 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
Canada's housing market both vigorous and stable # A3 q" V$ W) W
) `3 T: |: m, s5 U+ X- Country's market poised to show growth throughout 2006 -
; o1 o; @+ ^% \% V- s6 C% j- d2 M' D& d# ~7 A) a
TORONTO, Sept. 28 /CNW/ - For most of Canada, the housing market
9 a+ K3 Y/ n2 p5 d! Jexhibited moderate price increases and stable unit sales during the third
3 m* r- d) y. ]; {/ U7 G; _quarter. Wide regional variances continued to be the dominant characteristic, z1 @. p* h. T' k- h
in the market, exemplified by frenzied levels of activity and double digit/ d) t2 M6 ]# t, k+ o
price gains observed in the energy and commodity rich Western provinces, and
$ h+ s/ |- s! dmore reasonable sales volumes and moderate price appreciation in Ontario,
$ L J$ h4 L0 EQuebec and Atlantic Canada, according to a report released today by Royal% J8 C+ ?6 V3 T" a; ?
LePage Real Estate Services.0 F/ d2 C) s& @0 Q9 R1 D
$ r& E) `# M( p0 | Nationally, market trends established through the first three quarters
4 B9 P* J5 c6 p4 |. Sare forecast to continue for the remainder of the year. Robust economic
; {0 Y* O7 X) ?& a8 J0 ~8 Yconditions, low unemployment rates, modestly growing salaries and wages, and
4 c9 `6 D$ `) h6 m. a: ]sound consumer confidence contributed to the overall strength of the! P* n4 F8 b. f! p: s+ S2 U5 n
residential real estate sector. D b/ z: D! w! C- e
; I+ i: Y+ H: j# ~. K
Of the housing types surveyed, the highest average price appreciation5 i! S! V1 v1 B [" |2 E- Y9 F4 r
occurred in detached bungalows, which rose to $300,365 (+16.3%)+ T2 D& q" Z9 M6 g7 `+ l9 m
year-over-year, followed by standard condominiums, which rose to $211,562+ [3 f: r; L8 [& l+ P2 p3 a6 I
(+14.2%), and standard two-storey properties, which increased to $365,380! |; b Z- b. S! G( r
(+13.2%).
/ H' d4 [6 r0 ^4 b5 k, x0 W8 u/ q: u% R% ~6 w7 ~
"Canada's sturdy housing market continued to demonstrate steady growth# l4 h. R: B- O; f& h) y
during the third quarter. For all but the west, we have moved on from the4 n# ? t, B! `& ^3 a
frenzied expansion that characterized the first half of this decade, and are
/ U5 u& i: `( o8 m* ~! zpoised to show continued growth at a more moderate pace," said Phil Soper,
- j/ t. C' E8 A0 @president and chief executive officer, Royal LePage Real Estate Services.( Y1 i1 l7 H. R j$ r
"Gone is the sellers' market that we have lived with for some years. We$ v& Z, ~ u+ o" y+ D" l
welcome the more reliable conditions that are characteristic of a healthy5 T1 t" k9 L* ?: ?! o2 R" F
balanced market."+ e# K. H/ b0 Y! \: p1 y+ O
. ?9 j* ?* S+ Y
Despite the double-digit rise in average national house prices," x& d3 U# r4 t9 q; x
considerable regional variances were exhibited again this quarter. The shift$ K: D4 N, Q- o; S% d. G* }
to balanced market conditions, which began in late 2005, has continued
& I7 L, Q- W, _% D2 tthroughout most of the Central and Eastern regions of the country. In the core; M6 i3 s( }: A8 x1 o( J- o
energy producing western provinces, the combination of very high in-migration,, ?/ A# R# n4 Q: h1 X+ T
manageable affordability, and a shortage of inventory has driven record
6 v1 T9 n0 I, k" abreaking price appreciations.
