pub (mpi) 1-18 reference: ai.8, investment portfolio …€¦ · · 2017-01-28pub (mpi) 1-18 - 2...
TRANSCRIPT
August 4, 2010 Information Requests – Round 1
PUB (MPI) 1-18 - 1 -
PUB (MPI) 1-18 Reference: AI.8, Investment Portfolio
composition
(a) Please provide a table which summarizes each of the recommendations made by
AON relative to the Corporation's investment portfolio, the Corporation's response to
each recommendation, and the Corporation’s progress during 2009/10, 2010/11
(forecast) and 2011/12 (forecast) with implementation of the adopted
recommendations.
(b) Please re-file the schedule in AI.8 including 2009/10 and 2010/11.
(c) Please file an updated schedule to that provided in response to PUB/MPI I-7 (a) at
last year's GRA, compare that schedule to last year's filing and explain the
differences for each year.
(d) Please provide a listing of the Corporation's real estate investments for 2008/09,
2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/12 and 2012/13.
(e) Please provided the occupancy rate for Cityplace during 2009/10, the forecast
occupancy rate for 2010/11 and 2011/12 and indicate the actual and forecast net
operating results for rental and parking operations, including gross rental revenue,
parking revenue and operating expenses for each year. Please compare the rate of
return on this investment with the target rate for real estate investments.
(f) Please advise of the status of 1075 Portage Avenue and file any appraisals obtained
for that property.
RESPONSE:
(a) Refer to table below.
August 4, 2010 Information Requests – Round 1
PUB (MPI) 1-18 - 2 -
Recommendations made by Aon (p.34 and p.35 of the March 2008 ALM report)
The Corporation’s response The Corporation’s progress to June 2009
The Corporation’s progress to June 2010
Expectations for 2011/12
Long-term Bonds versus Universe Bonds – either change allocation from universe bonds to long-term bonds or change the fixed income using a defined transition schedule.
The Corporation adopted a 10% allocation to long-term bonds and intends to fund that allocation as conditions in the capital markets become favourable.
The Corporation has started to increase the long-bond allocation.
The Corporation has continued to increase its allocation to long-bonds and had a 6.6% allocation at May 31, 2010.
The Corporation expects to have an allocation of 8% to long bonds in 2011/12
Illiquid Asset Classes (real estate, private equity, infrastructure) –the corporation will be gaining significant exposure to illiquid asset classes, and it is unrealistic for some of the illiquid asset classes to increase by more than 2% per annum.
The Corporation anticipates that it will take several years to reach the normal policy weights for the alternative asset classes.
The Corporation has purchased the parking lots associated with Cityplace. The Corporation has developed a shortlist of Canadian real estate pooled fund managers. Research is currently being performed on private equity and infrastructure.
The Corporation contracted with an open ended pooled fund in June 2010 and made its first investment in July. The Corporation has hired a consultant to provide education and assistance with evaluating the infrastructure market.
The Corporation expects to have the following allocations to alternative asset classes in 2011/12: • real estate (10%), • infrastructure (2%), • private equity (0.3%).
Currency Hedging – hedge the foreign currency exposure for all asset classes that target a consistent absolute return (real estate and infrastructure).
The Corporation accepted this recommendation.
The mandate for real estate is Canadian and therefore does not need to be hedged. The Corporation does not have any assets in infrastructure to date.
There is no currency exposure associated with the current real estate investments. The Corporation has no investments in infrastructure to date.
The Corporation does not expect to make real estate investments outside of Canada. The Corporation will investigate the accounting and economic implications of hedging currency exposures related to infrastructure investments.
Currency Hedging – do not hedge the foreign currency exposure to U.S. public equity or private equity.
The Minister of Finance has agreed to allow the corporation to discontinue the foreign currency hedge for US equity investments.
The U.S. public equity is currently being hedged. The Corporation does not have any assets in foreign private equity.
The Corporation discontinued its currency hedge in May 2010.
The Corporation does not expect to hedge the currency exposure related to U.S. equities in 2011/12.
T-bills – add a level of cash in the asset allocation.
For operational purposes the Corporation has provided an allocation to cash of up to 3.0% in the Investment Policy Statement.
In the Investment Policy Statement, the minimum and maximum range for cash and short-term is 0% to 3%.
The Corporation continues to hold cash as necessary for day to day operations and investment purposes.
The Corporation expects to continue to hold cash as necessary for day to day operations and investment purposes.
August 4, 2010 Information Requests – Round 1
PUB (MPI) 1-18 - 3 -
(b) Refer to the attachment.
(c) Refer to the attachment.
(d) Refer to table below.
in millions
Description $ Annual Total $
2008/09
None 0
2009/10
Cityplace parking lots 15.4 15.4
2010/11 General provision Cityplace parking lots
71.3
15.4 86.3 2011/12 General provision
Cityplace parking lots
15.4 214.2 2012/13 General provision
Cityplace parking lots
15.4 251.0
(e) Refer to attached Schedules 1-4.
The rate of return on the portion of the Cityplace property that is real estate
investments (the three external parkades) is 5.3%. This rate excludes any change in
the fair market value of the investment. The target rate for real estate investments
is 6.0%.
(f) The facility is currently being tendered for sale. A copy of our current appraisal is
attached.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1 -18 (b) Attachment
1
Investment Allocation
Investment Investment IncomePortfolio Corporate Basic's
2009/10 @ Feb. 28/10 Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 92.9$ 33$ 29$ Long-term 1,711.3 92,598$ 80,925$ Equities 387.1 2,981$ 2,605$ Real Estate 15.2 670$ 586$ Infrastructure - -$ -$
96,282$ 84,145$
Basic % of Total 87.39%
Average Average Investment IncomeInvestment Effective Corporate Basic's
2010/11 Portfolio Rate Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 64.5$ 0.66% 298$ 265$ Long-term 1,725.8 4.06% 68,672$ 61,033$ Equities 405.8 6.14% 22,672$ 20,150$ Real Estate 86.3 6.00% 4,818$ 4,282$ Infrastructure - 7.00% -$ -$
Total return 96,460$ 85,730$
Basic % of Total 88.88%
Average Average Investment IncomeInvestment Effective Corporate Basic's
2011/12 Portfolio Rate Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 61.0$ 2.44% 826$ 741$ Long-term 1,605.8 4.50% 61,534$ 55,234$ Equities 477.9 6.07% 26,767$ 24,027$ Real Estate 214.2 6.00% 12,549$ 11,264$ Infrastructure 21.3 7.00% 1,491$ 1,338$
Total return 103,167$ 92,605$
Basic % of Total 89.76%
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1 -18 (b) Attachment
2
Average Average Investment IncomeInvestment Effective Corporate Basic's
2012/13 Portfolio Rate Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 60.3$ 3.19% 1,017$ 920$ Long-term 1,528.7 4.94% 55,822$ 50,497$ Equities 520.6 6.12% 29,212$ 26,425$ Real Estate 251.0 6.00% 14,911$ 13,489$ Infrastructure 89.3 7.00% 6,254$ 5,657$
Total return 107,216$ 96,988$
Basic % of Total 90.46%
Average Average Investment IncomeInvestment Effective Corporate Basic's
2013/14 Portfolio Rate Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 60.1$ 4.13% 1,292$ 1,174$ Long-term 1,560.8 5.15% 57,582$ 52,313$ Equities 652.0 6.15% 31,250$ 28,390$ Real Estate 266.4 6.00% 15,756$ 14,314$ Infrastructure 137.6 7.00% 9,633$ 8,752$
Total return 115,513$ 104,943$
Basic % of Total 90.85%
Average Average Investment IncomeInvestment Effective Corporate Basic's
2014/15 Portfolio Rate Total Share(in millions) (in thousands)
Short-term 60.4$ 4.69% 1,263$ 1,142$ Long-term 1,655.2 5.97% 61,666$ 55,781$ Equities 591.6 6.19% 33,350$ 30,167$ Real Estate 283.7 6.00% 17,019$ 15,395$ Infrastructure 146.4 7.00% 10,246$ 9,268$
Total return 123,544$ 111,754$
Basic % of Total 90.46%
Note:Portfolio balances and effective rates represent averages. The calculatedcorporate total for investment income is based on monthly calculations.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (c)Attachment
1
Forecast2010 GRA 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Investment Income:
Short Term Interest 3,267 4,802 4,279 610 906 1,510 1,989 2,363
Long Term Bond Income (1) 93,816 82,106 84,480 77,140 73,984 78,392 78,837 86,538
Equity Dividends (2) 9,390 10,374 9,976 16,662 19,061 20,141 22,049 24,295
Equity Gain/Loss 25,694 45,132 (80,405) 11,312 11,310 12,873 13,822 14,608
Realized gain (loss) on HFT bonds 6,541
Unrealized gain/loss on HFT bonds (5,533)
Sub Total 132,167 142,413 19,338 105,724 105,261 112,916 116,697 127,804
Income from New Asset Classes:
EAFE Dividends/Gains 1,574 4,683 4,412 4,692 5,000
Infrastructure Income - 585 1,984 3,381 4,785
Real Estate Income 1,440 3,130 5,607 8,086 10,558
Sub Total - - - 3,014 8,398 12,003 16,159 20,343
Management Fees (3,139) (3,338) (2,902) (2,285) (2,379) (2,589) (2,864) (3,155)
Pension Fund Transfer (8,603) (13,531) (11,804) (9,027) (9,642) (10,284) (10,958) (11,668)
Corporate Total 120,425 125,544 4,632 97,426 101,638 112,046 119,034 133,324
Basic's Share 104,016 108,763 3,695 84,152 88,337 97,916 104,768 118,017 % of Total 86.37% 86.63% 79.77% 86.38% 86.91% 87.39% 88.02% 88.52%
Yield Percentage:
Short Term 4.00% 4.14% 1.91% 0.44% 1.05% 2.37% 3.37% 4.30%Long Term 4.97% 480.00% 4.71% 3.05% 3.38% 4.25% 4.91% 5.22%Equities 8.14% 12.25% -18.50% 6.23% 6.23% 6.23% 6.23% 6.41%EAFE Equities 6.23% 6.23% 6.23% 6.23% 6.23%Real Estate 5.50% 6.00% 6.00% 6.00% 6.00%Infrastructure 7.00% 7.00% 7.00% 7.00%
2011 GRA Forecast2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Investment Income:
Short Term Interest 3,267 4,802 4,279 33 298 826 1,017 1,292
Long Term Bond Income (1) 93,816 82,106 84,480 88,943 79,714 73,418 68,490 71,040
Equity Dividends (2) 9,390 10,374 9,976 9,579 10,535 10,686 11,278 11,923
Equity Gain/Loss 25,694 45,132 (80,405) (5,332) 13,874 14,161 15,822 16,679
Realized gain (loss) on HFT bonds 6,541 2,863
Unrealized gain (loss) on HFT bonds (5,533) 14,576
Sub Total 132,167 142,413 19,338 110,662 104,421 99,091 96,607 100,934
Income from New Asset Classes:
EAFE Dividends/Gains - - 3,601 3,942 4,579
Infrastructure Income - - 1,491 6,254 9,633
Real Estate Income 670 4,818 12,549 14,911 15,756
Sub Total - - - 670 4,818 17,641 25,107 29,968
Management Fees (3,139) (3,338) (2,902) (2,715) (3,137) (3,281) (3,540) (3,721)
Pension Fund Transfer (8,603) (13,531) (11,804) (12,335) (9,642) (10,284) (10,958) (11,668)
Corporate Total 120,425 125,544 4,632 96,282 96,460 103,167 107,216 115,513
Basic's Share 104,016 108,763 3,695 84,145 85,730 92,605 96,988 104,943 % of Total 86.37% 86.63% 79.77% 87.39% 88.88% 89.76% 90.46% 90.85%
Yield Percentage:
Short Term 4.00% 4.14% 1.91% 0.04% 0.66% 2.44% 3.19% 4.13%Long Term 4.97% 4.80% 4.71% 5.36% 3.78% 4.22% 4.66% 4.87%Equities 8.14% 12.25% -18.50% 1.08% 6.14% 6.07% 6.12% 6.15%EAFE Equities - 5.54% 5.54% 5.54% 5.54%Real Estate 4.40% 5.75% 6.00% 6.00% 6.00%Infrastructure 6.75% 7.00% 7.00% 7.00%
Difference Forecast2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Investment Income:
Short Term Interest (577) (608) (684) (972) (1,071)
Long Term Bond Income (1) 11,803 5,730 (4,974) (10,347) (15,498)
Equity Dividends (2) (7,083) (8,526) (9,455) (10,771) (12,372)
Equity Gain/Loss (16,644) 2,564 1,288 2,000 2,071
Realized gain (loss) on HFT bonds 2,863 - - - -
Unrealized gain (loss) on HFT bonds 14,576 - - - -
Sub Total 4,938 (840) (13,825) (20,090) (26,870)
Income from New Asset Classes:
EAFE Dividends/Gains (1,574) (4,683) (811) (750) (421)
Infrastructure Income - (585) (493) 2,873 4,848
Real Estate Income (770) 1,688 6,942 6,825 5,198
Sub Total (2,344) (3,580) 5,638 8,948 9,625
Management Fees (430) (758) (692) (676) (566)
Pension Fund Transfer (3,308) - - - -
Corporate Total (1,144) (5,178) (8,879) (11,818) (17,811)
Basic's Share (7) (2,607) (5,311) (7,780) (13,074) % of Total 1.02% 1.96% 2.37% 2.45% 2.33%
(1) Includes bond gain (loss) on sale
(2) Includes foreign exchange gain (loss) on US equities, write-downs, and gain (loss) on Cdn and US equities
Corporate Investment Income For Fiscal years ending February 28/29
Actual Outlook
in $000s
Actual Outlook
in $000s
Actual Outlook
in $000s
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (e)Schedule 1 Attachment
Occupancy RateActual Forecast Forecast
as at Feb.28/2010 2010* 2011*
Total Gross Leasable Area (s.f.) 454,037 454,037 454,037 Less MPI portion 333,079 333,079 333,079 Adjusted GLA 120,958 120,958 120,958
Closing Vacancy (s.f.) 27,357 26,593 7,820
Closing Occupancy (s.f.) 93,601 94,365 113,138
Occupancy Rate (%) 77% 78% 94%
*based on calendar year
1
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (e)Schedule 2 Attachment
Actual Net Operating Results
Cityplace Building Operations
Cityplace Retail Cityplace Office Cityplace Parking GRAND TOTAL
Rental Revenue (net of MPI portion) 2,426,635.48 3,905,657.79 754,205.38 7,086,498.65
Operating Expenses 1,821,235.73 2,944,346.65 280,494.88 5,046,077.26 Depreciation Expense* 248,142.63 620,356.58 372,213.95 1,240,713.16
2,069,378.36 3,564,703.23 652,708.83 6,286,790.42
Net Operating Income 357,257.12 340,954.56 101,496.55 799,708.23
*based on allocation: 50% office30% parkade (20% 3rd & 4th flr & 10% basement)20% retail
External Parking Operations
TOTAL
Parking Revenue 1,617,857.58
Operating Expenses 762,119.65 Depreciation Expense 185,557.34
947,676.99
Net Operating Income 670,180.59
For the period May 1, 2009 to February 28, 2010
For the period May 1, 2009 to February 28, 2010
2
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (e)Schedule 3 Attachment
Net Operating Forecast
Cityplace Building Operations
Cityplace Retail Cityplace Office
Cityplace Parking GRAND TOTAL
Rental Revenue (net of MPI portion) 3,133,168 5,270,146 937,291 9,340,605
Operating Expenses 2,370,600 4,070,269 371,535 6,812,404 Depreciation Expense* 297,771 744,428 446,657 1,488,856
2,668,371 4,814,697 818,192 8,301,260
Net Operating Income 464,797 455,449 119,099 1,039,345
*based on allocation: 50% office30% parkade (20% 3rd & 4th flr & 10% basement)20% retail
External Parking Operations
TOTAL
Parking Revenue 2,067,850
Operating Expenses 1,042,983 Depreciation Expense 222,668
1,265,651
Net Operating Income 802,199
Forecast for the period January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010
Forecast for the periodJanuary 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010
3
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (e)Schedule 4 Attachment
Net Operating Forecast
Cityplace Building Operations
Cityplace Retail Cityplace Office
Cityplace Parking GRAND TOTAL
Rental Revenue (net of MPI portion) 3,614,232 5,466,370 955,044.31 10,035,646
Operating Expenses 2,432,584 4,177,421 378,959.00 6,988,964 Depreciation Expense* 297,771 744,428 446,656.80 1,488,856
2,730,355 4,921,849 825,615.80 8,477,820
Net Operating Income 883,877 544,521 129,429 1,557,826
*based on allocation: 50% office30% parkade (20% 3rd & 4th flr & 10% basement)20% retail (10% fitness & 10% retail)
External Parking Operations
TOTAL
Parking Revenue 2,109,208
Operating Expenses 1,064,341 Depreciation Expense 222,668
1,287,009
Net Operating Income 822,199
Forecast for the period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011
Forecast for the periodJanuary 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011
4
Summary Appraisal Report
1075 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, Manitoba
as of April 6, 2010
File No. 10-2298-10
Front Elevation of 1075 Portage Avenue
330 Portage Avenue, Suite 1000 Winnipeg, Manitoba
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
330 Portage Avenue, Suite 1000 | Winnipeg, Manitoba | Phone: 668-2583
April 14, 2010
Mr. Ron Moscinski, RPA
Manitoba Public Insurance
711-234 Donald Street
Winnipeg, MB R3C 4A4
RE: File 10-2298-10 Summary Appraisal; 1075 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba
In accordance with your instructions we have inspected the above noted property, more fully
described elsewhere in this report, for the purpose of estimating its market value. Market Value being
the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market as of the
specified date under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently
and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. It is noted that while
the retaining wall is stated in the report that it should be replaced, determining the replacement cost
of the retaining wall was not derived. The value applicable to replacing this retaining wall will mitigate
the value derived in this report,
After consideration of the available information, it is our opinion the market value, as April 6, 2010, is:
Three Million Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($3,750,000)
A description of the subject property, neighbourhood, and supporting data is provided in the attached
report. The appraisal has been prepared in conformity with the Canadian Uniform Standards of
Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute of Canada.
