 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
Canada's housing market both vigorous and stable * s9 v' K+ s9 z
) f% | S2 p+ }5 [/ k7 K+ M) m
- Country's market poised to show growth throughout 2006 -
# a" ?( b5 {, k
+ j# G- v$ t8 s+ B TORONTO, Sept. 28 /CNW/ - For most of Canada, the housing market
X: B$ W4 i [. Fexhibited moderate price increases and stable unit sales during the third
, V& J+ V+ i! C, R: ?! ~: Qquarter. Wide regional variances continued to be the dominant characteristic. V. t! Y- v3 W5 c; C! v# ^9 Z* q
in the market, exemplified by frenzied levels of activity and double digit( c& w) D& C& c4 L3 [
price gains observed in the energy and commodity rich Western provinces, and
9 |3 U% ]8 }; }1 l- @more reasonable sales volumes and moderate price appreciation in Ontario,
2 J* _8 c! H( YQuebec and Atlantic Canada, according to a report released today by Royal/ b" m/ o. K! \7 @+ M
LePage Real Estate Services.* k) f$ i! L' q& a
$ E5 ~- q+ q2 q) k
Nationally, market trends established through the first three quarters: l0 r: p* E! S+ I# U+ P
are forecast to continue for the remainder of the year. Robust economic
6 k( c' F% b# `" |$ lconditions, low unemployment rates, modestly growing salaries and wages, and
: N2 P9 d. k8 Fsound consumer confidence contributed to the overall strength of the
. a9 G; E4 s. Z6 `, cresidential real estate sector.
5 d* X4 M! V" R2 A& f, S" C, O- t; p( Y0 r6 `. Z
Of the housing types surveyed, the highest average price appreciation
: ]( G/ @9 Q! _* Y$ L# Toccurred in detached bungalows, which rose to $300,365 (+16.3%): ^/ K( J: ^! q3 i5 Y. e" N7 x7 w
year-over-year, followed by standard condominiums, which rose to $211,562; E; ]' o; ?- B" f5 D+ M/ C
(+14.2%), and standard two-storey properties, which increased to $365,380" c3 |0 c8 A4 X4 o" y+ V1 c3 Q9 H
(+13.2%).3 A1 S$ {; u- l/ Y0 A. R# {' [0 E* r
" f! A7 z5 @9 H; ? "Canada's sturdy housing market continued to demonstrate steady growth
+ y, U/ f! ?" p. u5 i& c# w; e4 \during the third quarter. For all but the west, we have moved on from the
- i8 o. @& O% v; j7 B6 Nfrenzied expansion that characterized the first half of this decade, and are7 r* p, ~. J! a: m+ v8 r
poised to show continued growth at a more moderate pace," said Phil Soper,
2 c' e- d8 O9 i4 [: x7 ipresident and chief executive officer, Royal LePage Real Estate Services.
+ V- C; r: h1 L3 E2 i/ m8 p' A+ d"Gone is the sellers' market that we have lived with for some years. We
& D& ]' h$ |* X( _7 D6 n7 A1 ]welcome the more reliable conditions that are characteristic of a healthy$ x4 r+ w( n [( _; Q
balanced market."
, ^0 L8 t8 F5 J) }4 M/ F0 [
7 g- ]. g( m R; C9 W Despite the double-digit rise in average national house prices,( V& c' y3 l5 n
considerable regional variances were exhibited again this quarter. The shift, J m$ v$ @. R/ Z4 d: g W
to balanced market conditions, which began in late 2005, has continued- I P7 }( z1 A; X
throughout most of the Central and Eastern regions of the country. In the core8 P9 d6 |$ W/ I" W
energy producing western provinces, the combination of very high in-migration,. M) M+ D$ Q! K: n. ?. l4 H& e
manageable affordability, and a shortage of inventory has driven record& I% z/ d8 l& I1 S( `; D% Z
breaking price appreciations.
