Family Sized Condos

[cdr108]

Translated: You want big units for cheaper than they are now.

The reason the condos are small is because of cost. Sizes are shrinking to accommodate the incomes of those buying. BTW, as I mentioned earlier in the thread I actually considered buying a 3-bedroom condo in my condo complex downtown but decided against it because of the cost. Let me tell you though, those large units didn't move quickly, but when they did, they were purchased by empty nesters, not young families.

And, when it came time to sell many years later, it was the 1 and 2-bedroom units that appreciated the most. The 3-bedroom units in my complex also appreciated significantly, but not to the same extent percentage wise.

BTW, I know several in 2-bedroom units who had kids during that time period. They ended moving out of downtown. Not a single family that I know of bought one of the 3-bedroom units in my complex. They just moved to places like Riverdale, and are very happy there.

as you said, it comes down to cost, and value.

why buy 3-bed dt condo when the cost is similar to 3-bed SFH just minutes outside of the dt core?

 

[Jennypea]

well, as someone who lives in a 3brm condo on King West with two kids I can say that I'd MUCH rather live in my condo than a SFH just outside of the core. hubby and I can both walk/bike to work. the kids are in a great daycare/school two treelined blocks away. we have trinity bellwoods park and a great community at our fingertips and while we own a car it barely gets used. Offer me a 3brm detached home in etobicoke to trade and i'd turn it down in a heartbeat.

that being said, we bought our place 5 years ago so we're fairly grounded in our neighbourhood and didn't pay an arm and a let.

 

[Eug]

That's great and that's fine. I just think it is selfish for a minority of condo buyers to advocate forcing the market to build more 3-bedroom units than is necessary and to lower their cost, just so that minority can benefit at the expense of others. IMHO, the demand for such units is already supported. There are already many larger units in the core. However, people are complaining just because they can't afford them.

As for taxation, I think utilization of assessed home value is a great way to levy a flat tax. I don't want to see condo property tax mill rated decrease unless everyone gets a decrease. If anything, I'd like to see SFH assessments become more accurate. I get the impression that SFH are under assessed more often than small condos.

PS. My sis just bought an 1800 sq ft waterfront condo. But it's a 2-bedroom because she has no use for a 3-bedroom. The extra bedroom would just be wasted space.

 

[cdr108]

well, as someone who lives in a 3brm condo on King West with two kids I can say that I'd MUCH rather live in my condo than a SFH just outside of the core. hubby and I can both walk/bike to work. the kids are in a great daycare/school two treelined blocks away. we have trinity bellwoods park and a great community at our fingertips and while we own a car it barely gets used. Offer me a 3brm detached home in etobicoke to trade and i'd turn it down in a heartbeat.

that being said, we bought our place 5 years ago so we're fairly grounded in our neighbourhood and didn't pay an arm and a let.

i wasnt referring to etobicoke ... more like BWV, Riverdale, Danforth, Roncescevalle, etc ... still downtown but not the core per se.
even in KW, one could buy a SFH in the area for the price of a 3-bed condo.

 

[Ex-Montreal Girl]

As an empty nester who recently sold a five BR house in Riverdale and bought a 3 BR condo not far away (which i was thrilled to find!), I can say that there were basically 2 sorts of people coming through the open house at my place and the open houses I went to to see how i should price my property.

1. Young couples with a baby, and maybe another on the way, coming from a downtown condo

2. Older couples -- empty nesters or with college-aged kids -- who were sick and tired of the commute and were willing to sacrifice their big homes in King City or wherever for walkability to restaurants, shopping etc.

I am a baby boomer and I know, based on what I see from my friends in Riverdale, the Beaches, Leslieville, Bloor West etc., that they want large apartments downtown or in central locations like where they currently live. They want to downsize, but not miniaturize, and they want room for their grandkids to spend a weekend. They despair of finding such affordable places in locations that suit them. They don't want to leave their neighbourhoods or go too far from them.

It makes sense to knock down walls in Montreal. I lived in such a rental unit myself on the border of Westmount for a while. It was approx 2500 sf, and it was much cheaper to rent than anything comparable in Toronto.

I have a 3 BR and contemplated buying two 2BR in this building. But the condo rules, logistics, issues with walls and plumbing that affect other unit owners, not to mention cost, was prohibitive.

