Toronto Exhibit Residences | 99.97m | 32s | Bazis | Rosario Varacalli

Or maybe like this
national-debt-1.jpg
 
caveatemptor said:
That is a specious argument. Any new development that increases density will increase the property tax base. The point is that Borat and Micky D's jacked the people of Toronto on this deal for probably upwards of several million dollars. That is egregious and shouldn't be tolerated without due justice.
Click to expand...

Agreed (let's not forget 'Mr. Miller's' revenue tools including Land Transfer Taxes)...having said that I am sure Section 37 funds will be 'secured' for the density that I am assuming that they will be asking for. One way or another the City will have its say... actually it probably makes sense to keep revenues out of the City's general accounts and direct it to Section 37 which gives more control to the councillor on where to spend it (as I understand it).
 
Caveatemptor, enough with your baseless allegations and slurs. You have repeated your uneducated theories four times already and we did not bite at the first post.

The government management committee approved it and so did counsel at a 28-4 vote. There is no scandal...not even a hint. Bad decision? Maybe. But that is it.

"Egregious conduct"? "Outrageous abuse"? What the hell are you talking about? Try using some facts instead of just loud and baseless allegations.
 
caveatemptor said:
All projects are subject to Section 37 requirements if greater density is granted. The point of this thread is that the People of Toronto got majorly STIFFED by a Fortune 500 corporation and the apparent arm of a former soviet bloc development organization with a dubious track record of marketing and ethics in this city.

How does this fiasco not translate into another MFP scandal? Think of potential loss to the City is this kind of egregious conduct allows to continue unchecked by proper investigatory oversight? As stated previously there are billions of dollars of potential deals on the table now and we should not tolerate such outrageous abuse and possibly under the table dealings.
Click to expand...

Yes, Section 37 applies to denisty and any additional bonusing (uses, relief from parking, amenities etc.) that the City grants a developer, notwithstanding this is a negotiated amount. There is no fee schedule (that I am aware of), you will never know.
 
caveatemptor said:
Micky D's jacked the people of Toronto on this deal for probably upwards of several million dollars.
Click to expand...
Sure they did - in the 1960s. What's done is done. Where is the City's leverage to force "justice"? They can't just vacate the lease remember. I'm sure Adam Vaughan could come up with some kind of harassment strategy like his sidewalk idea near the Island Airport and then McDs will sue the City as Deluce is doing.

After all, this is an opportunity for McDonalds but it's not like they'll go broke if the city decides to vacate the sale deal, but the city loses out on land transfer taxes and property tax base increases and will almost certainly be stuck for 33 years to 2037 or so with an arbitrated rent which will rapidly fail to value the land properly and will have spent tens of thousands of dollars of the property management division budget (i.e. a year of so of rent) dealing with the review and the arbitration.

In 2070 or so the city will own the land free and clear and it will be worth a bazillion dollars. Woohoo - we can totally wait that long to increase city revenue and dispose of city land we don't need.

The only option I can think of is for the City to approach Bazis, propose a joint development with the city taking a profit share and offering McDonalds a fixed fee to vacate the lease. But then the city shares the risk too if the property market takes a dive, it might have to put up money to share in the development cost and we have to make a profit which is in excess of 3.38 million plus McDs go-away money, plus interest on the time between when McDs would have paid vs the time the City receives its profit share.
 
From Adam Vaughan's Newletter:

Earlier this year, City Council agreed to sell the property on 192 Bloor Street. This property has now become part of a coordinated development plan that includes the properties from 192 – 200 Bloor Street West. The developer is Bazis International and they have engaged Roy Varacalli as the architect for the project.

The community expressed concerns expressed were about parking, a mid-block connection, pedestrian weather protection from winds – canopy etc., shadowing, affordable units and family units to be reserved, traffic especially at Prince Arthur and Bedford, the potential for green roof and less mechanical equipment on roof, street level green space and opportunities for professional and medical offices in the lower floors.

This project is in the early stages and a formal application for this site has not been submitted to the City for this project. Future meetings will be held with the Annex Residents Association and the community as this proposal evolves.
 