& w+ N: p; B: H5 `& U( q$ k6 S3 T5 G" R1 j2 P L( U; U% j4 E
Echoing the second quarter and supported by Alberta's rapidly expanding+ s' ?1 w) ^8 i' R6 M& D6 _! w
economy, Calgary and Edmonton led the charge of Canadian cities with the
$ ]5 _- |- @5 T9 u( llargest house price appreciation in all housing types surveyed.) c* {1 v. y1 \4 S% g, x% W
6 @1 D; p% [! I/ ^+ \
In Ottawa and Toronto, growth remained steady, supported by solid- s, D4 i0 X M* ~6 [; q, q
economic fundamentals, an increase in available inventory and strong consumer
: {% z* I& L- g8 k. Y9 j7 Uconfidence. While the pace of price appreciation in Ontario leveled off
+ s. E' q `: L4 \% i9 e( Rslightly, the province's real estate market remains poised for modest growth.( u1 a! A# n. p! T, p6 u( B
In Atlantic Canada, new housing and condominium construction offered buyers) \. u) \8 x2 u3 z/ W
greater selection at more competitive prices, resulting in a slower rate of
' A+ f" V" j+ G2 b6 _price appreciation when compared with 2005.6 c! ~% m( ~% }
' ^9 w @: G2 K' U9 }1 K While the pace of growth in Canada has slowed, the domestic housing2 O2 ^$ R% `) b$ m8 g
market is expected to outperform the American market. The economic and
# U- `. J( d" ]" Sfinancial fundamentals driving the residential real estate sector in Canada3 [, z- l. o9 j0 V8 f1 }3 s4 ^
are markedly different than those found in the United States.
9 ~4 i; ]# ]; Z
! A$ X% r. U+ D2 R Added Soper: "Canada's housing market is likely to outperform the
- G7 Y& h N: BAmerican market through 2007. A number of factors are working in Canada's# B9 e+ ?2 Y! I9 c0 i. q
favour, including healthy personal and governmental debt levels, the- u, Y( R0 A9 g: h+ k6 x+ H4 z# }
relatively modest rise in interest rates in our country, and general
# p/ B! ^$ h& k0 l" K$ Q1 xaffordability in our major cities. In addition, Americans are now seeing the8 B/ a9 ?. n U! [* z: Q+ ~
downside of a tax system that encourages maximum homeowner leverage, and- `) z. p, i1 g7 ~! H4 f0 i
aggressive financial products such as zero- and negative-amortization- H! Z1 ~. e6 {! i" R7 b
mortgages that work only in a high price growth environment."
. ~; @) }, `4 y- W' F
- k9 }' B$ L8 ?/ ` <<
* T$ F7 w/ H6 T5 `4 f* b, ? REGIONAL SUMMARIES
+ K3 h2 _% @; |! Z >>
/ Y( `4 B; l5 W4 A) e8 b+ p, X$ v( ^6 O j
Balanced conditions continued to characterize the housing market in' ^ H, t8 V3 k. w) w
Halifax, as significantly higher inventory levels helped to moderate the rate9 [" K, a( g, t4 T+ r: T6 A
of price appreciation. Buyers were increasingly choosy, taking more time% I) O8 Z' R9 q
looking for newer, low-maintenance properties that were not in need of0 R. J. a! n! @* w" J6 b- ?
renovations.
R' O U+ x, ]1 i, h8 @
2 g y$ t, T5 I0 ~( Q/ A The housing market in Moncton remained healthy and strong as a slight
, I* M: R" K7 g! N! l6 V3 g) c1 w3 pincrease in inventory helped to moderate the rate of price appreciation- p0 o/ L) l7 J' \8 r- o& i
compared to the same period in 2005. Activity was brisk throughout August and0 _' g( _1 L8 I( c$ L
September and is expected to remain this way through the fourth quarter./ Z) M: Y0 s; b) c
- ?" W) `% x6 Q! v5 _ The housing market in Saint John underwent its traditional summer( U( w: L; p( Q( t* t% R
slowdown in the third quarter, with activity picking up towards the end of the
3 D: {- z& K: ?+ O# h8 equarter. The local economy continued to thrive, as construction on a new
' M, _. r7 }8 J @, n; U7 \9 I600,000 square-foot shopping area has begun, bringing several new box stores+ m& \6 W; L+ M/ E5 Q4 b
to the area. Buyers have begun seeking less expensive fixtures for their homes8 M0 Y7 @, Q o- o" e
and are instead opting for more affordable housing options.
