Perhaps it's me, but how can there be an open discussion with an opening statement of

"The preliminary observations of the proposed Community Centre on the parking lot is that the site is too small for such an undertaking, is missing all the necessary functionality of a community centre and is not in the right location for our community."?

re: to karl - shareholder

I'm all for facts. What I quoted was in my opinion, an opinion.

Tanan, hr. Laikve!
Paljud meist olime volutud uute ja satendavate plaanidega, mis on maksnud meie uhiskonnale sadu tuhandeid.
Me vajame Eesti Maja ja mitte mingit killukest...
Koolil on vaja kodu.
Gaididel / skautidel on vaja kodu.
Meie minevik on seotud selle majaga ja meie tulevik vajab seda.
Eesti Maja Sobrad on palju tood teinud ja tulemused on nahtavad.
Teeme ara!
Paastame meie kodu... Toronto Eesti Maja!

I want to see a gutted and newly built centre at 958 Broadview, heritage restrictions permitting, with the maximum number of floors built. I want to see a new cool modern building fronted with the old school facade, as now required by the Toronto. I don’t want to see the same old tired structure. Only a revitalized building can be self sufficient, which it is not now (there are few who want to rent it presently).

And why can't Kongats do this at 958 Broadview? He's done it before:
www.canadianarchitect.com/feat...

I like this design with old facade:
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/20...


An important aspect is not being discussed. I believe that the Madison location will be more alienating for Estonian community members than a revised Broadview location.

Madison will alienate:
- Those living out of the city needing to commute in (more congestion and challenging parking options in Bloor area), especially bringing kids to school on a weeknight
- Car drivers, especially older ones, who don’t want to take the TTC
- Those wanting to rent a large communal space for an event
- Older ETCU clientele (though hearsay, I have heard of people already taking their money out of ETCU and transferring it to another bank in anticipation of the Madison move) because they don’t want to travel there

Who will a revamped Broadview alienate?

I’m interested in hearing others thoughts on this.

First... with a lot of mismanagment over the years.. the asset has fallen into disrepair... Though I am pro keeping the current Estonian house.. I recognize that the Estonian House does not have the funds to renovate or even upgrade the facility... please tell me why we keep hiring managers who are not managing the asset... where I can find NO Marketing of the Estonian house anywhere... and there are many places where you can place FREE ads... now we have volunteers who amazingly found sources for funding needed roof repairs.. who fix, paint and maintain our dearly loved Estonian house... where we have a shooting range... that will NEVER be appoved at the proposed Tartu College site...

Sadly though ... the reality is the board cannot figure out a way to finance fixing and upgrading the Estonian house... so they want to sell the asset to building a new Estonian House... and really over the years the board and management has not actually marketed nor maintained the asset that the community really loves.... yes, the community dynamics are changing.. but please do not tell me when on Saturdays the community needs to use the Baptist Church due to lack of rooms that we can "make due" with a smaller venue.. that lack parking... and really our parking lot if FULL Many nights that I am at the Estonian House... I think we are not vetting our board members properly... We need a building manager that understands how to manage an asset, where to find funding to maintain the asset.. so many levels of government give financial incentives to reduce costs... and with rebates.. I think that no manager has every even looked into that.

Yet the volunteers did... and they get put down for being proactive in finding funds.. and even fund raising ... so sad that we have such poor management skills... stop hiring friends and family.. and look for competent staff that know how to restore a super valuable asset.... and vote in board members who actually listen to the Estonian community and not there own agenda

Those attending today's announcement meeting should do so with an understanding of each organizations agenda, objectives and who they represent:

1) Bank ETCU
The bank has loaned Estonian House somewhere in the range of $200,000-$300,000. With revenues declining, the prospect for EM to repay the loan is unlikely. The only way that ETCU will see that loan repaid is via a sale of EM. It should be noted that a member of the ETCU board also sits on the EM tulevik board.

The bank has purchased the house directly north of the parking lot on Madison ave at the likely cost of some $2 million+ They have spent vast sums on renovations and rezoning. Due to some "misunderstandings" regarding rezoning, the property has remained vacant for two years, acting as a drain. If EM is sold, funds will be used to buy back this house from ETCU, which will allow them to recover. If EM is not sold yet the parking lot is secured, ETCU will sell the house and include part of the parking lot to liquidate this asset.
ETCU's objective will be to recover their assets and loan to EM.