Respectfully submitted,
Original signed by David van der Vis
David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI, P. App.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Table of Contents
S U M M A R Y O F I M P O R T A N T F A C T S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S I
I N T R O D U C T I O N 1 Property Address 1 Legal description 1 Purpose of the Appraisal 1 Function 1 Effective Date 1 Definition of Market Value 1 Property Rights Appraised 2 Exposure Time 2 Marketing Time 2 Scope of the Appraisal 3 Environmental Concerns 3 Current Ownership 4 Encumbrances 4 Sales History 4
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 5 Site Description 5 Zoning 7 Assessment and Taxes 7 Description of Improvements 8 Estimate of Depreciation 10 Estimated Effective Age of the Improvements 10
M A R K E T O V E R V I E W 1 1 Manitoba Economy 11 City Of Winnipeg 12
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 1 8 Introduction 18 Conclusion 19
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 2 0 Methodology 20 Estimate of Value by the Cost Approach 21 Estimate of Value by the Income Approach 22 Estimate of Value by the Direct Comparison Approach 28
C O M P A R A B L E P R O P E R T Y – R E T A I L / O F F I C E 2 8 Reconciliation of Value Estimates 31
APPENDICES Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Appendix 1 Certification Appendix 2 Photographs of Subject Property Appendix 3 Title, Tax , Assessment Appendix 4 Demographic Information Appendix 5 Building Sketch Plans Appendix 6
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Executive Summary
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
S U M M A R Y O F I M P O R T A N T F A C T S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S
Address of Subject Property 1075 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba
Legal Description Lot 3, Plan 26601 Winnipeg Land Titles Office in RL
58/60 of Parish of St. James.
Purpose To estimate current market value.
Function To assist in deriving a Sale Price
Site Area 161,502 sq. ft., or 3.7 acres
Building Area 22,307 sq.ft. Lower Level Area
22,845 sq.ft. Plan Area
69,112 sq.ft. Gross Floor Area
Zoning C2 - Commercial Zone
Assessment (2009) Roll No. 13-200105 $2,549,000
Assessment (2010) Roll No. 13-200105 $4,897,000
Property Taxes (2009) Roll No. 13-200105 $117,217.44
Highest and Best Use Current Office Use
Date of Appraisal April 6, 2010
Estimates of Value:
Cost Approach Not applicable
Income Approach $3,800,000
Direct Comparison Approach $3,650,000
Final Value Conclusion $3,750,000
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
I N T R O D U C T I O N 1
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Property Address
1075 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba
Legal description
Lot 3, Plan 22601 Winnipeg Land Titles Office in RL 58/60 of Parish of St. James.
Purpose of the Appraisal
The purpose of this report is to estimate the current market value of the subject property.
Function
This report is to aid in establishing a Sale Price for the Subject Property.
Effective Date
April 6, 2010
Definition of Market Value
Market Value is defined as “The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive
and open market as of the specified date under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and
seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue
stimulus.”
Implicit in this definition are the consummation of a sale as of the specified date and the
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
buyer and seller are typically motivated;
both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best
interests;
a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;
payment is made in terms of cash in Canadian dollars or in terms of financial arrangements
comparable thereto;
the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or
creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale.1
1 Source: 2010 Canadian Uniform Standards
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
I N T R O D U C T I O N 2
Property Rights Appraised
The property rights appraised are those of the fee simple ownership.
It is held in perpetuity, carrying with it the right to sell, lease, or give it away, and is subject only to
restrictions held by the Crown i.e. taxation, expropriation, police power, and escheat. Partial or sub-
interests, such as leasehold, can be created by the fee simple owner, granting some of those rights to
another for a stated period under certain conditions.
Exposure Time
Reasonable exposure time is one of a series of conditions in most market value definitions. It may be
defined as follows: “The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have
been offered in the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the
effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past events
assuming a competitive and open market”.
Exposure time can vary for various types of real estate under different market conditions. The fact
that exposure time is always presumed to occur prior to the effective date of the appraisal is
substantiated by related facts in the appraisal e.g. the use of current cost information, the analysis of
historical sales information (i.e. sold after exposure and after completion of negotiations between the
seller and the buyer), and the analysis of future income expectancy estimated from the effective date
of the appraisal.
The estimate of the time period for reasonable exposure is not intended to be a prediction of a date of
sale, but instead an integral part of the analysis conducted during the appraisal assignment. The
estimate may be expressed as a range and can be based on statistical information, specific sales
analysis or interviews with market participants. Related information gathered through this process
can include the identification of typical buyers and sellers for the type of real estate involved, typical
equity investment levels, and financial particulars term. Our estimate of the probable exposure time
for the property is six to twelve months.
Marketing Time
Marketing time is an opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a property interest in real
estate at the concluded market value level during the period immediately after the effective date of an
appraisal.2 A reasonable marketing time for the subject property is also estimated to be six to twelve
months.
2 Ibid.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
I N T R O D U C T I O N 3
Scope of the Appraisal
An interior and exterior inspection of the subject was made by David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI,
P. App., on April 6, 2010. Photographs appended were also taken on April 6, 2010.
The Cost Approach, Income Approach, and Direct Comparison Approach, were investigated as to
their relevance to this assignment, including a review of market data necessary to properly apply
these approaches. In this regard the Income Approach and Direct Comparison Approach have been
applied and later reconciled to a final estimate of value.
Publications provided by the City of Winnipeg provided information on land use controls and property
tax information. Sources of market evidence included, as appropriate, the Winnipeg Real Estate
Board – including the MAAP program and mlxchange, the Winnipeg Land Titles Office, the Johnson
Market Report, as well as local real estate agents, assessors, and vendors and purchasers active in
the market. Status of Title to the property was obtained through the Manitoba Land Titles Office,
Winnipeg location.
We did not complete technical investigations such as: detailed inspections or engineering review of
the structure, roof, or mechanical systems; an environmental review of the property; a site or building
survey; investigations into the bearing qualities of the soils; or audits of financial and legal
arrangements.
The analysis set out in this report relied on written and verbal information obtained from a variety of
sources we considered reliable. Unless otherwise stated herein, we did not verify client-supplied
information, which we believe to be correct. The mandate for the appraisal did not require a report
prepared to the standard appropriate for court purposes or for arbitration, so we did not fully
document or confirm by reference to primary sources all information herein.
Environmental Concerns
The subject property has been used as Government Offices since 1954. “An Environmental Site
Study completed in 2004 identified asbestos wrapped pipe and asbestos contamination in the crawl
space area. The pipe insulation was considered to be in good condition and is labeled “ASBESTOS”.
The entry to the crawl space as a sign identifying the area as contaminated with asbestos and that
entry to the crawlspace is only permitted while using respirators and coveralls.
Work was completed in 2005 to remedy an area in the parking lot that was identified in the
environmental site assessment as being contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons.”3
3 MPI 1075 Information Package, received by email in PDF format April 1, 2010.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
I N T R O D U C T I O N 4
Other than what is mentioned, the appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of contaminants on or
in the property unless otherwise stated. He is not, however, qualified to test such substances or
conditions. The presence of such substances, such as asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation,
other similar hazardous substances, or environmental conditions, may affect the value of the
property. The value estimate therefore is predicated on the assumption that there is no such
condition on or in the property or in such proximity that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility
is assumed for any conditions, or any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them.
Because this appraisal is not intended to determine the presence or absence of environmental risk,
should more particulars or detail be required, a qualified environmental professional should be
consulted.
Current Ownership
The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation is the registered owner on Certificate of Title Number
2080477 as registered on April 8, 2005.
Encumbrances
Registration No. Type From/By/To Consideration Registration Date 3111710 Caveat Zoning Agreement from the City of Winnipeg - 2005/03/31
This encumbrance is believed to be common to all forms of real estate. It is also believed this
encumbrance has no effect on the value, or marketability, of the subject property.
Sales History
The current owner purchased the property April 8, 2005 for a reported consideration of $1,700,000
and a sworn value of $2,250,000. The property transferred from Her Majesty the Queen (Manitoba)
to Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation. The transfer is deemed to be an unreliable transaction as
this transaction was from The Crown, to a Crown Corporation.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 5
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S
Site Description
The subject site consists of an irregular shaped lot with frontage along Portage Avenue of
approximately 47.0 feet on the south and flanking Dominion Street on the west approximately 456
feet (see figure 1 on the following page). The gross site area is approximately 161,502 square feet.
The subject building covers approximately 14.1% of the site with all parking located at the rear of the
building. Access to the site is from the public lane along the east side of the site and from Dominion
Street for vehicles and off Portage Avenue and Dominion Street for pedestrians.
The building is set back from Portage Avenue and the resulting front yard is somewhat park-like. A
ramp leads to the basement on the south side of the building and the retaining wall is in poor
condition, has been reinforced with structural steel bracing and the retaining wall should be replaced
(see photos in the addenda).
The site is surrounded by Portage Avenue and Commercial Development at the South, Dominion
Street Avenue at the west, Public Lane at the east and a parking lot and community churcg at the
north. All municipal services are available at the site.
Based upon the current zoning by-law the number of parking stalls needed for office space is one for
every 750 square feet and for call centers one for every 400 square feet. The subject site has
approximately 190 paved and electrified stalls which would meet the intensity of a call centre
development. There is a gravel surfaced portion at the northern extremity of the subject property
which provides approximately another 80 stalls.
Based upon the office occupancy the number of stalls required according to zoning is 93 stalls.
Based upon this it is estimated that the excess land could be as much as 60,000 square feet.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 6
Figure 1: Site Plan
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 7
Zoning
Under a Zoning Agreement completed March 31, 2005, whereby “The Owner, or representative of the
Owner, has made application to have the land rezoned to a “C2” Commercial District; and The City
has agreed insofar as it lawfully can and may and subject to the provisions of The City of Winnipeg
Charter to rezone that land as requested subject to execution of this agreement as a condition of
enactment of the rezoning by-law.”4
The Commercial Community (C2) District is intended to accommodate more intensive commercial
sites that do not have a local or neighbourhood orientation. The district is intended to include
attractive commercial, institutional, recreational, and service facilities needed to support the
surrounding neighbourhoods and the broader community. The C2 Commercial Community Districts
are generally located along collector streets, at arterial/collector intersections, or along portions of
arterial streets with relatively shallow lots.
Bulk requirements are as follows:
Minimum/ Maximum Front Yard
Minimum Rear Yard
Minimum Interior Side Yard
Minimum Corner side Yard
Maximum Height of Building
Maximum Floor Area Ratio
0 feet / NA 25 feet 0 feet 25 feet 49 feet 3.0
Permitted uses are many and varied. The subject does not appear to meet the bulk regulations
outlined in the zoning bylaw. The reader is directed to City of Winnipeg Zoning By-law Number
200/2006, which includes a comprehensive list of permitted and conditional uses for this zoning
designation. Only a cursory review of zoning requirements has been performed as part of our
analysis and questions regarding bulk zoning requirements should be directed to the City.
Assessment and Taxes
The property is listed under the City of Winnipeg tax rolls: 13-200105.
Roll Number Category Assessed Value (2010) 2009 Taxes
13-200105 Other Property (Grant) $4,897,000 $117,217.44
4 Zoning Agreement (DAZ 255/2004); Section 420, The City of Winnipeg Charter, registered March 31, 2005.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 8
Description of Improvements
The Subject Building, known formerly as the “Motor Vehicle Branch”, is a two storey building with
lower level; with associated areas as follows.
Lower Level 22,307 square feet
Plan Area 22,845 square feet
Gross Floor Area 69,112 square feet
The building was constructed in 1954. The building is a reinforced concrete framed building with
structural concrete floors and roof together with concrete exterior walls below grade. The roof
structure was available during inspection and the condition was noticed to be very good with what is
believed to be torched on asphalt roll, with upgraded insulation. The perimeter walls, that are
exposed above grade are predominantly window finished. While the windows are not believed to be
original, this appraiser is not aware of the details of when they were upgraded to the current level of
finish.
