Dofos latest sucking up to developers.

The more units you can jam on a property the less the developer is likely to pocket. If that was NOT true we'd see more of them I'm sure.
 
timtune said:
The more units you can jam on a property the less the developer is likely to pocket. If that was NOT true we'd see more of them I'm sure.
Click to expand...
What? The developer will build whatever they can to maximize profits. If three was more profitable than four (which I doubt), allowing four would change nothing and they would build three. If four was more profitable than three, allowing four may be considering sucking up. I guess conceivably, preventing four limits the ability of a normal homeowner to redevelop their dwelling and come out far ahead which limits small scale housing creation and pushes people to developments underwritten by major developers but seeing how few three-plexes are coming out, I don't think allowing four-plexes would change supply substantially. Every little bit helps supply but it wouldn't open the floodgates and change prices much.
 
Just a guess, in this context, if it is the motivation...

Fourplexes at scale create competition for big developers as it increases housing stock outside of large subdivisions, large townhouse complexes and high-rise condos that they build. Basically it could increase housing stock to the determent of big developer profits.

Is that why? I can't say.
 
GreyGhost said:
What? The developer will build whatever they can to maximize profits.
Click to expand...
Which I believe would be single family homes. Every step away from that would be a decrease in profits so 3 is likely better for them than four. Also after the green belt fiasco it's hard not to view him with a jaundiced eye.
 
Last edited:
timtune said:
Which I believe would be single family homes. Every step away from that would be a decrease in profits so 3 is likely better for them than four. Also after the green belt fiasco it's hard not to view him with a jaundiced eye.
Click to expand...
Umm wouldn't a building (of some sort) which has way more units and you can build up net you more money, then say a few homes on the same piece of land. Just a guess.
 
Every where you can build a 4 plex you could build a single family home. Pretty sure 4 singles will be worth more than a 4 plex.
Maybe I'm wrong, but sadly it's his deeds that cause me to no longer trust him.
 
sburns said:
Umm wouldn't a building (of some sort) which has way more units and you can build up net you more money, then say a few homes on the same piece of land. Just a guess.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Normally more units equals more gross revenue. More expenses as well though so the difference in net may not always be worth the effort. In general, the more units allowed, the more likely multi-unit wins economically. There are now developers in Toronto that buy one decrepit detached dwelling for <2M, bulldoze and build a triplex at ~1200 ft each and sell units for ~1.2-1.3. Not much room for profit on a triplex but a ton if you build a fourplex as incremental costs are very low compared to sales price.
 
timtune said:
Every where you can build a 4 plex you could build a single family home. Pretty sure 4 singles will be worth more than a 4 plex.
Maybe I'm wrong, but sadly it's his deeds cause me to no longer trust him.
Click to expand...
How do you fit four singles on one lot? The problem is ultimately limited land available. Four singles needs at least 120' of frontage (and probably more). A fourplex can fit on a single 30' lot (assuming you don't need parking for four cars, vehicles really throw a wrench into the program).
 
You don't. Each lot one house.
 
Best way to make money is cram as many units as you can into a single building. 4 plex is more profitable than a 3, 5 than a 4 and so on and so on. Once the foundation is poured…easy.

Only reason I can see this is less competition for developers as smaller scale builders can do it. And secondly…the NIMBY crowd forced him to pull back.

I sure as 💩 don’t want a 2/3/4 or more plex next door to me. Regardless of how much it helps others.

Now…would I want to build a 3 plex on my property and live in one eventually…yes please!
 
GreyGhost said:
How do you fit four singles on one lot? The problem is ultimately limited land available. Four singles needs at least 120' of frontage (and probably more). A fourplex can fit on a single 30' lot (assuming you don't need parking for four cars, vehicles really throw a wrench into the program).
Click to expand...
How so? A four plex needs what…8 spots max? Dig 12 feet deeper and you have an underground parking lot and add 50-100k/spot as profit.

Or do a wide condo split with 4 levels. Bottom level is a garage, entrance, and driveway for car #2 protected by a balcony on level #2.

Or just let the street deal with it and the hell with the neighbours.
 
mimico_polak said:
How so? A four plex needs what…8 spots max? Dig 12 feet deeper and you have an underground parking lot and add 50-100k/spot as profit.

Or do a wide condo split with 4 levels. Bottom level is a garage, entrance, and driveway for car #2 protected by a balcony on level #2.

Or just let the street deal with it and the hell with the neighbours.
Click to expand...
Triplex/fourplex on a narrow lot normally has one unit partially underground so walkup to top unit isn't quite as many stairs (and building doesn't look so huge from the street. If you have a wide lot, you have more freedom. Building a ramp down (or lift), access lane with room to turn and parking eats up a ton of land and is not feasible on most smallish lots.
 
GreyGhost said:
Triplex/fourplex on a narrow lot normally has one unit partially underground so walkup to top unit isn't quite as many stairs (and building doesn't look so huge from the street. If you have a wide lot, you have more freedom. Building a ramp down (or lift), access lane with room to turn and parking eats up a ton of land and is not feasible on most smallish lots.
Click to expand...
It usually ends up with more on-street parking, which the NIMBYs don't like.
 
TK4 said:
It usually ends up with more on-street parking, which the NIMBYs don't like.
Click to expand...
To be fair, that is normally a disaster as most suburb streets are designed to accommodate tons of cars parking on the street. As these conversions become more popular, I expect street parking in the burbs to require permits that are restricted to something like one per lot.
 
I don't think this has as much to do with developers... if anything at all.. as it does people tearing down single family homes in established neighbourhoods and trying to build 4 plexes on the lots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom