[T-Bor]

Apologies if this has already been covered elsewhere on this form. I've also looked for the answer on City documents, with no clear answer.

Simple question: Can multiplexes be sold as separate units, similar to condos? Or would this scenario need to be bought wholesale by a single owner, who must then rent them out to separate tenants?

It seems to me that if someone is able to buy a bungalow and turn it into 4 condo units, which are sold to 4 separate buyers, this has the potential to make a major dent in first-time homebuyer prices. But if these must all be kept as rentals, it seems it will do minimal to help home price affordability

 

[Northern Light]

Apologies if this has already been covered elsewhere on this form. I've also looked for the answer on City documents, with no clear answer.

Simple question: Can multiplexes be sold as separate units, similar to condos? Or would this scenario need to be bought wholesale by a single owner, who must then rent them out to separate tenants?

It seems to me that if someone is able to buy a bungalow and turn it into 4 condo units, which are sold to 4 separate buyers, this has the potential to make a major dent in first-time homebuyer prices. But if these must all be kept as rentals, it seems it will do minimal to help home price affordability

Individual ownership is permitted.

This permission is structured the same way as duplexes or semi-detached.

It simply contains additional flexibility in regards to unit numbers and certain criteria around dimensions/massing etc.

 

[T-Bor]

Individual ownership is permitted.

This permission is structured the same way as duplexes or semi-detached.

It simply contains additional flexibility in regards to unit numbers and certain criteria around dimensions/massing etc.

Thanks!

Okay so in theory, this should make it easier for a developer to buy up an old bungalow, and turn it into two semi-detached houses, which are then sold to individual owners?

I ask because I'm living in Calgary and out here, you see this happen all the time. Old bungalows on corner lots are bought up and turned into 4 townhouses, which are sold to individual owners. If this kind of thing would now be permitted in Toronto, that's a huge step forward

 

[bclair001]

Apologies if this has already been covered elsewhere on this form. I've also looked for the answer on City documents, with no clear answer.

Simple question: Can multiplexes be sold as separate units, similar to condos? Or would this scenario need to be bought wholesale by a single owner, who must then rent them out to separate tenants?

It seems to me that if someone is able to buy a bungalow and turn it into 4 condo units, which are sold to 4 separate buyers, this has the potential to make a major dent in first-time homebuyer prices. But if these must all be kept as rentals, it seems it will do minimal to help home price affordability

It's allowed, but the timeline to get it approved is often similar to high rise projects. This results in much higher holding costs. Also the appetite imo is low for such a product in comparison to just buying a condo.

As for splitting into townhouses and selling it, That does happen but will likely not be approved on most of the lots in the city.

 

[Northern Light]

It's allowed, but the timeline to get it approved is often similar to high rise projects. This results in much higher holding costs. Also the appetite imo is low for such a product in comparison to just buying a condo.

As for splitting into townhouses and selling it, That does happen but will likely not be approved on most of the lots in the city.

The above is essentially not the case. The amended rules have been passed, and multiplexes are now as-of-right in all residential zones.

No OPA (Official Plan Amendment) required, No ZBA (Zoning By-law Amendment) required.

 

[A Torontonian Now]

I think there is some confusion in this recent conversation in the thread between what is permitted as a multiplex (multiple units on a single lot) and the sort of infill where one bungalow is torn down for four townhouses. Both might result in 1 unit becoming 4, but in a different manner and with (likely) different ownership structures.

The tear down single bungalow, replace with four townhomes is most likely going to replace with freehold townhomes, but is going to require a severance application to make them each their own lot. That is not a multiplex, although loosening of height and setback restrictions made to permit multiplexes may also apply to this form (I am not sure, but it is possible, and certainly could be a consideration for a minor variance to allow this sort of thing).

Multiplexes themselves are more like mini apartment buildings, frequently with the units stacked on top of each other, and with the individual units having more of an "apartment flat" layout than a "townhouse" one. I think these are mainly contemplated to be single ownership by a landlord. It will still improve housing prices, if you consider rental units to be housing.