The building is accessible through a public entrance on the south wall near Dominion Street. There
was an entrance on the south and north sides, both near the east end of the building for staff access
and egress. In addition to these doors there is an emergency exit located on the north side of the
building near Dominion Street and two emergency doors on the east side, below grade; one in the
cafeteria and one adjacent to the cafeteria. There is a handicap entrance located in the southwest
corner of the building with access to an elevator for access to all floors.
Lower Level
The basement area is divided into a number of smaller office type rooms, a class room, mechanical
and electrical rooms and cafeteria. Most of the area is not utilized. The mechanical and electrical
rooms are located in the middle of the lower level, excluding the two boilers which are located in a
building extension on the northeast corner (see Basement Floor Plan in the Addenda) The
washrooms located in the lower level appear to be original in both toilet technology and wall hung
basins. The classroom and offices in the northwest area have newer interior improvements. There is
also a staff lounge area on the lower level with what appear to be a newer interior. The cafeteria
looks as if the improvements are original; The cafeteria is located at the east end of the of the lower
level with the eastern wall of the area finished in glass, with a view of a sloped grass area leading up
to the eastern portion the parking area. All ceilings in finished areas are suspended acoustic tile with
suspended fluorescent fixtures. Classroom and office areas have typical carpet flooring, hallways
and cafeteria have typical asphalt tile and the washrooms are finished with ceramic flooring.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 9
Main Floor
The main floor is divided into two general areas the eastern and northern wings. The eastern wing is
divided into two general areas finished with cubicles overall with a half dozen private offices scattered
along the perimeter. The interior finish looks newer on the eastern portion of the main floor. The
northern wing is divided into smaller general areas and a number of private offices along both the
east and west walls where the windows are located. This area is dated in interior finish. There is an
ample lobby with staircase to both the lower level and second floor. The lobby is finished with ceiling
similar to other areas and ceramic (quarry) tile flooring. There is a security desk in the lobby area.
For layout see floor plans in the addenda.
Second Floor
The second floor is laid out and finished similar to the main floor. The northern wing is dated and the
eastern wing has newer areas. Most of the second floor is finished with cubicles, with only 10 private
offices. The floor covering is similar to other levels with office areas predominantly carpeted with
corridors and stairwells finished with more durable goods. Second floor has a washroom compliment
located middle of the eastern wing and finished similar to those on the lower level.
Exterior
The exterior improvements such as concrete stairs and ramps are all in reasonable condition except
for the retaining wall on the south side which guards the exit from the lower level in the southeast
corner. This wall will need replacement (see photos in addenda).
Mechanical and Electrical
Mechanical Systems include:
One electric hot water system
Two gas fired steam boilers
Four AC compressors (two rebuilt in 2005 and two in 2007)
Two hot water heaters
Four supply fans
Two evaporator condensers
Five exhaust fans
One small (five ton) AC unit
One natural gas fired emergency generator
DDC Controlled HVAC system
Handicapped access elevator
Freight elevator
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
P R O P E R T Y D E T A I L S 10
Estimate of Depreciation
Actual Age, which is sometimes called historical, or chronological age, is the number of years that
have elapsed since construction was completed. This age classification is given the least recognition
in the appraisal process.
Economic Life is the period during which improvements to real estate contribute to property value.
Economic life and physical life can differ widely; typically, physical life is expected to be longer than
economic life. For example, buildings with varying degrees of physical integrity are ordinarily
replaced with new structures; however when some older properties are renovated or remodeled, their
economic life can exceed their physical life. Rehabilitation can extend a building’s physical life and
can have an effect on its remaining economic life.
Effective Age is the age based on the condition and use of a structure. A building’s effective age
might be less than its actual age if it has had above average maintenance, if it is of superior quality or
design, or if there is a scarcity of such buildings in the market.
Remaining Economic Life (REL) is the estimated period during which improvements continue to
contribute to overall property value. An appraiser estimates remaining economic life in part by
interpreting the attitudes and reactions of typical buyers of competitive properties. Emphasis must be
placed on location, building quality, leases and economic changes in the neighborhood.
Estimated Effective Age of the Improvements
Chronological Age 56 years
Effective Age 30 years
Economic Life 50 years
Remaining Economic Life 20 years
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 11
M A R K E T O V E R V I E W
Manitoba Economy
Statistics Canada estimated that Manitoba’s real GDP grew
by 2.0% in 2008, above the Canadian growth of 0.4%. In
March 2009, the Manitoba Bureau of Statistics estimated that
real GDP increased by 2.2% for 2008. This shows that
Manitoba’s GDP has exceeded Canada’s for the previous
three years.
In 2009, the Manitoba economy is expected to outperform all
of the other provinces and in 2010 the Manitoba economy
growth (2.3%) is expected to be slightly lower than the
Canadian average (2.5%).
In the first eleven months of 2009, employment increased 800, as compared to the 276,600 job
losses in other Canadian locations. In, 2008, employment increased 10,200 relative to 2007. Full-
time employment was up 2.1% while part-time employment increased 0.1%. As of April 1, 2009
Manitoba’s population stood at 1,221,964 a one year increase of 15,864 persons. The 1.3% increase
in Manitoba’s population was fourth best among provinces.
In the first three quarters of 2009, Manitoba’s cash receipts were unchanged with increased crop and
livestock receipts offsetting a decline in direct payment receipts. The decline in retail sales is led by
declines in gasoline (-14.7%), motor vehicle dealer (-8.8%) and furniture and electronics (-6.5%)
sales. Other stores (9.3%), pharmacies (7.5%) and department stores (5.6%) have the largest
increases. In, 2008 Manitoba retail sales increased 7.2% above the 3.4% national average increase
and third highest among provinces.
In the first nine months of 2009, the value of building permits in Manitoba decreased 24.1%, bettering
the national decrease of 37.5%. In 2008 housing starts decreased by 3.5%, to 5,537 units overall
with 4.3% decrease in single family with multiple family were down 1.8%. The building permit amount
has decreased by 10.8% in the first 10 months of 2009 with non-residential rising by 16.8% and
residential permits decreasing 23.1%.
In the first eight months of 2009, business bankruptcies decreased by 37.2% in Manitoba and
declined by 10.1% in Canada.
Source: Manitoba Finance – Manitoba Highlights December 31, 2009
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 12
City Of Winnipeg
Trend in 2009 (Published by Destination Winnipeg January 2010)
In the latest Metropolitan Outlook report for 2009, the Conference Board of Canada forecasts real
GDP growth in Winnipeg of 0.8%. Winnipeg continues to perform well economically and is ranked by
the Conference Board as second best among Canadian cities for GDP growth and the highest among
major centres (population over 500,000). Winnipeg is one of only a few Canadian (and North
American) cities to experience any overall growth in 2009. The Conference Board forecasts
Winnipeg’s GDP growth to improve in 2010 by 2.0% and3.3% in 2011.
During the third quarter of 2009, Winnipeg’s labour force grew by 1% over the same period last year
and employment remained stable. Winnipeg’s employment situation continues to surpass the national
average with an average unemployment rate of 5.1% in the third quarter compared with the national
average of 8.2%. In the third quarter, Winnipeg’s overall building permit values dropped by 20% from
the same period in 2008. Construction projects related to government, institutional and industrial
projects showed growth in building permits, but Winnipeg’s residential and commercial markets
continue to perform slower than recent years. The Conference Board forecasts overall new housing
starts in 2009 will grow marginally by 1.8% and by 2.4% in 2010.
The Winnipeg real estate market appears to be making a recovery as Winnipeg REALTORS®
reported third quarter home sales were almost on par with 2008 and for the first time in 2009, sales
and dollar volume in a single month exceeded the same period in the previous year. In September
2009, MLS sales grew 3% and dollar volume improved 11% over the 2008 records. The conversion of
listings to sales in 2009 are 67%, only a few percentage points off 2008. The average price of a
Winnipeg home improved to just under 2% from the previous quarter. Statistics Canada reported that
third quarter retail sales in Manitoba grew by 1% over the previous quarter. Preliminary records for
Manitoba’s retail sales in October 2009 were $1.3 billion, an increase of almost 4% from September.
The Conference Board, in their latest forecast report, projects annual retail sales in 2009 to decline by
2.6% in Manitoba and 2.3% in Winnipeg.
Property Location and Neighborhood Analysis
The subject property is located in the neighborhood commonly known as The West End. The West
End is a mostly residential area just west of Downtown Winnipeg. It is bordered by Route 62
(Osborne, Memorial, Colony, and Balmoral Streets) on the east and stretches as far west as St.
James Street, the boundary between the old City of Winnipeg and St. James-Assiniboia. The
southern boundary is the Assiniboine River and the northern boundary is Notre Dame Avenue. It
includes the neighborhoods of West Broadway, Armstrong's Point, Spence, Wolsely, St. Matthews,
Daniel McIntyre, Sargent Park, and Minto.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 13
History
Development of the area as a working and middle class residential area began in the late 19th
century and continued through the 1920s until the area was completely built up. The area developed
rapidly due to its proximity to Downtown Winnipeg, and, unlike Winnipeg's North End, the mainline of
the Canadian Pacific Railway did not impose a physical barrier between the West End and
Downtown. This fact, while it enhanced the area's reputation, retarded the development of a strong
sense of community, and the West End is today much less well-known outside of Winnipeg than the
North End. The area was also well served by the city's street railway system with lines on Portage
Avenue, Sargent Avenue, Sherbrook Street, and Arlington Street. The industrial area located
adjacent to the railway spur between Wall and Erin Streets provided employment for many West End
residents.
The West End was considered Ward Two in the Old City of Winnipeg and was seen as the "swing
riding" between the affluent and conservative Ward One and overwhelmingly socialist Ward Three,
which comprised the North End and Elmwood.
The area began a steady decline in the years following World War II as many of the more affluent
families moved to Winnipeg's suburbs and much of the housing stock was converted to rooming
houses and became dilapidated. Since the 1970s, parts of the area, particularly the neighborhoods
east of Arlington Street have been marked by crime. The majority of the properties in these areas are
rentals with a transient population, and in the last decade prostitution has become a serious problem.
Poverty is a serious problem in this part of the West End. The West Broadway neighborhood is the
poorest in the entire City of Winnipeg with an average household income of $20,923, just 40% of the
average for the city, and a home ownership rate of only 6%.
In contrast, Wolsely, Sargent Park, and Minto have experienced somewhat of a renaissance in recent
years and are again seen as desirable residential locations. These areas have experienced rapid
increases in property values in the last decade; in many cases values have doubled, or even tripled.
Historic Armstrong's Point, with its curving, tree-lined streets, and early 20th century mansions, is one
of Winnipeg's most affluent neighborhoods, with an average household income in 2001 of $102,214.
Ironically, this neighborhood is located directly to the south of West Broadway; the contrast could not
be more extreme.
Amenities
The commercial area around Polo Park Shopping Centre has expanded rapidly beginning in the
1990s with the building of dozens of big-box retail outlets, restaurants, and a major hotel. It has now
supplanted Downtown Winnipeg as the city's main commercial area. The West End was home to the
Winnipeg Arena until is demolition in 2006 due to the construction of the MTS Centre.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 14
Attractions in the area include, the University of Winnipeg, Vimy Ridge Memorial Park, Omand's
Creek and Park, Canad Inns Stadium, Westview Park, and the Sargent Park Recreation Complex, as
well as many houses, apartment buildings, schools, and an armory with significant architectural merit.
Portage Avenue is the site in the summer months of the "Sunday Night Cruise" by automobile
enthusiasts, which while delighting the participants, raises the ire of many West End residents due to
the noise, and the all too frequent practice of drag racing.
Figure 2: Neighborhood Map
Further Demographic Information is available in the addenda of this report.
Winnipeg Office Leasing & Vacancy
This is the analysis of approximately 17.5 million square feet of rentable office space. The inventory
consists of downtown and suburban office buildings, government, medical and other types of
buildings with above grade office space, but does not include office space available on a sublet basis.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 15
YEAR END 2009 - OFFICE SPACE INVENTORY & VACANCY (HEADLEASE)
BLDG TYPE INVENTORY VACANCY %
DOWNTOWN
CLASS A 2,652,477 101,470 3.8
CLASS B 3,874,572 274,110 7.1
CLASS C 1,773,370 74,440 4.2
TOTAL A,B,C 8,300,419 450,020 5.4
CLASS D 1,001,001 56,916 5.7
GOVERNMENT 1,705,732 0 0
MEDICAL 473,126 53,658 11.3
MISCELLANEOUS 1,457,702 107,920 7.4
DOWNTOWN TOTAL 12,937,980 668,514 5.2
SUBURBAN
CLASS A 241,154 32,098 13.3
CLASS B 189,124 22,000 11.6
CLASS C 316,318 26,794 8.5
TOTAL A,B,C 746,596 80,892 10.8
GOVERNMENT 863,790 0 0
MEDICAL 490,440 12,231 2.5
MISCELLANEOUS 2,449,835 181,195 7.4
TOTAL SUBURBAN 4,550,661 274,318 6.0
TOTAL INVENTORY 17,488,641 942,832 5.4
YEAR END 2009 - OFFICE SPACE VACANCY & SUBLEASES
DOWNTOWN CLASS A, B, & C INVESTMENT PROPERTIES
BLDG
TYPE
INVENTORY VACANCY % SUBLEASES TOTAL
VACANCY
TOTAL
%
CLASS A 1,725,294 101,470 5.9 68,776 170,246 9.9
CLASS B 2,950,474 274,110 9.3 46,511 320,621 10.9
CLASS C 1,695,570 74,440 4.4 0 74,440 4.4
TOTAL
A, B, C
6,371,338
450,020
7.1
115,287
565,307
8.9
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 16
Winnipeg Downtown Office has maintained a consistent vacancy between 250,000 and 425,000 sq.
ft. for over the past decade. The total Class A-C vacancy increased in 2009 by 188,000 sq. ft. but
about ½ of the increase is attributable to the reclassification of the office inventory. The story is in the
Classes. Class B has returned to its former vacancy, while A and C classes had marginal changes.
YEAR END CLASS A TO C DOWNTOWN VACANCY SUMMARY IN SQUARE FEET
YEAR CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C TOTAL
2005 167,807 188,210 65,512 421,529
2006 179,549 161,750 42,236 383,535
2007 114,116 236,075 21,296 371,487
2008 133,867 97,009 31,177 262,053
2009 101,470 274,110 74,440 450,020
Class A vacancy rate decreased due to the major addition of the Manitoba Hydro building. The office
portion of the building is completely occupied by Hydro. The balance of the Class A market had a
modest decrease in its vacancies. Class B returned to its previous vacancy totals primarily because
of the reclassification of the office inventory.
YEAR END CLASS A TO C VACANCY RATE SUMMARY
YEAR CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C OVERALL
2005 8.4% 5.9% 5.3% 6.6%
2006 9.0% 5.1% 3.4% 6.0%
2007 5.7% 7.4% 1.7% 5.8%
2008 5.1% 3.0% 2.5% 3.7%
2009 3.8% 7.1% 4.2% 5.4%
Stable or stagnant (you decide) but never boring. The Class A - C office market takes 1 step forward
and then 1 step back. The market for the past decade has seen the vacancy rate hover in the 4 – 7 %
range. Always acceptable but never spectacular as evidenced by the 20 year gap between
construction of Class A office buildings in downtown Winnipeg.
