Yes. The "What if we could get a whole lot more out of a new set of buyers?" reasoning.

It's shifting some cost-of-development risk to the buyers. For those purchasing strictly as an investment, maybe this kind of thing is more palatable (or at least "business"). For those buying for their future living space, it sucks. I wonder how often it happens.

This got held up a long time by the fighting over whether it should even be built. But that particular risk was all on the developer's shoulders. I don't know what kind of answer there is to this, but in this case it all seems quite unfair. I'm a believer in caveat emptor but there are still a lot of grey areas to that perspective.

I guess we know what kind of "Burlington developments" columns are coming soon to a newspaper site near us. :cool:

I get a little bit annoyed with the Spectator's writing on housing. It just blames the developers constantly, but at the same time complains that there isn't enough housing. The developers do take on a huge risk with new projects, that should be acknowledged. The Spec is always arguing that the city/province needs to do more to build new housing. In my opinion that is absolutely not the role of government. The role of government is to create laws and conditions that keeps developers in check and allows a healthy amount of housing to be built. It's role is also to create conditions where developers can be confident that they will make a healthy profit. So in this situation, I do believe the government needs to step in an introduce legislation that prevents unreasonable increases based on basically nothing, like this one. But I don't think the government should be outright punishing developers for trying to build residential developments..... like so many Spec columnists believe.

on the third floor.

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attach...f-jpeg.438318/

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...bf540866_b.jpg
3/12/2023 by Joe, on Flickr

So those who put down a deposit 8 years ago and were essentially forced to pay up to an additional 300k last year to keep their unit must feel great that they're still at least 2+ years from being able to move in [/sarcasm].

After all this BS, you would figure this build would at least move faster than it is.

I hope the view of the lake is spectacular (for those who have a unit facing that side).

It did have a deep pit, and it's a fairly confined site, so there's probably only so fast they can go. And the builder really has no incentive to speed things up unless this is stalling other projects for them.

Are the tall proposals on Old Lakeshore still in play? That view may not last long:
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=251448
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=243185

There's also the one next door, which will block views for many west side units:
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=237433

And these just down the road:
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=211158


The people who paid big bucks for their units at 360 on Pearl must still be oh so happy.

Seems to be moving a little bit faster, but this is still about 2+ years away.

https://i.ibb.co/bKzPTv5/PXL-20230714-163332992.jpg