04-09-2018, 02:56 PM
In the case of 18 Guelph, the property was recently sold (within the last year). So it's a new owner who has acquired the property and not (yet?) pursued plans for redevelopment, and letting the building deteriorate. And it is not a lack of zoning: the site can be redeveloped as zoned with modest density, and I think Dawn has a point that part of it is speculation about more favourable zoning in the future. Her other examples (Sacred Heart, Electrohome) are different cases, of course.
But I agree with you about taxation of vacant land, vacant commercial units, etc.
But I agree with you about taxation of vacant land, vacant commercial units, etc.