The implications of condominium neighbourhoods for long-term urban revitalisation

Article English OPEN
Webb, Brian ; Webber, Steven (2017)
  • Publisher: Elsevier BV
  • Journal: Cities (issn: 0264-2751, vol: 61, pp: 48-57)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2016.11.006
  • Subject: Development | Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management | Sociology and Political Science | G1

Condominium neighbourhoods are emerging in intensifying city centres as a response to market and\ud demographic preferences for homeownership. While the multi-ownership structure of individual\ud condominium buildings accommodates a short-term demand, the long-term implications for\ud neighbourhoods is a source of concern. In particular, the presence of unit owners with varied\ud acquisition objectives can lead to an anticommons problem resulting in building disinvestment due\ud to an inability to reach decisions on sustainable maintenance fees and capital reserve funds, and a\ud lack of end of lifecycle planning. The city of Toronto is experiencing unprecedented condominium\ud development and serves as the basis for a case study that assesses the anticipated future\ud neighbourhood challenges associated with a predominantly condominium-based form of ownership.\ud Twenty-two local stakeholders were interviewed to identify problems that are viewed as sources of\ud concern due to decisions made during the early stages of a building’s lifecycle and the absence of a\ud neighbourhood planning strategy. An analysis of the results indicates that lock-in, lacunae and\ud neighbourhood effects will likely complicate revitalisation efforts as condominium neighbourhoods\ud become more prevalent. Limited stakeholder recognition further suggests that it is necessary to raise\ud a greater awareness of the potential anticommons impediments to long-term collective revitalisation\ud actions.
  • References (62)
    62 references, page 1 of 7

    Adams, D., Disberry, A., Hutchison, N., & Munjoma, T. (2001). Ownership constraints to brownfield redevelopment. Environment & Planning A, 33(3), 453-477.

    Addison, C., Zhang, S., & Coomes, B. (2013). Smart growth and housing affordability: A review of regulatory mechanisms and planning practices. Journal of Planning Literature, 28(3), 215-257.

    Brueckner, J., & Rosenthal, S. (2005). Gentrification and neighborhood housing cycles: will America's future downtowns be rich? WP 1579, CESifo, Munich, Available: http:// www.ifo.de/pls/guestci/download/CESifo%20Working%20Papers%202005/CESifo% 20Working%20Papers%20October%202005/cesifo1 wp1579.pdf.

    Butler, T. (2007). For gentrification? Environment & Planning A, 39(1), 162-181.

    Christudason, A. (2009). Property rights: Achieving a fine balance in collective sales of strata developments in Singapore. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 1(1), 26-41.

    City of Toronto (2015a). How does the city grow. Available at http://www1.toronto.ca/ City%20Of%20Toronto/City%20Planning/SIPA/Files/pdf/H/HDCG_Final_Revised_ accessible.pdf.

    City of Toronto (2015b). TOcore phase 1 summary report and phase 2 directions (TE12. 43). Available at: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item= 2015.TE12.43.

    CMHC (2016). Housing market outlook: Greater Toronto area. Available at: https://www. cmhc-schl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/64319/64319_2016_B01.pdf?fr=1470049905208.

    Davidson, M., & Lees, L. (2005). New build “gentrification” and London's riverside renaissance. Environment & Planning A, 37, 1165-1190.

    Dredge, D., & Coiacetto, E. (2011). Strata title: Towards a research agenda for informed planning practice. Planning Practice & Research, 26(4), 417-433.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark