- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
In November 2015 Bob told Newmarket Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, he was thinking about putting a seven storey rental apartment building at the Clock Tower instead of a condo.
In fact, months earlier, Bob was spelling out the advantages of rental to his business associates. Bob crunched the numbers and concluded rental would be more profitable. He had already worked out the condo option would deliver a profit of over $10m. The profit with rental would be even greater.
How come?
Bob believes he can negotiate downwards the amount of development charges payable. Development charges do not vary by tenure (rental vs condo) but Bob-the-magician is convinced he can pay less.
Apartments are defined in the Town’s Development Charges By-law as
“a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed use building, other than a townhouse or stacked townhouse, consisting of more than three dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade”
The Town’s development charges are based on the size of the apartment with 650 sq ft as the dividing line between large and small apartments. The development charge for large apartments is $12,617 and for small apartments $10,242.
Bob’s Clock Tower development has lots of apartments under 650 sq ft.
He believes past practice shows the Town may be amenable to deferring Development Charges for five years without interest. This means that money can be freed up and used for construction. He says this could amount to $5m
Bob believes substantial savings can be achieved by negotiating with the Town for fewer parking spaces than the current by-law would require. He says he could save up to $40,000 per parking space. The Town’s engineers say he should provide 290 spaces for a development the size of the Clock Tower. Bob says he can get away with 199 spaces.
That means a potential saving of 91 x $40,000 = $3,640,000.
Bob says rental can deliver a permanent tax reduction. Ownership is indeed a factor when it comes to property taxes payable to the Town. Property tax assessments are based on the market value of the property at the time of assessment.
Rental properties are assessed on net income, meaning rent less expenses, and this can vary dramatically depending on factors such as condition of the property, its location and occupancy rates. People who know about these things tell me the difference in tax take from a condo and rental building is huge.
Bob is convinced he can get approval for a seventh storey so long as the building is rental. I have no idea who gave him that impression. However, it is certainly true that Bob raised the rental issue in his meetings with various councillors in 2015.
Bob says rental provides a quicker turn around as there is no need for a sales test.
So that’s why Bob is going for rental.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Oops!
Bob Forrest has forgotten he put the Clock Tower up for sale.
On 12 May 2015, a local business person emailed Bob to ask if the Clock Tower was still for sale.
On 13 May 2015, without missing a beat, Bob told him:
“The building is not for sale, nor has it been”.
Bob continued:
“We are redeveloping the site in conjunction with an adjoining land assembly.”
Excuse me?
It is an incontestable fact that on 19 June 2014 an advertisement appeared in the business section of the Globe and Mail offering for sale “the historic Clock Tower building and four commercial storefront buildings”.
FOR SALE
180-194 Main Street South – intersection of Park Avenue and Main Street South in Downtown Newmarket.
(Site includes historic Clock Tower building and four commercial storefront buildings)
0.656 acres
Present Zoning: UC-D1 OP
Historic Downtown Centre
Contact us at
905-752-6776 ext 229
or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Why did Bob say the Clock Tower had never been up for sale?
Incredible as it may seem, can it possibly be the case that the great entrepreneur and developer simply forgot?
Bob’s business ethics are summed up in the four points below which appear on Forrest Group stationery. I’ve taken the liberty of adding a fifth.
Simple Operating Instructions – No Special Tools Required
1/ Treat others as you would wish to be treated
2/ Make no promises you cannot deliver, then deliver on your promises
3/ Never make a deal you would not yourself accept
4/ Acknowledge your errors
5/ Don’t re-write history and stick to the facts.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Bob Forrest wants to demolish three historic commercial properties in his ownership to make way for his seven storey apartment building at the Clock Tower. But he cannot knock them down without getting the agreement of the Town first which may, or may not be, forthcoming.
An alternative option - and one that is attractive to developers - is simply to allow old buildings to fall down so there is nothing left to save. This is commonly known as demolition by neglect. The Town is presented with a fait accompli. 
Bob Forrest’s slide presentation to the Statutory Public Meeting on 9 May 2016 on his Clock Tower application was posted on the Town’s website. At some point, a second version was substituted replacing the earlier one.
Forrest inadvertently gave the game away.
Slide 24 on the original version was headed:
“Fact vs Fiction – Previous Tenants”
Forrest’s slide states as fact:
“The roofs leak. The roofs and floors sag.”
So if the roofs leak why doesn’t Bob fix them? And if the roofs and floors are sagging why doesn’t he do something about it?
This slide no longer appears in the version posted on the Town’s website.
The Town’s By-law enforcement people are now on to the case and, I am told, will “review, inspect and take action as necessary”.
Watch this space.
(Bob does)
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Clock Tower developer, Bob Forrest, has doctored the record of his deputation to the Town's Committee of the Whole on 9 May 2016. 
In the version posted on the Town's website before the 9 May meeting, Forrest's presentation had 28 slides.
Today, the record of the presentation has 26 slides with two pages saying these were intentionally left blank.
The original page 23 has been doctored and a new version appears on the Town's website.
The original page 24 has also been doctored.
