 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
Canada's housing market both vigorous and stable 7 I& N6 i& |8 r! ?1 L
# p2 `& k' P( B Q% U6 _- Country's market poised to show growth throughout 2006 -
/ `1 N( i' W3 n
" w; N$ ~& l+ f7 j. r' T1 C; Q. i TORONTO, Sept. 28 /CNW/ - For most of Canada, the housing market
Y4 E( Y8 x( X. H7 ~6 kexhibited moderate price increases and stable unit sales during the third, D: W: {, v; e: @+ `! ^
quarter. Wide regional variances continued to be the dominant characteristic) F/ n$ v! [* R/ ~ k0 z$ x) [: r
in the market, exemplified by frenzied levels of activity and double digit
, {- N! n; I. E- {5 _3 Oprice gains observed in the energy and commodity rich Western provinces, and8 f. R6 ]6 x, O, p
more reasonable sales volumes and moderate price appreciation in Ontario,
: M/ Q0 e& X. _4 ?+ m2 u) uQuebec and Atlantic Canada, according to a report released today by Royal3 v1 D6 d& Y+ ] l/ @( `7 t
LePage Real Estate Services.
3 X, ~& r, d- x% E; @& l( b
; F" D/ q$ ?8 F; ?4 B' q) F Nationally, market trends established through the first three quarters
) u! @7 D2 Z y6 Tare forecast to continue for the remainder of the year. Robust economic; z3 T3 {$ b! @: C
conditions, low unemployment rates, modestly growing salaries and wages, and& m: K7 H+ T/ w. k
sound consumer confidence contributed to the overall strength of the
b% y4 d' Y( _/ F7 e, Gresidential real estate sector.
- \% @2 E8 n* l7 {$ P# h' m' M( K& K# p: p0 W" e7 P
Of the housing types surveyed, the highest average price appreciation
# l# d7 d+ g8 p9 Aoccurred in detached bungalows, which rose to $300,365 (+16.3%)
9 R! w7 J/ s( hyear-over-year, followed by standard condominiums, which rose to $211,562
+ a4 f5 d2 p2 n3 P- e(+14.2%), and standard two-storey properties, which increased to $365,380
) q: O" u/ G9 ](+13.2%).8 c0 {' W$ p' d( z8 s5 `; `( @
S; o( ^3 i# b
"Canada's sturdy housing market continued to demonstrate steady growth* f* H6 f0 B8 Y' x( Y
during the third quarter. For all but the west, we have moved on from the
+ s" J9 y8 o1 N, Vfrenzied expansion that characterized the first half of this decade, and are
5 ^- H! c# w6 C1 v/ rpoised to show continued growth at a more moderate pace," said Phil Soper,
4 Y- K! V& I( s5 c8 |& K2 Y7 tpresident and chief executive officer, Royal LePage Real Estate Services.
' }( A/ _. T4 P% x"Gone is the sellers' market that we have lived with for some years. We
/ U, M4 L# ^! T9 U& ]welcome the more reliable conditions that are characteristic of a healthy
3 h R, M8 t3 V9 W+ T0 W" Kbalanced market."
( |+ ~: ?' g) }% c8 F/ y$ s6 I7 A3 v
Despite the double-digit rise in average national house prices,
8 C/ H( x7 ^) z7 N" U0 Z4 Q3 l4 {considerable regional variances were exhibited again this quarter. The shift4 h0 j+ E/ ^$ u& _ k
to balanced market conditions, which began in late 2005, has continued
9 v5 h# A/ h7 A; `/ jthroughout most of the Central and Eastern regions of the country. In the core
+ g) {/ g! M$ W& c0 o W w2 ?/ wenergy producing western provinces, the combination of very high in-migration,
/ ?7 L6 p+ x) I* V6 S: E. D4 ^, {manageable affordability, and a shortage of inventory has driven record% z$ c! W' N- ^0 i7 w- V1 |' K) K
breaking price appreciations.
. N- G I4 I% x( k
" D4 X5 z% r) P; N Echoing the second quarter and supported by Alberta's rapidly expanding3 A$ X" s i& Q0 {% N2 y; Z" v
economy, Calgary and Edmonton led the charge of Canadian cities with the
: n& a- a7 Y9 x6 v1 O- [largest house price appreciation in all housing types surveyed.