$ Z( z. U0 n, T
7 u- C) R; L. _1 e+ J: A1 b Echoing the second quarter and supported by Alberta's rapidly expanding' O5 _: `0 r( M8 X1 f* F
economy, Calgary and Edmonton led the charge of Canadian cities with the
0 F2 Y; Y$ |/ s2 |$ f" j9 U( vlargest house price appreciation in all housing types surveyed.5 N. ?9 t2 ?9 w, `" [
5 Y# I4 g) g: d, e$ K2 @ In Ottawa and Toronto, growth remained steady, supported by solid2 Y# A6 c/ v2 f# i( S
economic fundamentals, an increase in available inventory and strong consumer
$ R% ?4 o. u! ~; L& v5 J- N8 q ?confidence. While the pace of price appreciation in Ontario leveled off" h6 x' `" B& |- S
slightly, the province's real estate market remains poised for modest growth.
3 S2 \% w: I) u$ nIn Atlantic Canada, new housing and condominium construction offered buyers
o. }+ T# x; U+ O. @greater selection at more competitive prices, resulting in a slower rate of5 z9 z. {7 D2 B
price appreciation when compared with 2005.
( b+ M3 n2 k* G- B& s, ^% r3 w/ Y# U8 d- j0 j# R
While the pace of growth in Canada has slowed, the domestic housing
! T+ l+ l0 ~ w9 i% {1 Kmarket is expected to outperform the American market. The economic and& Q2 r( k* g6 i/ w. t, D3 r% T
financial fundamentals driving the residential real estate sector in Canada
2 G6 m/ u) K2 ~% L3 \5 u3 Uare markedly different than those found in the United States.
( c- r: W3 c# K$ U9 ]" [# d* {6 i7 D6 {+ j' F! b0 n
Added Soper: "Canada's housing market is likely to outperform the4 S( d' a4 f6 E$ T2 T
American market through 2007. A number of factors are working in Canada's
7 b" }" U: ]: Y1 g8 m2 ifavour, including healthy personal and governmental debt levels, the( @" j. _! B2 o+ B& v9 X5 O
relatively modest rise in interest rates in our country, and general
( a5 E6 c9 t/ Q: K3 ^2 Haffordability in our major cities. In addition, Americans are now seeing the% O/ y1 N- d& c) C9 q
downside of a tax system that encourages maximum homeowner leverage, and$ N: S& ?( T! }2 e* i* P
aggressive financial products such as zero- and negative-amortization
A8 u5 d( |8 {' K( Ymortgages that work only in a high price growth environment."5 G6 B) M$ d3 m: I/ O
. `" E% p% x4 B3 G( r3 d
<<! O& |1 b2 J* ]+ c0 A; @
REGIONAL SUMMARIES7 x8 A% c& Y8 K4 `- |
>>
* w' u; n9 J. p- M5 O3 W+ R
. u$ X$ X0 h) j. G" B0 q% [ Balanced conditions continued to characterize the housing market in; k& d' ^5 ]& v' P: F3 C! e; h4 g
Halifax, as significantly higher inventory levels helped to moderate the rate
* w+ I2 H; d% o. f8 W1 s+ p7 qof price appreciation. Buyers were increasingly choosy, taking more time
$ I! `# k6 `+ t+ nlooking for newer, low-maintenance properties that were not in need of
1 t0 K1 b4 H- X: @: Grenovations.
* t2 b4 v- p! M" A
/ U$ y$ r0 ` p# L; A0 j. o The housing market in Moncton remained healthy and strong as a slight6 P; Y" m8 S$ |$ `# q
increase in inventory helped to moderate the rate of price appreciation6 I1 Q V! d& ]4 t2 b. c2 j
compared to the same period in 2005. Activity was brisk throughout August and4 N% F1 `3 g) l) y7 p
September and is expected to remain this way through the fourth quarter.
; O& T1 {- W6 d4 s: T& c) O- g9 w/ y# F g/ t/ }2 J/ _
The housing market in Saint John underwent its traditional summer, z4 K, c6 p. @' j6 G, u
slowdown in the third quarter, with activity picking up towards the end of the
+ r: I. y1 ]" K' O" Pquarter. The local economy continued to thrive, as construction on a new
: T$ K$ I# S6 x) J4 \600,000 square-foot shopping area has begun, bringing several new box stores+ [2 Y+ z% U w4 ?( q! P6 r
to the area. Buyers have begun seeking less expensive fixtures for their homes
0 W& L( K' M8 J2 |# s& J, Land are instead opting for more affordable housing options.) F2 U# R. T/ d7 n: a* k* u
5 q2 C0 U& ?& T# f% S" j
In Charlottetown, the housing market started to move towards balanced6 O- d; i1 g7 ~: h$ `2 g
conditions, as some sellers had to begin to lower the asking prices on their! S* U/ F2 f& [) t8 o
homes to make them more competitive. Activity from out-of-town and US buyers
& L* a# b- E: Q( _was down slightly compared to 2005, likely attributable to the strong Canadian
( M9 \; C7 _4 k! | T9 jdollar. Inventory levels began to creep up in the third quarter, providing
+ E2 l7 P# B" o3 P, M+ u% L; cbuyers with more options when looking for a home.
