Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada > Toronto
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2014, 06:52 PM
 
Location: Centre Wellington, ON
5,771 posts, read 5,990,010 times
Reputation: 3110

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
No, I am not saying people will live in small homes. I meant people just have to get used to multiple family dwellings, with neighbours and sharing walls and ceilings, and give up the idea of SFH completely.

You can't be making $65k a year and whine about not being able to afford those nice homes priced above $800k (which are unlikely to get any cheaper, at least not in the old Toronto boundary). There might be some bubble but I am sure in 20 years, homes will be even less affordable.

Toronto did build many apartments in the 60/70s, but are they primarily condos (instead of rental apartments)? And many of them are subsidized social housing, which is completely different from today's market priced condominiums whose target buyers are middle class young folks with university degrees, not the working poor.
I guess it depends what you call multifamily, but for instance, a lot of the bungalows in Toronto could be replaced by semi detached homes, which is something you see happening in Calgary but not in Toronto.

Honestly I don't think there's that much of a shortage of "family oriented" dwellings when you consider

1 bedroom homes make up 19% of the Toronto CMA's housing stock.
2 bedroom homes make up 21% of the Toronto CMA's housing stock.
3+ bedroom homes make up 60% of the Toronto CMA's housing stock.

Couple households with children and single parent households make up 42.7% of households including 18.2% with only one child leaving just 24.5% with 2+ children.
Single person households and couples without children make up 42.4% of households.
Other types of households including room-mate households and extended family households are 14.8% of the total.

Overall about 52% of households have children.

31.0% of households have 4 people or more

42.0% of homes are apartments
41.3% are SFH detached
16.6% are attached and semi-detached SFH

Based on demographics, it would seem 1 bedroom dwellings are undersupplied so it's not even so much families that will have to move into apartments as more small apartments needed for the households without children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-10-2014, 08:18 PM
 
10,839 posts, read 14,658,389 times
Reputation: 7872
such an inefficient way of living when 58% dwellings are lowrise SFHs. This is why GTA has to spread that far away and people need to commute hours just to get to their work place.

If each 2 story homes are replaced by not highrise but simply a 6 story midrise, then GTA would only need half of the land it currently occupies and building the infrastructure would be so much easier and cheaper.

What bothers me most is even areas where there are subway stations, such Castle Frank, Summer Hill, Lawrence, or most of the stations along Danforth or Bloor are dominated by nothing but two story single family homes. Then we whine about not many people are within walking distance to rapid transit - well, we build the stations but end up having low density neighhourhood surrounding them. The low density near Castle Frank, or Dupont is simply shocking. But I guess the possibility of having highrise or even midrise buildings will bring full scale NIMBY protests under all sorts of pretexts.

I like this saying: Stop complaining about traffic. If you are driving every day for everything you do, you are not stuck in traffic, you ARE the traffic.

Last edited by botticelli; 09-10-2014 at 08:29 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2014, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
564 posts, read 1,037,030 times
Reputation: 996
I think a shift in how people view multi-residential housing also has to happen. In our culture, living in an apartment has traditionally been viewed as a step down from living in a detached house. It is considered the bottom rung of the property ladder, where people start their residential lives before moving up to rowhouses, semis, or detached homes. I'm not sure this is the case in large urban centres in Europe, where living in a flat is not looked down upon but is the way most people live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2014, 08:51 PM
 
10,839 posts, read 14,658,389 times
Reputation: 7872
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthYorkEd View Post
I think a shift in how people view multi-residential housing also has to happen. In our culture, living in an apartment has traditionally been viewed as a step down from living in a detached house. It is considered the bottom rung of the property ladder, where people start their residential lives before moving up to rowhouses, semis, or detached homes. I'm not sure this is the case in large urban centres in Europe, where living in a flat is not looked down upon but is the way most people live.
no need to look at Europe. NYC is nearby. Not sure if the SFH owners look down upon Madison Ave or Chesea condo owners.

Of course owning a house in downtown or the Annex is something to be proud of, not so much for those in Scarborough, or Brampton, or Orangeville or Milton (wherever those places are I only have a very vague idea) if they have to commute hours every day.

I have a coworker who lives in Vaughan in her 2500sf house. By the time she is barely at Yonge/Bloor after work, about 90 minutes away from her mansion, I am already in my condo exercising; and when she almost arrives downtown after getting up at 6:45am and a long ride on various buses/trains, I barely finished brushing my teeth. I wonder if I should envy her large home or should pity her for the pain.

I personally think any lifestyle involving more than an hour commuting (return trip) is kind of stupid. There is nothing but boring than being stuck on the highway or standing in a crowded bus/train with nothing to do but staring at strangers' faces.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2014, 06:58 AM
 
1,217 posts, read 2,590,729 times
Reputation: 1358
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
If I could afford it, I would buy a 1500sf house in Leslieville or preferably Moore Park too. But I can't, neither can majority of Torontonians. Big and successful cities get increasing expensive, especially when it comes to housing price and people who don't make tons of money will just have to accept this fact. Life decisions is about maximizing your utilities given the available resources. It is never about "what I want", and it is silly to say I refuse to live in a 600sf condo no matter what as if it were completely livable.

I think you are a successful person career wise and you probably can afford providing a typical Canadian lifestyle for yourself and future children. What about the average people with family income of $68k (more like $50k after tax)? Any single family home is completely beyond their reach anywhere near the subway lines, not to mention in central areas. Median detached house price in 416 is about 950K, and well above 650k for semis. Do you think owning one is realistic for those average families?

