then maybe, just maybe, you aren’t ready to buy a home. Remember that buying property means investing not just your hard-earned money, but a lot of time and energy. It also means making a commitment.

Take Brenda, a forty-something venture capitalist in Vancouver, who rents a beautiful apartment just blocks from the beach, on the main floor of a heritage home in the city’s moneyed Point Grey neighbourhood. While she makes good money in her career, she cannot afford to buy a property in that area without seriously compromising the lifestyle she now enjoys.

“The number-one reason I haven’t bought is the change of lifestyle it would require,” Brenda says. “I have witnessed so many single friends who, as soon as that purchase has been made, have no more spontaneous weekends. They are focussed on the house and that focus lasts a really long time. I think selfishly of how that has impacted my life. I have run out of people to have spontaneous trips with. They are not going out. The disposable income has dried up. It’s a dramatic change for everyone.”

Meanwhile, friends and colleagues have put pressure on her to join the homeowner club. “There are very few peers in my business who are still renting. Sometimes I feel like a social outcast.”

Brenda sought the advice of a financial planner. “Am I crazy not to be buying?” she asked. “What should I be doing with my money?”

Her planner brought calm. “He said, ‘You work too hard to feel like you cannot have the flexibility of trying to have a balanced life,’ ” Brenda recalls from the conversation. The financial planner advised her to ignore the peer pressure over buying property, and do what was best for her. What would make her happier? Spending time and money on owning and maintaining a home, or on leisure activities such as travel?

“I think my life would be more stressful if I was tapped out with a mortgage,” says Brenda. “It’s not like I’m rolling in dough, but I have a reasonable income that allows me to accrue cash to do things like go to Africa. There is not a hope that I would have been able to do that as a homeowner.”

Someday, Brenda says, she will buy a home, and she is setting aside money to make that purchase when she is ready.

To compare the costs of renting versus buying, there are a number of calculators you can access through a quick Google search online. These are useful, but they don’t take into consideration the lifestyle choices that are really behind the decision to buy a home (or not to buy).

Can You Afford It?

So how do you know if you can afford to buy? The common affordability rule used by financial experts is that your monthly housing costs should not be more than 32 per cent of your gross household monthly income.

CMHC defines monthly housing costs as your mortgage payment, as well as taxes and heating costs. If you own a condo, this sum also includes half your monthly condo fees. Add up these costs, and compare them to your gross income, and you’ll have a calculation known as your “gross debt service ratio.”

Here’s an example. If your gross monthly income is $5,000 (you earn $60,000 a year), you should pay no more than $1,600 in monthly housing expenses ($5,000 x 32%).

The next thing to consider is your total monthly debt load. This includes car loans, credit card payments, cellphone bills, gym memberships, and other monthly financial commitments. When you add these costs to that first calculation of housing costs, and compare them to your income, you’ll have what’s known as your “total debt service ratio.” The general rule is that your total debt load should not be more than 40 per cent of your monthly income. If it is, you may want to think twice about home ownership. Or, get those costs down to 40 per cent or less before you buy.

Patricia Lovett-Reid, a certified financial planner and wealth management spokesperson, as well as a senior vice-president with TD Waterhouse Canada, says you have to be honest with yourself about how much money you are really spending. It’s not like a diet where you can cheat when nobody is looking. “Clearly understand the money you have coming in from all sources and clearly know what you are spending your money on,” Patricia says.

This rule is especially true for single women buyers, because they will be solely responsible for the finances it takes to buy and maintain a home. She advises women to know their financial situation before they start looking for a home, and especially before they visit a bank or mortgage broker to negotiate rates.

“Treat yourself as though you are the chief financial officer. Ask yourself, ‘What are the risks? What will this mean for my overall lifestyle?’ There is no fun in being asset-rich and cash-poor,” says Patricia.

“People underestimate the stress and anxiety that owning a home can place on you.”

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

 

Fiona Anderson
Sun

After buying her first apartment six years ago, and two others since, Vancouver Sun chief news editor Brenda Bouw has been inundated by single woman friends asking her to help them do the same.

But unlike 25 years ago when Colette Dowling wrote Cinderella Complex bemoaning the fact that many women were still waiting for a man in their life before making big decisions like buying an apartment, Bouw found most of the reluctance was financial, not relationship-driven.