E% m! N# A- x8 O9 ?! A
$ _3 q2 [* r6 s Activity in St. John's slowed slightly in the third quarter, particularly
: V R# `; D* @+ L3 Q# zamong higher-priced properties, where there was a slight over-supply of homes
2 E% E" N+ j8 Q% w) G% l1 _: Y5 [4 spriced over $200,000. Listing periods have increased when compared with 2005,9 X: ~. ]' Z# f9 d5 ~! W \1 Z/ x
as some of the pent-up demand that had characterized the market over the last
, x, ?/ m! e6 T, }0 Y0 Lfew years has been satisfied, resulting in more normal, balanced conditions.
2 w1 M+ @ A" }3 y- k7 H0 w4 h2 s ~. S+ ^& m& v' n
Montreal's housing market recorded modest increases in average house0 W1 X0 o. I2 ?5 m7 z: y* y4 d
prices, due to a slight seasonal slowdown in the third quarter as inventory
; Z; L) N/ c6 z- ?& Wlevels rose. Part of this can be attributed to the fact that many renting) i z: j K9 I& [ L7 a2 v
first-time buyers were motivated to close on the purchase of a home by July 1,
! [- i2 ~* x2 ewhen rental leases expire in Quebec. Once this date has passed some of the
' s) I* k8 x- ]* V+ @ fpressure is taken off the market, allowing buyers to visit more homes before
" ?! P) O9 j- G' |* I+ Dmaking a purchase.
* N3 x5 l. b) L$ I3 |# f! f0 D* H: U& C8 z" |4 ]2 `" C$ s% i
Ottawa held its position as one of the country's most stable housing
5 [4 _- z3 ]+ @* N( k% Cmarkets in the third quarter, reinforced by a vibrant local economy and strong4 Y" y$ r, ~7 g& m# d2 L
confidence, resulting in modest increases in average house prices. The city
" @, v7 T, D" {" W# kcentre remained a bright spot in Ottawa, with homes in this area attracting
( V8 Y9 o# H" B% X7 }attention due to their convenient location and proximity to downtown4 q' f9 _1 m7 y4 K \ x
amenities.
1 `- |! s3 e6 x% h! f9 g! V
4 ?5 N* B2 q, ] The housing market in Toronto sustained healthy activity levels
1 C, x/ N, Y x) o4 b' L+ V" Kthroughout the third quarter, as a strong economy helped to maintain demand
/ l5 ^' P [9 v/ ^2 K5 Sacross the city, causing average house prices to rise moderately. Toronto has
+ V8 |+ \- ~( acontinued to experience modest growth in average house prices, and has been
" \. S3 Z9 `- S& J1 s9 q; Y1 C7 ^driven primarily by purchasers who are buying homes as their principle& k; N& T$ w0 ~$ Z+ X( H
residence, rather than for investment.
& T0 S3 ]* U9 D. v# X. ?7 n3 b V! ~
The vibrant Winnipeg housing market continued to show its strength as
& c( A) W* r* I8 j. s% Ghouse prices rose during the third quarter. The booming local economy resulted
7 X1 j+ g1 W6 win a historically low unemployment rate, helping to bolster consumer
]' K$ a! B8 F( Lconfidence and Winnipeg's ranking as the city with the lowest capitalization
8 B2 ]. I$ m2 s3 A1 hrate among the country's larger cities - helped to encourage buyers to enter5 U8 y' |5 T( [1 K
the market.
