06-10-2017, 09:12 AM
(06-10-2017, 09:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(06-09-2017, 10:48 PM)MacBerry Wrote: IMO, the most likely answer is in the savings of hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years which the developer will save in taxes. As a fully enclosed indoor mall the property taxes would be much higher on a fully enclosed large building.
Secondly, the TPO site is not meant to be an everyday, local, and enclosed, "lets go to the mall" site.
If that’s true then it’s yet another screw-up in the design of property taxes. I’m a bit unclear — is it simply because the property would be worth more fully enclosed, and therefore the mill rate would apply to a higher assessment, or is it because of special provisions related to some legalistic definition of the use of the property?
As to your second point, I’m not clear on what you’re saying. Nobody would ever want to visit one store, then walk to another? Or they would, but they would be more comfortable being rained on while they do so?
The Boardwalk, Sunrise Shopping Centre are examples of successful shopping centres that are not enclosed. Many who'd go there are not there window shopping but are actually going to buy something. I imagine this would be no different, only it has a few more twists.