Bouw, like most of the people she interviewed, just didn’t think she could afford to buy. But then she saw a co-worker take the plunge and knew if the co-worker could do it, so could she.

Bouw did some number-crunching and discovered that a mortgage would cost her only a few hundred dollars more a month than her rent at the time.

“It just suddenly dawned on me that I didn’t have to pay rent anymore,” Bouw said.

And when she did buy, Bouw was surprised at how many other single women had thought they, too, couldn’t buy a home on their own.

So Bouw wrote the ultimate guide: Home Girl: the Single Woman’s Guide to Buying Real Estate in Canada.

Much of the advice — though written for women — could just as easily apply to men who are opting to buy alone. But statistics show that more single women in Canada are in the market and likely to buy real estate than single men.

And Bouw spices up her writing with references that are going to appeal mainly to women.

Bouw’s biggest tip is: Don’t let emotion make the decision for you.

Don’t buy a house because you have fallen in love with the kitchen or yard, she says. “I think a lot of times you overlook the problems with the place because you picture yourself in that kitchen, and nothing else will do.”

And for single women, location, location, location is especially important. Make sure the area is safe and you feel comfortable in it, Bouw said.

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

 

Pool of buyers who can afford to get into market is shrinking

Derrick Penner
Sun

Greater Vancouver real estate markets saw a 55-per-cent increase in inventory of unsold pre-sale condominium units over the last six months, which may trigger a slowdown in future development, PricewaterhouseCoopers reported Thursday.

The rising inventory is likely because fewer buyers can afford to pay Vancouver’s high-flying prices, Craig Hennigar, vice-president of PricewaterhouseCoopers Real Estate, said.

However, Hennigar added that developers will likely build the projects they have in the works now, then scale back their future expectations rather than drop prices that are being driven largely by skyrocketing land and construction costs.

“We’re not suggesting, at this point, that the market is awash in unsold presales,” Hennigar said.

The 4,350 unsold condos across Greater Vancouver that PwC counted at the end of December in its semi-annual condominium market review compared with 2,780 unsold units that were counted at the beginning of 2006.

However, Hennigar said the proportion of pre-sale units available that have not sold has not increased dramatically. In the highrise category, PwC estimated that while unsold inventory increased to 2,270 from 1,300, the number represented only 28 per cent of all units in pre-sale.

The 1,300 counted last January represented 23 per cent of all units.

Hennigar added that 50-per-cent unsold would represent a balanced market, and the overall market isn’t approaching that figure.

“But we’re closer to [50 per cent] than we were six months ago, or 12 months ago when the market was hotter,” he said.

Hennigar added that the rise in inventory seems to correlate with a 30-per-cent rise in condominium prices, which far outpaced income growth of potential buyers.

So while immigration and economic growth is adding to the pool of potential buyers, the “pool of buyers that can afford to buy is probably being diminished by the increase in prices.”

Hennigar said that in high-rise condominiums, the biggest increases in inventory of pre-sale units are in Vancouver and Burnaby, where prices have also become extremely high.

The PwC market review found that average high-rise prices hit $800 per square foot in downtown Vancouver. The median high-rise price across Greater Vancouver hit $500 per square foot. Most unsold units — 900 — were in the $350,000-$450,000 range.

Low-rise condominiums had a pre-sale inventory of just over 1,000, with a median price of $325 per square foot. The biggest concentrations were in Vancouver, Burnaby and South Surrey, and most were in the $250,000-$350,000 range.

PwC found an inventory of almost 50 per cent among townhouses, with just under 1,000 unsold, and concentrations in south Surrey and Maple Ridge with most in the $250,000-$350,000 range.

Tsur Somerville, director of the centre for urban economics and real estate at the Sauder School of Business at the University of B.C., said rising inventories of pre-sale units is consistent with recent stories about the overall slowing market.

“We’re at a stage where there are a lot of units under construction,” Somerville said. “And to the extent they’re not 100-per-cent pre-sold … the market looks a lot weaker.”

Somerville added that it is hard to know how many unsold pre-sales would be too many. If it’s a three-month backlog of units, he said it is not significant. If it’s a year’s worth of unsold pre-sales at existing sales rates, “that is a big deal.”

