67Cup said:
Sunnyray is correct, IMO, that many potential purchasers will want to own a car in this particular location. That is certainly the case with me. We are beginning to look seriously at buying a Toronto or area condo after 14 years in Vancouver. It's not a case of needing to commute to work anymore but there are a dozen good reasons we would want to keep a car. Family in another Ontario city (including grandchildren, a major motivator!) a summer cottage, desire to attend church on Sunday AM when transit is terrible, etc. "Urban" doesn't mean not ever wanting to get out of the city. Others will have their own reasons.

I looked at this specific thread for two reasons. One is exactly as Sunnyray specified. This has good access to the DVP when we want to drive and to transit when we don't Not in rush hour, I add. It may also have shopping within walking distance, which we would like.

The other is nostalgia. I grew up in Leaside, spending childhood hours in the Don Valley. When my family moved there, Eglinton was a two lane street that ended at Brentcliffe. There was no bridge over that branch of the Don at the time.

It would be interesting to come full circle and return to the area... with a car.
Click to expand...

I use autoshare for when I need a car for a few hours or rental car if going out of town. It is still a lot cheaper than car and insurance payments for the month and convenient enough (and you get to try all kinds cars/SUVs). When I gave up my car I thought if it didn't work out I would just buy a car again; I just celebrated 10 years without a car; celebrated because a vehicle is a very poor investment, the value drops as soon as it is driven off the lot and for how much it sits there doing nothing either at home or at work
 
Older buyers are more likely to bring a car with them when buying a condo. Younger ones are not. It will depend upon the demographic mix that ultimately buys here that determines how many cars end up here. Personally, I think the Planning Department estimates are high: they've been very conservative across the board when cutting the number of parking spaces required at new buildings, and everybody but everybody applies to build fewer parking spaces than required in the bylaw.

42
 
Rando Polo said:
I expect that the LPOA (ie the Fripp/Kettle cabal) will leap on this by Tuesday with their typical earnest yet totally ineffectual gusto by lunch on Tuesday. It would be nice if some of the many real estate professionals living in the area took on the community's response to this application rather than the NIMBY kings at LPOA. Real estate professionals have the skill and intelligence to work with RioCan and Quadrangle in this situation to extract the maximum community benefit. We want major Section 37 contributions. For instance, the proposed community centre needs more pools and dance studios and ... LPOA lurches on developments in a totally misguided effort to shut them down or shrink them beyond the city's or the developers' capability/interest. But a reasoned and intelligent effort could leverage the RioCan's desire for goodwill and a successful project. SmartCentres would have given way more in Section 37 contributions during the rezoning of Wicksteed had the effort to stop the development not been so cockeyed and bungled. We now have an opportunity to really draw lifeblood from RioCan with a spigot. They want this so bad; we need to judo their energy to extract benefit rather that try to stop them and fail.
Much love to the Leasiders! We are all so lucky to live here, especially with the big big changes coming!
Click to expand...


While real-estate agents are trained professional negotiators,... there's also a percieved bias since the bigger the development is, real-estate agents could profit more via more opportunites for future transactions.

Its currently set up that the locally elected ward councillor is the main representative for the community and will represent the community in negotiation of Section37 CommunityBenefit fees with developers. The final amount of Section37 CommunityBenefit fees paid for by the developer will depend on a number of factors including: CityPlanning formula based on severity of zoning changes (height, density, etc,...) and valuation of development proposal. There's also a significant factor depending on negotiating skills of the local ward councillor and how hard the he/she will fight for the community,... which depends on the level of objections against the development proposal,... basically, the more outraged the community is against the development then the harder the councillor will fight,... and generally the higher the Section37 CommunityBenefit fees paid for by developers.

The locals will get their say via community consultation meetings, communication with councillor and CityPlanning staff. And since this particular development proposal is so large and due to the degree of zoning changes,.... there's a chance that a "community working group" will be formed,... thus, if you really want your voice heard, speak to the local councillor to get on that working group! Otherwise, that working group will be dominated by,... guess who! The NIMBY-guru himself and his disciples.

