Toronto SIX50 King West | ?m | 16s | Freed | Core Architects

ProjectEnd said:
No big guy, I don't. That's why I started with 'to me.' And why would one take in the local sights if they're just there to deface things? Confusing complaint, no?

You can hide behind your wide brush and boisterous tone but it's consistently obvious (with this oddly aggressive response and in other threads) that you've really got no idea what you're talking about. Take it easy. No-one's here to fight.
Click to expand...

This coming from a guy defending the crappiest of "graffiti."

Maybe you check into the voice you read with.
 
I am psychic: 8 May 2007:
urbandreamer said:
this area of the city is becoming my favourite. I'd like to see what freed can do with red brick instead of minimalistic white + glass. There's still many parking lots (and a few ugly office buildings to implode) to fill but within 5-10 years, I believe the area will become the new "yorkville." Everyone on Stewart St seems to drive either a Mini Cooper, Audi A4 or BMW--kind of disgusting in a way but it will be interesting to see if the city will allow Portland St (i'm thinking of those rundown old houses) to become the new John St---ie little cafes in those houses; plus some retail on Bathurst St etc.
Click to expand...
:D

18 December 2012:

20121218155105.jpg


20121218155238.jpg


20121218155316.jpg


20121218155334.jpg


20121218155507.jpg
 
cmcint01 said:
Anyone know whats going into the retail space of the Bathurst building. Saw it from a distance but looks like paper in the windows and for lease sign down.
Click to expand...

I think it's a burger joint - Fatburger's first location in Ontario
 
What an appealing name.

/sarcasm

42
 
Stratford1 said:
Yes- imo all of Freed's projects since Thompson hotel have been underwhelming rush jobs with no redeeming features.
Though Thompson project still has many issues, the lest of which is skyrocking condo fees in the first 1-2years. :eek:

I live in the immediate are and walk Wellington-Stewart-Bathurst-King strees all the time.
Click to expand...

Before putting Stratford1 on my ignore list based on his comment in the Downtown thread, I took a quick look at some prior posts to see if there was any redeeming merit to them - could not find any. This comment regarding 550 Wellington Project (Thompson Hotel and associated condominiums) maintenance fees is just plain wrong. First year fees were as per the registered declaration for the building. Second year fees went down 6% from the first year, and third year fees stayed the same as the second year, continuing to be down 6% from the first year.

Another one joins the ignore list.
 
AHK said:
Before putting Stratford1 on my ignore list based on his comment in the Downtown thread, I took a quick look at some prior posts to see if there was any redeeming merit to them - could not find any. This comment regarding 550 Wellington Project (Thompson Hotel and associated condominiums) maintenance fees is just plain wrong. First year fees were as per the registered declaration for the building. Second year fees went down 6% from the first year, and third year fees stayed the same as the second year, continuing to be down 6% from the first year.

Another one joins the ignore list.
Click to expand...

Not quite. I don't know which year it was but fees did in fact skyrocket. Residents were able to get the fees back down somehow, though. Thompson has had a lot of problems, but I still think it's a wonderful building. My buddy lives there and loves it. I've been there and love it.
 
TheKingEast said:
Not quite. I don't know which year it was but fees did in fact skyrocket. Residents were able to get the fees back down somehow, though. Thompson has had a lot of problems, but I still think it's a wonderful building. My buddy lives there and loves it. I've been there and love it.
Click to expand...

One last comment on this issue. The disclosure documents contained an initial schedule of fees, with the note that a 6% escalation would be applied for each year that registration took place after December 31, 2008. Registration took place in 2010. In addition to the two years of 6% compounded increases to the fees in the 2006 disclosure documents, there were some units which had other changes to the individual unit fees, based on differences between the original marketing drawing unit sizes, versus the sizes indicated in the permit and construction drawings.

The confusions regarding fees was further compounded by the declarant's lawyer incorrectly registering the wrong budget (which included the 6% escalation for one year), only to change it prior to the closings. Needless to say, with the two 6% increases factored in, and inflation being very tame over this timeframe, Freed was well covered regarding any risk of having to make up a first year shortfall, and in fact there was actually a surplus.

Could the declarant - Freed - been clearer and more up front about the basis for the maintenance fees - Yes.

Did Freed need to protect himself to the extent that he did with the 6% escalations. No - it turns out that he did not.

Would the situation have been managed better if Freed's lawyer had not registered the wrong budget, only to subsequently change it prior to closings of the purchases - Yes, that was a real screw up all round.

But back to the original point. Fees did not skyrocket. The first year fees were as documented in the disclosure documents, with the 6% escalation factored in for the two years between 2008 and 2010. Fees came down in second year, and were held the same for the third year. Any other differences would be due the change in area in an individual unit, between the original marketing drawings, and the subsequent construction / permit drawings.
 
Checked out the new french pastry/coffee shop Brioche Doree. Hrs are 7am till 9pm 7 days. Very different from the Timmy's, McD's, and 2nd cup in the hood. Now need to wait and see who moves into the retail section of the Bathurst portion of the complex.
 
AHK said:
One last comment on this issue. The disclosure documents contained an initial schedule of fees, with the note that a 6% escalation would be applied for each year that registration took place after December 31, 2008. Registration took place in 2010. In addition to the two years of 6% compounded increases to the fees in the 2006 disclosure documents, there were some units which had other changes to the individual unit fees, based on differences between the original marketing drawing unit sizes, versus the sizes indicated in the permit and construction drawings.

The confusions regarding fees was further compounded by the declarant's lawyer incorrectly registering the wrong budget (which included the 6% escalation for one year), only to change it prior to the closings. Needless to say, with the two 6% increases factored in, and inflation being very tame over this timeframe, Freed was well covered regarding any risk of having to make up a first year shortfall, and in fact there was actually a surplus.

Could the declarant - Freed - been clearer and more up front about the basis for the maintenance fees - Yes.

Did Freed need to protect himself to the extent that he did with the 6% escalations. No - it turns out that he did not.

Would the situation have been managed better if Freed's lawyer had not registered the wrong budget, only to subsequently change it prior to closings of the purchases - Yes, that was a real screw up all round.

But back to the original point. Fees did not skyrocket. The first year fees were as documented in the disclosure documents, with the 6% escalation factored in for the two years between 2008 and 2010. Fees came down in second year, and were held the same for the third year. Any other differences would be due the change in area in an individual unit, between the original marketing drawings, and the subsequent construction / permit drawings.
Click to expand...

The fees in the disclosure doc were far and away higher than what Freed broadcasted at the point of sale. Yes, the price usually goes up a bit in all projects but his skyrocketed.
 
AHK said:
Could the declarant - Freed - been clearer and more up front about the basis for the maintenance fees - Yes.

Did Freed need to protect himself to the extent that he did with the 6% escalations. No - it turns out that he did not.

Would the situation have been managed better if Freed's lawyer had not registered the wrong budget, only to subsequently change it prior to closings of the purchases - Yes, that was a real screw up all round.
Click to expand...

That's what lawyer's are paid the big coin for. ;)

It would be interesting to see what kind of first year budgeting issues will arise, and what kind of deficit may possibly come to light. The first year is the responsibility of the developer. If there is a sizable deficit arising from operations forward, residents may see a subsequent fee increase.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top