Toronto E18HTEEN Erskine | 106.98m | 35s | KG | Kirkor Architects

I use to buy candy in that store. One time I walked in and the women had her foot up on the desk clipping her toenails. Gross. Glad they're demolishing it.
 
someMidTowner said:
240 one-bedroom units out of 300 isn't a good look for Y/E And not a single 3br unit? come on
Click to expand...

Developers are mealy responding to market demand. Either the city regulates the inclusion of larger scale apartments or promotes its construction through incentives or subsidies.
 
fedplanner said:
Developers are mealy responding to market demand. Either the city regulates the inclusion of larger scale apartments or promotes its construction through incentives or subsidies.
Click to expand...

it's not market demand. it's price point and developers profits ! TO's overpriced r/e market has pushed prices beyond what is affordable even with current low interest rates, and developers are cramming in more narrow and deep units with windowless bedrooms per floorplate.

between 5 and 10 years ago the same point tower floorplate accommodated 8 units at most, now it's 10+.

unless the new condos constructed within the past 5 years have the ability to be merged to larger units in the future, demographics indicate TO will have more suppy than demand for these 450-500 sq ft boxes.
 
cdr108 said:
it's not market demand. it's price point and developers profits ! TO's overpriced r/e market has pushed prices beyond what is affordable even with current low interest rates, and developers are cramming in more narrow and deep units with windowless bedrooms per floorplate.

between 5 and 10 years ago the same point tower floorplate accommodated 8 units at most, now it's 10+.

unless the new condos constructed within the past 5 years have the ability to be merged to larger units in the future, demographics indicate TO will have more suppy than demand for these 450-500 sq ft boxes.
Click to expand...

although I take issue with many of your points above, what's your proposed solution to this perceived problem?

If there will be an oversupply of 450-500 as ft boxes, presumably there will be less of them constructed when this happens.

I believe Toronto would be wise to regulate thru zoning for larger units in condo developments along with offering density incentives for mixed-uses and affordable units.

And it is market demand! If people were willing to pay $500 per square ft fir a 1200 square Dr 3 bedroom condo, then that's what would be built. There is more demand for smaller units at that price, so that's what developers are building.
 
cdr108 said:
it's not market demand. it's price point and developers profits ! TO's overpriced r/e market has pushed prices beyond what is affordable even with current low interest rates, and developers are cramming in more narrow and deep units with windowless bedrooms per floorplate.

between 5 and 10 years ago the same point tower floorplate accommodated 8 units at most, now it's 10+.

unless the new condos constructed within the past 5 years have the ability to be merged to larger units in the future, demographics indicate TO will have more suppy than demand for these 450-500 sq ft boxes.
Click to expand...

What is an acceptable profit for developers? Just curious when the last time you looked at a developer pro-forma?

Residential developers are like almost all other busineses that look to maximize profits. The market can take a turn for the worse at any time, there is tremendous risk in the condo business, they price their units to maximize profit while also maximizing absorption levels.

I agree that the industry is probably building too many small suites, the market is catering to investors as opposed to end-users, but the reality is that is who the buyers are.

If developers could sell three bedroom units at a profit, then I'm sure they would. When buyers start demanding 3B units at the going price per-square-foot, developers will market them.

It would make for an interesting debate if developers are at fault for the the 'expensive' real estate in Toronto, they've made the city a more desirable place to live, but without new suites, how expensive would the city be?
 
BMyers said:
What is an acceptable profit for developers? Just curious when the last time you looked at a developer pro-forma?

Residential developers are like almost all other busineses that look to maximize profits. The market can take a turn for the worse at any time, there is tremendous risk in the condo business, they price their units to maximize profit while also maximizing absorption levels.

I agree that the industry is probably building too many small suites, the market is catering to investors as opposed to end-users, but the reality is that is who the buyers are.

If developers could sell three bedroom units at a profit, then I'm sure they would. When buyers start demanding 3B units at the going price per-square-foot, developers will market them.

It would make for an interesting debate if developers are at fault for the the 'expensive' real estate in Toronto, they've made the city a more desirable place to live, but without new suites, how expensive would the city be?
Click to expand...

I agree with you.
It is stupid to question whether developers are making too much profit. Developers should and will also care most about profits, otherwise, why else do we think they are in the business, to make the city prettier? If building 120sf will maximize profit and they will do it and there is nothing wrong with that because there is a demand. I am 100% sure those who are quetioning the profits of developers will do exactly the same thing if they were developers themselves.