2009 saw a step backward erasing the gains of the previous 3 years. It is an interesting phenomenon
that the construction of a Class A building has had no affect on the class A market but has and will
impact the Class B market. Having simply returned to the vacancies of 2007 is a small victory for the
class B buildings.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 17
YEAR END CLASS A - C OFFICE VACANCY CHANGE
YEAR PREVIOUS VACANCY CURRENT VACANCY INCREASE DECREASE
2005 391,646 421,529 29,883
2006 383,535 37,994
2007 383,535 371,487 12,048
2008 371,487 262,053 109,434
2009 262,053 450,020 187,967
The 2009 leasing activity was the weakest in the past 6 years and these weren’t good years to start
with. It is worth noting that in spite of ho hum leasing results, the vacancy rates have been
respectable to good. Tenant retention and expansion has helped create the stability in this Market.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
CLASS A - C LEASING SUMMARY
ANNUAL CLASS A - C LEASING SUMMARY IN SQUARE FEET
YEAR CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C TOTAL
2005 118,922 134,173 7,578 260,673
2006 80,798 88,154 21,637 190,589
2007 75,583 30,206 25,419 131,208
2008 44,767 209,671 5,580 260,018
2009 72,093 37,505 5,560 115,158
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 18
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E
Introduction
Highest and Best Use is defined as the most profitable likely use to which a property can be legally
put. It is that use of land, which at the time of appraisal is most likely to produce the greatest net
return to the land over a given period of time, i.e. the legal use which will yield to the land the highest
present value.
Highest and Best Use has further been defined as follows:
“The reasonable and probable use that supports the highest value as defined as of the effective date
of appraisal.” Alternatively, the use from among reasonable and alternative legal uses, found to be
physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, that results in the highest land
value.” 5 Criteria for determining the Highest and Best Use includes the following:
the use must be legal;
the use must be within the realm of probability, not speculative or conjectural;
demand for such use must exist;
the use must be profitable;
the use must provide the highest net return to the land; and,
the use must provide the maximum return for the longest possible time.
The concept of Highest and Best Use is fundamental to real property value. In one application of the
concept, a site is valued as though vacant and available for its highest and best use. In the other
application, the highest and best use of the property as improved is estimated. Thus, a site may have
one highest and best use as though vacant and another as presently improved. Existing
improvements have a value equal to the amount they contribute to the site or they may penalize value
by an amount equal to the cost to remove them from the site.
Existing improvements that do not develop the site to its highest and best use are worth less than
their reproduction or replacement cost. A new building that is poorly designed is worth less than its
reproduction cost due to the functional depreciation in its design. Thus, the improvement that
constitutes highest and best use is the one that adds the greatest value to the site.6
The single most important factor which influences any consideration of the most profitable likely use
to which a property can be put is the zoning as it exists or, in some instances, the feasibility or
possibility of rezoning to another or higher use.
5 Appraisal Institute of Canada “Basis of Real Estate Appraising”
6 Ibid.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
H I G H E S T A N D B E S T U S E 19
Demographics
The neighborhood in which the subject is located has a lower average family income than the City of
Winnipeg. The neighborhood north of Portage Avenue (Minto) has a lower family income than the
neighborhood on the south side of Portage Avenue, (Wolsely). The study completed shows
projections for the neighborhood within a 1 kilometer circle will continue to decrease in population
over the next five years. This trend is similar to that of the 2 and 3 kilometer circles but the decrease
tends to be reduced as the circle gets larger.
The subject neighborhood (Minto) population is (2006) 13.6% Philippines decent compared with 5.9%
of the City of Winnipeg population. The neighborhood has seen improvement to the housing stock in
recent years. The continued decrease could very well be attributable to smaller family size and not
an increase of vacant properties. The ages of the neighborhood show the younger age groups have
higher percentages than City of Winnipeg and vice versa for the older age groups.
Conclusion
The subject is a government office building which has recently become surplus. The overall structure
is in good condition. There are short lived items regarding interior improvements, and according to
Manitoba Public Insurance staff the HVAC components are dated and could be replaced. However,
according to the site package distributed by Manitoba Public Insurance the 4 compressors for the air
conditioning for the complex have been rebuilt over the last four years. While there may be some
concerns with some of the building components these are not reflected in the expenses (utility costs)
of running the facility.
In the case of the subject property the buildings are in fair condition and although been declared
surplus, are still in use. There is sufficient serviced parking stalls to meet the most demanding office
occupancies. Office vacancy has been stable in recent years and can be anticipated to continue
along this road with the increasing population of The City of Winnipeg.
Parking Lots have been known as a resort where vacant land can be held with the income for parking
operations cover the holding costs of the land. There have been recent vacant parcels of larger size
selling the City. While the vacant land could be used for development in the area, the location away
from the Dominion Street entrance and available servicing would mitigate the value the property
would bring in the market place, in comparison to the comparable sales prices.
Therefore, the current use of the property, an office building with land for further development, is
considered its Highest and Best Use.
As vacant, the site would be used for similar development.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 20
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S
Methodology
There are three commonly used approaches taken to evaluating real property; the cost approach, the
income approach, and the direct comparison approach. Which of these is utilized in any particular
appraisal depends on the property type and the use of the appraisal as well as the quality and
quantity of data available for analysis.
Cost Approach
The cost approach is based on the understanding that there is a relationship between value and cost
in the minds of many individuals. The approach is applied by estimating the value of the site and
adding to it the depreciated value of improvements. The approach is particularly useful in evaluating
relatively new improvements or those not frequently traded, and it has less application for properties
with older buildings suffering from various forms of accrued depreciation.
Income Approach
The income approach measures the present worth of the future economic benefit of property
ownership. In its simplest approach it assumes a relationship between the current net income and
the value of the property. Its application involves a study of the actual and expected income from a
property both from a quantitative and qualitative perspective, analysis of reductions in that income,
such as anticipated vacancy, collection loss, operating expenses and long term maintenance, and the
factoring of the derived net income into a value estimate based upon the expectations of investors in
similar properties.
Direct Comparison Approach
The direct comparison approach involves a comparison of properties that have been listed for sale,
have sold, or have received offers to purchase in order to derive an estimate of the value of a subject
property. The validity of this approach is directly related to the number and comparability of
properties sold that can be related to the subject as well as the quality of data available with which to
conduct an adequate analysis.
Excess Vacant Land
Commercial vacant land along major thoroughfares has been trading $15-40 per square foot
depending on the nature of final occupancy and speed of development, with the higher end going ot
McDonalds or Shoppers Drug Mart developments. Residential areas around the subject have seen
infill lots sell $5-10 per square foot. Given the location of the excess land, away from Dominion Street
and away from Portage Avenue it is estimated the value of the excess land will be $10 per square
foot. This will be added to the values derived in The Income Approach and The Direct Comparison
Approach.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 21
Estimate of Value by the Cost Approach
The Cost Approach assumes that a prudent purchaser will not pay more for a property than the cost
of replacing or reproducing it in its present condition, providing there are no costly delays or economic
factors which influence value. Inherent in this approach is the Principle of Substitution, which states
that when several similar or commensurate commodities, goods, or services are available, the one
with the lowest price attracts the greatest demand and widest distribution. It consists of four steps:
Estimate the land value as if vacant.
Estimate the building reproduction cost defined as the cost of creating an improvement
identical to the subject in utility, size, and material.
Estimate accrued depreciation from all causes and deduct this from the estimated
reproduction cost of the building.
Add the estimated vacant land value to the depreciated cost of the site improvements.
When dealing with older properties, including those remodelled, the cost approach is inherently weak.
Accurate construction details are often not available and older construction techniques and materials
are obsolete. Depreciation, which emanates from a number of causes, physical, functional, and
external, can be very difficult to determine in an older property. Additionally, purchasers of this type
of real estate are not thought to strongly consider this type of approach in determining the value of
properties they wish to acquire.
As the market does not relate depreciated cost to value for properties such as the subject, the Cost
Approach will not be utilized in this report.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 22
Estimate of Value by the Income Approach
The Income Approach is a valuable tool for estimating the value of an income generating property.
The theory of this approach is that the value of a property is the present worth of the net income it will
produce during the remainder of its productive life.
The methodology behind the income approach is as follows:
Estimate the gross annual income potential of the property combining a study of market rents
with actual income from tenant leases;
Estimate and apply an allowance for vacancy and uncollected rents;
Estimate and subtract expenses that are the responsibility of the landlord to determine net
annual income;
Analyze and select an appropriate capitalization rate for application to the net annual income;
and,
Apply an appropriate technique to factor net income into an estimate of value.
The subject property will be disposed of vacant. It was found that properties sold with vacancy
problems were evaluated, either of, two different ways. Development of an income stream as a if full
and deducted from this the usual costs, such as vacancy allowance, vacancy hold and structural and
capitalized at a rate approximately twice the cap rate of a building that was in fact full. The other
method is to develop the income stream as in the first method and capitalize at the market rate. This
value would then be discounted using an appropriate rate and over the number of years it may take to
fill the property and applying the appropriate incentives to lease the property. It is believed the first
method would be the most reliable as it has market information to draw from and the subjective
estimates of discounting, time required and incentives will not affect the estimate of market value.
Income Analysis
The subject property consists of a two storey with lower level as described earlier in this report, and
having 69,112 square feet gross floor area. The building is currently owner occupied and will become
vacant on sale. This property is larger than a number of recent transactions however, the available
market information is listed below.
Market Rents No. Address Rent / sq.ft. Area (sf) Comments
1 Portage Ave.(200 Block) $14.25 38,682 0 Parking Stalls. $40 psf incentive. First 15 months rent free for a ten year term
2 Buffalo Place $12.00 15,600 45 Parking Stalls included. $30 psf incentive. 3 King Edward $8.50 4,600 Net Lease. 11 Parking Stalls Included. 4 Border $9.50 18,500 Parking is included
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 23
Rental rate 1 is in the Canwest Building. The space was for a professional firm. This lease was
completed late 2008. This building is far superior to the subject in both quality of improvement and
location. This deal though, portrays the incentives that are offered to attract tenants.
Rental rate 2 is a suburban office structure in the Fort Garry area. This lease was completed late
2008. This building is superior to the subject although the subject location is superior. This deal
portrays that incentives are also available to in the suburbs together with the free parking. Downtown
parking is made available but will not be included in the rental rate.
Rental rates 3 and 4 are asking rates on major thoroughfares for smaller space. The property on
King Edward is REIT owned and would accept an incentive to the tenant for the right tenant and term
of five years.
Discussion
The subject property is larger than all the comparable properties.
Comparable 1 has more amenities than the subject. This lease was in a newer building, situated on
the Inner City covered walkway and adjacent to a number of indoor parking areas.
Comparable 2 is very similar to the subject except for the size.
Comparable 3 & 4 are similar to the subject except for the size. The interior of both comparables are
dated. These interiors could be improved through incentives, as with the subject
Based on the information reviewed it is estimated that the subject property would rent for $10.00 per
square foot annually on an absolute net rental basis with no expenses other than the roof and
structure. The estimated annual income is calculated as follows:
69,112 square feet x $10.00/sq.ft. = $691,120
Normalized Vacancy
According to the end of 2009 Johnson Report, vacancies in the overall universe of office space in the
City of Winnipeg stood at 5.4%, up slightly from 3.7 at year end 2008. For Class C office space, the
overall vacancy for Winnipeg was reported at 4.2% for 2009 up from 2.5% in 2008. The five year
average for Class C office is reported at 3.4%.
The subject property’s location offers good exposure and adequate parking. The subject property
although dated has an above average parking compliment. The larger size would be more difficult to
rent and according realtors interviewed could take upward of two years to locate a tenant. The
building does lend to possible subdivision with the around the front lobby and access to the lower
level and second floor via either the stairwell or the elevator.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 24
Given the location of the subject, together with age and amenities offered it would not be
unreasonable to apply a higher rate than the current vacancy rate, or 5.4%. Therefore, the vacancy
applicable to the subject property as at the effective date of appraisal is estimated to be 10%.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses have been based on information provided by the owner and have been
reconstructed where necessary to provide an estimate of operations under a “typical” operating
scenario. Final conclusions reached within this report are based on the assumption that the
information provided by the owner is accurate and valid.
Vacancy Carry Expenses
In addition, the landlord would be responsible for utilities and the proportionate share of expenses
relating to periods of vacancy or collection difficulties, and this must be accounted for as well. Utility
costs during periods of vacancy would be expected, although at reduced consumption, but other
costs (e.g. Security, insurance, etc) would be incurred. The 2009 realty taxes amount to $1.70 per
square foot. Adding for minimal utilities, security and insurance the holding costs are estimated to be
$4.00 per square foot per annum and this amount would be considered reasonable to account for the
shortfall during periods of vacancy.
The annual shortfall allowance would therefore be calculated as follows:
69,112 sq. ft. x $4.00 = $276,448 @ 10.0% = $27,645
Structural Reserve
Normally leases on office space such as the subject are written on a “triple net” basis with the tenant
responsible for all utilities, insurance, realty tax, et cetera, in addition to the rental. Despite the
tenants’ responsibility, however, the landlord normally bears the cost for “structural repair” i.e.
maintenance and repair of the roof deck, exterior walls, floor, and foundation of the building, and an
allowance for this expense must be made in the income calculation. Information pertaining to this
requires the long-term analysis of property expenses relating to structural components of a building;
for example the roof, which is expected to last a minimum of 20 years, extendible through routine
maintenance and repair. Financial records over such an extended period are not normally available.
In general, allowances for structural repair are calculated at between $0.10 and $0.25 per square foot
annually applied to the plan area of the building, with most reserves allocated for roofing repair and
renewal.
The subject property, although older, appeared to be in good condition structurally including the roof
cover and well cared for and an allowance of $0.20 per square foot will be used as an allowance for
structural reserve. Calculated on an area of 69,112 square feet, the allowance is $13,822.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 25
Calculation of Net Operating Income
Revenue $691,120
Vacancy 10.0% ($69,112)
Subtotal $622,008
Vacancy Costs 69,112 x $4.00 @ 10.0% ($27,645)
Structural Reserve 69,112 x $0.20 ($13,822)
Expense Subtotal ($41,467)
Net Operating Income $580,541
Capitalization
Capitalization is the process of converting income from a property into an expression of value. A
capitalization rate is a conversion factor, appropriate to the property being appraised that is applied to
the income stream to convert it into an indication of the market value. It is the rate, commensurate
with the risk presented, by which an income stream is discounted to a present worth.
In order to determine the most appropriate capitalization rate for the subject property, two methods of
capitalization rate selection are being explored.
1) Mortgage/Equity Method:
This method blends the mortgage capitalization rate with the equity capitalization rate. It is used
when the amount of the mortgage is unknown, because lenders will usually lend on a ratio of the
market value of the property that the appraiser estimates. The mortgage and equity rates are based
on what the market activities appear to indicate, and upon discussion with mortgage lending officers
with respect to rates, ratios and the types of properties to which they are extending mortgages.
