News   Nov 08, 2024
 810     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 1.2K     4 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 587     0 

1 Bloor East, DEAD AND BURIED (Bazis, -2s, Varacalli)

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

I don't know anything about that, but earlier in this thread someone posted some captures of the tenants' 'store closing' signs. Many of the tenants have indicated where their new stores will be relocated and it appears as if all of them will vacate by Dec. 31.

And for the record, I too have never developed a building. Well, except for lego.
 
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.
 
Clearly you've never looked at a commercial lease, investor. They routinely contain clauses allowing them to be terminated in certain circumstances.

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.

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.

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.
 
most uptodate price list available?

Does any one have up to date price list available?

How many units are still to be sold?

Or have they been sold out?
 
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...

I would hope that the good members of this forum are intelligent enough to avoid the many pitfalls of this project and recognize the massive price-to-value dislocation associated with it.
 
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.
 
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.

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.
 
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.

Unless you've done a property search on 90% of the office buildings in town, you are certain of nothing.

Well, if you're willing to negotiate away the demo clause for your property. That's your choice. No serious commercial landlord would do that. But maybe you don't have the bargaining power in terms of what you can deliver to your tenants in exchange.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top