BobBob
Senior Member
CN Tower: Have you read the report? Specifically, the part titled "Financing Renewal" on page 110?
So how do you propose encouraging building owners to develop these underused lands? By asking them to spend $$$ retrofitting and then taking on development and market risk that they don't want? The Tower Renewal plan is a fantasy.
CN Tower: Have you read the report? Specifically, the part titled "Financing Renewal" on page 110?
The solution to these constraints is believed to be a credit-enhanced capital pool, backed not by mortgage security
but rather by property tax-based security. In this scenario, private sector funds would be raised by a dedicated
Tower Renewal Corporation in order to finance projects. In addition, government would contribute a relatively
small amount of over-collateralization to improve the credit quality of the capital pool, and reduce the interest
rate associated with it. To ensure payment of project obligations, failure of building owners to repay financing
obligations would lead to a transfer of defaulted payment amounts to property tax, whereupon the City could use
existing priority lien mechanisms to recover obligations.
And Junctionist, you are dreaming! Energy hogs? My friend, if the boiler is broken, you fix the damn thing! If the windows leak heat you replace them! That's what my property owner friends tell me. If not you can't rent the place out! Until you can show the building owner a minimum 10% return on his equity I really doubt he's going to want to invest millions of dollars to 'renew' his asset.
On the topic of high rise energy efficiency, we have far more pressing issues to deal with than the concrete bunkers from the 1960s. Consider the image of a heat sink, below, which has been designed to exchange the maximum amount of heat. Looks an awful lot like a new condo with wrap around balconies and floor to ceiling windows, doesn't it?
![]()
Since I love sarcasm, this might have been a design inspiration for one of the GTA's flagship developments:
![]()
I wonder if it would be possible to just parcel up these large sites and sell the surplus vacant land to new developers? This would allow the current owners to cash in on the sale of property, and relieve them of the risk of building something new. I don't even think that it matters that most underground parking garages occupy the entire site - two towers in the park at Yonge and Eglinton (south side between Lillian and Brownlow) saw the land on top of their parking garages redeveloped with condos.