 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
Canada's housing market both vigorous and stable 8 B+ Q j' O1 ? O
4 h, w4 q/ V" O' Y' p- Country's market poised to show growth throughout 2006 -
, c0 b& V' e0 r$ O* a- N
4 E" T; r1 \2 o TORONTO, Sept. 28 /CNW/ - For most of Canada, the housing market
8 Z- N6 {$ M" u9 Bexhibited moderate price increases and stable unit sales during the third
) W$ ~0 E4 \5 |) y4 F' s9 K1 J4 wquarter. Wide regional variances continued to be the dominant characteristic# n" A+ z. k1 C
in the market, exemplified by frenzied levels of activity and double digit) ?/ f2 Q9 _2 j9 g3 i
price gains observed in the energy and commodity rich Western provinces, and
* y/ z; ^5 l+ p, G# I4 |8 x8 V9 \more reasonable sales volumes and moderate price appreciation in Ontario,
3 ^8 ]8 f# H! [6 dQuebec and Atlantic Canada, according to a report released today by Royal
" J" |$ o- v( h" [# ]6 RLePage Real Estate Services. P0 m+ c8 J: h/ I3 a& |5 L. N7 @ @
+ d; M4 m( D) w6 S* N Nationally, market trends established through the first three quarters
* K3 F9 W- `/ H& [( b$ fare forecast to continue for the remainder of the year. Robust economic
. i b9 o5 i. D; s; ]* r& Tconditions, low unemployment rates, modestly growing salaries and wages, and
# ]+ y& q0 j7 J+ G& Nsound consumer confidence contributed to the overall strength of the; i0 h: I: M) n+ p
residential real estate sector.
% A0 f. Q O* @& X
5 ~. C a9 N( P Of the housing types surveyed, the highest average price appreciation
& |* }7 H7 W0 r E" f% ~/ v: _occurred in detached bungalows, which rose to $300,365 (+16.3%)
, D6 c3 `' s7 E1 J; {year-over-year, followed by standard condominiums, which rose to $211,5629 ^% j4 [* `# f6 U) f& U4 }
(+14.2%), and standard two-storey properties, which increased to $365,380! Y! D" Z7 D) m2 Y; w1 A+ v E/ w! R
(+13.2%)." Y' Y4 a! y5 ^' e0 Y: {: D
) {$ o g" U R/ S "Canada's sturdy housing market continued to demonstrate steady growth' c; m. `: {5 W, H6 @( I
during the third quarter. For all but the west, we have moved on from the
+ q' n3 e/ F& ^% I1 x1 |! u) l W0 p9 rfrenzied expansion that characterized the first half of this decade, and are7 [6 R" j% q w3 w/ k5 ~ v
poised to show continued growth at a more moderate pace," said Phil Soper,
! F; ]2 O0 p6 tpresident and chief executive officer, Royal LePage Real Estate Services.
) s8 X, m9 \2 Y' s2 c8 M& x"Gone is the sellers' market that we have lived with for some years. We" S5 [" @, L: w/ G! f
welcome the more reliable conditions that are characteristic of a healthy6 V# r; G: e0 c% j1 d- Q7 [& f4 W
balanced market."