I fail to see why adding a few larger units is so expensive for developers since they can (1) charge more for them and (2) save on the front end with fewer costs for things like plumbing etc. Two BR+den require two kitchens, for example, and sometimes 2 bathrooms each. A 3BR needs one kitchen and 2 bathrooms.

I am no construction expert. But I do see a coming disaster in these neighbourhoods.

Don't forget St. James Town was built and sold sold as "Fun City" to the swinging 60s singles who moved on to Scarberia and Etobicoke when they married because those were seen as the places to raise a family. (Oh the irony.)

I can't help but wonder what will become of all these highly-concentrated towers of tiny boxes in a few years.

 

[AKS]

I fail to see why adding a few larger units is so expensive for developers since they can (1) charge more for them and (2) save on the front end with fewer costs for things like plumbing etc. Two BR+den require two kitchens, for example, and sometimes 2 bathrooms each. A 3BR needs one kitchen and 2 bathrooms.

1) Large units are difficult to sell. They sit around for a long time. I recently read in an RE report (flyer) that condos over $500,000 aren't selling. Units under $350k are selling.

2) Builders can sell small units faster. The quicker they get 80% sold, the quicker they can get financing and start building.

3) They can make more if the units are smaller. For example, selling 1 unit that's 1000 sq ft makes less money than selling 2 units at 500 sq ft. occupying the same space.
Smaller units can be sold at a higher price per square feet as opposed to large units. The smaller the unit, the higher the PSF.

 

[uptownto]

I have a 3 BR and contemplated buying two 2BR in this building. But the condo rules, logistics, issues with walls and plumbing that affect other unit owners, not to mention cost, was prohibitive.

The condo boards can definitely be a roadblock so this is where I think law changes should be made (in the Ontario Condo Act?) so that if a family intends to convert 2 units into 1, as long as they follow the requirements set out in the law (eg) having approved plans by an architect, licensed & insured renovators, etc), the board should have no say in the matter. New York doesn't have such a law. There you have to acquire both units that you intend to combine, and THEN apply to the board to approve combining them. That's a lot of risk but it happens enough which means the demand is really high. Also in NY, larger apartments sell for higher PSF than smaller ones which is the opposite of what happens in Toronto (for now).

But yes, I imagine it would be an expensive undertaking. Probably 6 figures for a minimal combination.

Here's a NY combo that used to be 2 1BR units combined into one with a slide Guess they wanted to use the space for that instead of a 3rd bedroom.
http://www.homedsgn.com/2011/03/09/duplex-apartment-with-a-helical-slide-in-new-york-city/

 

[W. K. Lis]

The condo boards can definitely be a roadblock so this is where I think law changes should be made (in the Ontario Condo Act?) so that if a family intends to convert 2 units into 1, as long as they follow the requirements set out in the law (eg) having approved plans by an architect, licensed & insured renovators, etc), the board should have no say in the matter. New York doesn't have such a law. There you have to acquire both units that you intend to combine, and THEN apply to the board to approve combining them. That's a lot of risk but it happens enough which means the demand is really high. Also in NY, larger apartments sell for higher PSF than smaller ones which is the opposite of what happens in Toronto (for now).

But yes, I imagine it would be an expensive undertaking. Probably 6 figures for a minimal combination.

Here's a NY combo that used to be 2 1BR units combined into one with a slide Guess they wanted to use the space for that instead of a 3rd bedroom.
http://www.homedsgn.com/2011/03/09/duplex-apartment-with-a-helical-slide-in-new-york-city/

Unfortunately, square footage includes the interior stairs, where the original apartments were above and below. There would be more space living space available if the original apartments were side-by-side.

 

[cdr108]

Here's a NY combo that used to be 2 1BR units combined into one with a slide Guess they wanted to use the space for that instead of a 3rd bedroom.
http://www.homedsgn.com/2011/03/09/duplex-apartment-with-a-helical-slide-in-new-york-city/

"Two identical one-bedroom units, one atop the other were combine together into a 2,400 square-foot duplex two-bedroom "

funny how 1,200 sq ft is a 1-bedroom unit in NYC vs. 500 sq ft in TO.
looking at the floorplan, the original 1,200 sq ft layout could have been transformed to 2-bed + office unit easily, but they obviously have the $$$ and wanted the additional space.

 

[Eug]

"Two identical one-bedroom units, one atop the other were combine together into a 2,400 square-foot duplex two-bedroom "

funny how 1,200 sq ft is a 1-bedroom unit in NYC vs. 500 sq ft in TO.
looking at the floorplan, the original 1,200 sq ft layout could have been transformed to 2-bed + office unit easily, but they obviously have the $$$ and wanted the additional space.