A conventional mortgage of 65 percent of value would likely be attainable on the subject property with
an interest rate of 5.25 percent over a 20-year amortization. The lenders return on investment is
included within the mortgage constant from which monthly and annual mortgage payments are
calculated. A property of this type and size would typically appeal to a small investor who would
anticipate a return on investment today in the order of 8-12 percent. Therefore, using current typical
financing terms and an estimated return of 8 percent, a capitalization rate can be determined as
follows:
Mortgage: 65% x (.08715 AMC) = 5.66%
Equity: 35% x 10%= 3.5%
Overall Developed Capitalization Rate= 9.16% or 9.2%
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 26
2) Overall Market Rate
This method is the most direct of the different methods of estimating overall rates. An analysis of
comparable properties is made having similar investment features, expense ratios, financing
availability, and type of property. An overall capitalization rate is calculated by dividing the
appropriate net income by the sale price of the property. This overall rate does not explain the yield
or rate of return on the investment. It merely expresses the relationship between the sale price and
the net income at the date of sale.
Index No.
Address Sale Price Sale Date Gross Floor Area
Cap. Rate*
1 55 Donald Street $1,040,000 March/2008 26,430 17.0%
2 287 Broadway $2,215,000 March/2009 68,319 17.8%
3 286 Smith Street $1,200,000 March/2009 40,107 21.1%
4 260 St. Mary Avenue $1,676,000 May/2009 41,262 16.7%
Mean 18.1%
Capitalization rates for larger office buildings have been in the 7.5% to 9.5% range for properties
leased up and operating on a going concern. These sales were all of buildings with substantial, or
entire, vacancy. These buildings are all newer with the St. Mary property constructed in the 1970`s
and the balance constructed in the late 1950`s or early 1960`s. Single tenant buildings are typically
owner occupied and capitalization rates can be difficult to obtain for single tenant buildings. All of the
comparable properties have the capability to be multi tenant as is the case with the subject, if need
be.
As indicated in the forgoing chart the capitalization rates range from 13.7% to 21.1%. It is difficult to
obtain accurate information regarding the income profile of sold properties, particularly for properties
with vacancy problems. These sales do, however, provide an indication of the current range of
capitalization rates considered appropriate for the subject property. Given the subject’s condition and
its location, a capitalization rate near the mean of the indicated range would be considered
applicable. A capitalization rate of 18.0% is considered reasonable for the subject.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 27
Discussions with financial institutions indicated they would not be interested in financing a property
that is totally vacant with typical mortgage product. Depending on the quality of covenant of the
owner may open the financing up to a term loan based upon the owner`s promise to pay and other
collateral that may be available. It is concluded that the mortgage equity method is not applicable in
this case and the market derived cap rate will be used. Therefore, in this case the income will be
capitalized at 18%.
Capitalization of Net Income
The two methods of capitalization rate selection explored indicated a rate of 8.0% by the
Mortgage/Equity Method and a rate of 8.4% by the Overall Market Method. The two methods
reasonably support one another and therefore, a rate of 8.25% will be utilized in the capitalization
analysis.
Net Operating Income / Rate = $580,541/ 18.0% = $3,225,227
Add Value per Excess Land 60,000 sf x $10 psf = 600,000
$3,825,227
Rounded to: $3,800,000
Estimate of Value by the Income Approach
Three Million Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($3,800,000)
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 28
Estimate of Value by the Direct Comparison Approach
The Direct Comparison Approach is the process in which a market value estimate is derived by
analyzing the market for similar properties and comparing these properties to the subject property. It
is the most common approach to value and may be used to estimate value by comparison, or in
conjunction with the Cost and Income Approaches.
Comparison is the basis of application of the Direct Comparison Approach because it requires the
comparing and rating of the subject property with other comparable properties for which market data
is shown. The direct comparison approach to value involves the use of sales data of all kinds in order
to arrive at an estimate of market value. In this approach, the similarities between the subject
property and other comparable properties are established and assessed.
Direct sales are good evidence of value because it represents the reactions of typical buyers. The
direct comparison approach is justified on the principle of substitution, which affirms that a prudent
purchaser will not pay more for a property than the price of an equally desirable substitute property
available under similar conditions.
The Direct Comparison Approach entails in one form or another, the adjustment of sales or other
sales of usually dissimilar but comparable properties towards a reasonable degree of identity with the
subject property. It is the most common approach to value and may be used to estimate value by
comparison, or in conjunction with the Cost and Income Approaches.
For purposes of estimating the value of the subject property by the Direct Comparison Approach,
sales of office properties in the Winnipeg marketplace were researched, with the results presented in
the following table.
C O M P A R A B L E P R O P E R T Y – O F F I C E
Sale Address Sale Price Sale Date Parcel Size
Age Gross
Floor Area
SP/SF Upper Floor
Area
Subject 1075 Portage Avenue n/a n/a 161,502 1954 69,112
1 286 Smith Street $ 1,200,000 Mar./2009 7,533 1,962 40,107 $29.92
2 260 St. Mary Avenue $ 1,676,000 May/2009 24,000 1,976 41,262 $40.62
3 55 Donald Street $ 1,040,000 Mar./2007 20,426 1,963 26,430 $39.35
4 287 Broadway $ 2,215,000 Mar.2009 13,042 1,957 68,319 $32.42
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 29
Analysis
The appraiser has searched the sales of office buildings in various locations throughout the City of
Winnipeg. Sales data on this type of building were limited and the appraiser has also reviewed
current listings in the marketplace. The comparables shown vary in age, size and parking
compliment, but were considered to give an indication of the current market for office space.
Typically, valuation of this type of building is carried out on a per square foot basis.
The sales that were uncovered were all relatively recent and had vacancy concerns. All of the sales
that were uncovered did not have the required on site parking to meet the one stall for every 750
square feet of office space, except for Sale Number 3. An adjustment was made to the sale prices by
determining the needed parking stalls to meet zoning requirements and coming up with a rental value
based a market parking rate for the stall. This is capitalized into a value and spread over the area of
the property.
Comparable No. 1 is a six storey building located downtown on the first block south of Portage
Avenue. The building had 4 of the 6 stories vacant at the time of the sale and henceforth lost another
floor on possession. The building was constructed in 1962 a similar circa to the subject. This building
is reinforced concrete construction. There is minimal on site parking at this building.
Comparable No.2 is a three storey building located downtown on the two blocks south of Portage
Avenue. The building was taken completely vacant at the time of the sale and on possession. The
building was constructed in 1976 a somewhat newer than the subject. This building is steel and
concrete construction. This property had enough room on site to meet 30 of the 45 required parking
stalls.
Comparable No. 3 is a five storey building located downtown one block south of Broadway. The
building had 3 of the 5 stories vacant on possession. The building was constructed in 1963 a similar
circa to the subject. This building is steel and concrete construction. This was the only property that
met the required parking to meet zoning requirements.
Comparable No. 4 is a six storey building located downtown on Broadway where it intersects with
Smith Street. The building had 3 of the 6 stories vacant at the time of the sale and henceforth lost
another floor shortly after possession. This building is steel and concrete construction. The building
was constructed in 1957 a similar circa to the subject. There is minimal parking at this building.
Sale Address Sale Price Sale Date SP/SF Upper Floor Area
Adjusted SP/SF
Subject 1075 Portage Avenue n/a n/a
1 286 Smith Street $ 1,200,000 Mar./2009 $29.92 $43.33
2 260 St. Mary Avenue $ 1,676,000 May/2009 $40.62 $45.93
3 55 Donald Street $ 1,040,000 Mar./2007 $39.35 $39.35
4 287 Broadway $ 2,215,000 Mar.2009 $32.42 $47.42
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 30
Based on gross floor area, the unadjusted sale prices range from $29.92 to $40.62 per square foot
with an average unit price of $35.58 per square foot. Based on gross floor area, the adjusted sale
prices range from $39.35 to $47.42 per square foot with an average unit price of $44.01 per square
foot. All of the buildings compared to the subject are similar in age but the property on St. Mary
Avenue. All of the comparable sales had less onsite parking than the subject but sale number 3
which met the zoning requirements. The shortage of onsite parking was the adjustment.
Given the age of the subject together with its condition and location it would not be unreasonable to
choose the mean of the adjusted unit sale prices. Therefore, the estimate of value for the subject
property is $44.01 per square foot. The estimate of value, based upon the Direct Comparison
Approach is:
69,112 square feet x $44.01 = $3,041,619
Add Value per Excess Land 60,000 sf x $10 psf = 600,000
$3,641,619
Rounded to: $3,650,000
Estimate of Value by the Direct Comparison Approach
Three Million Six Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($3,650,000)
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 31
Reconciliation of Value Estimates
Three approaches to value have been considered for the subject property and two applied as being
appropriate in its valuation:
Cost Approach Not applicable
Income Approach $3,800,000
Direct Comparison Approach $3,650,000
The cost approach is most accurate when valuing new properties or those under construction. The
cost approach was not utilized in this report due to the age of the improvements, the difficulty in
determining depreciation, and the failure of the market to recognize this as a valid approach in
determining the market value of this type of property.
The value estimate arrived at by the Income Approach was based on an analysis of the estimated
revenues and expenses for the subject property. The rents and operating expenses available in the
market place were analyzed and reflected back to the subject property. Capitalization rates were
considered using two methods, with the final value estimate being supported by both the mortgage
equity method and direct capitalization method. The mortgage equity method was not given any
weight in determining the Capitalization Rate. The final value estimate developed by the income
approach is supported by market data from other properties. The quantity and quality of data was
good and the resultant value is thought to provide an accurate indication of the value of the subject
property from the viewpoint of a typical investor.
The Direct Comparison Approach involved the analysis of the sales of five commercial properties.
This method is based on the principle of substitution and assumes that a prudent purchaser will not
pay more for a property than it would cost to buy an equally desirable substitute property, providing a
sufficient number of comparisons can be found. The validity of the direct comparison approach is
dependent upon the somewhat subjective nature of comparative analysis. However, this method is
simple and direct and approximates closely the actual behaviour of buyers and sellers in the
marketplace. All of the sales compared to the subject were experiencing various levels of vacancy on
the transaction. All but one of the sales did not have near the required onsite parking needed to meet
zoning requirements
The subject property is known in the market. The subject has a corner location superior to most of
the comparable sales. The land coverage is also somewhat lower than most the properties that were
compared. Both of these attributes would indicate the unit value of the subject should be somewhat
larger than the properties to which the subject property was compared. With both methods of
determining value having their merits the final estimate of value is estimated based on both with more
weight in the Income Approach and mitigated by the Direct Comparison Approach.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
V A L U A T I O N A N D F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S 32
Considering the information and facts contained within this report, as well as the limited number of
good quality commercial properties available on the market, the estimate of market value for the
subject property, 1075 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba as at April 6, 2010, is reasonably
Three Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars.
Final Estimate of Value
Three Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($3,750,000)
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Appendix 1
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
A P P E N D I X I - A S S U M P T I O N S A N D L I M I T I N G C O N D I T I O N S 1
This appraisal has been prepared at the request of Mr. Ron Moscinski, of Manitoba Public
Insurance, for the purpose of estimating the market value of the subject property as at the date of
inspection. The function of the appraisal is to assist in setting a sale price for the subject property. It is
not reasonable for any other person to rely upon this appraisal without first obtaining written
authorization from the above-mentioned and the appraiser. There may be qualifications, assumptions or
limiting conditions in addition to those set out below relevant to that person’s identity or their intended
use.
The report is prepared on the assumption that no other person will rely on it for any other purpose and
that all liability to all such persons is denied.
Aside from the standard assumptions and limiting conditions that are a fundamental component of an
appraisal report as prescribed by the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
(CUSPAP), sometimes it is necessary to identify extraordinary limiting conditions utilized in the
appraisal.
Extraordinary Limiting Condition - Exclusion of a relevant valuation approach
The Cost Approach to Value, due to the inherent difficulties in estimating accrued depreciation in older
improvements, will not be employed in the analysis.
Also noted that while the retaining wall is stated in the report that it should be replaced, determining the
replacement cost of the retaining wall was not derived. The value applicable to replacing this retaining
wall will mitigate the value derived in this report,
While expert in appraisal matters, the author is not qualified and does not purport to give legal advice. It
is assumed that:
the legal description as furnished by the Land Titles Office is correct;
the title to the property is good and marketable;
there are no encroachments, encumbrances, restrictions, leases or covenants that would in any
way affect the valuation, except as expressly noted herein;
the existing use is a legally conforming use, which may be continued by any purchaser from the
existing owner; and
rights-of-way, easements or encroachments over other real property and leases or other
covenants noted herein are legally enforceable.
Because these assumptions have been made, no investigation, legal or otherwise, has been undertaken
which would verify these assumptions except as expressly noted herein.
The author is not a qualified surveyor. Sketches, drawings, diagrams, photographs, etc., are presented
in this report to assist the reader in visualizing the property.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
A P P E N D I X I - A S S U M P T I O N S A N D L I M I T I N G C O N D I T I O N S 2
The author is not qualified to give engineering advice. It is assumed that there are no patent or latent
defects in the subject improvements, that they are structurally sound and in need of no immediate
repairs unless expressly noted within this report. No soil tests have been done, nor have tests of
heating, plumbing, electrical, air conditioning, or other systems been undertaken. For the purpose of
this opinion, they are assumed to be in good working order.
We have not inspected woodwork or other parts of the structure, which are covered, unexposed, or
inaccessible, and we are therefore unable to report that such parts of the property are free of rot, insect
infestation, or other defects.
This report has been prepared on the assumption that the property complies with all requirements of
authorities having jurisdiction over environmental matters and that there are no objectionable materials
present. The value reported may not reflect the actual market value of the property should the property
be contaminated.
The appraiser is not qualified to comment on environmental issues that may affect the market value of
the property appraised, including but not limited to pollution or contamination of land, buildings, water,
groundwater or air. Unless expressly stated, the property is assumed to be free and clear of pollutants
and contaminants, including but not limited to moulds or mildews or the conditions that might give rise to
either, and in compliance with all regulatory environmental requirements, government or otherwise, and
free of any environmental condition, past, present, or future, that might affect the market value of the
property appraised. If the party relying in this report requires information about environmental issues
then that party is cautioned to retain an expert qualified in such issues. We expressly deny any legal
liability relating to the effect of environmental issues on the market value of the property appraised.
No investigation has been undertaken with the local zoning office, the fire department, the building
inspector, the health department or any other government regulatory agency unless such investigations
are expressly represented to have been made in this report. The subject property must comply with
such government regulations and, if it does not comply, its non-compliance may affect market value. To
be certain of compliance, further investigations may be necessary.
Market data has been obtained, in part, from documents at the land registry office, the local assessment
office, or as reported by the real estate board. As well as using such documented and generally reliable
evidence of market transaction, it was also necessary to rely on hearsay evidence.
Because market conditions, including economic, social and political factors, change rapidly and, on
occasion, without warning, the market value expressed as of the date of this appraisal cannot be relied
upon to estimate the market value as of any other date except with further advice of the appraiser.