: R. J! E( u3 g% _$ L1 m# Y. @' y. `: O& @( V. A& f4 J: I
In Regina, the market experienced a slight seasonal slowdown through
3 L0 u5 T# X7 t w) c2 I- JJuly, as there were fewer purchasers in the market due to summer vacations. In
( E- V" t: v5 X, }1 {August, activity resumed to the busy pace previously seen in the spring
! H$ m7 c0 [" Lmonths, as the influx of purchasers made it more difficult to find a home due X e6 I3 B4 C, L' s" \: F
to the shortage of available inventory.3 s5 V; @9 z9 r' z8 H5 v
8 R: k# u! Q, y0 a& |1 [ Activity in Saskatoon remained brisk as the market maintained its4 I0 a& y, s0 ^
momentum from the busy spring sales period. The economy in Saskatoon remains
5 [9 \3 {! B9 `1 gvibrant, as employment opportunities are abundant with many businesses
1 d! s, `6 G" }$ k; {4 z' }$ |3 jstruggling to make hires and having to recruit outside the province.8 l& k+ G, M$ R! `/ ^+ y
, p9 l' G5 M1 n3 z
Calgary's housing market recorded blazing average house price increases
& t) G/ O! A1 X1 d0 f6 Z. pin the third quarter, in all surveyed categories. The burgeoning economy, low/ U; P) L7 i; _4 ]+ D1 T
unemployment rates and low inventory levels remained the leading factors that
+ G; L3 d/ B2 |; Q0 Kpressured Calgary's house prices upwards. However, regardless of the soaring
- k$ s& h" Z1 z0 ?prices that characterized the market - even during the typically slower summer8 _* R! M" A' s7 o7 O
season - it is expected that activity will become slightly more balanced, as( }5 D3 K+ A* M+ T
buyers are becoming more reluctant to participate in the frenetic activity.( O1 k- O4 q5 E1 o1 N/ t
* ?# G; l1 t9 b Edmonton's booming local economy continued to thrive in the third quarter, n, E9 g1 B* G/ m
as activity in the oil sands north of the city continued to flourish. Edmonton: c# d9 p6 G3 L1 X5 v3 O+ U, d
remained the hub of activity for those coming to work in the oil industry,! Q/ S7 r: d3 D8 t
maintaining tight inventory levels across the city, resulting in prices
9 g& G# H9 h' ]increasing at record levels. However, as inventory levels continued to improve+ S: e9 U) a5 T% i
in the third quarter the rate of price appreciation should moderate slightly0 [& v% t4 u! P" B- t8 V8 D* a( \
towards the end of 2006. 1 \0 p/ L x4 N
% f F( f, W2 E0 [While Vancouver has seen a slight reprieve from the severe shortage of$ a9 }$ z9 O. H0 q6 v) N
inventory that had previously characterized the market, supply is still unable
2 F2 \! q' N% u) Qto meet demand, driving house prices upwards. Vancouver has a very diverse' R0 g. ^* J5 y9 Y6 l% C. T( ^
group of active buyers - from first-time home buyers to baby-boomers to
1 C6 Q. ]* Z% l- Dforeign investors - all of whom fuel the demand for houses, placing added
# x8 P( Z/ L0 i* W( ipressure on tight inventory levels.7 ^6 }1 N) |1 d5 Z. R/ c
8 l& h( Y+ N' z" i! o Victoria's market is vibrant and supported by strong economic
3 u2 q& \! f8 \6 S7 o1 s3 Ffundamentals, fuelled by a booming tech sector and a migration of young people% B2 ?. g; E2 k
into the city that has continued to support the area's house price increases;
$ a. a4 X5 H8 {, u; A: Vwhile increased inventory levels have afforded buyers more time when searching
4 j! e9 e2 t, q% \. O- X5 F; rfor a home, helping to normalize the market's pace.# U3 a& Z& Y4 s9 c
. C, u$ L4 R& y
<<
2 R5 n. ]6 `* ?: y; v0 ? Survey of Canadian Average House Prices in the Third Quarter 20061 h" b/ G7 D% ]& }0 L w- t
, p& s+ l: Q9 O3 m8 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
! x& r$ l# z g' ^ Detached Bungalows Standard Two Storey1 @/ C( {- u1 } L J; e( U