The original page 25 disappears and some points are folded into other slides.
And the original page 28 in which Forrest proclaims he is the "Barbarian at the gate" has gone, no doubt after sober second thought. Forrest was alluding to a reference made in one of my earlier blogs.
A number of questions arise from this sleight of hand.
Which version is the official record?
This could be important if the Town approves Forrest's rental building and, in so doing, votes against its own Zoning By-law and Heritage Conservation District By-law, and residents are forced to seek a remedy at the OMB. 
So, when was the doctored version submitted to the Town?
And by whom?
Were reasons given for the substitution?
Who gave permission for the doctored version to appear on the Town's website?
When was it posted?
Is it usual for documentation lodged with the Town to be subsequently amended?
At what point does the documentation become part of the official record?
Has this happened before at a Statutory Public meeting? If so, when?
I am in touch with the Town Clerk to seek answers to these questions and others.
In the doctored version, a slide appears saying this page has been "intentionally left blank".
This is completely dishonest. The slide should say:
"The original slide has been removed because we had second thoughts."
At the meeting on 9 May, Forrest said he had been asked to cut short his presentation to save time and, as a result, not all his slides were projected on to the big screen in the Council Chamber.
On the right is the original version, page 23. And below is the doctored version of page 23.
On the right is the original version of slide 24. And below is the doctored version of slide 24.
Why the deception?
It's time for answers.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Tim Hortons has an important role in the planning process in Newmarket. It is a neutral location where developers can meet individual councillors and talk about their pet projects over a cup of coffee and answer any questions.
The idea is to sound out the views of councillors and, in a subtle way, to influence them. That is the whole point of the exercise. If it is in the developer’s interests the information gleaned from the unsuspecting councillor is passed back to the Mothership (aka 395 Mulock Drive). Tony Van Bynen and Bob Shelton received briefings from the Forrest Group’s Director of Development, Chris Bobyk, after his meetings with councillors.
In a democracy such as ours it is perfectly legitimate for people to lobby elected officials. To be clear, councillors can and do meet with developers. There is nothing sinister about that. But if the lobbyist wants something from the Municipality – such as a planning approval – then warning bells should ring and the red lights should flash. And the details of any meetings should be entered in a public register.
The City of Toronto puts it this way:
“Public office holders and the public should be able to know who is attempting to influence City Government.”
Newmarket has chosen not to have a Lobbyist Register despite being designated as one of the places to grow in Ontario. The Town anticipates a huge increase in development applications over coming years especially in the Davis and Yonge corridors but we don’t know who is approaching whom for what.
All-in-all, that could mean a lot of new business for Tim Hortons. 
My Freedom of Information request for sight of emails from the Clock Tower developer, Bob Forrest, and his Director of Development, Chris Bobyk, to Mayor Tony Van Bynen, the Town’s Chief Administrative Officer Bob Shelton and others show how information on what councillors are thinking is routinely shared between the developer, the Mayor and top staff.
The Mayor helps set up meetings for the developer to brief some councillors - those new to the Council.
Others are approached directly by Bobyk who promises to update Van Bynen on his colleagues’ thinking.
Why is the Mayor relying on feedback from the developer? Why doesn't Van Bynen simply ask his Council colleagues direct?
Try as I may to be respectful, I cannot help but think of the Mayor as a diminutive ventriloquist’s dummy, huge chain of office round his neck, sitting on Chris Bobyk’s knee, mouthing the words:
“The Clock Tower is a great example of the intensification we need.”
Clock Tower timeline (to be extended)
(see also the early chronology in my November 2015 blog “Van Bynen set to give approval to condo blighting Newmarket’s historic Main Street”
18 October 2013: Bob Forrest emails Andrew Brouwer, Town Clerk, asking the Council to defer any decision on bringing into force the Heritage Conservation District By-law.
12 August 2014: Bob Forrest emails Tina Bates with the agenda for his meeting with the Mayor and Bob Shelton on Thursday 14 August 2014.
“Tina… as requested.
“Clock Tower
1) Density/height/heritage
2) Revitalising Main Street
3) A firm land swap deal
4) OMB
5) A potential Newmarket partner
6) This will only happen if you help
7) Yes, it is an election year
Slessor. An update. Renessa. An update.
19 May 2015: Chris Bobyk emails Tony Van Bynen.
“Mayor Van Bynen, thank you again for setting up the meetings with Councillor Broome-Plumley and Noehammer attended last week.
“As an update I am meeting Councillor Taylor, Twinney, Vegh and Hempen this week independently regarding the Clock Tower redevelopment. Following I will circle back with you as an update.
3 June 2015: Chris Bobyk emails Mayor Van Bynen and Tina Bates about the “Clock Tower municipal parking option discussion”.
“Tina – can you set up a meeting for me with the Mayor next week – based on discussions with Councillor Sponga and the Mayor. It is suggested a meeting with the Mayor is needed relative to a discussion on the Town reconsidering the construction of additional municipal parking in parallel with the proposed redevelopment of the Clock Tower. I understand from Joe that while this opportunity was turned down by past Council the current Council has different views.