7 F' e' D, t% }4 z, l7 U% J4 k, i4 r8 q) G4 P2 Y' r
Despite the double-digit rise in average national house prices,
' ~9 j) ^1 D- |; o% d qconsiderable regional variances were exhibited again this quarter. The shift6 H- k m. ?& ~0 G. N. ^# L
to balanced market conditions, which began in late 2005, has continued
* U0 n0 l# V, D+ @$ E3 k6 ?% g9 R) tthroughout most of the Central and Eastern regions of the country. In the core
! H4 F* S2 w5 [3 _3 ^" j" e# ]energy producing western provinces, the combination of very high in-migration,7 C0 q) k% M3 C7 U
manageable affordability, and a shortage of inventory has driven record
# h* Q* {* n( F4 o l5 D( E$ ?breaking price appreciations.0 w7 R% P% x# t3 ^
7 K" j( C% t( }. p7 ~- {/ c Echoing the second quarter and supported by Alberta's rapidly expanding0 o5 j2 B" s# k/ Y, \# l% T5 }/ x
economy, Calgary and Edmonton led the charge of Canadian cities with the& k. A8 b! r8 w7 d
largest house price appreciation in all housing types surveyed.; F3 U& X( o) ^) F
@4 S9 F, Q: K: a N# H In Ottawa and Toronto, growth remained steady, supported by solid2 V) w. K, ^+ Q
economic fundamentals, an increase in available inventory and strong consumer
" I+ v) L$ v, t, v0 Oconfidence. While the pace of price appreciation in Ontario leveled off
% b n4 D# m# ?: U- \6 Pslightly, the province's real estate market remains poised for modest growth.* z% M5 m, n1 ], v6 L4 b# }( D
In Atlantic Canada, new housing and condominium construction offered buyers
; M. R. y( U1 X9 K3 s6 P5 B' D2 mgreater selection at more competitive prices, resulting in a slower rate of1 [( Y6 Z0 C- l; q3 D7 z
price appreciation when compared with 2005.4 o2 w1 j" v; ~" v0 J, n( k
* Q5 c8 l# x4 g While the pace of growth in Canada has slowed, the domestic housing
- x! U; [" m4 xmarket is expected to outperform the American market. The economic and, ]( s! _/ e# W+ v+ P
financial fundamentals driving the residential real estate sector in Canada
5 O) e4 O, ^: o- ^7 ^0 g- qare markedly different than those found in the United States.
/ _( N$ W2 A$ ^. q0 _6 Q
% ?! C* j$ ~- \/ q) d' g Added Soper: "Canada's housing market is likely to outperform the+ x% [* e8 M+ A# b7 x& W. I9 u
American market through 2007. A number of factors are working in Canada's
+ t$ F4 }* {% Hfavour, including healthy personal and governmental debt levels, the
& |. {" d6 x! Y5 j: B. ?relatively modest rise in interest rates in our country, and general8 x, E G0 @ {5 ]2 H
affordability in our major cities. In addition, Americans are now seeing the
0 w/ a, {* z+ o! |2 xdownside of a tax system that encourages maximum homeowner leverage, and
1 ^+ ~' b3 r( M5 A. W. x' baggressive financial products such as zero- and negative-amortization. i6 _& I: Y/ ?2 f5 p# k6 W
mortgages that work only in a high price growth environment."3 C, t* e% I- f! X! u
( J. D: k' Q& \$ ]4 U G <<( @- I' s2 R2 c
REGIONAL SUMMARIES
6 f/ P( N: |; C( r. d1 u V6 X >>3 e; |1 Y8 |' K% K" a- q, g$ l
0 z3 Z( o1 x- i) ?$ y. S' c
Balanced conditions continued to characterize the housing market in* X+ b9 p4 e& x& u3 Q3 `
Halifax, as significantly higher inventory levels helped to moderate the rate; Y7 @* K! [ u2 i4 y2 c
of price appreciation. Buyers were increasingly choosy, taking more time2 R) |; I) b% I$ m0 D2 I
looking for newer, low-maintenance properties that were not in need of" T7 F* U s0 B4 B% ]5 E
renovations.
- y. B3 s! ]6 f k- v* K- Z0 \1 I7 \$ R
The housing market in Moncton remained healthy and strong as a slight% Q+ L/ n% `* @$ i* ^8 r* |$ i V
increase in inventory helped to moderate the rate of price appreciation0 c$ A, t; m \& M9 i1 t
compared to the same period in 2005. Activity was brisk throughout August and
( c1 j& U) P: eSeptember and is expected to remain this way through the fourth quarter.8 I4 ]& p' d+ |/ H' f- i
& W6 Q: }3 i& g6 P q% i The housing market in Saint John underwent its traditional summer: R$ N" K7 a+ G; z6 u6 b, E
slowdown in the third quarter, with activity picking up towards the end of the) o: C, O0 w# p5 H: t
quarter. The local economy continued to thrive, as construction on a new
; T6 j W! d/ N- J600,000 square-foot shopping area has begun, bringing several new box stores" i3 j+ _. `: S6 c
to the area. Buyers have begun seeking less expensive fixtures for their homes
3 O" N( _, u& n7 nand are instead opting for more affordable housing options.
1 M7 K b4 |1 P: Q3 m. y: j
& ], J) }) j1 o3 @; C9 c9 @ In Charlottetown, the housing market started to move towards balanced; b9 C# r; q# ^/ G2 T8 I f( V
conditions, as some sellers had to begin to lower the asking prices on their
* Q8 D0 n( D4 F8 `5 d1 h( [homes to make them more competitive. Activity from out-of-town and US buyers
5 T4 E+ Y, s6 R) ]was down slightly compared to 2005, likely attributable to the strong Canadian& ?! B7 U' [, X/ I
dollar. Inventory levels began to creep up in the third quarter, providing7 _ X6 w( W5 v0 }; a2 q
buyers with more options when looking for a home.