7 \' D J1 M/ |" W# e9 v* Z/ I' o% l- Q: X5 c
In Ottawa and Toronto, growth remained steady, supported by solid# |6 [- p: z& N' ?$ F, h
economic fundamentals, an increase in available inventory and strong consumer& R- [9 A# w0 f: y
confidence. While the pace of price appreciation in Ontario leveled off" o: q9 ?3 s; B3 Y+ x, B& ?
slightly, the province's real estate market remains poised for modest growth.
9 m2 X1 ]. C% r1 ]1 |; @In Atlantic Canada, new housing and condominium construction offered buyers
+ L. p# D( d5 M0 `, D0 M% ?# Tgreater selection at more competitive prices, resulting in a slower rate of5 r l: D4 \2 R; }; M# ?6 {
price appreciation when compared with 2005., F2 L. N. i& o& Z- `4 n* Q
+ t5 g" R+ H6 b
While the pace of growth in Canada has slowed, the domestic housing
' w. s: {$ T2 E4 i6 e6 _2 c. r1 I# |; Lmarket is expected to outperform the American market. The economic and
* u6 ]& j; b# `& X. f7 efinancial fundamentals driving the residential real estate sector in Canada) t% [7 P- l" G7 ~6 \
are markedly different than those found in the United States.! z0 h2 l1 I0 Y& g( P
* P7 M' Q7 b2 M+ @2 y Added Soper: "Canada's housing market is likely to outperform the
5 }5 E6 t5 f6 Y) }0 N" F, k bAmerican market through 2007. A number of factors are working in Canada's5 I/ v3 [8 l3 {$ }
favour, including healthy personal and governmental debt levels, the
8 ]/ O2 O/ P: J+ ]6 ]relatively modest rise in interest rates in our country, and general% d8 V, W: G g! s
affordability in our major cities. In addition, Americans are now seeing the( H5 Y0 X3 Y% B" S2 g
downside of a tax system that encourages maximum homeowner leverage, and
: ]( q* W4 j, G# _aggressive financial products such as zero- and negative-amortization
4 F3 x6 T. l% F5 r5 }2 Mmortgages that work only in a high price growth environment."7 E( c7 o$ O0 s9 z$ g. b8 d
+ A! I- @, B/ z4 r) R! _ <<
7 w* k6 A+ i' R: ]8 f: I5 Z7 T; R REGIONAL SUMMARIES
) f h2 G* t# Z$ z5 A+ E) j >>
' n* ~0 |9 ^7 O! ^+ A+ |" d8 M r, t8 b6 ]
Balanced conditions continued to characterize the housing market in5 |4 H& A& Z: p) M0 p0 T3 t
Halifax, as significantly higher inventory levels helped to moderate the rate& |+ E! X5 ?7 G* c
of price appreciation. Buyers were increasingly choosy, taking more time( [3 X: E9 S6 z
looking for newer, low-maintenance properties that were not in need of
5 B5 Z5 c: @' d m# Srenovations.
& Y6 K3 h; d- S# d& B/ X' W) Z& ]& V( f1 t/ v
The housing market in Moncton remained healthy and strong as a slight
7 L/ r8 V; U/ ?6 ?6 W* `* @5 x. gincrease in inventory helped to moderate the rate of price appreciation# R4 I L! e% A: g
compared to the same period in 2005. Activity was brisk throughout August and$ T! y! I) n" f- _* L& \
September and is expected to remain this way through the fourth quarter., @) L. F" \, ?. Z! W+ F3 ^
, O. r2 B1 x$ s# _$ Q8 Y3 I: _ The housing market in Saint John underwent its traditional summer
* L* m8 x! N) D& _* Vslowdown in the third quarter, with activity picking up towards the end of the3 Q+ k" } i' y3 h/ @9 w
quarter. The local economy continued to thrive, as construction on a new
, h( V7 C# z0 W) ] |% G) V' x600,000 square-foot shopping area has begun, bringing several new box stores- j2 Z+ D* B! g0 \: }4 l" {
to the area. Buyers have begun seeking less expensive fixtures for their homes
, J! {5 P$ C3 |+ f( s kand are instead opting for more affordable housing options.
