Wendy Koch
USA Today

The American dream is shrinking. For the first time in at least a decade, builders are substantially reducing the size of new houses.

“We’re trending toward smaller homes,” says Gopal Ahluwalia, director of research for the National Association of Home Builders. He says growth in the average size of new single-family homes, which went from 1,750 square feet in 1978 to 2,479 in 2007, is starting to reverse.

His analysis of Census data shows that homes started in the third quarter of 2008 averaged 2,438 square feet, down from 2,629 square feet in the second quarter. Ahluwalia, who began the quarterly analysis in 1999, says there have been slight dips before, but the latest drop was much steeper and is likely to hold even after the economy recovers.

In a survey of builders this month, his group found that 89% are building or planning smaller homes than they had been.

Kermit Baker, chief economist of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), also sees the shift toward smaller houses. He says it was obvious with high-end buyers even before the economic downturn and he expects it to continue with them.

In a survey last April, the AIA found twice as many architects reporting a size decline rather than an increase. In 2006, the reverse was true.

“Affordability is a major problem,” Ahluwalia says, and building smaller usually means cheaper. Also, he says, people are realizing as household size shrinks that they don’t need big homes.

Baker says there is less incentive to buy a bigger, more expensive home as the economy weakens, home prices fall and energy costs remain a concern. He says people are less likely to see a home as a good investment.

Even high-end buyers, Baker says, are showing more interest in smaller, better-crafted homes.

“People don’t want to be wasteful,” says JD Callander of Weichert Realtors. She says they are concerned about utility costs and cleaning requirements.

Clients used to like the status of a big home, she says, but “those days are gone.”

Vancouverites could be on the hook for hundreds of millions to guarantee Olympic Village loan

Miro Cernetig
Sun

Vancouver’s Olympic Village under construction. Photograph by: Steve Bosch, Vancouver Sun

The news from Vancouver’s Olympic Village is becoming dire. And next Thursday is the day this billion-dollar financial minefield could blow up for the world to see.

That’s when the companies that are building Vancouver’s billion-dollar Olympic Village hope to access more of a $750-million construction loan from Wall Street, to keep constructing the crown jewel of Canada’s 2010 Winter Olympics.

But suddenly, there’s a problem in getting that money. The city might have to offer as much as half a billion dollars in loan guarantees as security, significantly more than the $100 million it has already put up to keep the Olympic Village construction going.

The project’s main, U.S. financier, Wall Street’s formidable Fortress Investment Group, has toughened conditions for accessing its loan. Fortress is asking the City of Vancouver to guarantee most of the $750-million loan it has offered to build the $1.2-billion Olympic Village.

That borrowed money is the primary source of funds for the work crews and developers, working on an increasingly tight — and tenuous — schedule to get the Olympic Athletes’ Village built by this October.

But with its own share price in a slump, the global banking crisis still unwinding and a falling real estate market in Vancouver, Fortress essentially wants a guarantee from the City of Vancouver and its taxpayers that it will be paid. It wants the city to make good on the project’s loan and interest costs if the Olympic Village fails as a real estate venture.

In short, the profitability of the Olympic Village, whose condos were supposed to be sold to the public at great profit after being used by Olympic athletes, is no longer viewed as such a sure thing. In fact, those close to the deal — now watching condo prices drop dramatically — wonder if the deal will ever make a profit.

So here’s what Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson is facing. You’ll be hearing it in the next few days, when he makes it public:

The Wall Street financial firm is saying it will continue to lend the money to build the Olympic Village — on the condition Vancouverites absorb most of the future risk. The money will be loaned until 2010, as promised, under contract, if the city guarantees repayment of the loans to Fortress.

Here’s the financial — and political — challenge to Mayor Robertson, and why he’s got to find another way to get the village built.

First, the rates of Fortress’ loans, negotiated long before he took office, are high by today’s standards: about eight per cent (or more) per annum, roughly $50 million a year or more for the project, according those I spoke to close to the deal. That is eroding the project’s profitability. It’s also about double the rates that might be negotiated if a similar loan were renegotiated today, with the city’s backing and solid credit rating.

Secondly, it no longer seems the Olympic Village condos can be quickly sold off by 2010, as was expected. That was what made this deal work.

The local real estate market has slowed dramatically. Only 250 of the 750 Olympic Village condos have been sold. The new plan — a prudent one — is to delay the sale of the others until the market rebounds and avoid fire-sale prices at taxpayers’ expense.

But that prudence comes at a cost, too. It means loan financing costs won’t end on the Olympic Village by 2010. Instead, they could drag on for years, until all the units are sold.

That means the loans to carry the project will need to be extended, perhaps for years. That will entails tens of millions of dollars in added carrying costs a year, too.

But the Olympic Village’s red ink might deepen even further. There is no guarantee — if the real estate market sags longer than expected — that the Olympic condos will ever be sold at prices high enough to recoup the original investment and carrying costs.

So what’s the focus of the Gregor Robertson administration these days? It’s the only one left: Refinance, as soon as possible.

Mayor Robertson and his advisers hope to find alternative sources of financing for the Olympic Village project, to reduce loan costs for the city and the developers building the project. That might enable them to renegotiate the Fortress loan, using the leverage of the Triple A ratings of the provincial and federal governments.

So far, those governments aren’t saying much. The province, in fact, continues to say this is the city’s problem, not theirs. But that’s a mistake. This is the moment when the West Coast’s biggest city needs the help of the bigger boys at the negotiating table. The city’s past administrations messed up badly.

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

RICHMOND: Low-cost housing, child-care centre among casualties

KENT SPENCER
Province

Richmond Coun. Bill McNulty stands under SkyTrain tracks at No. 3 Road and Capstan Way where a station and other developments have been halted because of the recession.

Richmond stands to lose $25 million in developer-added benefits as a major downtown condo project is shut down, says a city councillor.“This is Richmond’s first casualty in the economic downturn,” Coun. Bill McNulty said yesterday. “Our losses are extremely significant.”

Staff sent a report to Richmond’s general purposes committee yesterday, recommending that approval be rescinded for the Capstan Village development at No. 3 Road and Capstan Way.

Staff said the developers, Pinnacle International and Concord Pacific, have not fulfilled their requirements since preliminary approval was given 20 months ago.

“The development brought a laudable opportunity to the community. It was a stimulus to north Richmond. You can’t measure that. I don’t know if the next proposal will be the same,” said McNulty.

Councillors will likely vote on the issue on Jan. 12.

McNulty said the developers have withdrawn their promise to pay $15 million toward a Canada Line station at Capstan Way.
Instead, Pinnacle’s Dan Kent offered $500,000 in a Nov. 27 letter to council. The balance would follow upon 50per-cent completion of the project.

Staff said the offer was not secured by a letter of credit and was not acceptable to TransLink, which is building the line. Pinnacle representatives did not return phone calls yesterday.

The station would have served 16 highrise towers and 2,136 housing units. It would have been added after Canada Line’s completion later this year.

“Stations are usually built when there’s people. Now, there’s no people,” said spokesman Alan Dever of the Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc., which is building the Canada Line.

McNulty said Richmond also stands to lose 50,000 square feet of low-cost rental housing and $4 million in funding for a 25-space child-care facility. A Richmond property was also due to be sold on the seven-hectare site.

In the meantime, the zoning would revert to commercial and industrial.

Region will show the nation

Prices may be down this year, but they