Toronto Daniels Waterfront - City of the Arts | 156.05m | 45s | Daniels | RAW Design

IMG_1390.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1390.JPG
    IMG_1390.JPG
    121.6 KB · Views: 481
The Starbucks is quite nice. My phone was charging at home and so didn't get any pictures. I'm surprised they open so early actually - hopefully they still get enough traffic (the Starbucks booth at Loblaws is still open as well IIRC).
 
Front page story here, distance shot here:

DSC08723.jpg


42
 

Attachments

  • DSC08723.jpg
    DSC08723.jpg
    367.8 KB · Views: 431
Now with the office building done, we can pay attention to the condo. I'm surprised it was ignored.

And the Gardiner canyon is spreading east!
 
I am wondering will Sugar Beach North open for business before the completion of the residential towers (Lighthouse Tower West and Lighthouse Tower East)
 
Jowblow333333 said:
I am wondering will Sugar Beach North open for business before the completion of the residential towers (Lighthouse Tower West and Lighthouse Tower East)
Click to expand...
It looks on track to be! I'd be shocked if it wasn't, considering they'd want the office towers/ground retail occupied and operating :)
 
DSC said:
That would seem to be their plan as they are working hard on it - and why not? - it is well separated from the 2 residential towers.
Click to expand...

Just wondering who is on the hook with the ongoing maintenance expenses of Sugar Beach North. It would be logical to conclude this is part of 130QQ instead of the residential owners or maybe City is picking up the tap ?
 
Jowblow333333 said:
Just wondering who is on the hook with the ongoing maintenance expenses of Sugar Beach North. It would be logical to conclude this is part of 130QQ instead of the residential owners or maybe City is picking up the tap ?
Click to expand...
It is, I think, a POPS (Privately-Owned Publicly Accessible Space) and these are the responsibility of the property owner - I assume this is NOT the residential towers and their future Condominium Corporations.
 
The documents I have show that Daniels was proposing to turn over most of Sugar Beach North to the City… but not all of it, probably the 10% of the property that the City calls for in parkland dedication. That would be in lieu of a payment to a parkland fund.

I do not know if that was how it was resolved in the end, or if Daniels intends/has offered to maintain Sugar Beach North regardless of who owns what portions of it, but I suspect that might be they may have.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top