" m6 h" i8 l" H7 Z4 \7 ^6 \; p' i! }
In Charlottetown, the housing market started to move towards balanced* q' R' V* Z! T G, J9 ?8 a! k
conditions, as some sellers had to begin to lower the asking prices on their9 p. q5 w( Y. E3 o5 j
homes to make them more competitive. Activity from out-of-town and US buyers$ L, l5 x8 X% F7 _9 v
was down slightly compared to 2005, likely attributable to the strong Canadian6 {4 d/ ]3 o0 p e5 G
dollar. Inventory levels began to creep up in the third quarter, providing
8 A0 [6 J0 F! @buyers with more options when looking for a home.( t& o9 x5 e5 u* i" ^; u
- P. f; ~& f, |. x$ n. n
Activity in St. John's slowed slightly in the third quarter, particularly
: J7 M& |3 _* E9 z6 n, ?# h' `among higher-priced properties, where there was a slight over-supply of homes
) X+ }5 M# `1 r" j; n7 tpriced over $200,000. Listing periods have increased when compared with 2005,0 [ r3 i2 z; A3 c4 T" V7 ~
as some of the pent-up demand that had characterized the market over the last& ~ E2 n; d, z7 |; J+ W
few years has been satisfied, resulting in more normal, balanced conditions.
y+ e5 e3 F. G: A6 H/ x( f) Q2 w5 z8 i1 S+ {% l
Montreal's housing market recorded modest increases in average house
+ b! l. {* z2 R* Nprices, due to a slight seasonal slowdown in the third quarter as inventory
9 l" i# P, O1 W& \1 {4 I6 klevels rose. Part of this can be attributed to the fact that many renting. c8 d' Y" [! w4 R0 L
first-time buyers were motivated to close on the purchase of a home by July 1,
+ m( E# r' E7 R4 Lwhen rental leases expire in Quebec. Once this date has passed some of the
& k- ]- e8 f6 W) O* ?2 Y$ hpressure is taken off the market, allowing buyers to visit more homes before. W k- {; y7 v A7 [
making a purchase.
% F" p! G' I v; J" m ~9 y
, @; u3 P) f" b6 i k# [ Ottawa held its position as one of the country's most stable housing0 P& y8 V( T8 U4 @( M
markets in the third quarter, reinforced by a vibrant local economy and strong
0 w& M' I/ S% Fconfidence, resulting in modest increases in average house prices. The city
5 ^3 _1 C& H& O# F0 O3 Q/ Acentre remained a bright spot in Ottawa, with homes in this area attracting' P# r; Z$ E/ D" v
attention due to their convenient location and proximity to downtown
6 B( d( s- x* t( K9 H5 Tamenities.# d) F+ ], z7 k6 r O, y
# O- O7 c. k2 k# T- q" {. s; h+ S The housing market in Toronto sustained healthy activity levels
$ [5 a; l8 o5 b( vthroughout the third quarter, as a strong economy helped to maintain demand; J: [5 R; y! I. g" j9 U* B
across the city, causing average house prices to rise moderately. Toronto has
* }3 m0 i& }9 \# q4 e/ M mcontinued to experience modest growth in average house prices, and has been1 P. Q [; ] Z$ q
driven primarily by purchasers who are buying homes as their principle
n; M6 d; [/ h! xresidence, rather than for investment.
$ O8 i$ |8 ?' ?6 S0 B4 U/ C2 t$ x- p) v5 }6 e
The vibrant Winnipeg housing market continued to show its strength as8 r) z2 }$ ^4 G5 N
house prices rose during the third quarter. The booming local economy resulted
& `9 |- H6 [. z( w* Q6 ^6 h {in a historically low unemployment rate, helping to bolster consumer
- ~) x/ J: | ^4 w4 Qconfidence and Winnipeg's ranking as the city with the lowest capitalization6 n2 C* Q( z7 N6 M" T+ `
rate among the country's larger cities - helped to encourage buyers to enter( g+ Z V% ] d7 M
the market.