The compensation for services rendered in this report does not include a fee for court preparation or
court appearance, which must be negotiated separately. Neither this nor any other of these limiting
conditions, however, is an attempt to limit the use that might be made of this report should it properly
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
A P P E N D I X I - A S S U M P T I O N S A N D L I M I T I N G C O N D I T I O N S 3
become evidence in a judicial proceeding which will decide the use of the report which best serves the
administration of justice.
Possession of this report or a copy does not carry with it the right of publication. All copyright is
reserved to the author. The report is considered confidential between the author, client, and other
indicated users. It shall not be disclosed, quoted from, referred to in whole or in part, or published in any
manner, without the express written consent of the appraiser. The report is subject only to confidential
review by the Appraisal Institute of Canada as provided in the Code of Ethics, Standards of Professional
Conduct and Standards of Professional Practice of the Institute.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
A P P E N D I X I I - C E R T I F I C A T I O N 1
Appendix 2
Certification by David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI, P. App.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
A P P E N D I X I I - C E R T I F I C A T I O N 2
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct;
the reported analyses, opinions, conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and
limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions
and conclusions;
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no
personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved;
I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties
involved with this assignment;
my engagement in and compensation for this assignment were not contingent upon developing or
reporting predetermined results, the amount of the value estimate, or a conclusion favoring the
client;
my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the Canadian Uniform Standards;
I have the knowledge and experience to complete the assignment competently;
no one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report;
as of the date of this report, David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI, P. App., has fulfilled the
requirements of The Appraisal Institute of Canada Mandatory Recertification Program for
designated members;
David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI, P. App., personally inspected the subject property on April 6,
2010;
Final Estimate of Value
Having regard to all of the information contained in this report, it is our opinion that the estimate of
value for the subject property, 1075 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, as at the effective date
of appraisal, April 6, 2010, subject to the conditions outlined in the report, is:
Three Million Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($3,750,000)
Original signed by David van der Vis
__________________________
David van der Vis MBA, CCIM, AACI, P.App.
Signed and sealed this 14nd day of April 2010 in the City of Winnipeg, Province of Manitoba
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Appendix 3
Photographs of Subject Property
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Subject from the Southwest
Subject from Southeast
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
East Wing from the Northeast
North Wing from the Northeast
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
View along West Wall of North Wing
View along North Wall of North Wing
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
View of Handicap Entrance
View of Roof East Wing
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
View of Retaining Wall in need of Replacement
View of Parking Area Northeast of Building
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Typical Office Space
Typical Office Space
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Typical Office Space
Typical Office Space
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Mechanical Room
Mechanical Room
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Cafeteria Area
Cafeteria Area
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
1075 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba
Boiler
Boiler Piping showing Asbestos Warning
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Appendix 4
Title, Tax, and Assessment Information
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
STATEMENT DATE: MAY 15,2OOg
rNT IvlANffOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE CORPORATION
THE CITY OF WINNIPEG 2OO9 GRANT'IN-LIEUPROPERTY Tl\)( STATEMENT AND DEMAND
(FRANCAS AU VERSO)
ROLL NUMBER: 130200105002080477
LoE B lock P lan Par ish
3 26501 58 /50 ST 'JA
Inquir ies:Municipal Taxes 311or toll free 1-877-311'4974
School Division(2041775-0231
Iitle No.:Mortgage No.:Part of Lot
(1,656,850 x 0.025448)
mlrJXdFJ{*(.}=J
E
v
CITY OF WINNIPEG MUNICIPAL TAXES
Other ChargesSTREET RENEWAL
$43,676.4973,540.95
The City of WinniPegAssessment and Taxation Department
Frontage LevY 1,512.97
$43,676.49
NET PROPERTY TN(ES
f f iTONWITHYOURPAYMENT
DUE DATE: JUNE 30' 2009
A penalty is charged if payment is received or postmarked after June 30, 2009
PLEASE RETAIN YOUR CANCELLED CHEQUE AS NO ADDITIONAL RECEIPT WILL BE ISSUED--- 510 Marn srreetWlnnlpeg Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 3M2
ROLL NUMBEruruUUENO DU ROLE
13020010500
MANITOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE CORPORATION
C/O LAI{D MANAGEMENT SERVIEES
3 0 8 . 2 5 T U P P E R S T N
PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE,MB R]-N 3K1
R t , 3 0 e 0 0 I 0 58CI00 I J '7?1 ? q t { I 3 na0 B1 u50u
PAYABLE AT MOST FINANCTAL INSTITUTIONS.
PLEASE MAKE CHEQUE PAYABLE TO:
THE CITY OF WINNIPEG, TAX BR,ANCH
anRennsienntEnE
$0.00TOTAL PAYABLSMONTANT PAYABLE
$117,217 -44AMouNT PAIDiMoNTANT PRvE
GiatcureniTtaa- $117,217'44
TffieS oue $1fl,217.44
IMpoRTArvr nzgssnegj - vk'tt ;tur wabsite at: www.winnipegassessment com
r : l l l ? l r r r Q 0 O r ! g E
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
.*-3lw lnnlpeg
THE CITY OF WII\ITIPEG - VILLE DF'WINI\IPEG) FOR 2OO9 GRAI{T-II{.LIEU BUSIT{ESS TAXESSTATEMENT AND DEMAI{D FOR 2OO9 GR
' ,REI,EVE ET DEMANDE DE SUB\{ENTION TENAI{T LIEU DE TAXES - 2OO9
STATEMENT DATE / DATE DU RELEVE
April 20, 2009
NAMETS) OF TMABLE PARTY / NOM(S) DE LA pARTtE |MPOSABLE
MANITOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE CORPORATION
TNQUIRIES / RENSEIGNEMENTS
311 or tollfree 1-877-3114974
311 ou (sans frais) le 1-877-3114974
IMPORTANT MESSAGES, -. Visit ourwebgite at;:.Wwlv.winnipegasse.ssment.com
ROLL NUMBEFyNUMERo ou R6ue
24730
ARREARS/ARRIERES
$0.00
TOTAL PAYABLEIMONTANT PAYABLE
$47,039.40
AMOUNT PAIDiMONTANT PAYE
MANITOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE
7\ I .234 DONAIJD ST
WINNIPEG, MB R3C ] .M8
B E q ? 3 N X X X X X X N O O q S O 3 I q O E q ? 3 O X X X X X X
PLEASE PAY: ..\ FAIRE PNRVEruIN A:The City of winnipeg \y Ville de Winnipeg
Assessment and Taxation Department -{ Service de l'€valuation et des laxes
510 Main Street rr,. . \ 510, rue Mainwrnnip"g,rl,r"ntobaR3B3M2 Winnipeg ;;;i-".1 *.t.*t
CORPORATION
ROLL NO. / N'DU ROLE
PREMISES ASSESSED. STREET NUMBER, ETC./ LOCAUX EVRI.UES - N' DE VOIRIE, ETC.
1075 PORTAGE AVE
ANNUAL RENTAL VALUEANNUAL RENTAL VALUC I % RATEVALEUR LOCATIVE ANNUELLE I
TAUX EN 7O
606,960 | 7.75
CURRENT YEAR'S TM (add penalties from'June 1,2009)TAXE DE L'ANNEE EN COURS (aioutez p6nalitds i compter du 1er iuin 2009) 47,039.40
0.00SMALL BUSINESS TAX CREDITcREDtrs D'rMpOT pouR pETlrES ENTREpRISESNET BUSINESS TAXTAXE D'ENTREPRISE NETTE
$47,039.40
0.00BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ZONEZONE D:AMELIORATION COMMERCIALE
TOTAL DUE / MONTANT DU $47,039.40
r : l 1 l ? l r u l [ Q r ! q &
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Winnipeg.ca (UD) : Assessment & Taxation : Business Details
City of WinnipegAssessrnent & Taxation Deparlment
Business Details
Business Assessment Roll Number24730
Total Annual Renta!-Value Total Premise Area
$606,960
1075 Portage Ave
Premise Area 44,614 sq ft
Estimated Base Rent
Cost To Occupy
Total Cost To Occupy
Premise Annual Rental Value
Paee 1 of I
Heat 44,614 sq ft @ $0.67 =. $29,891Hydro 44 ,614sqf t@$0.32 =$14,276
Water 44,614 sqft @ $0.11 = $4,908AirConditioning 44,614 sqft @ $0.30 = $13,384
Total Cost To Occupy
Premise Annual Rental Value
1075 Portage Ave
Premise Area 19,238 sq ft
Estimated Base Rent
Cost To Occupy
63,852 sq ft
Record # 1
$400,634
$62,459 $62,459
$463,080
Record # 3
$116,967
$26,932 $26,932
$143,880
Heat 19,238 sq ft @ $0.67 = $12,889Hydro 19,238 sq ft @ $0 32 = $6,156
W a t e r 1 9 , 2 3 8 s q f t @ $ 0 . 1 1 = $ 2 , 1 1 6
AirCondi t ioning 19,238sqft @ $0.30 = $5,771
http://winnipegassessment.com/AsmtPub/englislr/propertydetails/BADetails.aspx?pglang... 0412212009
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
^ ' 87 / L5 /2809 13 : lB 2449852332 PAGE A2
THE CITY OF WINNIPEGmrupeg AS$E$$MENT AND IAXATION DEPARTMENT
SERVICE DE L'EVALUATION ET DE$ TAXES
20{ 0 PROPERTY AS$ES$MENT HOTICE June 0s, z00el
Plesse reviaw the fottowtng infonnation fo ansum that your addnss,/aEal descnp tion andyalues dn ecarate,
PROFIRTY I'lto itt ssn.'rt dnd To;otidn lhpafim.i eltablilhes your 7nwly vdhe b! looltng ot propcrty charact1tlsurg 1fidVALU! astiol.atcs dthe mort probable ,. hs pttc.Ior yonr iopeiV iaai O""n,iH rr,tirU 6 j,'iiOi,
THts fsASSE$SED
VALUESTATUSCODE
PROPERTY CIASSCODE
REASON FORCHANGE
$4,9s7,000Grarrt Otner Fnope$ Reessgssmgnt
TOTAL PROFERTYAssEBtirEHr $4,897,000
NOTA
DO YOU lifllD y:Y\:lyd " "**
alllollrWorwtton k cotscl Eawcv€t, ilroulnd d n*nb nrreld cldrliczda , ptcarc conlaat,E q3AssfttraNc!?
'rftnm D'Iw
ne dtiltlnant N t, Ulbltc t {.onftltio,' ond efi &.vhwd at , onies qfflf.lwtsnen adiwtiat Deprmudt *4i, Matn stftet ot dt cia Hai. t'*qncnt * powni i rt', r,inaa"iiiigi iiiifririfr"]:i#r * .,p a6,**,. }nmcen naamcrrr, in thri noi* andlrc i"i, ii,tJ *iipt*_t.
pROFERfY Fcr ftrrthir hrtonnrflonr ph.re codrct 3tl or tolt frg. t.!? fel,t4e.'a,ASglSttlIlT vrw$.,wlndpe!f,rmtmcnLconrWeulnlEg: prlvat UEer |t|! 2aO?Za
__ ___ - __ __ _ -__- :_ -_:_-- -____- : - ._-
Notice of Appeel to the Board of RevisionRoilNunber 13020010500
[ffiid!$gHo$wrffif;hn*Ti"ffi*[:",:*$Rel,r!h" jy3 F,!l"d S.E 9l1d.or nru*n ii+,r6atin"6ir am *nrdraE mih*b hE rddterg belqir. ;oudfu; i,;uiliriifriffijilrlippr r6rhrur.oc*riis.Final Date of Appeel Applicetion: June 25 20os . F$f"ilfiXif,lrgil;1'i5r,l* t'rt-,wtnnrpog, nE Riu 2rirr
BILL
I,IANTTOBA PuBLrc IN$URAI.ICE eoRFozu\TIoNe/o rAtirD !4AivAcBMEN? sERticss308-25 TIIPPER ST N IPORTAGE I.A PRAIRTE, MB RlN 3K1.
ROLL NUMBER
13020010500
PROPERW ADDRESS1075 PORTAGE AVE
TITLF / DEED2084477
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONPart of Lot Lot Blqck Plan Farieh
3 ?6601 5S/60 gT , IA
REGTSTERED OWNER(S)TI"IE MANTTOBA FUBLIC INSURANCE CORPORATION
llllillillllilillllilillllllillllllillilllllllllilllillllililillilllltiltiltlililillililliltiltilillltilililllltlllillilt
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
DATE: 20L0104/06T I I ' lE :08 :36
STATUS ( )F T ITLE. . . . . .ORIGII{ATIJIG ()FFICE. . .REGISTERIJIG OFFICE. . .REGISTMTIOJ{ DATE... .C()l ' lPLETI()ll DATE. . . .,,
I'IANIT0BASTATUS OF
ACCEPTEDt' l I NN I PEGl ' l l NN I PEG2005/04/082005/04/?0
TITLE
PR(lDUCEDADDRESS.
F()R..
CLIE I IT F ILE . . . NAPRODUCED BY. . . S. ROSE
TITLE 1IO:
PAGE:
2080477
1
LEGAL DESCRIPTIOII:
THE MAIiIITOBA PUBLIC INST'RJATiICE CORPORJATION
IS REGISTERED OWNER SUBJECT TO SUCH ENTRIES RECORDEDHEREON IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LATiID:
LOT 3 PLA}I 2660L WLTOIN RL 58 TO 60 PARISH OF ST iIAMES
ACTIYE TITLE CHARGE(S):
3111710 t{PG ACCEPTED CAVEAT REG'D: 2005/03/3LDESCRIPTIOlI : ZONING AGREEMENTFR0l ' l /BY: THE CITY 0F WINNIPEGT(): I ' I ILLIAM R. STOVEL AS SOLICITOR AND AGENTCOllSI DERATIOI{: l l0TES:
ACTIVE MANITOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE CORPC/O LAND I'|ANAGEl'|ENT SERVICES3 0 8 . 2 5 T U P P E R S T N ,PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, t ' |B
ORI GI I|ATI llG I llSTRUl'lEllT(S) :REGISTRATI0II ]|U]'IBER TYPE REG. DATE
2005/04/083116549 l^lPG TPRESE]ITED BY: LAND
FR0l'l: H. M.T(): THE
POSTAL CODE
R1N 3K1
C()NSIDERATIOlI
$ 1 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0MANAGE1'|ENT SERVICESTHE QUEEN ( l ' |ANITOBA)
MAllITOBA PUBLIC INSURANCE CORPORATION
SHOR]I YALUE
$2 ,250 ,000 .00
FROl'l TITLE llUl,lBER(S) :
T4L7364 t'lPG ALL
LA]ID I]IDEX:-_TOT-BLOCK SURYEY PLAN
3 26601IIOTE:
CERTIFIED TRUE EXTRACT PRODUCED FROM THE LAND TITLES DATASTORAGE SYSTEM ON 2OLO/04/06 OF TITLE NUMBER 2080477
************ STATUS 0F TITLE 2080477 HPG ColtrIllUED 011 I|EXTPAGE ************
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
DATE: 2oLotolto6 }IANI T0BATIl' lE: 08:36
STATUS ()F TITLETITLE ll0: 2080177
PAGE: 2
STATUS OF TITLE... . . . ACCEPTED PR(IDUCED FOR.. NAORIGI]IATIJIG (IFFICE... t . I I ] ' | ] ' | IPEG ADDRESS... O ' O IREGISTERIJIG OFFICE... l . l INNIPEGREGISTRATIOII DATE.... 2005/04/08Coli fPLETI0lf DATE... . . . 2005/04/20
CLIEI IT FILE. . . NAPRODUCED 8Y... S.ROSE
ACCEPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2OO5BY B.iICEACHERII T()R THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR ()FTHE LA]ID TITLES DISTRICT OF TIIIIIIPEG.