Since the development is generally disadvantageous for the existing locals due to increase local density, height, traffic congestion, shadowing effect, etc,... the purpose of Section37 CommunityBenefit fees is to pay for positive new local resources that would offset some of the negative effects of the development. That's the original purpose,... I've always advocated that Section37 CommunityBenefit money be all spent within a 1km radius of where the development occurs; the city specifies it must be spent within the ward where the development occurs,... thus, even though this development is near the northern boundaries of the ward, the Section37 CommunityBenefit money could be spent in Thorncliffe or MoorePark area,.... many km away and hardly beneficial to the locals most impacted by this development. This one will be interesting to watch since it's the old commercial industrial land area east of Laird that's being converted to high density residential,.... but most of the NIMBY will come from the west side of Laird where the single residential houses are,.... and they'll likely move the Section37 CommunityBenefits into their neighbourhoods.
 
Therion said:
The problem is everything I read about the LPOA makes me think they still think we live in the Leaside village of the 1920s that is separate from the rest of Toronto, and they'll be damned if they don't do their best to keep it that way. I did the survey that they sent out to ask opinions about the Brentcliffe development, which I'm fairly pro on, and at the end you had to provide your name and full address! As a small business owner I can't alienate local customers just because we disagree on local development, so I didn't send in my survey. They are clearly trying to fish for consensus, rather than get real numbers. I'm sure I wasn't the only one who did that.

Maybe Leasider members of this board who view development more progressively should form our own LPOA-type of association. One that isn't dominated by 75-year-olds.

PS I love how it's "property owners", not residents. It's like back in the 18th century. If you don't own land, you don't get to vote! Renters sit down!
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention that,.... they've been talking about fighting development by having Leaside classified as a "heritage section",.... you know how historical buildings/houses can't change their exteriors,.... well, in a heritage section that's a much larger scale,... of course, that would kill property value since no one would buy properties in the area for tear-down and reconstruction,....

It's always been geared towards "Property Owners" because property owners are deemed to have more skin in the game,.... and thus have a bigger vote. Even today,... CityPlanning and CommitteeOfAdjustment notices are automatically addressed to property owners,.... whenever a non-property owner signs a notice it's ignored by city staff.

Geoff Kettel is an interesting old chap,... a real professional NIMBY-guru not just for Leaside, nor Midtown, but the entire Toronto,.... G.Kettel is involved in multiple "community" organizations including co-chair of FONTRA where they have access to their own planners, lawyers, etc,.... They know what they're doing and come well prepared. Every time I see him at community meetings in North York Centre, I'm like,... What is he doing here,... and how did he get here on his bike?!?!? He delayed the Doris Ave extension south of Sheppard trying to protect some "historical" trees on private property at northeast corner of Sheppard & Doris,.... I'm like,... dude, you don't even live around here!

It'll be tough to beat G.Kettel and his NIMBY-disciples,.... not only will you have to form a fairly sized Leaside based counter group, you'll have to convince the local councillor (ie more Section37 CommunityBenefit, tax revenue, and development fees for local programs), form working groups to work with city staff, you'll need a treasure chest to counter their's, etc,....
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
From Laird in Focus/Planning:

View attachment 84153


PiP: http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toronto/City Planning/Community Planning/Files/pdf/L/Laird in Focus - PiPs Boards.pdf
Website: http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=bc46ef65db1c5510VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

AoD
Click to expand...


CityPlanning having a PlannersInPublicSpaces meeting for LairdInFocus,.... This development and the Brentcliffe (959 Eglinton) which has already been chopped by a third (1500 units chopped to under 1000 units, eliminated 34 storey tower and had 24-storey tower chopped to 14-storey) will obviously dominate,....