“It may make sense to have Bob Shelton attend. Will leave that in the Mayor’s court.
On 16 June 2015 Chris Bobyk emails the Mayor and Bob Shelton about the “Market Square below grade parking expansion option”. The email is heavily redacted. Bobyk closes by saying;
“I look forward to your thoughts/agreed directions regarding this item soon and would be happy to meet again should you wish. We want to get the land exchange proposal to the Committee of the Whole at the earliest opportunity.
“I am setting up individual councillor meetings for next week in follow up to the first meetings and expect there will be some follow up discussion on this same matter.
On 22 June 2015 Chris Bobyk emails Bob Shelton with copies to Forrest and Van Bynen:
“Bob, hope you are well.
“In follow up to below, would you be able to meet tomorrow afternoon or Thursday between 11.30am and 4pm to discuss further. I have councillor meetings both days with time in between. Failing that, happy to discuss on phone.
“We need to get the land exchange item to Committee of the Whole in the scheduled August 31st meeting and the decision on below being incorporated or not (this refers to the option of expanding the below grade parking under Market Square) is needed for the terms and conditions drafting of the land exchange for Committee of the Whole approval.”
“I will raise (this) as a subject of discussion as well in my Councillor meetings relative to individual opinions/comments on the matter and interest levels of its inclusion or not. I will report back to you and the Mayor on that outcome.”
26 June 2015: Bob Shelton tells Bobyk that the Town’s senior staff have looked at the option of expanding the below grade parking under Market Square and they are interested in exploring it further.
26 June 2015: Bobyk replies to Shelton:
“I have had dialogue with all the Council members but two on the below grade parking opportunity at Market Square, FYI, as part of my follow up meetings suggested by the Mayor.”
“I can review with you their comments and we can conclude as to whether it’s worth bringing it back to Committee of the Whole for a second time in conjunction with our stand alone development land exchange requirements. We need to get the land exchange initiative to the next Committee of the Whole meeting which I understand is August 31st.”
6 July 2015: Bobyk emails Shelton:
“I need to start organizing approach/presentation on the land exchange – (I need to) know whether or not the municipal option (of expanding the below grade parking under Market Square) is to be conveyed (and if it) is needed at this time.”
“It appears you want to review it – but whether it is to be presented to the Committee of the Whole for a second time is the question.”
“Joe Sponga called me this morning and is saying it is desired and needed. He is also saying the BIA is of the view that it is needed to accommodate new uses that have come downtown (now) and (in the) future. Nonetheless we need to get the land exchange before (the) Committee of the Whole without delay and carry forward with the Zoning By-law Amendment application. The boundaries for the land exchange vary dependent on whether the municipal parking option is included or not. Need your direction soon.”
24 November 2015: Forrest emails the Mayor:
“Mr Mayor
“We have spent several months studying the prospect of doing the Clock Tower as a new rental building. While we are not ready to make a decision on that, we propose to visit with you and all of the councillors to discuss how this might be made to happen.”
“Some time ago, Bob Shelton asked us to meet with Rick Nethery to discuss how we can firm up the land swap issue in the face of policy matters. We deferred that meeting as we wondered how a switch to rental might impact on us. However, it is scheduled for today.”
“After this meeting we are anxious to meet with you as soon as possible to kick off a renewed effort. I wonder if we could be provided with some times that will work for your side. In the past these meetings have included Bob (Shelton) Rick (Nethery) and Joe (Sponga?) but, of course, it is not our position to determine that part.”
“Currently we are revising our drawings as to renew the public process.
“Our goal will be……
To show you the current plan which has changed little
To discuss how rental might be accomplished
Talk about the land swap, post meeting with Rick, and
Because it has again been raised, determine if there is a strong appetite for funding and building an underground parking garage for the Town beneath Market Square.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Best… Bob
27 November and 1 December 2015: There is a series of email exchanges from Chris Bobyk to the Mayor’s assistant, Pat Noble, asking for a meeting with the Mayor before the end of the year to discuss the Clock Tower.
16 February 2016: Chris Bobyk emails Tina Bates about setting up meetings with councillors to discuss the Clock Tower application.
“Tina, hope you are well. I have forgotten who to approach in your group as to setting up Councillor meetings with the following councillors in red below. I would meet each individually. Last time I met with them at the Tim Horton’s on Yonge Street, north of the Regional Offices, west side of Yonge. If possible, individual meetings next week, the week of February 22nd would be great if possible. Let me know what days and times work for the three of them.
Most appreciated.
1) Kelly Broome-Plumley
2) Christina Bisanz
3) Jane Twinney
4) Tom Vegh – I will contact him directly
5) Tom Hempen – I will contact him directly
6) Dave Kerwin - I will contact him directly
7) Joe Sponga - I will contact him directly
8) John Taylor - I will contact him directly
6 April 2016: Pat Noble emails Bob Forrest about setting up a meeting with the Mayor and Bob Shelton to get an update on the Clock Tower.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
You can see the original emails here. Scroll to FoI records May 2016.
more will follow
Page 192 of 273