AlvinofDiaspar said:
The very fact that Ceta voted for the project would have been unthinkable 10 years ago. Her story would be a very, very interesting one to listen to. Some background:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/a-new-look-a-new-bond-with-residents/article1065641/

AoD
Click to expand...

Yeah, a bit of a surprise actually. However, she seems to favour community collaboration and certainly the M-G project with its unique committee served that purpose.

She has also had one of my favourite development related quotes of recent memory (via Toronto Life):

“We get fucked by the OMB and we get fucked by the university, and we’re about to get screwed again by the developer.”
—Ceta Ramkhalawansingh, a member of the Grange Community Association, telling the Star what she thinks about a recent Ontario Municipal Board decision that clears the way for the construction of a 25-storey private student residence on College Street, south of the University of Toronto. Residents fear that the development, which had previously been rejected by the city, will attract noisy, messy tenants.
 
Big Daddy said:
Wow, the author is so clearly biased in her dislike for Mirvish it's hard to read - it drips off the pages. I dont undestand how she could possibly know some of the points she tried to make - "his jaw dropped" like this was recorded in the minutes of the meeting between Keesmaat and Mirvish? Or was she there? Does she expect us to believe that only Keesmaat had the foresight to calculate the potential return on the original proposal? That Mirvish put this massive proposal together without doing the math? Get real.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Can someone just answer the following question. Do you believe that an experienced Developer like Kofman, an experienced architect like Gehery and Mirvish, who has contacts in banking, didn’t have any idea about the project’s viability & profitability?

If someone can offer their opinion and explain their logic, I’d appreciate it. This would answer a lot of questions and would get to the heart of the article.
 
E.B. said:
Do you believe that an experienced Developer like Kofman, an experienced architect like Gehery and Mirvish, who has contacts in banking, didn’t have any idea about the project’s viability & profitability?
Click to expand...
Lehman Brothers, 2008.

All these superstars are always right. Until they're wrong.
 
typezed said:
Lehman Brothers, 2008.

All these superstars are always right. Until they're wrong.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you skirt around the question.

I didn't ask, do you think they'll succeed.

I asked, do you believe that they didn’t have any idea about the project’s viability & profitability before they went forward with the submission?

Can you just offer your opinion & logic for that question?
 
Last edited:
typezed said:
Lehman Brothers, 2008.

All these superstars are always right. Until they're wrong.
Click to expand...

Except since when is building condos in downtown Toronto synonymous with subprime lending meltdowns?

And since when does the planning department care about the financial viability of condo projects submitted for their approval?
 
I have no idea of why two buildings would be that much more economically viable than three. It's not like there aren't other developments that have multiple buildings. But while the impact of the study might be over-emphasized by the writer or Keesmat, I have little doubt that someone conducted that study and came to those conclusions.

What you're asking is how a rich dude, a starchitect and a banker wouldn't already know these things simply because they're so fabulous. And all I'm saying is that we have plenty of recent history of important powerful well-connected people buffing up whatever bubble keeps them afloat. It's possible that someone else can bring another perspective. Mirvish has been super wrong in his area of expertise, and it looks like his previous development experience was with Harry Stinson. I don't know much of Stinson's story, but I thought there was a reason that he ended up pumping Hamilton properties on late-night tv. Gehry might be good at mining a budget to find the freedom for his sculptural flourishes, but I doubt he's attentive at early design stages to the financial concerns. And then there's a banker.
 
Okay, because they're so celebrated. Or because they're so important. Or because they're so powerful. Chose your own word, the one that best describes for whatever reason you think these three are incapable of not knowing all aspects of their proposal. It's a quick forum post, I'm not really tied to the word choice.

Not drinking anything. Thanks for your concern.
 
freshcutgrass said:
And since when does the planning department care about the financial viability of condo projects submitted for their approval?
Click to expand...

Keesmaat is shrewd and this was a bold move. But for a big project like this, it is in the city's best interest that the project succeeds too, so yes, the city and planning department should care.
 
The Mirvish / Stinson marriage did not end happily... or profitably for either partner...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top