9 S V' l9 S( e+ q' x; a- F' i
3 x2 i& v* n6 L! N4 D0 O Activity in St. John's slowed slightly in the third quarter, particularly
8 P$ G, \- l+ G' @1 Xamong higher-priced properties, where there was a slight over-supply of homes
% y/ z2 j7 u" [9 ]priced over $200,000. Listing periods have increased when compared with 2005,4 S6 d! n4 l6 o4 Q6 m( g
as some of the pent-up demand that had characterized the market over the last
h4 D: @1 X! y/ C Ifew years has been satisfied, resulting in more normal, balanced conditions.
- S, H9 U1 ?) U: f& ~3 g5 e/ k- l0 A6 Y. c- S6 z
Montreal's housing market recorded modest increases in average house7 |9 }$ j6 ~' `$ r
prices, due to a slight seasonal slowdown in the third quarter as inventory3 k) K- d: o" S* O% u9 f& G, g
levels rose. Part of this can be attributed to the fact that many renting
$ u' a! d4 j7 x6 Afirst-time buyers were motivated to close on the purchase of a home by July 1,
6 w( J* ^8 N0 d$ _. ~7 [4 Nwhen rental leases expire in Quebec. Once this date has passed some of the! C: D I {- h. q
pressure is taken off the market, allowing buyers to visit more homes before
8 K3 B$ ^( a- Y) p4 pmaking a purchase.( t, z9 e! T& z( J
1 B8 Z3 b5 K: Y$ l2 { Ottawa held its position as one of the country's most stable housing
/ O0 v) f- Z8 ?4 imarkets in the third quarter, reinforced by a vibrant local economy and strong4 g4 u/ m+ s5 J: N' ` t
confidence, resulting in modest increases in average house prices. The city( N5 k. J+ H9 j* E5 e
centre remained a bright spot in Ottawa, with homes in this area attracting) k7 k. ~4 g L
attention due to their convenient location and proximity to downtown
1 ?3 @6 l9 [% Y2 {" |) Samenities.
* l% @0 A, n4 N( v1 N/ H, j" f. v: S7 ~: h7 {
The housing market in Toronto sustained healthy activity levels) t5 K5 j6 {( d0 D
throughout the third quarter, as a strong economy helped to maintain demand
: K9 p0 {: a. D3 aacross the city, causing average house prices to rise moderately. Toronto has# o5 ]9 ?, M) [3 Q; U8 T
continued to experience modest growth in average house prices, and has been' |4 c8 ?( ~/ s3 N
driven primarily by purchasers who are buying homes as their principle0 ^! n$ i7 z- x
residence, rather than for investment.
! Q! u( e1 U; E4 Z3 d, @7 e: F% N6 V- y3 {; C: O9 _6 ?
The vibrant Winnipeg housing market continued to show its strength as4 ]8 {) n& K* M* s5 \$ V0 C
house prices rose during the third quarter. The booming local economy resulted( A4 o+ G: E5 }. I3 F3 R
in a historically low unemployment rate, helping to bolster consumer3 @( n+ k2 s/ R' v
confidence and Winnipeg's ranking as the city with the lowest capitalization
: v# v0 X9 f' c! w, \" E1 x. Arate among the country's larger cities - helped to encourage buyers to enter8 Y5 Q3 V) h( d3 l& C3 B Z+ o
the market.- h K3 l6 L" E; ~" N
- w9 W$ B" Y6 V/ J+ f2 s, x9 N
In Regina, the market experienced a slight seasonal slowdown through
) q z' q& X2 GJuly, as there were fewer purchasers in the market due to summer vacations. In0 F7 E: S7 o, n# W9 O8 |. r* z8 W
August, activity resumed to the busy pace previously seen in the spring
! F: y4 f- t5 L* x6 ^months, as the influx of purchasers made it more difficult to find a home due. R% U" {, ~& j2 c: P5 I4 a
to the shortage of available inventory.