Hennigar said prices in the current environment are unlikely to drop, even though the pool of buyers able to afford units is shrinking, because developers can’t build condominiums at lower prices.

“If they’re finding that they’re having difficulty moving product, instead of trying to push product at a lower profit, they might just scale back their development expectations,” Hennigar said.

However, Somerville said that will also depend on whether any developers wind up with unsold inventory at completion and construction loans that haven’t been paid off.

“When you look at what drives markets down, it’s people who are under pressure to sell, or are trying to liquidate before they think there’s a bigger loss,” he said.

Hennigar added that while the inventory of pre-sale units is rising, the number of completed, vacant and unsold condominiums is still very low — 151 across all of Greater Vancouver at the time of the market review.

“We’re definitely not in a buyer’s market,” Hennigar said, “and if developers are careful about what they’re doing, we won’t get there.”

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

Harvey Enchin
Sun

When British Columbia homeowners opened their letters from BC Assessment this month their first reaction might have been delight at seeing the increased value of their investment.

But a moment of reflection would have led to a more appropriate response — fear that property taxes will go up.

There’s no law that says municipalities have to hike taxes to match the rising value of real estate, but they will because they can and there’s not much you can do about it.

While property owners who realize they are about to be fleeced prepare their appeals, politicians at city hall are writing their bloated budgets based on the extra revenue the 23-per-cent, provincewide, year-over-year jump in assessed value will inevitably raise.

Because the assessments come out in January and local budgets aren’t delivered until spring, councillors and bureaucrats have plenty of time to figure out how to spend all the additional money they will be able to extort from taxpayers.

Our property tax regime is not markedly different from the one in force in Britain in the 14th century. The king’s tax assessors used ownership or occupancy of property to estimate a taxpayer’s ability to pay. Value was determined on the basis of the annual rent from the property.

Our political system has evolved, but our tax policies have not. The only difference between now and then is that property ownership has lost its connection with the means to pay. The average Vancouver property owner paid $2,210 in municipal taxes last year, up 6.4 per cent from 2005. Inflation was running well below two per cent.

Why did the taxpayer get hit for so much more? For new and enhanced public services? Nope. For a major citywide beautification initiative. Nope. Aggressive road repair? Again, no. It was mainly to pay municipal workers more money for doing the work they were already doing.

There may be some who cheer “make the rich pay” when property taxes soar, but property owners aren’t necessarily rich. They may very well be poor. Vancouver is Canada’s least affordable city, according to the RBC housing affordability index. The costs of home ownership consume 68 per cent of the average income. An elderly couple living in Kerrisdale may have a valuable home, but little income. To impose taxes based on its estimated value is unfair and punitive.

Besides, market values fluctuate. Can anyone remember the last time assessments were lowered and municipal taxes went down?

What’s more, the assessments are not conducted by a professional real estate appraiser who visits each property to determine its proper value. Rather, they are fictions developed by bureaucrats toying with statistical models, forecasts and historical data. They haven’t the slightest idea what your house is really worth.

The property tax is essentially a tax on capital, the most regressive, destructive tax there is. It takes from rich and poor alike, irrespective of age, family status, health or income.

The system is so unfair and arbitrary that support programs have had to be introduced by other levels of government for the poorest of the poor to mitigate the deleterious impact of the property tax.

The current situation is not only unfair, but it turns the budgeting process upside down.

After seeing the assessments, politicians make a wish list and determine a mill rate that will raise the revenue needed to make their dreams come true. Budgeting should be about frugally allocating resources, not spending increasing amounts of taxpayers’ money every year.

Municipal councillors should be focused on fiscal restraint and accountability. Instead, they are driven by polls they commission that ask loaded questions like this one from 2004: “What would you prefer, an increase in taxes or a cut in municipal services?”

How about neither? Why not just deliver municipal services more cost-effectively? Both federal and provincial governments are subject to the scrutiny of an auditor-general. Municipal governments should face the same kind of review to encourage fiscal discipline.

