Glen
Senior Member
Sure
http://www.lennard.com/market_subcategory.php?cat=15
http://www.lennard.com/market_subcategory.php?cat=16
It reconciles with various searches on individual properties.
|
|
|
Toronto Trounced
- Thread starter Glen
- Start date
Sure
http://www.lennard.com/market_subcategory.php?cat=15
http://www.lennard.com/market_subcategory.php?cat=16
It reconciles with various searches on individual properties.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
If this is so for land costs as well as rents, then you're just reinforcing my point that there's more to land costs than taxes alone. If you desire a comprehensive list of non-tax factors that influence land costs (and/or rents, I guess) that is always applicable to every employment site, well, go to google.ca and knock yourself out.
Glen
Senior Member
I never really disputed the notion many factors determine value. In the context of this discussion I posited that it is predominately property taxes that have created such a disparity. The factors that you mentioned have little effect in this case. Which again is consistent with the gross rental rates, as a reflection of desirability, being equal.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
You took my random and clearly incomplete list of factors as authoritative but I never intended to provide you with unequivocal explanations of the differences...it's real estate, after all.
Even if taxes were equalized, perhaps I'd forego Consumers and locate myself in the ACC (for a period of time after such equalization, Mississauga might still be seen as "better for business" than some spot out near Scarborough). A list of tenants in each office park may be illuminating.
Even if taxes were equalized, perhaps I'd forego Consumers and locate myself in the ACC (for a period of time after such equalization, Mississauga might still be seen as "better for business" than some spot out near Scarborough). A list of tenants in each office park may be illuminating.
CDL.TO
Moderator
Thanks. Lennard seems to be an interesting website. Vacancy rates in the ACC have been continuously lower than in MCC, but rents are higher in MCC. This seems to suggest that the quality of office space available for rent is different in the two locations. More Grade A in MCC and more Grade B in ACC?
Glen
Senior Member
No again. I took what you offered as potential reasons as to why land for office development at ACC would be worth 55% more than an equivalent parcel on Consumers Rd, and showed you why your reasoning failed. Demand is reflected in gross rents, not net.
The issue here is not where you would locate but rather where you would build. If taxes were equal, gross rents the same, and the land etc.still cheaper in Toronto I would build there.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Glen, you do not need to be so obtusely literal. You think I was trying to argue that taxes have a trivial or no effect on the land value of office parks...I wasn't.
When I said locate, I meant build/lease/whatever. Even if taxes and rents were the same and the land cheaper in Toronto, some would still choose to build in Mississauga...at the end of the day, people make these decisions and people are irrational (and if they weren't, perhaps Toronto would have changed its tax scheme by now). If all else was equal, though - other than land cost - we probably would see more office complexes get built at sites like Consumers. Tax rates can be changed and Mississauga's land costs may not respond quickly...a situation indicative of fundamental problems could potentially be turned a moderate boom for the 416.
When I said locate, I meant build/lease/whatever. Even if taxes and rents were the same and the land cheaper in Toronto, some would still choose to build in Mississauga...at the end of the day, people make these decisions and people are irrational (and if they weren't, perhaps Toronto would have changed its tax scheme by now). If all else was equal, though - other than land cost - we probably would see more office complexes get built at sites like Consumers. Tax rates can be changed and Mississauga's land costs may not respond quickly...a situation indicative of fundamental problems could potentially be turned a moderate boom for the 416.
Glen
Senior Member
That I agree with. Only when this disparity gone will Toronto be able to capitalize on its advantages.
One of things that has been frustrating, at least from my point of view, is how the city has dragged its feet in this area. It took nearly fifteen years after amalgamation to address the issue. Then the first kick at the can was the first iteration of the Enhancing Toronto's Business Climate plan. The public consultations which helped shape that, expressed concern that the 15 year phase in was too long. It was even suggested that the the 2.5x ratio was still to high. The second kick at the can accelerated the reduction for 'neighbourhood retail', with the creation of a new class. The third and last look at this issue has been the city wide CIP program that uses tax refunds for new developments. Each step is an admission that that not enough has been done. It remains to be seen if this is sufficient.
In all steps the response from the city has been to do as little over as long a period of time possible.
w.ll.am
Active Member
The use of these two statistics somewhat inaccurate. With a percentage increase in one being much higher than the other doesn't show one outweighing the other because no base is given. What was the original employment number and what was the population number?
If the employment was 100k then 27k new jobs were created. If the population is 300k then the growth is 27k . Which paints a different picture than percentages.
So no. You did not show that jobs are being taken by people outside the 905.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
We should also note that the land costs themselves as reported by Hemson may not be rock-solidly reliable...the ACC may have received a bump due to 401-frontage greenfields, whereas Consumers land costs may be skewed towards sales of parking lots with lesser frontages. I'd also wonder what exactly is permitted to be built in each office park - do zonings and regulations encourage higher quality office space in one over the other, or mandate underground parking or above ground garages instead of cheap surface lots, etc.?
Glen
Senior Member
They are never going to be exact. They are best estimations. It is not that difficult to get an approximation accounting for the issues you raise. IMO they would be within a 10% margin of error.