4 e! O& ~+ M" @
4 X& D$ U/ m/ J! h Activity in Saskatoon remained brisk as the market maintained its
. ~/ r1 w; M# W% G3 i; j2 C* Pmomentum from the busy spring sales period. The economy in Saskatoon remains8 Z$ `! y& \0 N0 Z% n
vibrant, as employment opportunities are abundant with many businesses
: y2 l2 Z7 ~& sstruggling to make hires and having to recruit outside the province.
+ b- ^% k8 d8 W( ]
" [+ t4 `7 g- y+ b Calgary's housing market recorded blazing average house price increases3 A% x/ ^6 F3 Y+ B# r) t
in the third quarter, in all surveyed categories. The burgeoning economy, low
2 a" n% j5 K3 h$ Uunemployment rates and low inventory levels remained the leading factors that! N9 N* K) |4 D* G g) p# S
pressured Calgary's house prices upwards. However, regardless of the soaring/ k3 P2 q! L, ]' o
prices that characterized the market - even during the typically slower summer& }" H/ M( F+ C" Z' s) {
season - it is expected that activity will become slightly more balanced, as2 x& J# r) `4 ?& E7 U9 b9 {. b
buyers are becoming more reluctant to participate in the frenetic activity.
) g, D& Q( c g" u( w' o6 I' E! x, p) @
Edmonton's booming local economy continued to thrive in the third quarter
4 p" x8 j& s+ ~ N- v* ~as activity in the oil sands north of the city continued to flourish. Edmonton
, ~2 ^) N( s0 T% {5 t8 tremained the hub of activity for those coming to work in the oil industry,* ?+ U: y/ K5 K% l' Q" _, B
maintaining tight inventory levels across the city, resulting in prices
5 ]' F( n! m Z1 ]* n, pincreasing at record levels. However, as inventory levels continued to improve
?: W i; T+ @in the third quarter the rate of price appreciation should moderate slightly
7 |; b. o8 B" P( d" L2 ?towards the end of 2006. 2 z$ Z; D9 r }7 i. ^
6 w1 C) S& [( p4 n( o
While Vancouver has seen a slight reprieve from the severe shortage of7 y& o% v$ l4 p
inventory that had previously characterized the market, supply is still unable
) R' O1 Z: r4 ~# yto meet demand, driving house prices upwards. Vancouver has a very diverse
- v1 l0 h5 m ?% `& S" Q3 x( cgroup of active buyers - from first-time home buyers to baby-boomers to
& v" d* L% j' c/ xforeign investors - all of whom fuel the demand for houses, placing added2 H' Y1 k( ^6 I3 y- Z N$ ]
pressure on tight inventory levels.8 {4 O" s p% d1 R5 K* [+ C5 k
! Z' i6 P" {# S# g( v, d
Victoria's market is vibrant and supported by strong economic
' @$ l8 t( w! n+ \4 j0 E- Kfundamentals, fuelled by a booming tech sector and a migration of young people/ Z2 W# k# \, v" t: Q+ b
into the city that has continued to support the area's house price increases;
1 |) u. \, g+ ]while increased inventory levels have afforded buyers more time when searching* Z/ m# @5 S1 V$ t3 }0 \) L6 q( i
for a home, helping to normalize the market's pace.7 K# D6 r9 [+ P, j" c( G
/ Y+ ?, Q) L ~! K" n8 X2 A
<<! |! A% ^0 I: [7 R. ~# J4 y4 p
Survey of Canadian Average House Prices in the Third Quarter 2006) G* _5 r9 M, M- p
7 O/ b! B( d; m" K
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
# l5 a# F" @# x Detached Bungalows Standard Two Storey
4 n$ [- s7 @( n; @# Y3 f -------------------------------------------------------------------------
l5 p. e! d0 K. q4 @) H 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Bungalow 2006 Q3 2005 Q3
) A" e8 G$ ^: }& N5 N Market Average Average % Change Average Average. r% g1 P1 h3 T- M
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 w' q8 @6 P! q% D3 T S5 x. x2 e! d Halifax 186,333 173,333 7.5% 198,667 199,000