That said, there is no legal reason to not condominiumize a four-unit multiplex, but the cost and ongoing complexity may make it a less popular option. There could also be a revival of co-operative models of housing or even plain and simple joint ownership (i.e. multiple people on title) with multiplex housing.

 

[rdaner]

There are examples of 4 unit condos in The Junction. Will post info when I get home.

 

[T-Bor]

Thanks, all. Very helpful!

It sounds like the recent reforms don't make it any easier to, for example, take a North York 50 x 120 foot bungalow and turn it into 2 semi-detached houses a la several other cities in North America.

But it DOES, in theory, make it easier to turn these 4-unit multiplexes into either rental OR condo housing, if the developer chooses to go either route.

 

[bclair001]

The above is essentially not the case. The amended rules have been passed, and multiplexes are now as-of-right in all residential zones.

No OPA (Official Plan Amendment) required, No ZBA (Zoning By-law Amendment) required.

I was replying to the question about each unit being sold separately which would require each unit to be on separate title. That is certainly not as-of-right.

 

[Northern Light]

Thanks, all. Very helpful!

It sounds like the recent reforms don't make it any easier to, for example, take a North York 50 x 120 foot bungalow and turn it into 2 semi-detached houses a la several other cities in North America.

They do make it easier; previously, an OPA and a ZBA would have been required to turn a bungalow site into a duplex or triplex etc.in much of the city.

Now, this is no longer required.

Several other complicating rules have been lessened, streamlined, or removed.

Yes, title splitting/severance is still a process unto itself, but that's going to be the case just about anywhere, including Alberta.

 

[T-Bor]

I think if those complicating rules to build more semis/townhouses have been sufficiently streamlined, this could be transformative on both buyer psychology and speculation.

If people start seeing more semis/townhouses popping up in the yellowbelt, it may start to shift the current mentality that people should pay anything because there are only so many semis/townhouses to go around.

I only moved to Calgary a year ago, but it's been interesting noting that the mentality is more "why would I overpay for a 15-year-old semi, when there are dozens of new ones being built nearby".

There are many other factors at play of course, but the ease of building semis/townhouses seems to play a part in mitigating speculation.

 

[AlbertC]

Application Details

www.toronto.ca

152 BRUNSWICK AVE​

To convert the existing two-storey semi-detached dwelling into a three-storey triplex by constructing a complete third storey addition, a rear three-storey addition, a rear ground floor deck, as well as rear second and third storey balconies. The existing rear detached garage, abutting the laneway, will be demolished.

 

[AlbertC]

Application Details

www.toronto.ca

155 STRACHAN AVE​

To construct a new four-storey semi-detached duplex dwelling with front and rear ground floor porches, basement walkouts in the front and rear, as well as front and rear fourth floor rooftop decks. The existing one-storey ancillary building (detached garage, in the rear yard, abutting the laneway) will be maintained and unaltered.

Interestingly, this property was featured in an old Then and Now feature by UT before:

Then and Now: Strachan Avenue | UrbanToronto

UrbanToronto's historical look at Toronto property and real estate.

urbantoronto.ca

 

[rdaner]

Kitchener, Waterloo and Guelph all in the process of approving 4 units per lot. This would bring a sizeable percentage of Ontario’s population into this trend.

Kitchener and Guelph to consider allowing fourplexes on residential lots to address housing crisis

The mayors of Kitchener and Guelph are set to propose the same motion to their councils next week which would allow fourplexes to be built on residential lots.

kitchener.ctvnews.ca

 

[Bojaxs]

Kitchener, Waterloo and Guelph all in the process of approving 4 units per lot. This would bring a sizeable percentage of Ontario’s population into this trend.

Kitchener and Guelph to consider allowing fourplexes on residential lots to address housing crisis

The mayors of Kitchener and Guelph are set to propose the same motion to their councils next week which would allow fourplexes to be built on residential lots.

kitchener.ctvnews.ca

I might be reading the article wrong, but it sounds like all they're doing is allowing fourplexes to be built where triplexes can already be built. And if triplexes could already be built in these cities, why was no one building them?