News   Apr 18, 2024
Long Term Care Facility to be Built at Hennick Bridgepoint Hospital
 700     0 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Canada's Tallest Tower to be Taller, Again
 6.3K     2 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Originate Developments Achieves Zoning Approval for Two Ambitious Residential Projects
 2.4K     4 

Public vs private amenity space

F

fedplanner

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
572
Reaction score
18
Location
NYC
Zoning requires a minimum amount of square footage be dedicated toward private amenity space for new residential developments. The philosophy behind this is to prevent new developments from placing an undue burden on existing public amenities. I often wonder if this requirement triggers the law of unintended consequences.

Picture a gated residential subdivision with private pool, club house, and green space. Would it not be better for the community if those facilities were public and easily accessible by the surrounding community.

In the case of a condo development, I wonder if its feasible to allow developers to choose to make their amenity space public or to serve multiple new confominims in an area. The pool, gym, and other amenities be constructed by in the podium, then transfered over to the city or other non-profit organization like the Y. In theory, it should result in lower maintenance fees for the condo owners while opening up the amenities, on a user fee basis, for the overall community. Is that new desirese form of city building? Is it even practical?

I've heard the term vertical subdivisions on here and I believe the term has merit. How can new condominiums be better integrated into the community.

Just musing this afternoon
 
if i paid money for my condo....it was to keep people out and only accessible to my neighbors[paid]

this is why condos have security and a gate. to keep out the trash
 
That's weird, most of the trash in the area live in the condo building with me.

It would be a question of scale. The pool in my building is too small for residents, not to mention neighbourhood guests....for example. You would end up with the inverse: the public overburdening the private.
 
Sounds like it would be a good solution for some condos (perhaps making them more affordable/in reach to some people) while others who prefer to stay exclusive & private should just stay that way. *shrugs*
 
I think the city should be prepared to expand public facilities like pools, parks and community centres rather than expecting developers to build everything. I don't think anyone would want to live in a condo whose amenities are open to the public when it's the owners paying to maintain them. Public facilities are better for building a sense of community and social cohesion. If people want private amenities for their condo, that's fine, but they shouldn't supersede public amenities. People from different socioeconomic backgrounds can meet and socialize with each other at public facilities, whereas the condo amenities are only for the similar people who live in the condo.
 
junctionist said:
I think the city should be prepared to expand public facilities like pools, parks and community centres rather than expecting developers to build everything. I don't think anyone would want to live in a condo whose amenities are open to the public when it's the owners paying to maintain them. Public facilities are better for building a sense of community and social cohesion. If people want private amenities for their condo, that's fine, but they shouldn't supersede public amenities. People from different socioeconomic backgrounds can meet and socialize with each other at public facilities, whereas the condo amenities are only for the similar people who live in the condo.
Click to expand...

No, no... the OP said "on a user fee basis" -- the idea would be to decrease the costs to the owners. I mean, pools and gyms are de rigueur in condos now, but I'll bet in some cases they are barely used. Maybe a user fee or even some kind of membership structure for those that live nearby would discourage the non-residents from just trashing it, plus lower the maintenance costs for the residents.
 
Good luck passing this kind of Motion to change the rules at any condo, at any AGM!
 
I'm not suggesting for existing condo corporations to change their rules to allow for public access of private amenity space. What I am suggesting is to revisit the city planning requirement for a minimum amount of private amenity space to be included in each new condo development. I believe the need for amenity space would be better served with new or expanded community centres, supported by user fees.

The logic behind the city planning requirement for mandatory private amenity space is that new condo residents should not burden existing public amenities in a community. However, this may have the unintended consequence of isolating condo residents from the rest of the community. Additionally, with the condo boom, does it really make sense to require each new condo developments to have their own pool, gym, movie theater and whatever else may classify as amenity space these days? The new and existing residents would be better served with a community centre containing the public amenity space.

Amenity space has been ingrained as part of the marketing for new condo developments, but the upkeep of the amenity space is rolled into monthly maintenance fees, increasing the cost. It becomes an affordability issue for condo residents to pay for space they may never use.
 
fedplanner said:
not burden existing public amenities in a community
they dont, they pay taxes just like you, infact probably more than apartment dwellers.

It becomes an affordability issue for condo residents to pay for space they may never use.
clearly its not by the amount of condos sold. people will pay a premium to keep the rift raft out.
Click to expand...

answers in bold
 
fedplanner said:
:rolleyes:



Wrong! It's akin to having the option to forego the big backyard in exchange for being located near a city park. Not everyone wants a backyard and the costs associated with lawn care.
Click to expand...

If you want to build a condo in the future with a community center in the bottom floor and everbody buying units is aware thats completely different.

People who already bought condos bought it with the intention of keeping people out.
 
Yes, thanks for that, but no one was suggesting existing amenity space be repurposed.

Besides, I've already told ya, half my area's riff raff lives in my condo building.
 
fedplanner said:
Wrong! It's akin to having the option to forego the big backyard in exchange for being located near a city park. Not everyone wants a backyard and the costs associated with lawn care.
Click to expand...
Another option is to keep the big yard and pool for yourself and hire the riff raff to maintain it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top