Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed

[cherrypark]

Meeting tonight was pretty civil by comparison to the delegates for 660 Belmont, minus one pretty loaded question on "whats in it for you" towards the developer. A lot of checking GSP's work on the shadows from 3-4 concerned citizens that had done their own sketch-up models, which was definitely not something I expected to hear more than once.

I think this proposal is really solid and hope the debate on height and shadows peters off. Did seem that Eric's comments on forthcoming zoning changes stifled a bit of the stick to the plan angle. This group felt more earnest in the quality and attention to the building impact than similar presentations from others downtown (thinking of IN8/SRM).

[jeffster]

I wonder why the huge difference between the very small Belmont development vs the very large development on Park and Victoria?

Maybe NIMBYS want little children to be eaten by rogue sharks, so they don't want this development to be stopped. Less kids equals more fun!

[CP42]

minus one pretty loaded question on "whats in it for you" towards the developer.

That guy has been at every meeting I’ve been to, throwing out all of the classic NIMBY lines. 

Regarding a question like that, some people just seem laser focused on the fact that someone may profit off of a project, without considering the several benefits it will have to others in the community. That is just a fact of development. If there was no profit, nobody would put up hundreds of millions of dollars to build it.

[clasher]

I wanted to ask that guy if he'd give me his house.

[jeremyroman]

Liz Monteiro's piece in The Record today was fairly positive (and the meeting itself went fairly well, in my opinion).

[danbrotherston]

That is quite positive, although I still had to laugh because it starts with the usual contradictory fears, not enough parking and too much traffic.

[Chris]

Meeting tonight was pretty civil by comparison to the delegates for 660 Belmont, minus one pretty loaded question on "whats in it for you" towards the developer. A lot of checking GSP's work on the shadows from 3-4 concerned citizens that had done their own sketch-up models, which was definitely not something I expected to hear more than once.

I think this proposal is really solid and hope the debate on height and shadows peters off. Did seem that Eric's comments on forthcoming zoning changes stifled a bit of the stick to the plan angle. This group felt more earnest in the quality and attention to the building impact than similar presentations from others downtown (thinking of IN8/SRM).

I really like this development for this location. I found GSP good to deal with. When they first held meetings for Victoria Commons they listened to concerns and provided info on why they made the decisions and suggestions for the development and neighbourhood. They even shared some presentation materials via email if you requested them.

[nms]

I wonder why the huge difference between the very small Belmont development vs the very large development on Park and Victoria?

As the saying goes: "Location, Location, Location"

660 Belmont is walking distance from the Westmount neighbourhood and in the middle of a largely developed commercial space with a well-established neighbourhood feel.

Victoria & Park is in an already changing landscape with rough and tumble industrial and commercial architecture.

[Spokes]

When is this being voted on?

[Lebronj23]

Looks like this is going to Council on June 13th

https://pub-kitchener.escribemeetings.co...ng=English

[CP42]

Community comments… let me know what you think:

https://pub-kitchener.escribemeetings.co...entId=3810

[ac3r]

Lots of NIMBY nonsense, lots of support. I hope the City of Kitchener approves it without forcing this developer to go back to the drawing board and delay this for another year (just for more people to complain in round 2). What I find hilarious about these letters is the sheer amount of people who are acting like they don't already live in the downtown. "First of all, it's too tall for where it is located! In the DR core a building like that makes sense." My dude...the Victoria and Park intersection is downtown. Downtown isn't limited to King Street.

[clasher]

I emailed Debbie Chapman supporting this. The zoom meeting I went to was kinda funny, some people had their shadow study that claimed basically the opposite of what the developer's shadow study claimed... can't remember the details about it though, I dunno if it'd be in the minutes or if someone was even taking minutes or a recording.

[westwardloo]

I also Emailed Debbie Chapman. I encourage all on this forum to do the same. Do not let NIMBY's determine the cities housing policy. 

https://www.kitchener.ca/en/council-and-...apman.aspx

[Lebronj23]

Iv never seen so much opposition than to this project, 200 pages worth lol. I really hope this goes ahead, it looks like staff is recommending it be approved, that’s a start