4 H8 y; K0 h5 H5 |; B; K/ X -------------------------------------------------------------------------$ l! M3 c; t! w( | X1 X, n
Charlottetown 145,000 141,000 2.8% 175,000 170,0000 S" e( w, ^4 m! i
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ e' l }/ w* H0 [! \ Moncton 135,000 127,000 6.3% 129,000 123,0007 P5 q! t2 @2 d/ `2 b; y
-------------------------------------------------------------------------1 A2 D R: t0 o. `) p: t
Saint John 141,200 142,900 -1.2% - -" N8 C% e, t' j1 G% E
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 y8 @/ @5 P2 H* `. F% `) j St. John's 143,667 142,667 0.7% 200,667 202,3330 x" A4 e1 | r! E3 `( [
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
( l+ o1 D0 \- o- G& O" Q( n Atlantic 150,240 145,380 3.3% 175,833 173,5834 R% T# B0 y) o! J
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 M8 Y o+ z9 s( C Montreal 213,691 203,500 5.0% 321,141 316,1857 v: X, h% N8 g0 {6 @
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- m" W" G2 \2 ~: q# i6 Q2 V4 Z; Q Ottawa 290,083 278,417 4.2% 285,667 273,250
: b' n ]: r6 }8 U" g9 { -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% X" t2 v& R$ ]( ^ Toronto 373,368 355,882 4.9% 481,523 474,766( I @0 E* T. E9 A4 Q' g
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
" I! K( U' U3 C5 x8 a( J3 g$ q" |! l Winnipeg 181,579 159,860 13.6% 202,337 180,707
$ ^3 K% x6 J* p; r( v) a -------------------------------------------------------------------------2 {) a2 e+ t( f* } h- U
Saskatchewan 170,667 156,083 9.3% 182,600 166,500! N- R! K. t0 c8 X: D2 n* j2 |( {5 {
-------------------------------------------------------------------------1 N2 ]5 Y1 t: t: c
Calgary 395,067 252,411 56.5% 405,778 264,389; B3 R8 c, ?* m1 f8 B, k
-------------------------------------------------------------------------$ C5 A5 Z) [/ w) f' y% M
Edmonton 286,857 194,857 47.2% 316,429 206,714# i' X6 K; W0 X) j) H
-------------------------------------------------------------------------1 M, M4 n% x: i
Vancouver 704,250 601,000 17.2% 794,000 697,500
S% n- H4 o0 M8 C5 I/ u -------------------------------------------------------------------------
* F4 Y& `# I3 C7 B+ u J Victoria 375,000 348,000 7.8% 403,000 391,000; `) f5 O: i& [# x9 V1 R
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
' ^, y1 o3 U/ j: c0 N9 k' E; ] National 300,365 258,202 16.3% 365,380 322,860$ C1 @% W5 o4 Z' R4 }; q, ^$ H, x- C( S
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- o% _: \2 d. }
& K7 z9 u8 n* m# i6 y$ k" e -------------------------------------------------------------. V3 g/ y2 _. u7 n% B" r
Standard Condominium
" ]( W0 r$ E: S; h; K/ P! @ -------------------------------------------------------------
4 z8 U0 U5 L6 E0 ] 2-Storey 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Condo/ R, J: v6 p0 {4 y
Market % Change Average Average % Change; c4 ]2 D2 q, b# m5 Q
-------------------------------------------------------------' X/ s* q, b: R& ?/ c& H
Halifax -0.2% 142,000 103,000 37.9%) d0 t/ `4 x/ a+ N' o0 Z
-------------------------------------------------------------0 C1 l0 z- i7 c; a6 k+ D
Charlottetown 2.9% 98,000 98,000 0.0%
) \( q: O) p" n+ F+ e -------------------------------------------------------------+ Z" e: m8 b( V5 b
Moncton 4.9% - - N/A
- S' b2 T( z, ~2 |5 k; H4 ? -------------------------------------------------------------
3 m. ^8 K" O; D1 `# m# S5 A! F) B# \ Saint John N/A - - N/A