In 2070 or so the city will own the land free and clear and it will be worth a bazillion dollars. Woohoo - we can totally wait that long to increase city revenue and dispose of city land we don't need.
Click to expand...


The renegotiated lease at reasonable market rates, with the appropriate increases this time would still give the city ongoing revenue, which is just as good a revenue source as a one-time pay-off. It's not like the city doesn't have tons of other property it can sell that doesn't involve getting ripped off in the process.

And on top of that month-to-month revenue, I'm sure the good folks of Toronto in 2070 will appreciate that bazillion dollars win fall, as I'm sure the city won't be any richer then than it is now.

In the grand scheme of things, this is pretty small potatoes...but has become yet another political football, which is the real liability to the city.
 
Where's the inquiry!
Click to expand...

I can see Bazis going to McD to work a deal, but there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see the "city" benefiting from any pay-offs, as they don't gain. If it's an individual your referring to, I don't see any individuals being able to do anything, as it's a council-vote thing.

I see nothing to inquire about. Decades ago, this was the best deal the city had on its plate....so it took it...it was hardly as major priority at the time. Taking advantage of the city's shitty position isn't a crime either.

The city doesn't capitalize on real estate deals...because it isn't structured to do these things (TEDCO is a joke)....it's in the business for what it does...and nothing else. Personally, the city should structure itself for this...hire crack real estate people who will make them a huge load of money. Hell, they could develop the land themselves and make the real moolaw.

The city could have played hardball on this and won. Given the facts, an arbitrator would have given the city a fair market rent deal for the lease. If McD still thought they could pay that rent and still make a buck selling fries...fine, but if it wasn't, then they would be willing to make a better deal for them to get out of the lease with the city.

But why stop there...if the city really wanted to win, it could have started flexing some of its new powers. On another issue, I heard them saying they have the ability to tax based on potential value, rather than what is actually there (which is why there were so many surface parking lots...lots without buildings on them pay squat in property tax). The purpose of this new idea was to force density where they wanted it.

So...instead of decreasing height and density limitations on this site, as they mentioned...increase it instead, making its potential value all that more. Then tax the shit out of McD based on this 50-story tower the site is now approved for.

Between the high taxes and market rent, there's no way they could sell enough fries to justify continuing the lease (it is after all, just a fricken McD franchise taking up a giant, platinum site). They would pay the city quite handsomely just to break the lease.

Then the city could win all the way around...take the cash from McD for breaking the lease...sell the site for a ton to Bazis with increased densities...have something better than a 70's McPuke restaurant on such a high-profile spot...and even force Varacalli to come up with a fab design, or buz-off.
 
McPuke?
Click to expand...

I was referring to the food.

As for the building itself being worthy of any kind of vintage 70's status...sorry...isn't that good (even if it had been maintained to vintage condition...which it hasn't).
 
There was an update on this development at the Annex Planning Meeting tonight.

There is a max of 100m for the building, as agreed when the city sold the land to McD's. The architect (who also did 10 Bellair I think it is - the one with Pottery Barn and Williams-Sonoma out front on Bloor) expects it will be 32 stories tall.

The architect has no renders, but had a general idea of the shape of the building, which will be a kind of L shape,with an 8 story podium with a very slight setback on the Bloor side of the building, and then a green roof above the parking on the 8th floor or so.

The next two parts were really interesting to me:

Huge beams will go across the main floor of the building over the subway in order to support the weight of the 7-8 stories of above ground parking which will be on the backside of the lot facing onto the TPA parking lot. If I remember correctly, this part of the main floor will be partially useless.

And they will only be digging down only one level.

Since the basement will be split in two due to the subway running directly underneath, the smaller portion on the northside of where the subway intersects the land will contain the mechanical portion of the building. The larger portion of the basement will be for bikes and storage lockers.

There will be two floors of retail on Bloor with some kind of interesting facade I'm sure.
 
It's also worth noting - if it hasn't already been noted here - that this project will demolish everything between Lobby and Museum House. A bunch of small businesses will be caught up in this one.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top