My sister's 2-bedroom condo in Toronto is almost 1800 square feet. My mom's 1-bedroom condo is about 750 square feet but with a 180 square foot patio.

 

[cdr108]

My sister's 2-bedroom condo in Toronto is almost 1800 square feet. My mom's 1-bedroom condo is about 750 square feet but with a 180 square foot patio.

when were the above constructed?
the above were the norm about 15 years agoi GTA, but the 2-bed 1,800 sq ft is an anomoly ... sounds like something that combined 2 units into 1. iirc i don't know if units that big were common in Tip Top Lofts (i think that's where you said she lives)

it's rare to find 1-bed units bigger than 600 sq ft, or 2-bed units bigger than 1,000 sq ft in Toronto now.

the NYC apartments/condo, according to the article is new construction:

“TCA has had a lot of experience connecting smaller apartments together into a seamless whole, but this adventurous client requested something we’d never seen before. In a newly constructed multi-residential development, in the East Village of NYC, TCA had the opportunity to meet a unique client’s desire to combine two penthouse condos… with a helical slide.

 

[Ex-Montreal Girl]

If they build it, they will come

I appreciate all the talk of economics and sf costs and profits.

Capitalism is a b-tch ain't it?

I fail to see why developers should be allowed to wreck the fabric of a city. They are already making things dangerous with all that fall, cracking, contracting and expanding glass.

Perhaps (what I believe to be the perceived) lack of demand has to do with the fact that all those tiny boxes in a building makes it less desirable for family living. Who wants to raise their kids in a frat house where there's partying in the halls and puke in the elevator? (And, if you think I am kidding, I invite you to check out some of those buildings on a weekend.)

Why convert two units in a building like that when, in five years, the building will be a slum? Too many of the current residents are renters or people just passing through.

If a building has nothing but larger units -- and, BTW, many empty-nesters with dough want larger units but can't afford Yorkville -- it will attract a whole different crowd with a stake in maintaining the building. They'd pay a few bucks more per s.f. if it's the right building in the right location.

I really hate this attitude of, oh, it can't be done, oh it's not profitable, oh there's no demand.

If you build it, I can guarantee that they will come.

 

[ponyboy]

Well said. Thanks.

 

[AKS]

If you build it, I can guarantee that they will come.

Not with most people's mindset. Like CDR says, if it costs as much as a SFH, most would rather spend money on a SFH than a condo. But you can't expect a large condo downtown to be cheaper than a SFH outside of downtown. That's why large units don't sell well. Builders were forced to build it, but they have difficulty selling it. Berczy at St. Lawrence market area offered a lot of large units but in the end, they had to cave in and broke up the remaining large units they couldn't sell into 2-3 smaller units.

 

[Ex-Montreal Girl]

Thanks PonyBoy

I don't doubt this was true in the past.

But the market is changing and here's why I say that.

Millennials, aka Gen Y, have different mindsets and priorities. Not all of them, of course. but enough of them to constitute a market. They ride bikes all over town, like to live in the core, and are not suddenly going to move to Pickering and buy two cars because a 1500 sf townhouse there is cheaper than a 1200 sf condo downtown-ish.

Aging baby boomers, who live in areas like Riverdale and the Annex or Bloor West, the ones who moved into these hoods when they were borderline slummy and renovated and turned them into what they became, want to stay close by because they are used to an urban lifestyle. They already accepted smaller homes in their younger years, preferring tiny backyards to bigger spreads in Mississauga or wherever because they preferred not to spend their life on the DVP or in white breadville. Well, a lot of them can't handle the stairs anymore, and want less stress. They aren't suddenly going to pack off for a condo in North York. They will sell their homes for $1M or more. Some of them will rent. But all of them will stay in the core -- if they can find places to live.

Smart marketers don't plan for the past. They plan for the future.

BTW, this just in.

Location-efficient homes — the opposite of urban sprawl — are a convenient distance from workplaces, amenities (such as stores and urban hubs) and/or rapid transit.

Residents in Ontario and elsewhere increasingly say they would give up a large house and yard and a long car commute in favour of location-efficient homes.

Live Where You Go identifies five policy tools that could be put in place now to encourage more location-efficient development in the Greater Golden Horseshoe region — creating more affordable choices for homebuyers to live where they go, work and play.