ETCU represents the interests of their members not community stakeholders (as they may claim to)

2) ESK
ESK has invested in EM tulevik with community funds. They pay the rents of all organizations who use the rooms in EM. They also own strategically critical properties adjacent to EM, without which, EM's own value would be drastically reduced.
ESK looks to save money and consolidating to one location will do that.
ESK will also want to liquidate their real estate assets to recover from a poor fundraising year. ESK members and DONORS should ask why ESK is using funds intended for programming to fund consultants for the Madison project. How will ESK be repaid? Are Donor funds being used to benefit the bank and TC?

ESK represents the interests of their paid members, donors and funds they use to fund community acitivities

3) Tartu College
Tartu College's main objective is to secure the parking lot. They will benefit whether the new EM is relocated to Madison or not. If the parking lot is split with ETCU, this will increase the value of TC. If EM moves to TC the value of TC increases and VEMU will be closer to being realized. ETCU and TC are rumored to be in discussions about a permanent move for ETCU from EM to TC.

TC represents the interests of its members and board. An ETCU member also sits on the TC board.

4) Estonian House
The Estonian House is in deep financial trouble with a large mortgage owed to ETCU. Having spent hundreds of thousands on consultants through at least three known failed redevelopment deals, a decision need to be made soon. However, lack of leadership and misdirection have caused the board to fraction with one faction calling for renovations (with considerable
Funds that have been raised), while another supports a move to TC. The former core tulevik committee will try to spin ten years of repeated disappointments into a positive story.

EM has repeatedly stated that it represents ONLY the interests of its shareholders and that community stakeholders and community groups without shares (those who pay rents) have no say in the future of EM.

I'm not anti- EM board, or EM management and appreciate the time and effort they've spent working on these and past plans.

Tonight is all about the TC proposal. I'm very curious to hear more....something....anything... about it.

My main concern with this proposal is whether this plan provides sufficient community space for the schools/scouts/guides/choirs/dancers as it just looks like office-space upgrades and fancy hallways. It looks like a place where kids will be told "shhh istu paigal" a lot.

Easy subway access is great, but I think majority of the kids participating in the schools/activities at EM are currently being driven. Will there be a pickup/drop-off area?

My concern is not parking. I think there are sufficient pay parking lots around TC. IMO Eesti Maja should charge for parking currently anyway.

I'm not sure how safe the Spadina/Bloor area is for kids to wander after scouts/guides or at recess. The vagrants will probably enjoy the open square.

Sorry, I guess speculation is all we have until information is disseminated to the masses.

"Won't someone please think of the children."

I think it is wonderful that OTHER architects,engineers are starting to take an interest in what is going on with TC and EM. This should have been done 10 years ago. We need more architects who will offer ideas and look into development plans for the EM. It is my understanding that Hr. Laikve (RET) is retired and that his article only serviced to inform the shareholders about the pros/cons for the 9 Madison proposal.

In addition to issues of moral judgment, reality testing, and mental efficiency, there is the shadow of possible malfeasance and gross incompetence. Could lawyers among others be invited to comment on how these might be dealt with, and precipitous action avoided?

Architect Laikve is fighting to preserve his personal legacy on Broadview. He knows any comprehensive redevelopment of Esto House or its sale to a third party will mean demolition of his 1970’s street-front addition. That explains why Laikve only suggests rebuilding the middle part of Esto House. However this central section is a 1900’s schoolhouse and is part of Toronto’s heritage building inventory. Redevelopment is more complex and costly. Laikve has not presented a budget for his proposal nor does he explain how community activity continues in the front and rear sections while the midddle is a big construction site. Temporary relocation for the construction period adds more costs to an already unfunded project. Let’s understand and accept Laikve’s preference for staying on Broadview and retaining the current facade unchanged. For the same reason, let’s also recognize that Laikve is unlikely to provide a balanced assessment of other alternatives, including the current Madison proposal.

Please note who is said to have assessed Laikve's proposal: Turner and Townsend, and/or Cushman and Wakefield. The former specializes in capital projects - large and expensive - of the very type the EH board was pursuing with a developer. Part of T & T's job is to "grow support for the investment" - the hundreds of thousands put into those large and expensive projects with developers. Cushman and Wakefield specializes in commercial real estate. Would expanding the rental space in EM itself without the developer scheme, not be better assessed by property managers?
Let's not get into personal legacies...

I have been following this debate from afar and have not been able to attend the meetings. I have many fond memories of attending parties and other occasions as a child at EM. One day I hope that my children will be able to enjoy similar events.

It's difficult for me to comment on the merits of the new building proposal as I do not have many details but I am stunned by how much has been spent to get to this point. Hundreds of thousands of dollars? How does the Board account for this speculative investment?

There are professional fundraisers in Toronto who are expert in raising money. All I can think is that, had the Board hired one five years ago, perhaps the community would not be so divided and in debt now and that the EM would be a rejuvenated and profitable community center.