CERTIFIED TRUE EXTRACT PRODUCED FROM THE LAND TITLES DATASTORAGE SYSTEM ON 2OLO/04/06 OF TITLE I'IUI'|BER 2080477 .
ElfD 0F STATUS 0F TITLE 2090477 tpc **************
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Appendix 5
Demographic Information
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Site MapPrepared by Clarus Real Estate Advisors
©2009 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www.esri.com/bao or call 800-292-2224 4/12/2010 Page 1 of 1
1075 Portage Avenue Latitude: 49.8842971075 Portage Ave, Winnipeg,... Longitude: -97.177896Motor Vehicle Branch Site Type: Ring Rings: 1, 2, 3 Kilometers
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Census Market Profile
Summary Reports
Store ID: 1 0 - 1 Kilometers 0 - 2 Kilometers 0 - 3 Kilometers
2006 Population 15+ by Language Characteristics
Total population by Knowledge of Official Languages 12,799 48,191 103,778
English only 11,238 42,648 91,943
French only 0 27 34
English and French 1,463 4,980 10,493
Neither English nor French 98 536 1,308
2006 Population 15+ by Mother Tongue
Total Single Response 12,564 47,150 102,123
English 10,054 34,753 74,214
French 197 992 2,120
Total Non-Official 2,313 11,405 25,789
Multiple Languages 235 1,041 1,655
French & Non-Official 0 10 34
English & Non-Official 198 903 1,400
English & French 37 128 218
English & French & Non-Official 0 0 2
2006 Population 15+ by Ethnic Characteristics
Immigration Status
Non-immigrant population 10,513 37,037 78,399
Total immigrants by selected places of birth 2,231 10,538 23,864
Non-permanent residents 55 615 1,515
Visible Minority Status
Visible Minority Chinese 182 669 2,220
Visible Minority South Asian 116 589 1,381
Visible Minority Black 267 1,295 3,800
Visible Minority Filipino 1,049 5,703 10,102
Visible Minority Latin American 119 354 889
Visible Minority Southeast Asian 129 792 1,670
Visible Minority Arab 19 129 569
Visible Minority West Asian 12 103 510
Visible Minority Korean 11 196 408
Visible Minority Japanese 36 143 399
Visible Minority All Other Visible Minorities 35 164 413
Visible Minority Multiple Visible Minorities 71 335 745
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTY THEQUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement 6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 1 of 4
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Census Market Profile
Summary Reports
Store ID: 1 0 - 1 Kilometers 0 - 2 Kilometers 0 - 3 Kilometers
2006 Population 15+ by Educational Attainment
Total population 15+ years by highest certificate, diploma ordegree
10,543 39,924 87,502
No certificate, diploma or degree 2,000 9,297 19,599
Certificate, diploma or degree 8,543 30,627 67,903
High school certificate or equivalent 2,808 10,632 23,588
Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma 796 3,103 7,093
College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate ordiploma
1,508 5,173 12,069
University certificate, diploma or degree 3,431 11,719 25,153
University certificate or diploma below bachelor level 402 1,596 3,248
University certificate or degree 3,029 10,123 21,905
Bachelor's degree 2,019 6,342 14,211
University certificate or diploma above bachelorlevel
342 1,123 2,128
Degree in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicineor optometry
64 297 631
Master's degree 463 1,740 3,816
Earned doctorate 141 621 1,120
2006 Population 15+ by Sex and Marital Status
Total 10,769 40,818 89,108
Never Married 4,811 18,496 41,257
Married, not Separated 4,063 14,616 30,505
Married, Separated 386 1,456 3,241
Widowed 1,017 3,643 8,189
Divorced 491 2,608 5,916
2006 Population 15+ by Common-Law Status
Total 10,769 40,818 89,108
Not in a common-law relationship 9,460 37,051 80,824
In a common-law relationship 1,309 3,767 8,284
2006 Population 15+ by Employment Status
Total 10,543 39,924 87,502
In the labour force 7,882 28,026 59,818
Employed 7,484 26,248 55,899
Unemployed 398 1,779 3,919
Not in the labour force 2,662 11,897 27,683
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTY THEQUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement 6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 2 of 4
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Census Market Profile
Summary Reports
Store ID: 1 0 - 1 Kilometers 0 - 2 Kilometers 0 - 3 Kilometers
2006 Employed Population 15+ by Occupation
Total labour force 15 years and over by occupation 7,882 28,026 59,818
All occupations
A Management occupations 583 2,157 4,951
B Business, finance and administration occupation 1,312 4,624 10,184
C Natural and applied sciences and relatedoccupations
477 1,625 3,606
D Health occupations 535 1,833 3,972
E Occupations in social science, education,government service and religion
1,104 3,263 6,818
F Occupations in art, culture, recreation and sport 603 1,333 2,644
G Sales and service occupations 1,841 7,501 15,968
H Trades, transport and equipment operators andrelated occupations
859 3,085 6,318
I Occupations unique to primary industry 64 268 590
J Occupations unique to processing, manufacturingand utilities
376 1,842 3,567
2006 Workers by Means of Transportation to Work
Total 6,948 24,664 53,099
Car, truck, van, as driver 3,692 13,167 27,756
Car, truck, van, as passenger 653 2,483 4,480
Public transportation 1,463 4,929 11,050
Walked 687 2,788 7,597
Other means 452 1,296 2,216
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTY THEQUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement 6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 3 of 4
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Census Market Profile
Summary Reports
Store ID: 1 0 - 1 Kilometers 0 - 2 Kilometers 0 - 3 Kilometers
2006 Households by Type
Total Family Households 4,039 14,433 30,449
Couple Family Households 3,318 11,551 24,412
Married-couple family 1,923 6,805 14,268
With Children 1,215 4,119 8,026
Common-Law Couples 673 1,865 4,107
With Children 237 662 1,203
Lone Parent Family 721 2,882 6,037
Total number of persons in private households (20% sampledata)
12,768 47,382 102,306
Number of non-family persons 3,014 12,596 31,234
Living with relatives 387 1,377 3,086
Living with non-relatives only 788 2,696 6,240
Living alone 1,839 8,523 21,907
2006 Households by Size
Total 5,501 21,413 49,712
1 person 1,837 8,553 21,963
2 persons 1,767 6,179 14,562
3 persons 837 2,862 5,927
4-5 persons 928 3,258 6,237
6 or more persons 132 560 1,023
2006 Housing Units by Year Structure Built
Total number of occupied private dwellings by period ofconstruction
5,503 21,412 49,731
Period of construction, before 1946 4,213 13,039 22,332
Period of construction, 1946 to 1960 742 3,506 10,634
Period of construction, 1961 to 1970 236 2,183 6,715
Period of construction, 1971 to 1980 75 1,425 5,353
Period of construction, 1981 to 1985 65 521 2,061
Period of construction, 1986 to 1990 65 297 1,525
Period of construction, 1991 to 1995 86 272 601
Period of construction, 1996 to 2000 8 69 232
Period of construction, 2001 to 2006 14 98 277
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTY THEQUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement 6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 4 of 4
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_1 Description: 0 - 1 Kilometers
Summary 2004 2009 2014
Population 13,675 12,783 12,154
Households 5,643 5,538 5,491
Families 3,450 3,383 3,355
Average Household Size 2.37 2.26 2.17
Owned Dwellings 3,888 3,824 3,798
Rented Dwellings 1,756 1,714 1,693
Median Age 35.40 36.20 36.90
Trends: 2009-2014 Annual Rate Area Nation
Population -1.00% 1.16%
Households -0.17% 1.56%
Families -0.17% 1.73%
Owned Dwellings -0.14% 1.84%
Median Household Income 2.57% 3.23%
2004 2009 2014
Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
<$10,000 381 6.76% 305 5.50% 240 4.37%
$10,000 - $19,999 703 12.46% 548 9.89% 452 8.23%
$20,000 - $29,999 769 13.62% 626 11.31% 538 9.80%
$30,000 - $39,999 854 15.13% 711 12.83% 595 10.84%
$40,000 - $49,999 689 12.21% 657 11.87% 626 11.41%
$50,000 - $59,999 617 10.94% 582 10.51% 543 9.89%
$60,000 - $69,999 375 6.64% 468 8.45% 517 9.41%
$70,000 - $79,999 291 5.16% 341 6.15% 406 7.39%
$80,000 - $89,999 192 3.40% 256 4.63% 315 5.73%
$90,000 - $99,999 158 2.79% 169 3.05% 224 4.08%
$100,000+ 615 10.90% 875 15.81% 1,034 18.84%
Median Household Income 41,669 48,813 55,414
Average Household Income 53,808 67,494 78,083
Per Capita Income 22,204 29,241 35,277
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 1 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_1 Description: 0 - 1 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
0-4 812 5.93% 610 4.77% 508 4.18%
5-9 831 6.08% 708 5.54% 541 4.45%
10-14 756 5.53% 651 5.09% 565 4.65%
15-19 804 5.88% 783 6.13% 683 5.62%
20-24 988 7.22% 981 7.67% 913 7.51%
25-34 2,550 18.65% 2,415 18.89% 2,494 20.52%
35-44 1,207 8.83% 1,993 15.59% 1,845 15.18%
45-54 2,027 14.82% 2,021 15.81% 1,802 14.83%
55-64 1,183 8.65% 1,373 10.74% 1,448 11.92%
65-74 608 4.45% 604 4.72% 727 5.98%
75-84 467 3.42% 440 3.44% 410 3.37%
85+ 170 1.24% 205 1.60% 216 1.78%
Population by Language and Ethnic Indicators
2004 2009 2014
Population by MotherTongue
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Total Single Response 13,231 98.77% 12,352 98.79% 11,749 98.83%
English 10,588 79.04% 9,859 78.86% 9,299 78.22%
French 207 1.54% 205 1.64% 210 1.77%
Total Non-Official 2,437 18.19% 2,288 18.30% 2,240 18.84%
Italian 130 0.97% 122 0.98% 119 1.00%
German 467 3.49% 398 3.19% 353 2.97%
Panjabi 22 0.16% 19 0.15% 17 0.14%
Cantonese 71 0.53% 71 0.57% 71 0.60%
Spanish 140 1.05% 140 1.12% 147 1.24%
Arabic 11 0.08% 10 0.08% 9 0.08%
Tagalog 684 5.11% 664 5.31% 675 5.68%
Portuguese 189 1.41% 163 1.31% 142 1.20%
Polish 52 0.39% 48 0.39% 45 0.38%
Mandarin 15 0.11% 16 0.13% 17 0.14%
Chinese n.o.s. 25 0.19% 28 0.22% 30 0.25%
Urdu 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Vietnamese 55 0.41% 43 0.34% 33 0.27%
Ukrainian 142 1.06% 141 1.13% 145 1.22%
Persian 2 0.01% 2 0.01% 2 0.01%
Russian 4 0.03% 3 0.03% 3 0.02%
Dutch 36 0.27% 32 0.26% 31 0.26%
Korean 20 0.15% 20 0.16% 18 0.15%
Greek 18 0.13% 13 0.10% 10 0.09%
Tamil 11 0.08% 10 0.08% 10 0.08%
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Gujarati 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Romanian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Hindi 2 0.01% 2 0.02% 2 0.02%
Hungarian 13 0.10% 12 0.09% 10 0.08%
Croatian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Creoles 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Serbian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Bengali 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Japanese 10 0.07% 10 0.08% 9 0.08%
Armenian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Turkish 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Czech 10 0.07% 10 0.08% 11 0.09%
Finnish 4 0.03% 3 0.03% 3 0.02%
Aboriginal Languages 102 0.76% 98 0.78% 97 0.82%
Others 202 1.51% 209 1.67% 231 1.94%
Multiple Languages 223 1.67% 204 1.63% 188 1.58%
French & Non-Official 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 164 0.00%
English & Non-Official 195 1.46% 177 1.41% 0 1.38%
English & French 28 0.21% 27 0.22% 24 0.20%
English & French &Non-Official
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 2 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_1 Description: 0 - 1 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Immigration Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Non-immigrant population 11,112 82.59% 10,270 81.80% 9,665 80.97%
Total immigrants by selected places ofbirth
2,280 16.95% 2,223 17.70% 2,210 18.51%
Non-permanent residents 63 0.47% 63 0.50% 63 0.52%
2004 2009 2014
Population by Visible Minority Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Visible Minority Chinese 165 1.23% 174 1.39% 180 1.51%
Visible Minority South Asian 100 0.75% 126 1.01% 146 1.23%
Visible Minority Black 282 2.11% 302 2.41% 311 2.62%
Visible Minority Filipino 1,074 8.02% 1,051 8.40% 1,004 8.45%
Visible Minority Latin American 115 0.86% 132 1.06% 141 1.19%
Visible Minority Southeast Asian 136 1.02% 118 0.94% 103 0.87%
Visible Minority Arab 17 0.13% 16 0.13% 15 0.12%
Visible Minority West Asian 2 0.01% 2 0.01% 2 0.01%
Visible Minority Korean 12 0.09% 10 0.08% 9 0.08%
Visible Minority Japanese 54 0.41% 48 0.39% 44 0.37%
Visible Minority All Other VisibleMinorities
31 0.23% 27 0.22% 24 0.20%
Visible Minority Multiple VisibleMinorities
55 0.41 66 0.53% 73 0.61%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 3 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_1 Description: 0 - 1 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 4 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_1 Description: 0 - 1 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 5 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_2 Description: 0 - 2 Kilometers
Summary 2004 2009 2014
Population 51,309 48,822 46,745
Households 21,857 21,740 21,648
Families 12,174 12,128 12,081
Average Household Size 2.27 2.16 2.08
Owned Dwellings 12,089 12,052 12,005
Rented Dwellings 9,768 9,687 9,643
Median Age 35.60 36.60 37.40