# c& U. z* ?! Q. C$ f1 L4 \ -------------------------------------------------------------& N0 m% x6 S8 \( t1 W5 w/ `
St. John's -0.8% 146,333 145,667 0.5%! ^9 q) z* B0 A' p0 ^8 n G" @
-------------------------------------------------------------
( J; H- [8 T3 P Atlantic 1.3% 128,778 115,556 11.4%
2 I2 N, ~- W8 p6 z; R -------------------------------------------------------------
4 n# G6 B7 o$ _1 r* w! D W3 p Montreal 1.6% 193,190 188,016 2.8%
$ e4 u* l- Y/ ^! y$ O9 G1 V- R -------------------------------------------------------------
+ z$ @9 x, @6 j% y9 y. u5 |) X Ottawa 4.5% 181,083 172,250 5.1%
; Z* {5 L9 x3 z -------------------------------------------------------------
3 z' S* r* o" n: E! n3 [& U Toronto 1.4% 252,088 242,918 3.8%' z: L% D' N+ w; u0 c
-------------------------------------------------------------6 F+ v4 _) M1 `& S6 B! S8 j
Winnipeg 12.0% 105,648 96,008 10.0%
& t E) b: r3 d9 v8 S1 j3 I -------------------------------------------------------------
8 F: f- E4 }( b' ^ Saskatchewan 9.7% 106,250 101,000 5.2%3 U- K% L5 U7 L: ?) a/ C Z
-------------------------------------------------------------
) r+ `% C0 [. U0 d Calgary 53.5% 245,844 153,867 59.8%
( Q8 L! Z+ c) l8 c$ Y( d -------------------------------------------------------------
7 b' G$ G( W: U5 ]( U; r" c Edmonton 53.1% 200,433 131,500 52.4%+ R) F q: e+ D$ g4 \4 i) h
-------------------------------------------------------------
. t. y: U+ [7 E D# V7 w5 Z Vancouver 13.8% 366,250 323,250 13.3%
- y( E1 R6 N9 a7 f/ z( j/ d9 m4 O -------------------------------------------------------------: l" V" O7 I% @$ e$ B
Victoria 3.1% 229,000 220,000 4.1%
" @, D8 }0 c2 H -------------------------------------------------------------& v [+ C* q( p4 Y) G) Y$ h6 B
National 13.2% 211,562 185,296 14.2%2 z, u4 W. a) M
-------------------------------------------------------------- @7 W& |. D$ h4 v+ g( |
>>4 g h# ~. \% K
" x8 ?, s3 T' }7 `' N8 ^# W3 w Average house prices are based on an average of all sub-markets examined
- ]% K! F0 e; N7 Hin the area, except for the smaller markets of Charlottetown, Moncton, Saint
+ X3 X* z7 l' {John and Victoria.
% H. @) v1 i7 a9 }# l
' b" x: k9 D8 }$ k& \2 O The Royal LePage Survey of Canadian House Prices is the largest, most
( t; q/ x5 r5 ]5 J& B2 X& ]comprehensive study of its kind in Canada, with information on seven types of
$ M$ f: Q/ ]: H5 |; g5 E2 shousing in over 250 neighbourhoods from coast to coast. This release( K6 f: X; S# o3 _! g b% t" d4 h
references an abbreviated version of the survey, which highlights house price
O' P; j# J+ o% |# M: ctrends for the three most common types of housing in Canada in 80 communities
% u& D- H. v& M% V# o: S" `across the country. A complete database of past and present surveys is' P5 ?+ ?7 [" F' e' l1 n
available on the Royal LePage Web site at www.royallepage.ca, and current5 ^) a/ y; o, ]; L' W
figures will be updated following the end of the third quarter. A printable, g; }$ E& L" w) c( y2 l
version of the third quarter 2006 survey will be available online on) }9 M$ y; T2 E" w% [* ]0 [$ ]
November 15, 2006.$ i( h9 J5 w3 E0 E; J5 L8 D' }6 |# \
Housing values in the Royal LePage Survey are Royal LePage opinions of( S( X5 Z Y8 p
fair market value in each location, based on local data and market knowledge
C0 |: z0 a1 I/ A+ u# x( t9 sprovided by Royal LePage residential real estate experts. Historical data is
) [% G/ @& }7 H/ }) W, |, oavailable for some areas back to the early 1970s. |
|