General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours

[tomh009]

"(...) Ability to enter into bonusing agreements expires sep 2022, as a result of provincial legislation changes)”

Does any know more details about this?

[ac3r]

I sent an angry e-mail to SRM once telling them to stop designing shit...but I don't think that'll work lol. TBH I don't think there is much to do besides going to community meetings and objecting against the design choices and voicing concerns, for example with their bait and switch design of Duke Tower where the final building looked nothing like the original proposal. It'd be possible to do that in a way that does not make you a NIMBY, but nevertheless lets the developer know that you do not like their design choices and would object to approval unless it's improved. I could totally get behind that because SRM is absolute garbage.

Sadly, I don't think IN8 cares because they are choosing to work with SRM due to the fact they're a cheap firm to hire for designs. But as a result, they design garbage. Just compare their work to, for example, Hariri Pontarini Architects who design beautiful condo projects in Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver etc.

But what we really need in the region/cities is a design review panel like other cities have. Toronto has one that covers a lot of aspects of design:


I'd love to have something like that here in Waterloo Region one day...I'd happily join it myself! Not every building in Toronto is an award winner but you'd almost never see a disaster like Duke Tower built at the corner of Bay and Adelaide for a reason: their design panel would raise concerns and object to it.

How do those design panels get implemented? For example, how would we get one started in Waterloo Region?

It's a very long process. The one in Toronto took a long time to get started and only ended up becoming a trial project at first, until it was realized that it would be a benefit.

You'd first need a good proposal to sell it. Then you'd need to gather a series of professionals - architects, landscape architects, planners, engineers, perhaps even Indigenous people - to propose the idea to the city (or cities) and/or region, though more likely the cities as the region doesn't have much say in development. You'd need to make a good case as to why it would be a benefit for the city in question to have such a thing, and why it's a negative to not have one. You'd also need to organize a team, bring in some legal people (to combat potential conflicts of interest etc). Then as a team you'd need to develop goals, plans, strategies etc that can help define a design panels purpose, goals and so on. Impartiality is paramount with this stuff.

Ultimately, I don't know much. I know for sure you'd need to do that, then to pitch the idea to council and see what they say. They could vote yes, or no. You'd need to keep pressuring them about it. I think we would greatly benefit from implementing something like this - especially right now when the cities in this region have been experiencing a renaissance with a huge construction boom. It's as good a time as any to start having some sort of "bare minimum" of design principles that could be used to ensure the beautification of our cities, rather than wait. But as for how to get it started...I don't know the minutiae. If I were starting anything like this, I'd need a few months to plan and to get into contact with existing design panels in other cities. But I am actually totally open to the idea of having something like this here. I doubt I'd have the time to be involved much, but I'd happily help if I ever find any of my colleagues in the industry considering it.

[nms]

I didn't see it posted but I heard that the City is looking at hiking the costs for developers with park dedication to over $40k a unit. This may be speculation or inaccurate but what your thoughts if true?  Adding more costs isn't going to help with affordability but I was thinking that the City should have areas where that is waive to encourage dense developments close by rather then all over the map.

Perhaps its recognizing that the purchase prices for the units have increased dramatically since the park dedication fee was first established. If it was tied to a proportion of the purchase price (eg 0.5% of the purchase price) would make it rise automatically as prices rise.

[Zoo]

I didn't see it posted but I heard that the City is looking at hiking the costs for developers with park dedication to over $40k a unit. This may be speculation or inaccurate but what your thoughts if true?  Adding more costs isn't going to help with affordability but I was thinking that the City should have areas where that is waive to encourage dense developments close by rather then all over the map.

Perhaps its recognizing that the purchase prices for the units have increased dramatically since the park dedication fee was first established.  If it was tied to a proportion of the purchase price (eg 0.5% of the purchase price) would make it rise automatically as prices rise.

Tying it to purchase price becomes a slippery slope in my opinion. I see that Vaughan and Markham are looking at making changes to their programs and Vaughan is phasing increases in over time rather than in one shot. I can't imagine that there is enough money for $40,000 a door in extra profit. Also, I am not the expert on this area at all so I am not suggesting that I understand exactly how it works.

[cherrypark]

Record Editorial - Kitchener must rethink its downtown growth plans

Not super enthusiastic about the momentum pre-election season behind the downtown construction approval moratorium. Credit to Debbie for finding her wedge while presenting next to nothing in terms of what that looks like for timeline, substantive changes that could be made, or why this instead of accelerating staff review of the approvals system and parameters overall.

Proposing a stop order while presenting nothing constructive on the root causes of this "problem" or what is supposed to be changed is such a waste of time. Sort of like the waste of time having 4 committee nights for 660 Belmont to drop 1 story.

[Rainrider22]

"What makes Chapman’s response to this project especially valuable is that she’s not just opposing, she’s proposing. She’s calling for a moratorium on development in the core area until the city finishes reworking its downtown plan."

You are bang on, this is not a solution or a plan. It is simply saying put the brakes on any new development That is so backwards in thinking it isn't even funny. Speaks to Chapman's thinking process.

"This newspaper has long supported Waterloo Region’s hard country line and the intensification of its three cities. We backed light rail transit, too, long before regional council gave it the go-ahead. But we worry that cities such as Kitchener are adopting a confusing, patchwork approach to which major developments get a green light and which get a red one. We want redevelopment and realize it’s more profitable for developers to build as high as they can. But surely development should not only be about maximum profit. It must also be about maximum intelligent growth." The Record... You are a newspaper, I get it that it is an editorial, but what you want and what many people want, dont necessarily agree. Stay in your lane.