$ M) u; Z, Q' V- K
# N {6 ^' Z) m- [2 \3 d In Charlottetown, the housing market started to move towards balanced- j& s* `9 [. |) u& c
conditions, as some sellers had to begin to lower the asking prices on their
; a( @: U8 Q1 s' ~0 vhomes to make them more competitive. Activity from out-of-town and US buyers
" c1 }; R' J, l( r, h ]was down slightly compared to 2005, likely attributable to the strong Canadian
4 [# k J, W. V8 Kdollar. Inventory levels began to creep up in the third quarter, providing1 Q) [2 f/ E5 _& |3 I+ \) I
buyers with more options when looking for a home.4 C8 b6 P# U3 L6 r, Q' x
0 V/ `# p- W$ h
Activity in St. John's slowed slightly in the third quarter, particularly, T/ J/ b8 v: j
among higher-priced properties, where there was a slight over-supply of homes" m; {8 @0 F; T [2 T: G1 e8 ] u6 ?
priced over $200,000. Listing periods have increased when compared with 2005,) Y& I9 K# @5 D) F8 X
as some of the pent-up demand that had characterized the market over the last- H" f" E! q, O1 ?6 B- I
few years has been satisfied, resulting in more normal, balanced conditions.
, ?/ ^' s0 p$ o5 |- E. d3 L4 F0 w; T6 `! I, B
Montreal's housing market recorded modest increases in average house
# ?1 [ `; l7 jprices, due to a slight seasonal slowdown in the third quarter as inventory
5 w/ q1 z/ e; i& f8 z+ dlevels rose. Part of this can be attributed to the fact that many renting
6 p) w, \ U3 Vfirst-time buyers were motivated to close on the purchase of a home by July 1,7 Y) N9 z& ], h# W6 f d0 k; ^. R
when rental leases expire in Quebec. Once this date has passed some of the% G+ k" Q" R1 l; d' j
pressure is taken off the market, allowing buyers to visit more homes before
% N5 ^0 d; }9 G% I# @! mmaking a purchase.7 h! w1 w; _3 l. }4 W
4 r4 b6 M7 f5 m/ i1 y1 O
Ottawa held its position as one of the country's most stable housing5 ~+ W- ?4 W# h8 J
markets in the third quarter, reinforced by a vibrant local economy and strong
8 a! ?' {6 |. R, Uconfidence, resulting in modest increases in average house prices. The city [3 ^" ]8 b! q. S& x9 [5 o( D
centre remained a bright spot in Ottawa, with homes in this area attracting0 N/ h" g4 i& n9 }
attention due to their convenient location and proximity to downtown% U+ v' I. d8 h7 r7 i+ ?
amenities.
8 k; x: ]/ [; p- L. U& {% ?+ E3 C2 Y! K9 n# u
The housing market in Toronto sustained healthy activity levels( b7 G& M" [6 ]- ?9 H9 h
throughout the third quarter, as a strong economy helped to maintain demand. c9 _; j" p3 o8 {
across the city, causing average house prices to rise moderately. Toronto has
" d8 f2 Y! J, c8 U1 w( Bcontinued to experience modest growth in average house prices, and has been
- i1 I% i4 ]8 \ F6 Odriven primarily by purchasers who are buying homes as their principle
; d2 P" o% o2 S$ @residence, rather than for investment.
9 L+ U! \4 f; ]3 w/ l+ K3 Q$ N( U( L; T
The vibrant Winnipeg housing market continued to show its strength as$ p2 Q$ \; _* `# ?
house prices rose during the third quarter. The booming local economy resulted, m( s# J( G+ _3 s7 L, E, l
in a historically low unemployment rate, helping to bolster consumer* Z! r7 {6 o, Z, L; s
confidence and Winnipeg's ranking as the city with the lowest capitalization
: I) y, p; L }; o3 A& [4 \rate among the country's larger cities - helped to encourage buyers to enter5 m2 i2 s' e+ J: M
the market.