It may be unrealistic to suggest this archaic tax be eliminated, but it should be amended to contain its damage. It’s not often the New Democratic Party has sensible ideas, but a party committee in Ontario has come up with something called the “freeze-til-sale” model, under which the assessed value would remain unchanged from the date of purchase until a property is sold. Municipalities would still determine tax rates on the total value of property in the community, but the process would become more predictable and our elderly couple wouldn’t have to fear losing their home to the tax collector.

An even better suggestion is to limit the increase in taxes to the rate of the consumer price index, a proposal championed by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. It argues that not only would homeowners benefit by knowing with some certainty what their tax bill will be, but that municipalities would also gain from a stable revenue stream.

Reform of the property tax system is 700 years overdue. Let’s fix it — now.

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

 

Study: Housing prices are driving many buyers out of the market

Paul Luke
Province

Rising prices for condos across the Lower Mainland have triggered a jump in the number of unsold units in new developments, PricewaterhouseCoopers says.

Average price hikes of as much as 29 per cent in the last six months have sparked an affordability crunch for low-to-medium-income earners, the company said yesterday in a review of the region’s condo market.

“People who are buying condos for the most part tend to be individuals who are in an early buying stage, or young couples,” said review author Craig Hennigar.

“Consumers have to have a higher income to be able to afford the average product and we very quickly have a diminishing pool of potential buyers.”

The supply of pre-sale condo units in new developments jumped by more than 55 per cent from 2,780 units in January, 2006 to 4,350 units at the end of December 2006, Hennigar said. In the high-rise category alone, unsold units in pre-sale inventory jumped almost 75 per cent between December 2005 and December 2006.

The region’s highrise condo sector remains a seller’s market, but the pace of sales is slowing, thanks to escalating prices, Hennigar said.

“If we keep putting more and more product on the market we could be running into a bit of a glut of pre-sale,” he said.

Such an over-supply could spark price weakness or prompt firms to delay developing their properties, Hennigar said.

The median asking price for a new highrise condo in the region in the second half of last year was $500 a square foot. For a lowrise condo it was $325, and for a townhouse condo it was $240 a square foot.

Vancouver realtor Marty Pospischil of Dexter Associates Realty said strata condos priced at $600,000 to $800,000 in Vancouver’s downtown and west side are taking longer to sell.

“There is just not a lot of people with the equity or cash available to buy in that category,” Pospischil said.

“However, at the same time, condominium product under $500,000 is more active than it has ever been.”

© The Vancouver Province 2007

 

USA Today

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sales of existing homes fell in December, closing out a year in which demand for homes slumped by the largest amount in 24 years.

The National Association of Realtors says sales of existing homes fell 0.8% last month to a 6.22 million annual rate, a bigger decline than had been expected.

For the year, sales dropped 8.4% to 6,480,000 homes, biggest annual decline since 1982, when existing home sales fell 17.7% in the midst of a severe recession. In 2005, 7,075,000 existing homes were sold.

The sales figure underscored the sharp contraction in the once high-flying housing market, which before last year had set sales records for five straight years.

Even with the sharp drop in sales last year, the median price of an existing home sold in 2006 managed to rise a slight 1.1% to $222,000. But that was far below the double-digit gains during the boom years. The median home price had risen 12.4% in 2005.

And the inventory of homes for sale was down 7.9% to 3.508 million units at the end of December.

Analysts had expected home resales to fall to a 6.25 million-unit pace from the 6.28 million-unit rate initially reported for November. November’s sales rate was revised down Thursday to 6.27 million.

After a five-year boom, housing slowed significantly last year, which has caused ripple effects throughout the economy with rising job layoffs in construction and other housing-related industries.

But some economists believe the low point for housing has been reached and they are forecasting a slow rebound in 2007. Because of that optimism, analysts don’t believe the slump in housing will drag the overall economy into a recession.

The 0.8% drop in sales in December came after two straight months of improving sales, first back-to-back sales gains since spring 2005.

David Lereah, chief economist for the Realtors, said even with the December setback, he believes sales of existing homes have hit bottom and will start to gradually improve.

He said that in 2005, 40% of the market represented purchases of second homes and investors buying homes looking to resell them for quick profits.

He said speculators have now left the market and that should leave sales at a more sustainable level.

“With fingers and toes crossed, it appears that we have hit bottom in the existing home market,” he said.