* x: n" W7 z% m% o, z) I
& l, Z' s, V+ ]- r+ x4 ~% f* n9 j In Regina, the market experienced a slight seasonal slowdown through: @4 z+ Q& w4 l6 r& q3 \
July, as there were fewer purchasers in the market due to summer vacations. In! o8 f& u0 _3 D
August, activity resumed to the busy pace previously seen in the spring
9 Q1 G0 T2 L. c X* t- ymonths, as the influx of purchasers made it more difficult to find a home due
6 }/ F i O7 pto the shortage of available inventory.0 B1 R% Y: L5 | l/ m( E# L) F
& b/ e& I0 e7 t: z Activity in Saskatoon remained brisk as the market maintained its
+ ^6 p8 T& d6 |" C, omomentum from the busy spring sales period. The economy in Saskatoon remains
7 f7 I- o6 k, p |% ]4 B$ Lvibrant, as employment opportunities are abundant with many businesses8 G; p: J/ g- u a
struggling to make hires and having to recruit outside the province.+ ~2 T4 t S3 K A3 u
" c4 }* Q+ { M, ~7 j% C3 _
Calgary's housing market recorded blazing average house price increases
- Y C: }- k& `/ k9 Cin the third quarter, in all surveyed categories. The burgeoning economy, low( W* R8 B* I7 ]7 q8 i
unemployment rates and low inventory levels remained the leading factors that6 {: F: E) U4 ~# U; I2 G/ ^3 @, s4 `
pressured Calgary's house prices upwards. However, regardless of the soaring. U! F7 `) S: _, D$ j; D# }( L
prices that characterized the market - even during the typically slower summer
$ T& \/ g2 I' V& n2 Dseason - it is expected that activity will become slightly more balanced, as
) `+ H0 Y5 V& v8 Z) Zbuyers are becoming more reluctant to participate in the frenetic activity.' E4 S. p4 O4 y3 L
/ u* @5 t# Y3 s9 K3 f. ?, ~& V7 D. H
Edmonton's booming local economy continued to thrive in the third quarter
; @+ Z# A# P1 K+ I3 J4 Aas activity in the oil sands north of the city continued to flourish. Edmonton2 k) d3 j5 ~0 J7 W7 R$ F" ]
remained the hub of activity for those coming to work in the oil industry,
. _2 N$ |* o9 S: \maintaining tight inventory levels across the city, resulting in prices
/ y+ u5 G) }( j U6 d6 p6 T4 yincreasing at record levels. However, as inventory levels continued to improve7 U2 I7 U% F' y' [4 z4 m, Y8 @
in the third quarter the rate of price appreciation should moderate slightly# K6 y- {; @/ s, \! d, p
towards the end of 2006. ) {- `8 m( t- Y5 ]
& z# I% u' E8 i: G- K3 a, j% m
While Vancouver has seen a slight reprieve from the severe shortage of9 { n; \/ H) Z3 d! w4 \1 P, w& h
inventory that had previously characterized the market, supply is still unable
/ I, U2 T: e$ c# R7 d" @( ?to meet demand, driving house prices upwards. Vancouver has a very diverse
! I0 t4 l& X" M6 D7 K5 fgroup of active buyers - from first-time home buyers to baby-boomers to1 O: g5 x! m" v7 ^6 R6 H
foreign investors - all of whom fuel the demand for houses, placing added: ?4 T: }( B+ G/ U
pressure on tight inventory levels.