! |$ q* ` A% l2 R) \: d
" q/ J) ]0 V5 |4 B* q In Regina, the market experienced a slight seasonal slowdown through
9 y( p4 g( E; f$ F- tJuly, as there were fewer purchasers in the market due to summer vacations. In
* l2 u3 V& V% RAugust, activity resumed to the busy pace previously seen in the spring
0 w2 M' d' t8 [months, as the influx of purchasers made it more difficult to find a home due
7 G3 c; `, O$ O/ Fto the shortage of available inventory.
5 @- G& |" ~! n' d- b8 {" j
: f% Y0 h3 i4 z; ]- _. Q1 H, A9 m4 l: L Activity in Saskatoon remained brisk as the market maintained its
- x5 T7 D" }$ N2 dmomentum from the busy spring sales period. The economy in Saskatoon remains
7 S9 L: {) s! p" Yvibrant, as employment opportunities are abundant with many businesses4 O9 O b! f, K2 u/ G3 n8 U8 v1 H/ d
struggling to make hires and having to recruit outside the province.
' e, Y- t% _/ u" _! e1 z. z
h( k7 n' k- _& u& p/ W" o Calgary's housing market recorded blazing average house price increases
+ K/ V, {, ]8 x9 H, b6 Rin the third quarter, in all surveyed categories. The burgeoning economy, low
* E5 `' x: l& C( l: Sunemployment rates and low inventory levels remained the leading factors that
* V& v' _ f; t" S4 W, m5 W, C4 R0 H9 u5 ppressured Calgary's house prices upwards. However, regardless of the soaring
2 S8 ?, `) O* V9 oprices that characterized the market - even during the typically slower summer
* R- O; B- \# ?) v9 q* Yseason - it is expected that activity will become slightly more balanced, as
* X7 l, |) Q7 ], g" U, S5 u8 ubuyers are becoming more reluctant to participate in the frenetic activity.
# \ v1 J- i0 i3 ]) g2 }' w
) c! G# W3 n+ y" ]9 U5 n0 o4 y Edmonton's booming local economy continued to thrive in the third quarter
% C( ~% R* a* Z; \0 h/ S5 Vas activity in the oil sands north of the city continued to flourish. Edmonton
+ {, u5 h6 O7 ?. Zremained the hub of activity for those coming to work in the oil industry,, K: z* ^2 l+ m, _" i. g
maintaining tight inventory levels across the city, resulting in prices
. ]- {& x+ E) c. }9 s' {increasing at record levels. However, as inventory levels continued to improve
' K( F; u% A6 ain the third quarter the rate of price appreciation should moderate slightly1 ?8 M1 D4 ?' U5 X& I/ Q
towards the end of 2006. 9 Y9 n' |; d3 n" ~7 y( z
+ H5 L$ o; M- SWhile Vancouver has seen a slight reprieve from the severe shortage of6 x! \/ }0 p/ }4 M) ~; o& u
inventory that had previously characterized the market, supply is still unable+ J0 q- [, C% Q/ V, N- {9 [7 M
to meet demand, driving house prices upwards. Vancouver has a very diverse
" J* r# f2 y H8 w- ~4 [group of active buyers - from first-time home buyers to baby-boomers to5 r' _5 s) e2 d. L+ h
foreign investors - all of whom fuel the demand for houses, placing added/ f8 y, L7 r: Y6 ~+ w+ ]! R
pressure on tight inventory levels.
: p( p8 f3 i1 F; U, c, m, w# \0 R. e" r
Victoria's market is vibrant and supported by strong economic1 A% Z0 @/ j* e. O
fundamentals, fuelled by a booming tech sector and a migration of young people8 _! k7 I- L+ {+ L' k$ `: O' N
into the city that has continued to support the area's house price increases;$ q, w& ~ z5 x$ U1 j# `7 ?$ V0 k/ e
while increased inventory levels have afforded buyers more time when searching
" H, `9 C3 h5 y7 p8 M) Sfor a home, helping to normalize the market's pace.