Then they have two options: settle with smaller places and abandon their Canadian dream, or live somewhere 40 miles from work and the city and suffer excorticating commute every single day until they retire for the pride of owning a Canadian home. It is their choice.
I understand the average family income is not that high. So it comes down to preferences if you want to have a family. Let's say a family of 4 has a $500K budget.

(1) Two bedroom condo downtown. You cannot deny it will be tight space for 4 people. Doable for sure, but still not a lot of space. You will get to work quicker (assuming you work downtown). But unless you live in Midtown or a couple of other pockets (which is likely not affordable for $500K), the schools in downtown Toronto are not the greatest on average. Plus you may not have as easy access to hockey rinks and soccer practice and other amenities that one would want when raising a family. Also if you don't live right by a subway station, and I know many people that don't, commute time using street car then subway does come out around 45-50mins. And if you don't have proper parking in the condo or you are not right off the subway line, then it's harder for people with families out in the burbs (where most of them are) to come and visit or throw parties and stuff.

(2) House (decent sized, not massive) outside of the city in say Ajax or Mississauga or something like that. Commute time to work will be 1 hour - 1:20 mins with a more fixed train schedule coming home. It is true that some people spend 1.5 hours commuting but most do it in less time, and many do it in an hour if they are walking distance from Union. You'd get more space and better schools on average (a huge driver) plus a lot more family friendly amenities. When you have a family, you are not out eating and drinking late night so those city amenities don't mean as much as well - life is focused on work-kids-work-kids, it is what it is. For a lower budget, living in a boring suburb is a trade off people have to make and probably suits many people's lifestyle. On the flip side, you will need a car but this will increase what you can do greatly in terms of family-oriented activities and visiting family/friends. You might even need one if you live downtown.

My point is that there are many considerations for those with families and people do have preferences that may be different from me or yourself. Like I said, I'm not a suburbs guy but I can see why many people with families choose it and I'm not judging them for it.

Last edited by johnathanc; 09-11-2014 at 07:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2014, 09:53 PM
 
24 posts, read 28,570 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthYorkEd View Post

Back in the 80's, while growing up, we viewed big houses as something to covet and aspire to. Now I see them as giant wastes of space and resources. So you can afford a mega-mansion. So what? Think of the costs associated with keeping it running, just so you can strut and swing the big di*k in front of your friends and neighbours. I now see them as nothing more than huge drains of both money and energy, and there are better things to do with both.
I'm sorry to break it to you but....Don't you think your reaction is because you're getting old and jaded?!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2014, 07:36 AM
 
10,839 posts, read 14,658,389 times
Reputation: 7872
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentReign View Post
I'm sorry to break it to you but....Don't you think your reaction is because you're getting old and jaded?!
I don't agree. He placed less value on the house because you came to appreciate life more.

Honestly, I am not old and I don't think a big house over a comfortable threshold (say 1200sf for a family of 4) dramatically increases your quality of life. The additional size offers

1) a boasting right and some kind of vanity - look at my house, it is so big! I must be perceived as wealthy and successful.

2) many rooms you don't really need, at least not on a regular basis. If you don't spend more than two hours each day in a room, then I would say it is really not necessary and its function should be combined with other rooms.

If you think 1200sf is cramped for 4 people, then you are not making good use of your space, or you bought too much junk you don't need when it is on sale.

On the other hand, it comes with disadvantage

1) you spend a lot more time maintaining it, keep fixing this and that - yeah, that's what life is about, fixing roofs and broken staircases as a weekend hobby? and have less time doing other things
2) usually means longer commute - waste of time every day, 5 days a week for the rest of your entire family's life. Any one way commute over an hour is just insane.
3) higher property taxes. This is probably not a great deal.
4) a more boring lifestyle. You are stuck in the generic suburbs with nothing within walking distance, and therefore tend of spend more time in your house (watching endless TV) than experiencing an urban life. Eventually even walking a movie with the family is a big event involving significant "planning".

I don't think big houses don't necessarily improve quality of life. It only creates a false illusion of a high quality of life in other people's eyes, as if bigger house trumps everything in terms of lifestyle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2014, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Toronto
15,106 posts, read 15,763,340 times
Reputation: 5196
^^^^

Excellent post Botticelli!! Actually I was looking at staying in an Apartment in Lisbon during my trip in the Alfama district.. Looks like an interesting place!

https://www.google.ca/search?q=alfam...2&ved=0CBwQsAQ

Lots of mid-rise apartments that i'm sure house numerous families and by and large I have a feeling that similar to the L'Eixample district in Barcelona - people are enjoying life and wouldn't miss an hour + lonely commute to live in an oversized house where the border with your neighbour is like crossing one territory to another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2014, 09:33 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
564 posts, read 1,037,030 times
Reputation: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentReign View Post
I'm sorry to break it to you but....Don't you think your reaction is because you're getting old and jaded?!
No. Older and wiser.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2015, 11:38 AM
 
1 posts, read 1,001 times
Reputation: 10
Default How about immigrants from Asia

How about immigrants from Asia (India/China) creating demand and raising prices? That was my perception of constantly increasing prices. I am no economist though and could be wrong.

It is really easy to move to the US where real estate is so much cheaper.

Any thoughts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada > Toronto

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top