( M$ D9 E- P) P4 E3 c2 x% Y/ U) s
Victoria's market is vibrant and supported by strong economic; \: o; w2 n3 r: ~8 r! H7 n# q
fundamentals, fuelled by a booming tech sector and a migration of young people; J/ ^1 K( a% |! g
into the city that has continued to support the area's house price increases;7 L |! B/ D9 a3 c1 R
while increased inventory levels have afforded buyers more time when searching7 ? F5 p# _, S: n6 ]3 f& \
for a home, helping to normalize the market's pace.0 d7 u5 t. p' r
7 g) F( `3 X* p% H: q4 N. [9 P <<# H; u$ y+ v' Y/ Q7 ^$ \- |
Survey of Canadian Average House Prices in the Third Quarter 2006& M+ j9 ^$ N( }. s# t6 I
9 o# N; c9 u1 F1 }& R5 I$ \ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
. [$ V8 w6 ] e2 b6 U" A7 P Detached Bungalows Standard Two Storey
( Y# X: i: q: V# E1 l9 t8 N3 G -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% R/ w7 h2 p. Q' F& D! B( \) { 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Bungalow 2006 Q3 2005 Q3; i; c n8 [' ~5 C h
Market Average Average % Change Average Average
( ~( t5 \3 B! U# p' l# ?4 {' l3 r -------------------------------------------------------------------------
$ Z1 a0 a6 g7 B8 p0 X2 Y Halifax 186,333 173,333 7.5% 198,667 199,000" j! p- X" P2 G7 F0 h& q* \0 s+ N
-------------------------------------------------------------------------8 T$ t4 {* ]" H
Charlottetown 145,000 141,000 2.8% 175,000 170,000 @( y( X' e0 V. S, F
-------------------------------------------------------------------------6 Q6 _. V+ z: o3 i0 v( G
Moncton 135,000 127,000 6.3% 129,000 123,000; e/ X1 t3 U' b
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 m* ]2 |) j+ t9 z Saint John 141,200 142,900 -1.2% - -
* W+ d0 B9 c# S/ z+ m% s -------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 ?0 h0 _- A0 l( k) _ St. John's 143,667 142,667 0.7% 200,667 202,333
) _/ ^4 m2 q/ l8 q -------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ]6 Y! ?7 ]+ a$ U9 n) k
Atlantic 150,240 145,380 3.3% 175,833 173,583
! h! h( e S& p -------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 v) [+ h; [' C- s9 ?% U# k& \ Montreal 213,691 203,500 5.0% 321,141 316,185
9 y: f. u( ?; v9 S) m -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% J6 v0 d( Y# I2 n, J$ t7 O: a Ottawa 290,083 278,417 4.2% 285,667 273,250
- t4 o3 n. i; H) y -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% G/ {# K2 s/ Q: w- D Toronto 373,368 355,882 4.9% 481,523 474,766
4 w" t3 A) \: m- h2 `, e1 y -------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ @! R& A1 I: \/ r/ i. {8 b* n% T Winnipeg 181,579 159,860 13.6% 202,337 180,7077 d+ Q% m4 t' k+ W; H/ i5 i$ |. G
-------------------------------------------------------------------------! I5 _5 f0 H& G$ [" k5 v, j
Saskatchewan 170,667 156,083 9.3% 182,600 166,5001 F! [( z4 f' C. J$ ~* p8 m
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
( r5 W6 Q2 v% i3 h! b7 c Calgary 395,067 252,411 56.5% 405,778 264,389) H) a. K8 F- L2 ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------: o6 C/ R( y$ _4 d: D
Edmonton 286,857 194,857 47.2% 316,429 206,714& h8 D7 D" s6 E# p& t
-------------------------------------------------------------------------9 I! |, ~$ {; t/ A
Vancouver 704,250 601,000 17.2% 794,000 697,500- e' D) V5 K% W
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
s. I2 W1 r) o; L+ R Victoria 375,000 348,000 7.8% 403,000 391,000
4 |- i. H$ q( ~6 Y2 M -------------------------------------------------------------------------
: T1 \) F, Z( k: `) ^! U National 300,365 258,202 16.3% 365,380 322,860
, Y2 x9 e/ s/ [7 X) Z0 S8 Q5 o -------------------------------------------------------------------------
" a( q; \% {9 t5 ]3 ~: z3 p6 @9 L, i) k; t
-------------------------------------------------------------
: T5 R/ z0 j3 P1 N( k4 e. r Standard Condominium
8 g5 Q) c9 c0 P1 [% { Y( V4 ~ -------------------------------------------------------------
2 [1 e. Q% j1 g! n3 j6 o 2-Storey 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Condo
9 C3 y/ R+ z: W: q Market % Change Average Average % Change! R7 m' O- r4 g: }