Trends: 2009-2014 Annual Rate Area Nation
Population -0.87% 1.16%
Households -0.08% 1.56%
Families -0.08% 1.73%
Owned Dwellings -0.08% 1.84%
Median Household Income 2.40% 3.23%
2004 2009 2014
Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
<$10,000 2,220 10.16% 1,965 9.04% 1,733 8.01%
$10,000 - $19,999 3,460 15.83% 2,832 13.03% 2,381 11.00%
$20,000 - $29,999 3,223 14.75% 2,745 12.63% 2,436 11.25%
$30,000 - $39,999 2,805 12.83% 2,538 11.67% 2,317 10.71%
$40,000 - $49,999 2,166 9.91% 2,110 9.70% 2,113 9.76%
$50,000 - $59,999 1,768 8.09% 1,730 7.96% 1,661 7.67%
$60,000 - $69,999 1,384 6.33% 1,452 6.68% 1,447 6.68%
$70,000 - $79,999 1,099 5.03% 1,209 5.56% 1,243 5.74%
$80,000 - $89,999 628 2.87% 918 4.22% 1,045 4.83%
$90,000 - $99,999 556 2.55% 632 2.91% 813 3.75%
$100,000+ 2,548 11.66% 3,609 16.60% 4,458 20.59%
Median Household Income 37,221 43,744 49,259
Average Household Income 53,724 67,519 78,115
Per Capita Income 22,886 30,065 36,175
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 6 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_2 Description: 0 - 2 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
0-4 3,025 5.90% 2,309 4.73% 1,961 4.20%
5-9 2,972 5.79% 2,573 5.27% 1,987 4.25%
10-14 2,888 5.63% 2,526 5.17% 2,240 4.79%
15-19 3,152 6.14% 3,113 6.38% 2,734 5.85%
20-24 4,307 8.39% 4,328 8.86% 4,061 8.69%
25-34 8,806 17.16% 8,443 17.29% 8,767 18.75%
35-44 3,994 7.79% 6,781 13.89% 6,310 13.50%
45-54 7,326 14.28% 7,421 15.20% 6,616 14.15%
55-64 4,608 8.98% 5,444 11.15% 5,812 12.43%
65-74 2,517 4.91% 2,513 5.15% 2,987 6.39%
75-84 2,193 4.27% 2,022 4.14% 1,881 4.02%
85+ 1,187 2.31% 1,349 2.76% 1,390 2.97%
Population by Language and Ethnic Indicators
2004 2009 2014
Population by MotherTongue
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Total Single Response 48,653 98.21% 46,060 97.93% 43,910 97.49%
English 36,134 72.94% 33,940 72.16% 31,854 70.72%
French 989 2.00% 967 2.06% 969 2.15%
Total Non-Official 11,529 23.27% 11,154 23.71% 11,088 24.62%
Italian 318 0.64% 286 0.61% 266 0.59%
German 1,394 2.81% 1,175 2.50% 1,017 2.26%
Panjabi 80 0.16% 75 0.16% 69 0.15%
Cantonese 256 0.52% 245 0.52% 241 0.53%
Spanish 417 0.84% 429 0.91% 451 1.00%
Arabic 137 0.28% 138 0.29% 140 0.31%
Tagalog 3,633 7.33% 3,663 7.79% 3,762 8.35%
Portuguese 1,082 2.18% 895 1.90% 751 1.67%
Polish 210 0.42% 179 0.38% 155 0.34%
Mandarin 91 0.18% 98 0.21% 103 0.23%
Chinese n.o.s. 189 0.38% 198 0.42% 199 0.44%
Urdu 40 0.08% 42 0.09% 41 0.09%
Vietnamese 384 0.77% 394 0.84% 399 0.89%
Ukrainian 359 0.72% 341 0.72% 332 0.74%
Persian 41 0.08% 43 0.09% 44 0.10%
Russian 41 0.08% 37 0.08% 34 0.08%
Dutch 90 0.18% 80 0.17% 75 0.17%
Korean 190 0.38% 197 0.42% 200 0.44%
Greek 137 0.28% 124 0.26% 112 0.25%
Tamil 21 0.04% 17 0.04% 15 0.03%
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Gujarati 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Romanian 73 0.15% 78 0.17% 78 0.17%
Hindi 64 0.13% 57 0.12% 55 0.12%
Hungarian 95 0.19% 84 0.18% 75 0.17%
Croatian 35 0.07% 35 0.07% 34 0.07%
Creoles 41 0.08% 33 0.07% 26 0.06%
Serbian 30 0.06% 32 0.07% 33 0.07%
Bengali 9 0.02% 9 0.02% 9 0.02%
Japanese 86 0.17% 79 0.17% 68 0.15%
Armenian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Turkish 9 0.02% 9 0.02% 9 0.02%
Czech 41 0.08% 36 0.08% 33 0.07%
Finnish 37 0.08% 35 0.08% 33 0.07%
Aboriginal Languages 674 1.36% 644 1.37% 636 1.41%
Others 1,226 2.47% 1,367 2.91% 1,593 3.54%
Multiple Languages 971 1.96% 1,051 2.23% 1,200 2.66%
French & Non-Official 15 0.03% 14 0.03% 1,099 0.03%
English & Non-Official 856 1.73% 942 2.00% 13 2.44%
English & French 101 0.20% 95 0.20% 88 0.20%
English & French &Non-Official
0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 7 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_2 Description: 0 - 2 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Immigration Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Non-immigrant population 38,371 77.32% 36,939 78.41% 35,586 78.89%
Total immigrants by selected places ofbirth
10,648 21.46% 9,567 20.31% 8,918 19.77%
Non-permanent residents 605 1.22% 605 1.28% 605 1.34%
2004 2009 2014
Population by Visible Minority Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Visible Minority Chinese 665 1.34% 648 1.38% 633 1.41%
Visible Minority South Asian 571 1.15% 599 1.27% 604 1.34%
Visible Minority Black 1,294 2.61% 1,301 2.77% 1,246 2.77%
Visible Minority Filipino 5,908 11.93% 5,684 12.08% 5,360 11.90%
Visible Minority Latin American 342 0.69% 343 0.73% 336 0.75%
Visible Minority Southeast Asian 754 1.52% 828 1.76% 899 2.00%
Visible Minority Arab 110 0.22% 137 0.29% 155 0.34%
Visible Minority West Asian 89 0.18% 84 0.18% 83 0.18%
Visible Minority Korean 174 0.35% 229 0.49% 279 0.62%
Visible Minority Japanese 127 0.26% 123 0.26% 119 0.27%
Visible Minority All Other VisibleMinorities
147 0.30% 185 0.39% 254 0.56%
Visible Minority Multiple VisibleMinorities
311 0.63 338 0.72% 351 0.78%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 8 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_2 Description: 0 - 2 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 9 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_2 Description: 0 - 2 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 10 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_3 Description: 0 - 3 Kilometers
Summary 2004 2009 2014
Population 110,199 105,356 101,291
Households 50,682 50,697 50,730
Families 25,444 25,475 25,466
Average Household Size 2.11 2.01 1.94
Owned Dwellings 23,175 23,221 23,199
Rented Dwellings 27,507 27,476 27,531
Median Age 35.60 36.60 37.30
Trends: 2009-2014 Annual Rate Area Nation
Population -0.78% 1.16%
Households 0.01% 1.56%
Families -0.01% 1.73%
Owned Dwellings -0.02% 1.84%
Median Household Income 2.29% 3.23%
2004 2009 2014
Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
<$10,000 5,538 10.93% 4,946 9.76% 4,452 8.78%
$10,000 - $19,999 8,189 16.16% 6,872 13.55% 5,926 11.68%
$20,000 - $29,999 7,545 14.89% 6,573 12.96% 5,987 11.80%
$30,000 - $39,999 6,836 13.49% 6,146 12.12% 5,639 11.11%
$40,000 - $49,999 5,294 10.45% 5,143 10.14% 5,114 10.08%
$50,000 - $59,999 4,220 8.33% 4,192 8.27% 3,981 7.85%
$60,000 - $69,999 3,145 6.21% 3,394 6.69% 3,434 6.77%
$70,000 - $79,999 2,306 4.55% 2,668 5.26% 2,846 5.61%
$80,000 - $89,999 1,432 2.83% 1,959 3.86% 2,293 4.52%
$90,000 - $99,999 1,103 2.18% 1,352 2.67% 1,725 3.40%
$100,000+ 5,075 10.01% 7,453 14.70% 9,334 18.40%
Median Household Income 35,953 41,579 46,573
Average Household Income 50,260 63,114 72,994
Per Capita Income 23,115 30,370 36,558
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 11 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_3 Description: 0 - 3 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
0-4 6,077 5.51% 4,664 4.43% 3,968 3.92%
5-9 5,965 5.41% 5,192 4.93% 4,015 3.96%
10-14 5,510 5.00% 4,854 4.61% 4,314 4.26%
15-19 6,023 5.47% 5,961 5.66% 5,250 5.18%
20-24 9,412 8.54% 9,467 8.99% 8,852 8.74%
25-34 21,063 19.11% 20,194 19.17% 20,880 20.61%
35-44 8,623 7.82% 14,474 13.74% 13,445 13.27%
45-54 14,910 13.53% 15,131 14.36% 13,463 13.29%
55-64 9,693 8.80% 11,472 10.89% 12,227 12.07%
65-74 5,974 5.42% 5,978 5.67% 7,091 7.00%
75-84 5,279 4.79% 4,921 4.67% 4,603 4.54%
85+ 2,582 2.34% 3,049 2.89% 3,183 3.14%
Population by Language and Ethnic Indicators
2004 2009 2014
Population by MotherTongue
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Total Single Response 105,430 98.47% 100,385 98.27% 96,188 97.97%
English 77,625 72.50% 72,904 71.37% 68,316 69.58%
French 2,099 1.96% 2,031 1.99% 2,025 2.06%
Total Non-Official 25,705 24.01% 25,451 24.92% 25,847 26.33%
Italian 711 0.66% 637 0.62% 579 0.59%
German 2,447 2.29% 2,117 2.07% 1,859 1.89%
Panjabi 250 0.23% 246 0.24% 244 0.25%
Cantonese 530 0.50% 519 0.51% 525 0.53%
Spanish 1,043 0.97% 1,047 1.02% 1,068 1.09%
Arabic 597 0.56% 660 0.65% 730 0.74%
Tagalog 6,798 6.35% 6,800 6.66% 6,913 7.04%
Portuguese 1,836 1.72% 1,510 1.48% 1,260 1.28%
Polish 546 0.51% 465 0.46% 414 0.42%
Mandarin 433 0.40% 451 0.44% 465 0.47%
Chinese n.o.s. 666 0.62% 680 0.67% 693 0.71%
Urdu 83 0.08% 84 0.08% 80 0.08%
Vietnamese 907 0.85% 911 0.89% 920 0.94%
Ukrainian 1,085 1.01% 1,056 1.03% 1,072 1.09%
Persian 322 0.30% 324 0.32% 312 0.32%
Russian 223 0.21% 255 0.25% 296 0.30%
Dutch 206 0.19% 180 0.18% 165 0.17%
Korean 423 0.40% 429 0.42% 428 0.44%
Greek 189 0.18% 172 0.17% 158 0.16%
Tamil 47 0.04% 42 0.04% 38 0.04%
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Gujarati 22 0.02% 20 0.02% 18 0.02%
Romanian 127 0.12% 137 0.13% 142 0.14%
Hindi 168 0.16% 180 0.18% 196 0.20%
Hungarian 230 0.21% 209 0.20% 191 0.19%
Croatian 172 0.16% 160 0.16% 145 0.15%
Creoles 134 0.13% 122 0.12% 113 0.11%
Serbian 205 0.19% 214 0.21% 224 0.23%
Bengali 54 0.05% 52 0.05% 52 0.05%
Japanese 266 0.25% 249 0.24% 228 0.23%
Armenian 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Turkish 20 0.02% 19 0.02% 19 0.02%
Czech 118 0.11% 114 0.11% 109 0.11%
Finnish 42 0.04% 40 0.04% 38 0.04%
Aboriginal Languages 1,428 1.33% 1,365 1.34% 1,344 1.37%
Others 3,377 3.15% 3,988 3.90% 4,811 4.90%
Multiple Languages 1,527 1.43% 1,656 1.62% 1,885 1.92%
French & Non-Official 19 0.02% 18 0.02% 1,713 0.02%
English & Non-Official 1,337 1.25% 1,472 1.44% 16 1.74%
English & French 161 0.15% 155 0.15% 146 0.15%
English & French &Non-Official
10 0.01% 11 0.01% 11 0.01%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 12 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_3 Description: 0 - 3 Kilometers
2004 2009 2014
Population by Immigration Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Non-immigrant population 82,470 77.11% 77,864 76.31% 74,426 75.89%
Total immigrants by selected places ofbirth
22,999 21.50% 22,689 22.24% 22,160 22.59%
Non-permanent residents 1,487 1.39% 1,487 1.46% 1,487 1.52%
2004 2009 2014
Population by Visible Minority Status Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Visible Minority Chinese 2,011 1.88% 2,079 2.04% 2,101 2.14%
Visible Minority South Asian 1,261 1.18% 1,317 1.29% 1,325 1.35%
Visible Minority Black 3,662 3.42% 3,791 3.71% 3,766 3.84%
Visible Minority Filipino 10,371 9.69% 9,984 9.77% 9,450 9.63%
Visible Minority Latin American 866 0.81% 849 0.83% 820 0.84%
Visible Minority Southeast Asian 1,594 1.49% 1,683 1.65% 1,756 1.79%
Visible Minority Arab 559 0.52% 667 0.65% 728 0.74%
Visible Minority West Asian 450 0.42% 434 0.42% 414 0.42%
Visible Minority Korean 368 0.34% 450 0.44% 526 0.54%
Visible Minority Japanese 362 0.34% 375 0.37% 379 0.39%
Visible Minority All Other VisibleMinorities
340 0.32% 489 0.48% 645 0.66%
Visible Minority Multiple VisibleMinorities
692 0.65 753 0.74% 793 0.81%
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 13 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_3 Description: 0 - 3 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 14 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Demographic and Income
Summary Reports
Area ID: 1_3 Description: 0 - 3 Kilometers
Source: Selected Environics Analytics Information Products are based, in whole or in part, on Computer File(s) licensed from Statistics Canada.© Copyright, HER MAJESTYTHE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada 2004.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized User of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) and Distributor of derived Information Products under Licensing Agreement6894.Environics Analytics Group is an Authorized Reseller of selected Statistics Canada Computer File(s) under Licensing Agreement 6894.No confidential information about an individual, family, household, organisation or business has been obtained from Statistics Canada.
©2009 ESRI Phone: 888-377-4575 - www.esri.com 04/12/2010 Page 15 of 15
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
Appendix 6
Building Sketch Plans
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
MASTERPLANS
BASEMENT FLOOR PLANMR
OCT. 2009
NOT TO SCALE
MP38182-B
1075 PORTAGE AVE.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/4837/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/4837/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/3037/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/30
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/4837/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/24
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
MASTERPLANS
MAIN FLOOR PLANMR
OCT. 2009
NOT TO SCALE
MP38182-1
1075 PORTAGE AVE.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/4837/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/3037/30
37/2437/24
37/3037/24
37/3037/24
37/3037/24
37/2437/30
37/3037/24
37/2437/30
37/3037/24
37/3037/24
37/3037/24
37/2437/30
37/3037/24
37/3037/30
37/2437/24
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/2437/3037/24
37/48
37/48
37/30
37/48
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/48
37/24 37/30
37/2437/24
37/30
37/48
37/48
37/2437/3037/24
37/48
37/48
37/30
37/3037/30
37/3037/30
MASTERPLANS
SECOND FLOOR PLANMR
OCT. 2009
NOT TO SCALE
MP38182-2
1075 PORTAGE AVE.
August 4, 2010 PUB (MPI) 1-18 (f) Attachment