caltrane74
Senior Member
I believe the leases expire at the end of December.....
Presumably the owners of the property have given termination notices, and aren't sitting around waiting for the leases to expire.
Andrea, obviously you've never developed any property before. The owners of the property take it SUBJECT TO the leases in place. Unless the lease have a demo clause in them the owners are stuck with the tenants for the duration of the leases (and extensions) unless they buy them out of their space.
Andrea, obviously you've never developed any property before. The owners of the property take it SUBJECT TO the leases in place. Unless the lease have a demo clause in them the owners are stuck with the tenants for the duration of the leases (and extensions) unless they buy them out of their space.
Clearly you've never looked at a commercial lease, investor. They routinely contain clauses allowing them to be terminated in certain circumstances.
And if you'd developed any property before, you'd know that its common for the underlying land not to be sold to the developer. Instead, it is leased to the developer for a long period, usually 99 years.
I've heard the suites left are in the million dollar plus range...
And I know of only 2 forumers that could easily afford units...
There's nothing routine about it. I own and develop property and do a lot of leasing. I always try and get a demo clause, but it's always tough and it's always a negotiating point.
It's not common. In fact it's rare. I would estimate that 95% of the condos in Toronto sit on fee simple title and the remainder on 99 year leases. The stats for office property are probably closer to 90%. U of T owns a lot of the land underneath properties proximate to their campus.
You need a better lawyer. And better information on how property is owned. I can't think of a single class a office building downtown that doesn't sit on land owned by multiple parties under a head lease.
Should I buy a unit@1 Bloor East? I could rent it out to a bunch of ladies....
The trophy office properties in the core are indeed an exception to the rule. The overwhelming (again I'm certain it's 90%) of office buildings in this city are owned fee simple.
Regardless, this is a residential project, not a commercial one. As far as my lawyer goes, he won't be of much help when Starbucks refuses to sign a lease with a demo clause it in. And why should they? They invest most of their money up front in tenant improvements that take years to recover. They're not going to take the risk that you're going to tear the building down in 2 years for a high-rise development. Certainly not for market rent.
No serious commercial landlord would do that.