Thursday, September 15, 2016
4:00 pm to 7:00 pm
Leaside Library, 165 McRae Drive

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=bc46ef65db1c5510VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
 
Now keep in mind Section37 Community Benefit fee isn't always the huge winfall it's always seems,.... why? Section37 CommunityBenefit is a one-time fee that usually amount to a max of 5-10% of the value of the development depending on degree of zoning changes and negotiating skill of the local councillor and CityPlanning staff (some midtown mid-rise development have paid as high as about 15% but that's rare). Section37 CommunityBenefit is a one-time fee.

The real money winfall is the new development increase the property value on that piece of land of which the city gets 1% property tax revenue annually each and every year. Example would be 10 adjacent bungalows in NorthYorkCentre pays $5,000 property tax each year; that land generates $50,000 revenue per year for the city. Developer buys all 10 adjacent properties and build 100m 30 storey condo,... 400 units at about 400-500k each,... that's about $2,000,000 in property tax revenue for the city each year. All on the same land that used to generate $50,000 (as bungalows) but now generates $2,000,000 in property tax revenue! It's the same land,... that's why Toronto is going high density! This is how a city grows its revenue via increase in property tax payer volume VS increasing property rate which would isn't politically favoured. That's why every little 905 hicky-town is trying to build their own high density downtown! Look at it this way,... if you're making $50,000 a year at a clerical gig,... and the competition offers you $2million to do the exact same job for them,... what would you do? Of course, you'll take the $2,000,000 gig,... that's $1,950,000 more!

The problem with city property tax revenue is that it goes in to the general accounts and gets spent where-ever,.... usually not in the area that generated the property tax winfall for the city!

There's also the one-time development fee of about $25,000 per unit that's "supposed" to go for local infrastructure improvement,.... but rarely does,.... moneywise, it's pretty close in range to Section37 CommunityBenefit amount,...

The real challenge is to also get the newly generated property tax revenue and development fees spent in the local area where the development happens,....


Now look at the Brentcliffe 959 Eglinton development that just got chopped by a third (1500 units down to under 1000, 34-storey tower eliminated and 24-storey tower chopped to 14-storey),.... the community just lost at least a third of the Section37 CommunityBenefit money. Assuming the original proposal was worth about $750 Million, and with all the zoning and height changes we would have been looking at close to 10% for Section37 CommunityBenefit,... that would have been about $75million!,... but now likely reduced by about $25 million,.... that's basically about the cost to rebuild a large high-school when the school board already owns the land,.... so think of it this way, the community likely just lost a newly built large community centre at a local park like the new LeonardLinton Park or E.T.Seton Park or Sunnybrook park,.... and the city lost about a third of future property tax revenue and development fees that the original proposal would have generated,.... So while the G.Kettel and his LPOA NIMBY-types are patting themselves on the back for getting the Brentcliffe 959 Eglinton development chopped,.... the Leaside community should be saying,.... Hey, you just cost us about $25million in Section37 CommunityBenefit money!,... that amounts to a large fully equipped brand new CommunityCentre on city owned land.
 
Tuscani01 said:
It's actually a tiny store, but one of the most profitable stores in Toronto (And even top performer in the GTA at times). Not sure where @Therion heard it's poorly run from, as that is far from the case. The dealer has worked pretty closely with upper management to make that store work, as its sales are extremely disproportionate to its size, which has always been the challenge there.

It will be sad to see the showroom disappear, but I think some aspects of it will simply be carried over to the new store, as is being done in new builds across the chain.

I can't wait for planning to start on this one!
Click to expand...

Skeezix said:
Doesn't surprise me that it's profitable, given its location. But what a dump.
Click to expand...

I hear from friends though that this CT location in particular treats its workers terribly.
 
TF are doing the working drawings, and the retail design. Quadrangle is still the residential and overall design architect.

42
 
For fun, I decided to stitch together the site maps of this project, and of 939 Eglinton Ave E next door to get a feel of how these two projects are going to change the area.

Leaside Eglinton Redevelopment StitchMap.png
 

Attachments

  • Leaside Eglinton Redevelopment StitchMap.png
    Leaside Eglinton Redevelopment StitchMap.png
    1.4 MB · Views: 1,323
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top