British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Canada (https://britishexpats.com/forum/canada-56/)
-   -   A mls listing question, in BC (https://britishexpats.com/forum/canada-56/mls-listing-question-bc-337911/)

Cowtown Nov 17th 2005 1:45 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 
The basement should always be excluded - look for the "above grade" details.

The grey point comes with four splits where the third level is below grade but still above the basement - some realtors include this and some exclude it.

Watch out for 'open to above' areas - some realtors count this again in the sq footage even though you are unable to actually walk on it upstairs.

jcexit Nov 17th 2005 1:58 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Souvenir
In Oakville, the word "park" is used to describe any patch of grass larger that 10 square feet.

We were in College Park. Not the prettiest part of town, I have to admit. Our house was spectacularly ugly from the outside. Sold incredibly quickly, though.

College Park, I know it well. The ugliest townhouses in that area must be in Napier. They have taken to cramming houses in tightly in Oakville, resulting in small back yards. There is very little privacy unless you are in an end unit, in which case you might be grateful to have a 'Parkette' on one side of you!

iaink Nov 17th 2005 2:09 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 
Looking at the pic Im pretty sure thats 1800 without the basement.

Souvenir Nov 17th 2005 2:21 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by jcexit
College Park, I know it well. The ugliest townhouses in that area must be in Napier. They have taken to cramming houses in tightly in Oakville, resulting in small back yards. There is very little privacy unless you are in an end unit, in which case you might be grateful to have a 'Parkette' on one side of you!

I've never been Napier but I'm prepared to bet that mine was uglier than anything down there. Next time you're in the area, go have a look at Oakdale (off Oxford). You'll see what I mean. :eek:

There are none for sale at the moment, so I can't give you an MLS link.

I know what you mean about cramming, though. Those new developments up by Dundas just depressed me.

iaink Nov 17th 2005 2:35 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Souvenir
Those new developments up by Dundas just depressed me.

Driving along Taunton yesterday depressed me. 29' houses on 30' lots :eek:

I remember when all that was fields...well, golf courses anyway.

jcexit Nov 17th 2005 2:36 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Souvenir
I've never been Napier but I'm prepared to bet that mine was uglier than anything down there. Next time you're in the area, go have a look at Oakdale (off Oxford). You'll see what I mean. :eek:

There are none for sale at the moment, so I can't give you an MLS link.

I know what you mean about cramming, though. Those new developments up by Dundas just depressed me.

Sorry, I had forgotten about Oakdale but still I am not sure that they are uglier than the townhouses in Napier Crescent (McCraney, Montclair (high school on corner), Sewell, Napier). Oddly enough I was thinking about the developments in along Dundas.

Souvenir Nov 17th 2005 2:44 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by jcexit
Sorry, I had forgotten about Oakdale but still I am not sure that they are uglier than the townhouses in Napier Crescent (McCraney, Montclair (high school on corner), Sewell, Napier). Oddly enough I was thinking about the developments in along Dundas.

I wouldn't have minded living at the top end of McCraney!

My townhouse did have one advantage that I suspect helped a lot in selling it so easily.

Souvenir Nov 17th 2005 2:54 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by jcexit
Sorry, I had forgotten about Oakdale but still I am not sure that they are uglier than the townhouses in Napier Crescent (McCraney, Montclair (high school on corner), Sewell, Napier). Oddly enough I was thinking about the developments in along Dundas.

I'd forgotten that you're a realtor.

jcexit Nov 17th 2005 2:55 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Souvenir
I wouldn't have minded living at the top end of McCraney!

My townhouse did have one advantage that I suspect helped a lot in selling it so easily.

I have to ask, what was that?

Souvenir Nov 17th 2005 2:59 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by jcexit
I have to ask, what was that?

Freehold.

Steve_P Nov 17th 2005 3:12 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Cowtown
The basement should always be excluded - look for the "above grade" details.

The grey point comes with four splits where the third level is below grade but still above the basement - some realtors include this and some exclude it.

This is the case with our home. When we purchased 18 years ago. It was listed as a 1050 square foot four level split even though it was fully developed. All four level splits were listed this way.

Recently we have seen similar model homes in our neighborhood listed as 1500 square feet. I am not sure when this change took place.

I guess it makes it more attractive square footage wise in an age were bigger is better. Not too many people are interested in looking at a 1050 square foot home these days, most want 1500 or larger.

Purley Nov 17th 2005 7:22 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 
I would be willing to bet that the 1800 sq. feet is on the two upper levels and the "basement" is the part behind the garage. Mind you, it could have a partial basement too, but it would not include the space beneath the garage.

I have a 4 level split. Whenever you see split levels for sale, at least in Saskatchewan, it will say 1,700 on three levels. My house has a basement - beneath the main floor, but I don't think you count that even if its completely finished.

Cowtown Nov 17th 2005 7:23 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by Hangman
This is the case with our home. When we purchased 18 years ago. It was listed as a 1050 square foot four level split even though it was fully developed. All four level splits were listed this way.

Recently we have seen similar model homes in our neighborhood listed as 1500 square feet. I am not sure when this change took place.

I guess it makes it more attractive square footage wise in an age were bigger is better. Not too many people are interested in looking at a 1050 square foot home these days, most want 1500 or larger.

Exactly - it all comes down to how the realtor feels about it.

For those in the UK: this house is on four levels with 1050 sq feet above grade. The first and third levels are off to the one side. The third level is below grade and often is not counted. Level two is probably above the basement. Everything is shifted by a half floor distance so there are only about six steps between each level.

Another "interesting" four split point: They are not all created equal. For a long time I thought all four splits had a walkout on the third level and a proper in ground basement. Now I know that this is not the case and that in some four splits both the third and fourth level can be what I regard to be "proper basements" - ie in the ground with little natural light. Obviously there should be a price premium for the walkout!

AnnetteM Nov 17th 2005 7:36 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 

Originally Posted by lipards
Does the size includes basement?
For example this:
http://www.mls.ca/PropertyDetails.as...ertyID=4144345

The same area same price usually around 1200sqf, but this one is 1800...thanks.


This is too funny - I work with the realtor who has this property listed, so I left him a message to ask him - he'll be back in a couple of hours, so I'll let you know for sure!!!

Purley Nov 17th 2005 7:36 am

Re: A mls listing question, in BC
 
In my house, the doors are on the main level. I have french doors off the dining room that go onto a deck that is level with the floor in the diningroom and its about 3 feet off the ground.

I have a third level that has windows that are 41 inches tall and together they are about 7 feet wide, so I have plenty of light on the third level. If you go outside though, the bottoms of the windows are about 2 feet off the ground. The basement is another thing. Down there I just have a little window about a foot high, so its pretty dark down there without the light on.

However, under the third level I have a crawl space which is about 3 feet high and has a concrete floor. It is a wonderful place to store all your junk, including about 500 broken skateboards - just the board part - that belong to my older son who is married and has his own house. If we ever want to move from here, he will either have to move to a bigger house to store all those skateboards or else we will have a big bonfire!

That seems to be how it goes with offspring. They move and take the good stuff and you get left storing their junk! And I am certainly not crawling around under there and hauling all that crap to the bin!


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 6:54 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.