Treadstone Associates
Case File № 198 · Construction & Land

Drawing against owned land, one inspected stage at a time, in Salmon Arm

With the land already owned free and clear, a self-build drew against a $410,000 construction budget in four inspected stages instead of a cash down payment. The completed mortgage landed at 73.9% loan-to-value and 37.0% GDS.

British ColumbiaUninsured · 74% LTVFiled August 7, 20265 min read
$145,000

in owned land equity, standing in for a cash down payment

73.9%

loan-to-value against the as-complete appraisal

37.0%

GDS on the completed construction-to-term mortgage

Anonymized illustration. The borrowers, dollar figures, and rates in this file are an illustrative composite — no real client is identifiable, and any rate shown is illustrative, not a quote. The rules are real: every regulatory figure is cited to its source in the Sources section, and the math computes exactly as shown.

№ 01

The client

A dual-income couple building on land they already owned, free and clear, in Salmon Arm, part of a BC Interior market where residential construction investment has stayed active through recent rate cycles. Rather than a cash down payment, the land’s appraised equity stood in for it, with the lender releasing draws only against completed, inspected stages of construction.

Borrowers

Dual-income couple, salaried

Combined income $9,400/month

Land

$145,000 owned equity, free and clear

Substituted for a cash down payment

Construction budget

$410,000 financed via progress draws

Released stage by stage against inspections

As-complete appraisal

$555,000

Land plus completed construction

Property carrying costs

Property tax $260/mo; heat estimate $170/mo

Lender-standard figures

Other debt

One auto loan at $410/mo

Current

№ 02

The problem

Draws that release only against inspected, completed stages are the lender’s own protection against paying for work not yet done — and they are also where a self-build most often stalls. If a stage inspection fails or is delayed, the draw does not release, and where mortgage deals actually die, stage by stage is rarely at the appraisal or the rate; it is at exactly this kind of sequencing gap.

The couple’s equity in the land was real, but only useful to the file if the appraiser credited it at a value the lender’s loan-to-value math actually needed — which meant getting the as-complete appraisal right mattered as much as the construction itself.

№ 03

The numbers

Four stages, four inspections, four draws — each sized as a percentage of the $410,000 construction mortgage.

The draw scheduleAmount
Excavation/foundation draw (15%)$61,500
Framing/lock-up draw (25%)$102,500
Drywall/interior draw (25%)$102,500
Final-completion draw (35%)$143,500
Total construction financed$410,000

$410,000 against the $555,000 as-complete appraisal — land plus completed construction — is 73.9% loan-to-value, comfortably inside conventional lending limits without any cash down beyond the land itself.

Qualifying the completed construction-to-term mortgage

Rate & paymentsFigure
Contract rate (illustrative, not a quote)5.69%
Minimum qualifying rate — greater of contract + 2% and 5.25%7.69%
Monthly payment at the qualifying rate$3,048
Monthly payment at the contract rate$2,548
GDS / TDSMonthly
Payment at the qualifying rate$3,048
Property tax$260
Heat$170
GDS: $3,478 ÷ $9,400 → 37.0%
Auto loan$410
TDS: $3,888 ÷ $9,400 → 41.4%
№ 04

The solution

A BCFSA-licensed submortgage broker sequenced the four inspections directly against the lender’s field appraiser’s calendar, rather than leaving the timing to chance between the couple’s trades and the lender’s process.

Understanding how progress advances actually get released meant no trade started a new stage before the prior draw had actually funded — the discipline that kept the build from ever stalling on a sequencing gap rather than a construction problem.

Land title and equity confirmation
Contractor quotes for each construction stage
Stage-inspection reports
Lender’s draw schedule and release conditions
Income documentation for both applicants
90-day funds evidence beyond the land equity
№ 05

The outcome

Completed and converted: all four draws released on schedule, the construction mortgage rolled into a term mortgage at 73.9% loan-to-value, 25-year amortization.

No title transfer occurred on this file — the land was already owned — so no provincial property transfer tax applied.

№ 06

What to take from this file

  • 01Owned land equity is a legitimate substitute for cash down, but only if the appraiser credits it at the value the lender’s math needs.
  • 02Never let a trade start a stage before its draw has actually funded. A stalled inspection stalls the whole build behind it.
  • 03As-complete value carries the loan-to-value math on a self-build, not the land value alone — get the appraisal that reflects both.
  • 04Four stages means four chances for a delay. Build the timeline with slack, not against it.

Sources

Every regulatory figure in this file traces to one of these primary sources. Client details and anything that varies by lender are illustrative, as flagged below.

Illustrative in this file — lender-specific, not rules:

  • 5.69% contract rate — rates move daily; not a quote.
  • the four-stage draw schedule and its percentages — each lender publishes its own draw schedule and inspection triggers.

Authority & provenance

How this case file was built

We publish the origin, the verification method and the reviewer for every case file, so you can judge how far to trust it before you rely on it with a client.

Where it comes from

Derived from files handled by Treadstone’s fulfillment desk and from scenarios contributed by partner brokerages. Names, employers, exact amounts and dates are changed so no client or file is identifiable.

Provenance: Composite — a pattern seen repeatedly on fulfilled files, not a single transaction.

What is verified

Every regulatory figure traces to a primary source listed above and was checked against it on the date shown. The arithmetic is recomputed by machine on every rebuild.

Anything that varies by lender is labelled illustrative rather than stated as a rule.

Who reviewed it

Reviewed for Canadian regulatory accuracy before publication, and re-checked whenever a cited rule changes.

Reviewed by: Nicholas Parson, Treadstone Associates — reviews every case file before publication.

First published 7 August 2026Rules last verified 7 August 2026Next scheduled review 7 February 2027

This case file is professional reference material for licensed mortgage professionals. It is not advice to a borrower, and it is not a lender commitment. Insurer rules, qualifying rates and provincial taxes change — confirm the current position with the insurer, regulator or lender before you rely on any figure here in a live file.

Treadstone fulfillment

Files like this are daily work for our desk.

Document collection, ratio math under multiple treatments, lender placement notes, and submission-ready packaging — for Canadian mortgage brokers who would rather be in front of clients.