, }8 s$ r" ], [9 i! F% F# N" X
1 \2 T# U. R7 F2 Z: H0 c7 | <<% {8 R0 T+ {, `! a
Survey of Canadian Average House Prices in the Third Quarter 2006/ \, d, U% l+ d% p
3 g+ C5 L3 U5 I; h0 @* f7 |% w
-------------------------------------------------------------------------9 k ~) z& i/ j' H
Detached Bungalows Standard Two Storey9 ?! I2 g. X5 q6 G. N" D& E
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
" I- ^2 `0 Q% {+ | 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Bungalow 2006 Q3 2005 Q3
# p! j4 g: Q/ l0 z1 {. F Market Average Average % Change Average Average* n- f1 ^' f( V
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
% \# j3 r7 v$ V Halifax 186,333 173,333 7.5% 198,667 199,000 L( n9 Y: t G5 `. j0 O
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
% }: A" i4 J# o- Y; s: U Charlottetown 145,000 141,000 2.8% 175,000 170,000
, V' w& ?' x- g7 A w5 e F -------------------------------------------------------------------------6 ^- T% c% O: t
Moncton 135,000 127,000 6.3% 129,000 123,000
* L' R! _; @" t, n1 m- Z, l# E -------------------------------------------------------------------------( d$ a2 m4 F, J- v/ D
Saint John 141,200 142,900 -1.2% - -+ B$ {% ^/ w' g) I3 n8 d' Q4 i
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
, U- A2 |2 s' ^* E St. John's 143,667 142,667 0.7% 200,667 202,333
2 ~( z9 R5 e8 d; F( K) o/ u/ X$ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
% G( y2 ]% D: Z9 e3 J/ |9 t Atlantic 150,240 145,380 3.3% 175,833 173,5833 t/ j. n1 \# i, C% n
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
) q% q* g3 ]9 i9 [ Montreal 213,691 203,500 5.0% 321,141 316,185; j" X' F) h$ L0 _" ^4 T' p; ?$ g- g
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
, C, F/ m) Y& k( I Ottawa 290,083 278,417 4.2% 285,667 273,2504 V% P' {" k) B1 u; z
-------------------------------------------------------------------------0 `% w1 T: p X! @; ~2 B, ^
Toronto 373,368 355,882 4.9% 481,523 474,766
( ~7 X- I3 h/ |$ Q( G Y* h -------------------------------------------------------------------------$ U5 `1 B9 E' V
Winnipeg 181,579 159,860 13.6% 202,337 180,7070 [5 p7 H# ~2 w' V& o7 M
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 V8 N5 {) w8 w7 | Saskatchewan 170,667 156,083 9.3% 182,600 166,500
% L* N/ L$ f' _. A5 Q! v A -------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 @ g; T. R+ A( S- E# h Calgary 395,067 252,411 56.5% 405,778 264,389* K2 k1 _* d9 o/ g$ G( G6 O& j
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
: z. O: P8 g2 v. D: ^7 X9 L! U( y Edmonton 286,857 194,857 47.2% 316,429 206,714& ^: f. d! w4 f4 B. r% v6 X% B3 V
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
( L7 i. G/ \5 P4 \+ f2 T2 m9 ? Vancouver 704,250 601,000 17.2% 794,000 697,500
, c( q$ V' e. u' R -------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 X c6 A7 O8 o" z8 e8 G Victoria 375,000 348,000 7.8% 403,000 391,000
w7 l. T1 m* V. M* A/ N -------------------------------------------------------------------------# h J9 y; w' G
National 300,365 258,202 16.3% 365,380 322,860
: x! x0 i+ u2 `* y& i -------------------------------------------------------------------------% B9 t# L" ? B1 w$ M& c
! ^! X: I4 P. y5 m -------------------------------------------------------------
3 g# ]: \: v7 U& Q8 S9 v Standard Condominium
$ ~2 c. x7 t/ U, z8 R -------------------------------------------------------------5 p% s/ v2 [' G' P8 x
2-Storey 2006 Q3 2005 Q3 Condo
3 B0 R; F: U- r; F1 }0 n Market % Change Average Average % Change
8 Q3 \2 m* J" ]2 C# ? -------------------------------------------------------------0 i2 N6 @% V, ~+ v, k( t/ }
Halifax -0.2% 142,000 103,000 37.9%
6 D: f2 i* G [2 C -------------------------------------------------------------5 D; c- U6 u, z. {' K' Q
