Economy putting chokehold on luxury highrises, too

The Yonge Bloor travesty, a combination of NYC based Lehman Brothers' financial genius and Bazis International (Bazi International), a Kazakhstan company, originally conceived to give the corner of Yonge and Bloor a facelift with a sleek 80-storey tower combining condominiums, a hotel and high-end stores, is now a hole in the center of Toronto. A parking lot I expect where there were once thriving businesses. Known as Roys Square now we have the look of an open-pit mining site. There probably should have been a clause in the original deal to make something nice, yes a park, call it "Travesty Park" with large fountain - Tevi like fountain - and flowers and trees in the event the actual project is abandoned. But really, .. 80 stories!? Who will be able to see its full "grandeur"? Not from the street! Maybe it should be built in Paris? No wait, Paris won't allow such monstrosities. In any case, I doubt we will ever see it built here so Plan B, C, D etc may be an option. Oh yea, I forgot. There isn't a Plan B , C or D etc. Good work folks! But in truth the whole thing was an "eye sore" from the start. Oh wait .. other than screwing everything up, there is no start.

I am glad to see the luxury condos are having financial problems. I hope the developers and investors lose their shirts.

I am a small-scale BC Developer, specializing in small, high-quality, but modest-sized homes. For too long now, there has been an oversupply of massive condo projects in BC. There are both benefits and detriments to the principle of buildings condominimum, both fiscally and environmentally, but they really have had their day...

Yes, it's a way to maximize density, therefore, squeeze out the profit; and, also, a way to fit as many people into a small-space as possible (good for the environment because it means more people living in downtown cores close to public transit). However, and it's a BIG however - condo living is unpalletable, therefore the Developer is forced to go up-scale to make condo living APPEAR to be desirable. They have to make it appear to be a "lifestyle-choice", and fill it with toys, which, inevitably, put-up the price! It's a case of the old saying - you can't have your cake and eat it too. The question is, "is that really a flavour of cake which we want to eat?" I don't think so.

When I say that condo living is unpalletable, who REALLY wants to be beholden to the whims and fancies of 300 of their neighbours?!?!?! The whole idea of being ruled by a massive Strata Association makes most people quake-in-their-boots, not to mention the long-term financial implications of having to pay into "contingency funds". The current situation with the way contingency funds are set up JUST DOESN'T WORK. No excuses for it, the way the law is written on this subject is LUDICROUS!!! I'll give you an example: - So, I'm an owner of a single-family home, and I buy my house new, and live in it for 10 years. When I go to sell my home, what would my reaction be if the prospective purchaser demanded that I cut them a cheque for $10,000 in anticipation of the fact that in a further 10 years from now, the roof might need to be repaired? "Go take a flying leap buddy!" And yet THAT is exactly what we ask of condo owners - that year-in-year-out, during the lifetime of their ownership, they pay into a non-reimbursable contingency fund, in order that sometime, down the road, a future owner may benefit!!!

In some jurisdictions, stakeholding in the contingency fund is considered a paper asset, which is sold-on to the new owner at face value, ensuring - that a) there will be enough in the fund to deal with contingencies, but also - that b) owners are not paying out for repairs not carried out during their ownership. Older strata properties are proportionately cheaper in recognition of the fact that purchaser must fund not just the purchase price of the unit, but also the reimbursement of the stakeholding! The system works, and it's far more fair.

All-of-the-above not-withstanding, the highly-flawed zoning process in BC is primarily responsible for the condo mess which we're now seeing. And why? Well, a Developer must spend massive amounts of time and resources in order to navigate the re-zoning process, so they are going to make sure that it is actually going to PAY! If you're a doctor, or a lawyer or a teacher, or a scholar, you get paid for the work that you do, don't you? You provide your effort, and your expertise, and you are financially compensated for it. Well, why should it be any different for Developers. We are the ones responsible, ultimately, for ensuring that there are enough homes to live in (at least for those who can afford to buy homes, but even for those who can't, there still needs to be enough housing stock to be able to find a place to rent). We are compensated for utilizing our time, expertise, and organizational skills to provide homes to people. It's called making a profit. It's not a sin to earn money.

We can, however, choose to waste 2.5 years and approximately $25,000 in funds in order to battle to re-zone a single-family lot to a duplex (gaining one low-impact in-fill unit), as recently evidenced by a real-life case in Victoria City, or we can spend the same amount to battle to re-zone to a high-density condo unit, and (gain 300 high-impact units). The zoning process places the same ridiculous burden on us as "Developers", whether we are proposing small, high-benefit, low-impact schemes, or large, low-benefit, high-impact schemes.

Which, would you, Mr., Mrs. & Ms. Public prefer to see more of - small-scale, high-quality, low-cost in-fill, - or - alternatively, massive high-priced, condo blocks. If your answer was small-scale in-fill, then you need to let your politicians know that under the current BC legislation, the legislative burdens on small-scale development, and the prohibitive road-blocks in the zoning process will positively ensure that there is NO financial incentive to Developers to build the homes that YOU actually want to be able to buy! Unfortunately, therefore, small-scale Developers like me who want to provide high-quality, reasonably priced homes are few and far-between. Not because all Develpers are greedy, but because some are just realistic!

It saddens me to once again have a journalist blow everything out of proportion. So ONE condo isn't going up. What about the hundreds of others that are and who wants to live in a box anyway. This isn't China! This is Canada and I think we can make condos larger that 500 sq ft and all for a reasonable price. I am so sick and tired of everything being over priced. So does anyone elso agree that maybe the recession is right on time? Housing is overpriced, too many people are overpaid and executives with private jets just about sends me over the edge. Consumers are fed up with being gouged!!!!!