------------------------------------------------------------- s: @ J p5 C0 A
Halifax -0.2% 142,000 103,000 37.9%
8 T5 l* B2 y5 N, O* K& x -------------------------------------------------------------
; V& }( T* _ E. v" K Charlottetown 2.9% 98,000 98,000 0.0%
' |' w6 B D7 ~$ K6 p# Q* K+ Z, L( T7 \ -------------------------------------------------------------8 w( X1 s7 m0 @4 W3 ^0 H
Moncton 4.9% - - N/A
' @( t& M& z( g: s9 i) n -------------------------------------------------------------
% ~9 |/ C/ j1 _# D6 |/ V: @ Saint John N/A - - N/A/ v# I) L* M. U7 P9 L
-------------------------------------------------------------
( o3 z5 c* U/ ~3 H( m St. John's -0.8% 146,333 145,667 0.5%
: B% V, U& Q5 X$ t3 E/ `) z -------------------------------------------------------------
* N$ v* [" O9 W4 O6 a- t Atlantic 1.3% 128,778 115,556 11.4%" Z* N6 j" b* @: r" V8 P
-------------------------------------------------------------
% w+ v, }; E2 F- z7 F3 i* C) `4 @2 \ Montreal 1.6% 193,190 188,016 2.8%
5 P0 _, N" {& q/ u( q7 c -------------------------------------------------------------* I9 P/ o( q% A
Ottawa 4.5% 181,083 172,250 5.1%
3 {! ]5 o! L# B% s8 C, H* { -------------------------------------------------------------4 K0 f& g5 C( r: ]( C
Toronto 1.4% 252,088 242,918 3.8% E0 s% k, i5 C/ R0 @
-------------------------------------------------------------! }+ Z$ t# @% z4 b$ X
Winnipeg 12.0% 105,648 96,008 10.0%& \7 @ l( f/ G! c8 x& e
------------------------------------------------------------- d+ ] H7 n' [" }2 q
Saskatchewan 9.7% 106,250 101,000 5.2%* L/ `0 s( U+ x" A
-------------------------------------------------------------& x S" b. X! C7 ~4 a% {3 q- P7 K
Calgary 53.5% 245,844 153,867 59.8%. g( v0 E2 c- ]0 U. Z- g
-------------------------------------------------------------
5 a V6 l" ~, l9 s# m1 _ N Edmonton 53.1% 200,433 131,500 52.4%/ V# V% Q( u* }1 h7 N4 L1 V/ n
-------------------------------------------------------------
; u, k$ t' S; }+ w$ \2 ?' n Vancouver 13.8% 366,250 323,250 13.3%+ l! Y* @# I4 v: z( N9 O! Q8 C
-------------------------------------------------------------1 g3 r& u' V: `8 ?8 D- D# Z, O- p! [
Victoria 3.1% 229,000 220,000 4.1%
: b) |, j) @+ o% ^: D: e9 c -------------------------------------------------------------
7 n6 L3 c' k* W6 P4 j1 e National 13.2% 211,562 185,296 14.2%* W0 A3 R, b0 X2 ?
-------------------------------------------------------------6 |; D0 d7 W( j {2 [1 M
>>8 w/ y2 H% {; B% b; o& i
9 A2 V8 k* r0 Y7 j, }
Average house prices are based on an average of all sub-markets examined% h% T: d4 \) j+ p- R
in the area, except for the smaller markets of Charlottetown, Moncton, Saint' s$ {( l. q. Z
John and Victoria.- ]- m2 Z: M3 m8 H! @: d( J$ U
( G. @% H: p5 F; G4 x [
The Royal LePage Survey of Canadian House Prices is the largest, most
! b% [2 F5 c6 k" lcomprehensive study of its kind in Canada, with information on seven types of; _ n! |1 g: a& w: N
housing in over 250 neighbourhoods from coast to coast. This release
4 C# P' _- w5 `$ m' i2 @/ areferences an abbreviated version of the survey, which highlights house price
! }- {* m- i* `) _# Otrends for the three most common types of housing in Canada in 80 communities* t" y% q) N2 W/ G: c6 _% x
across the country. A complete database of past and present surveys is
/ s5 ^2 F q3 x& ]0 @available on the Royal LePage Web site at www.royallepage.ca, and current
0 T! `( W( w/ e" ^figures will be updated following the end of the third quarter. A printable
9 w! m2 v; L% ?6 n8 nversion of the third quarter 2006 survey will be available online on
) G6 D0 g5 y; J& C e3 DNovember 15, 2006., g3 e8 s8 m( t+ D, W& n" U
Housing values in the Royal LePage Survey are Royal LePage opinions of' v# Y2 @! u7 O+ S- \. ?6 W+ P4 J
fair market value in each location, based on local data and market knowledge
2 ^; z2 h$ y7 l7 m i+ gprovided by Royal LePage residential real estate experts. Historical data is' r4 g7 x) d z7 V/ s8 Z# g3 v
available for some areas back to the early 1970s. |
|