Charlottetown 2.9% 98,000 98,000 0.0%
5 z' w* ^6 H/ j- t; i& {% [' c4 T! b -------------------------------------------------------------1 g- X; r6 t5 H. V" ]
Moncton 4.9% - - N/A
8 ^6 W9 j% u9 M" L: `( w -------------------------------------------------------------, ^- s9 ~3 g& V& V% n
Saint John N/A - - N/A
$ E8 n+ _ H& |# F6 s! L4 w -------------------------------------------------------------
7 Y8 P, I; m8 c1 a St. John's -0.8% 146,333 145,667 0.5%1 i' ~* F! R$ f3 F6 \ E/ t
-------------------------------------------------------------
3 g' d, L0 K1 l' T* H Atlantic 1.3% 128,778 115,556 11.4%" X' ~8 C" K e- d% j r
-------------------------------------------------------------
! I8 _, B: g2 R' B) l1 ?" L Montreal 1.6% 193,190 188,016 2.8%
' [$ ]+ u$ Z3 Y( z8 r -------------------------------------------------------------3 M% O+ N- r) ?. I# V
Ottawa 4.5% 181,083 172,250 5.1%* F6 O- h J, f- y( P
-------------------------------------------------------------
) q& x# Z2 R# p/ L Toronto 1.4% 252,088 242,918 3.8%/ i& T5 D; g k0 h; E9 b8 R4 c4 Z8 j
-------------------------------------------------------------
2 }7 u& S, Z: N; x6 r Winnipeg 12.0% 105,648 96,008 10.0%6 z! D2 Y, u! f) p# e
-------------------------------------------------------------# r2 P B; q; Q8 a& X
Saskatchewan 9.7% 106,250 101,000 5.2%( e- j/ Q" W k1 G' T. \
-------------------------------------------------------------+ s0 y6 ?9 {$ D' A: I; Q! J' @9 d
Calgary 53.5% 245,844 153,867 59.8%
5 V6 e Q) p$ r* u! K5 }0 J -------------------------------------------------------------/ t* `) O' d S. v
Edmonton 53.1% 200,433 131,500 52.4%
1 A0 b- a0 g* E6 n -------------------------------------------------------------$ v7 E/ m& I# a* ~
Vancouver 13.8% 366,250 323,250 13.3% z) u3 V5 }' y+ ?
-------------------------------------------------------------0 p. _8 @& n S$ g# r
Victoria 3.1% 229,000 220,000 4.1%
3 m* v' _- g0 k6 w. ]% r -------------------------------------------------------------' l2 g! `) [# V" ^- A
National 13.2% 211,562 185,296 14.2%
/ u7 D7 K( s& M6 j$ t' x$ o -------------------------------------------------------------
+ ]: t0 K# r2 w3 ^ >>
& }. Y6 q3 O2 | w
3 ~ i3 c# Q/ X4 o, @1 Q% b, Z3 ` Average house prices are based on an average of all sub-markets examined
6 o6 g/ M1 a3 j! K4 E" t; ^4 Z* ~in the area, except for the smaller markets of Charlottetown, Moncton, Saint
7 Z& Y+ \: ~" A: |John and Victoria.
- L1 o; ~3 v" D4 S1 f* A- z
7 D1 ~. j0 D' p' Q& @, Z& [ The Royal LePage Survey of Canadian House Prices is the largest, most' j z" ]: M* j2 G4 Z0 ]
comprehensive study of its kind in Canada, with information on seven types of
; I! j5 {8 i, a J2 E6 ihousing in over 250 neighbourhoods from coast to coast. This release
% l+ k; F: A" W4 dreferences an abbreviated version of the survey, which highlights house price; O( v5 X% F0 n% q& }4 [4 V
trends for the three most common types of housing in Canada in 80 communities9 y2 e5 i! p$ C/ Q3 {
across the country. A complete database of past and present surveys is
7 Q# T& ^6 P8 M# S7 I0 @3 J) q( @' I: gavailable on the Royal LePage Web site at www.royallepage.ca, and current8 J& k6 G; ^9 @/ |
figures will be updated following the end of the third quarter. A printable1 J" ^. ]7 C h: O
version of the third quarter 2006 survey will be available online on: d6 H' n0 t0 C* o9 u6 w& f) E
November 15, 2006.
0 r6 v. m$ Y/ _; z, Y, O- E Housing values in the Royal LePage Survey are Royal LePage opinions of
: A. k6 C# D7 s/ lfair market value in each location, based on local data and market knowledge7 H$ Q/ U7 W; N: D ~
provided by Royal LePage residential real estate experts. Historical data is
/ ^) q: ~' [# ^4 c7 u1 p: davailable for some areas back to the early 1970s. |
|