[Joedelay Highhoe]

All the belly aching for this:

"She’s raising legitimate objections that this project will have insufficient parking and create traffic problems in the surrounding area while failing to provide enough affordable units and, indeed, any three-bedroom units that would suit many families."

I've heard home-owning boomers make the same "no three bedroom units" argument. What they fail to realize is that a 3 bedroom unit in a building like this would easily cost 1M+. Any family desiring space with a million dollar budget would have no problem buying a detached house or townhouse in the region. These $800K concrete boxes are the new starter home, as sick as that sounds. It's a tough concept to grasp for the geriatrics who bought their first home 30+ years ago.

[KaiserWilhelmsBust]

Chapman isn't just clueless, she dangerously misguided and actively bad. We need to stop giving these groups a voice. Shame on the record for continuing to push their agenda.

[cherrypark]

If there is a shortage of desired multi-unit buildings incorporating 3 bedroom options which, as you say, are incredibly expensive floor plate area in a tower like this, perhaps the problem to address is developer incentives to do more with low to mid-rise and not with the official plan.

However the truth is, these are just virtuous oppositions that only become a concern to anyone when it's a tower proposed. Before then, not a single person in these heritage districts was lobbying the city to do more to build denser family homes - if anything, they were also opposing them the same as any other change.

[ijmorlan]

All the belly aching for this:

"She’s raising legitimate objections that this project will have insufficient parking and create traffic problems in the surrounding area while failing to provide enough affordable units and, indeed, any three-bedroom units that would suit many families."

I've heard home-owning boomers make the same "no three bedroom units" argument. What they fail to realize is that a 3 bedroom unit in a building like this would easily cost 1M+. Any family desiring space with a million dollar budget would have no problem buying a detached house or townhouse in the region. These $800K concrete boxes are the new starter home, as sick as that sounds. It's a tough concept to grasp for the geriatrics who bought their first home 30+ years ago.

So it doesn’t provide enough affordable units, and the solution to this is to require the provision of larger (and therefore more expensive) units, and to require each unit to include parking (and therefore be more expensive).

Makes sense!

If we’re going to go that way, I say every new single-family home fails to provide enough units. It uses a piece of land that could take a 6-apartment building and puts just one dwelling unit on it.

[ac3r]

I think I'll pass on taking urban planning suggestions few from some shitty local journalists writing for a dead newspaper that operates out of Toronto.

[jamincan]

Call me a NIMBY, but I'm not really convinced that a lot of these new projects like the TEK Tower are making even a tiny dent in the issue of housing affordability. I can't even comprehend who would consider buying those shoe box units for those prices to the point that I have a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that we're filling our cities with the real estate equivalent of hyped-up NFTs. I'm not sure a moratorium on development is the right response, but I'm also not sure that loosing the reins is the right response either and the conservative part of me is that it's better to wait and do nothing for the time being than it is to barrel ahead without better understanding of the problem and live with the wrong thing for the rest of our lives.

[cherrypark]

Call me a NIMBY, but I'm not really convinced that a lot of these new projects like the TEK Tower are making even a tiny dent in the issue of housing affordability. I can't even comprehend who would consider buying those shoe box units for those prices to the point that I have a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that we're filling our cities with the real estate equivalent of hyped-up NFTs. I'm not sure a moratorium on development is the right response, but I'm also not sure that loosing the reins is the right response either and the conservative part of me is that it's better to wait and do nothing for the time being than it is to barrel ahead without better understanding of the problem and live with the wrong thing for the rest of our lives.

Doesn't have to make you a NIMBY - its possible to be pro-development and simultaneously concerned that certain developments are not held to a sufficient quality or merit standard. Every TEK tower that goes up is setting back the argument that quality and livable condo/apartment developments are reasonable for 1-2 bed household units when they aren't all created equal.

To me: its less about loosening the reigns than it is whether we're wasting staff, council and public time on piecemeal battles over every development that leads to a proposal to just block them all indefinitely, vs. a clear eyed identification of what the actual supposed problems are and what can be done to adjust and focus work on system level changes.

The unproductive, stagnating preference of a vocal portion of opponents that would see a pause as a chance to catch up and block these kinds of higher density projects wholesale are not truly motivated by affordability, family oriented developments, or changing zoning. If they were, they would be concerned with the lack of as-of-right zoning permitting 3-6 story multi units in their heritage encirclement of downtown or the continued existence of enormous parking land use.

[danbrotherston]

We literally had a midrise development that preserved heritage buildings rejected on Frederick.

The claim to want to build good things instead of just more things is transparently false.

As transparent as the "Oh no, the traffic, and there isn't enough parking" bullshit.

I *might* argue for better developments, but I refuse to be associated in any way with these anti-development folks.

That being said, I know people who live in small apartments. There isn't anything wrong it, and some people don't mind it. If they're serving a market need, the problem is the lack of other units meeting other market needs, not that some people's needs are being met.

[ijmorlan]

Call me a NIMBY, but I'm not really convinced that a lot of these new projects like the TEK Tower are making even a tiny dent in the issue of housing affordability. I can't even comprehend who would consider buying those shoe box units for those prices to the point that I have a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that we're filling our cities with the real estate equivalent of hyped-up NFTs. I'm not sure a moratorium on development is the right response, but I'm also not sure that loosing the reins is the right response either and the conservative part of me is that it's better to wait and do nothing for the time being than it is to barrel ahead without better understanding of the problem and live with the wrong thing for the rest of our lives.

Maybe there will be a property crash and those units will become affordable.

Stranger things have happened.