Let's be honest, demand for 3 bedrooms is small, which is the only reason not many of them are being built. At Y/E, at 550/sf, a 1200sf three bedroom will cost $660K, plus $40-50K for a parking spot; assuming $0.5/sf condo fee, monthly condo fee is a whopping $600 a month, to be escalated 3-5% a year. Let's ask ourselves, how many of us here are willing to buy these units, instead of a $700k nice single family house with no fees a bit farther away from the core?

We all say developers should build larger units so that families can live there. Question is, do you want to throw in $650-700K into a 3br condo plus $7000-8000 condo fee annually as a family? If not, why do you insist developers should build these units? market price is there, and this is the only reason they are not building large units because they are unaffordable and not many families will be interested in living in them. Always blaming developers for their greed is futile. Being greedy and profit-driven within the boundary of laws and regulations is their fiduciary duty.
 
cdr108 said:
it's not market demand. it's price point and developers profits ! TO's overpriced r/e market has pushed prices beyond what is affordable even with current low interest rates, and developers are cramming in more narrow and deep units with windowless bedrooms per floorplate.
Click to expand...

while i was condo-shopping, I was shocked to find so many new condos, while glamourous on the outside, have such pathetic inside. Since when windowless bedrooms with sliding doors become acceptable? Some don't even have doors and should be called a den instead of a bedroom. There should be a regulation prohibiting windowless rooms be labled as "bedroom". In many cases these bedrooms can fit a double bed and ONE night table, leaving hardly any space for you to walk.

the livingroom is usually cramped, with the "kitchen" along one wall. I often struggle where to put even a love seat and a TV stand since there is obviously no space. Not to mention something usual such as a small dining table, a desk, or a bookshelf. I used to view a unit at Casa, which with 495sf, including the balcony, charges $299,000.

I wonder whether Toronto is entering a compact living trend following Manhattan and most European cities, where a couple living in 495sf becomes the norm, or it is just a temporary thing. I am actually not sure why people are still buying those shiny new condos, when nearby older ones at the same price range offer 30% more space, although less glitzy lobbies and amenities.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with Balenciaga (!). For the price point it would cost to buy a 3 bedroom condo, you could easily buy a house - not necessarily in the exact same location, but the house would likely be 50% larger at the same price point. That is why the demand is limited. Until people actually want to buy these units (and some do, don't get me wrong), they won't be offered in large numbers. Another thing is that rising costs for low rise housing might eventually lend this market some more impetus, as the lowrise segment is poised to outperform condos over the next few years, bringing the cost benefit equation more toward the condo and increasing demand. Some regulation requiring a certain percentage of larger units would not be horrible to me for the long run, however.

As to the developer greed, again I agree: they won't build if they can't make a profit. However, I don't agree that building a better city should not be part of the builder's equation - that is where a better design board could be put into place - as it could ultimately increase the builder's profit in the future if they become known for quality and beauty (though this is muted by investors who don't visit the buildings).

Last, there should be regulation against the type of bedroom that is proliferating in Toronto now that Balenciaga describes: bedrooms with no windows and the like. Not good for long-term livability. This is my fear regarding the 3-bedroom regulation: 3 bedrooms @ 750 sq. ft. with 9x9 rooms just to meet the rules on paper. This is happening in the ED and other places downtown IIRC.
 
N C said:
495sqft for two is luxurious compared to most cities, especially the ones people on this forum tend to idolize
Click to expand...

true.
While we idolize the city of Paris, do we realize how much space the Parisians have to sacrifice in order to live in such a museum like old city where practically every single building is heritage and untouchable? I used to stay with a friend at the 15th arrondissement. The roughly 120sf apartment charges 650 euros, or $1000 a month. Selling price starts at about 9,000-10,000 euros per square meter, pretty much the same range as Trump tower or Shangrila The Parisians probably make no more money than Torontonians, after their high taxes.

Paris has a very tight heigh limit, which essentially makes more housing supply impossible. For those who hate height and prefer all lowrise and 6 storey midrise buildings and think the entire city should look like Jarvis st, this means supply will be low and price will be high. Are we ready to embrace that and ditch our 2000sf SFH with garage dreams? Are we willing to pay $1,100/sf for an average apartment?

San Francisco is another example where supply of housing has been restricted, resulting in very unaffordable prices. On the other hand, cities like Chicago have been pro-development, which has kept housing price quite affordable (no it is not because Chicago is less desirable, it has a massive population).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top