-------------------------------------------------------------------------6 J, h! ~4 n. `$ @4 D. {
2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Bungalow 2006 Q3 2005 Q32 i# `( V/ E- U+ @; ^% x0 _
Market Average Average % Change Average Average3 W2 ~( I* o; v! Y* p/ g
-------------------------------------------------------------------------! z8 }+ G( J, V& J: |
Halifax 186,333 173,333 7.5% 198,667 199,000$ H4 q( m( v; J X, u3 i/ ?* h
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
, `7 f1 U' G1 D- d' y3 I5 B Charlottetown 145,000 141,000 2.8% 175,000 170,000
: Q: ~. }- P/ S! m -------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ q: m- M) \6 s" A3 z Moncton 135,000 127,000 6.3% 129,000 123,000% F, |( _1 ~; Y7 W9 V/ ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------; L! x* P/ s( C+ M( `0 W
Saint John 141,200 142,900 -1.2% - -' \; v; f8 ^6 C2 G4 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- S1 p+ K7 k4 }: {! p% B St. John's 143,667 142,667 0.7% 200,667 202,333
$ O6 V! Y0 E: e' C -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% m2 p: L' Z, m q( |7 D2 ]- u8 b Atlantic 150,240 145,380 3.3% 175,833 173,5835 e+ z. U9 |! J" e0 K
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 }& u" X6 ?( Z& u6 w! W Montreal 213,691 203,500 5.0% 321,141 316,185
8 l( Q; S- t+ v5 q& c: y5 S! V, g -------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 f: P4 O/ w- G) e1 j' b7 d! m+ Q7 E) Y Ottawa 290,083 278,417 4.2% 285,667 273,250
% a6 b1 E/ O/ L* n' j: F -------------------------------------------------------------------------9 c3 s; p; e7 M. ^" a) G" M
Toronto 373,368 355,882 4.9% 481,523 474,7661 q5 T: a" `, t2 h! U! a/ z
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 z; b5 B. X5 U- A9 {; O Winnipeg 181,579 159,860 13.6% 202,337 180,707
# y+ x% ^# G% o/ B9 y& n -------------------------------------------------------------------------1 V2 V4 m- g6 G% I( N
Saskatchewan 170,667 156,083 9.3% 182,600 166,500
" f4 O% ~+ L) _! {# r3 U- ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 |5 V+ V/ }7 D Calgary 395,067 252,411 56.5% 405,778 264,389
8 n% c: b/ V% R; _+ `" a; a -------------------------------------------------------------------------3 B3 u2 y: h$ {8 k7 C7 h. S) Q
Edmonton 286,857 194,857 47.2% 316,429 206,714
& f+ d& [/ D7 J6 c% t: K w -------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 }5 y# n' K* f9 m6 s1 z' f& A0 F% A Vancouver 704,250 601,000 17.2% 794,000 697,500
, N3 `1 L! o1 g% {+ r& d9 F* e, [: a" v -------------------------------------------------------------------------
- {- n) Y. K0 ?+ c7 ^ Victoria 375,000 348,000 7.8% 403,000 391,000
5 d5 K5 ^- b! _ m. Y, g0 N -------------------------------------------------------------------------+ c$ T4 I) h- M9 J3 x. b* p
National 300,365 258,202 16.3% 365,380 322,8602 i2 v: |7 J) `$ d. U( g6 O
------------------------------------------------------------------------- @' a& O7 \. @" Y# [& P1 b
8 ~) ?: `( W' k7 G$ f6 D -------------------------------------------------------------, n" L7 K9 R- K$ v! Y, z9 g
Standard Condominium/ H* n8 z( Z# H7 h7 T- m5 T
-------------------------------------------------------------
) | V/ U! |7 ]2 y 2-Storey 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Condo
6 ]) m- d6 ~" _+ U% w Market % Change Average Average % Change) k; [0 e5 ^ B3 f. b- Q* Z
-------------------------------------------------------------
! `5 B8 ?( ?1 i/ r$ ?7 Z0 e Halifax -0.2% 142,000 103,000 37.9%
% m! A3 g& G3 @ -------------------------------------------------------------) u. C0 E) n4 i. l
Charlottetown 2.9% 98,000 98,000 0.0%' c0 y8 x' U+ {9 {% t
