UPDATED - see the May 13 post on this property.

This is the latest in a never ending continuum of misleading land deals advertised on the MLS by the local realtors.  I remain firm in my belief the realtors should know better than to do this and should be held to a higher standard of accountability.  The listing featured today is from a realtor I actually know, and I believe he does know better, but chooses to do these misleading listings anyway.    

Basically the lot is an oversized corner on a busy road in Killarney.  A large inner city builder bought it a few years ago for about $650K and tried to rezone it for multi family use (and failed).  It is actually an ideal multi family redevelopment site due to its size and position on the block.  The land use re-designation application met with an angry horde of nimbyism and the Council at the time voted against it.  This was a poor choice by Council, and since then Council has made some significant progress in this area.  The local Councillor voted in favour of the re-designation (but I don't recall the remaining vote split).  

The biggest issue may have been the plan for six townhouses presented by the builder.  Perhaps four or five would have been less vigorously opposed.  The local residents, for whatever nimby reason that is most trendy, felt that it should only ever be redeveloped as a duplex.  There is zero business case to redevelop the site as a duplex, so this will not happen.

The listing agent basically claims what was voted against before would now be permitted (same Council), and indicates the project is a great six unit development prospect at a reasonable price. Unfortunately they have raised the price by $200k over the course of the last two years of recession (seems a little impossible) and put forth a site plan that I view to be impossible to permit at the DP stage (would violate too many bylaws).  So not only would a builder have to navigate an ugly rezoning process, he would later have to deal with the disappointment of receiving a diminished permit (or maybe a reality based permit). I would forecast a unit reduction of one to two based on what they suggest would be allowed.  This would render the project from marginal to uneconomic because of the elevated land value ($650k was likely too much for the site, so not sure why it is now worth $850k).

As a fall back plan the realtor suggests it is also a great holding/rental property.  At a price/rent ratio of 340 this would be an outrageously terrible investment property.  This would be a good holding property for a landlord that likes to lose $2k per month.  

This is the site plan proposed to be re-used (same as the plan that failed last time).  I made some comments on it in red.  This will be an interesting project to follow.  I will post a new article if it ever sells or someone else tries to develop the site.