-------------------------------------------------------------6 k) j; a. D% {3 r# L9 s3 s1 b
Moncton 4.9% - - N/A
: E& P% r$ ]+ V$ C) ] -------------------------------------------------------------
5 _ J L$ a4 h2 k/ ? Saint John N/A - - N/A" I2 s' D: j# J# l
-------------------------------------------------------------
# g0 A. N5 M+ q' ?, \- [- v St. John's -0.8% 146,333 145,667 0.5%, U( `9 m: o: C0 ~1 q9 _
-------------------------------------------------------------% ~8 g R6 D# p7 [* [! g
Atlantic 1.3% 128,778 115,556 11.4%' }' B; ]: B/ D" l' L z F7 u
-------------------------------------------------------------* {$ o: x8 v- n! X2 U; I" C# w; c% r
Montreal 1.6% 193,190 188,016 2.8%
! h+ e6 g0 Z! ~ -------------------------------------------------------------' G/ f& v1 ^- W( p" K
Ottawa 4.5% 181,083 172,250 5.1%" j) s y% l5 j/ a6 W0 R' B
-------------------------------------------------------------
6 i5 e# }- u7 A8 b% j. _ T Toronto 1.4% 252,088 242,918 3.8%
3 M- W$ K$ ]/ {5 h; J; ?. V -------------------------------------------------------------0 U" q3 r g% r' V
Winnipeg 12.0% 105,648 96,008 10.0%+ j: p2 J% _0 q) S
-------------------------------------------------------------
* m2 d0 m+ E9 W0 d# P Saskatchewan 9.7% 106,250 101,000 5.2%6 w% F0 H5 m" n& u6 y
-------------------------------------------------------------& O0 L w. X0 R u+ p
Calgary 53.5% 245,844 153,867 59.8%* B" p2 o4 g% t+ v* u- f$ v
-------------------------------------------------------------( X+ `( U: g4 f$ T5 u) S- ~
Edmonton 53.1% 200,433 131,500 52.4%! H; o9 e9 A2 c8 F8 E: v
-------------------------------------------------------------
" B% z! h. N8 ~ Vancouver 13.8% 366,250 323,250 13.3%
! f: k: l4 _+ e8 ]+ T! J. P$ c: f- n -------------------------------------------------------------) e" T+ N% C+ w2 p, v
Victoria 3.1% 229,000 220,000 4.1%
# R+ z: D+ j* P; G2 t5 R -------------------------------------------------------------
_4 V8 b) N; L National 13.2% 211,562 185,296 14.2%
P# F# t% |* p$ e -------------------------------------------------------------) P" ~; K S7 ?. D! J% E7 N
>>
! [% o! r4 }/ A8 N+ M
, k" v" W; y" i5 G Average house prices are based on an average of all sub-markets examined3 D) q: c6 X! I# x3 \
in the area, except for the smaller markets of Charlottetown, Moncton, Saint
' U6 u$ N( @7 d1 A3 PJohn and Victoria.5 y" h' x" ]7 G5 Y; Z
( [2 c9 B7 G0 O The Royal LePage Survey of Canadian House Prices is the largest, most
/ W/ `. p" u. e g$ N _6 r! scomprehensive study of its kind in Canada, with information on seven types of2 e/ Y! q. m) j, k. F/ t
housing in over 250 neighbourhoods from coast to coast. This release
" O, p. O5 l) J! Preferences an abbreviated version of the survey, which highlights house price4 b! o; f- @2 v; s1 m0 s8 Q
trends for the three most common types of housing in Canada in 80 communities! {! q; P5 x' M8 k0 b: \1 q& @
across the country. A complete database of past and present surveys is, }+ ?4 O, }* u; ]: B
available on the Royal LePage Web site at www.royallepage.ca, and current' t2 G" y& n6 O# Q4 J3 H- e
figures will be updated following the end of the third quarter. A printable
) ^7 g$ i+ [4 r! x0 _ qversion of the third quarter 2006 survey will be available online on
" f* Z7 ~. ^8 CNovember 15, 2006.
- A1 a' M4 t) J* `# H; D$ g Housing values in the Royal LePage Survey are Royal LePage opinions of; f: A( b! z; v5 o3 {) L
fair market value in each location, based on local data and market knowledge
# U$ o1 T- N8 P+ Yprovided by Royal LePage residential real estate experts. Historical data is
- j6 a ?: ~6 s( a& t+ javailable for some areas back to the early 1970s. |
|