Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Walter | 24m | 5 fl | U/C
#16
Yes, balance is tricky, and it’s hard to be objective about it. I don’t think I suggested that respecting the existing means that only a two-storey building can be located near existing two-storey buildings. Walter is by and large a two storey street, but I don’t see a six-storey building as being inappropriate given the proximity to King. I don’t agree that existing residents should have no input (which I know is not what you are saying), but I also think they cannot reasonably expect their neighbourhood to be static.

I’m very interested in this one because my neighbourhood is equidistant from King, on the other side of King, and looks and feels (the same vintage, similar scale) much like Walter. There are possibilities for reuse (that have been identified) on my street that will bring increased density and all that comes with it. I would expect that, if buildings very much taller than those existing be approved, that shading and privacy be considered, but I would welcome the increased density.
Reply
#17
I agree. The proper word is "expect" not "respect". If I buy a bungalow on King St, I shouldn't be surprised if ten years from now there is a high rise next to me. If on the other hand I buy a split level in a cul-de-sac in suburbia, I have every right to be shocked by a highrise proposal.

Even then, sometimes things change and zoning has to be revamped. In this case the best idea is to push for a swift change that maximizes the return for those who choose to sell. For example houses on Columbia doubled in price when mid-rises were approved about 6 years ago.
Reply
#18
(10-30-2014, 09:17 AM)BuildingScout Wrote: I agree. The proper word is "expect" not "respect". If I buy a bungalow on King St, I shouldn't be surprised if ten years from now there is a high rise next to me. If on the other hand I buy a split level in a cul-de-sac in suburbia, I have every right to be shocked by a highrise proposal.

Even then, sometimes things change and zoning has to be revamped. In this case the best idea is to push for a swift change that maximizes the return for those who choose to sell. For example houses on Columbia doubled in price when mid-rises were approved about 6 years ago.

This is why it is very important to look at a City's Official Plan and Land Use Maps to understand the long term vision. While there are always deviations and amendments made to the Official Plan, those land use designations and their associated policies set the tone for zoning (i.e. general form, heights and permitted uses). Especially after a new Official Plan is released, the existing zoning may not conform to the land use designation for the property. So it is not enough to simply look at the zoning to determine what could be built around you. Over time, a municipality will update their zoning to conform to the Official Plan - Kitchener has recently initiated this. Often, developers are ahead of the municipality in this respect and seek zoning amendments themselves to advance their developments. With that said, the local municipalities generally attempt to preserve the majority of existing suburban neighbourhoods (post 1960's) because their associated road networks, lot sizing and congruent housing form are less conducive to new higher density development. That's not to say that certain parcels within suburban developments aren't designated for higher density development though.

The lesson here, always consult the Official Plan for an understanding of what could be.
Reply
#19
This one's been reduced to 5 storeys, recommended for approval by council.  Again.
Reply
#20
Kitchener council to vote Monday on two big apartment plans along LRT route


November 15, 2014 | Waterloo Region Record | Link

Quote:KITCHENER — Two controversial apartment project plans along the planned LRT route have been modified and return to Kitchener council on Monday with staff recommendations for approval.

On Sept. 15, city council heard objections from neighbouring property owners and deferred considering approval of twin, highrise apartment towers at 100 Victoria St. S., and a smaller building at 100 Walter St. beside King Edward School.

Both projects have been reshaped in an effort to appease neighbouring property owners worried about the height of the buildings. Both also include more units, say city staff reports going to the 7 p.m. council meeting at City Hall, 200 King St. W.

Momentum Development's project on Victoria near King Street started with two residential towers, at 16 and 19 storeys each, including three storeys of retail space at the base. The revamped plan now has towers of 17 and 21 storeys, and moves the buildings away from an abutting property line along Arthur Place. The number of residential units has increased from 276 to 306, while the commercial space was reduced.

The minimum setback from Arthur Place was originally 1.1 metres. Now it's 12 metres.

Lakeshore group also plans an apartment tower on the abutting Arthur Street property. It sent a letter to the council meeting, asking that Momentum's project be put on hold until the city develops comprehensive "tower separation guidelines" that both it and Momentum must follow.

City staff recommend the revamped Momentum project be approved now, after reviewing tower separation guideline in other similar-sized cities.

Vanguard Developments now wants to build a five-storey, 34-unit building in a century-old neighbourhood of two-storey homes on Walter Street. The previous proposal called for a six-storey building with 31 larger apartments.

City staff recommend approval for Vanguard's plan as well, even though zoning for the area only allows a three-storey building.

Both projects are within walking distance of the planned light rail transit line along King Street through that area of Kitchener.
Reply
#21
More, smaller units vs. an extra storey. I doubt the neighbours will be mollified, but we'll see on Monday.
Reply
#22
Kind of a shame to see a reduction of commercial space on Victoria though.
Reply
#23
My understanding of the process is that if Council fails to pass these two projects that the developers would go to the OMB which would give the City of Kitchener less say in the outcomes.
Reply
#24
The owner of the Arthur Pl properties has already said if they ARE passed he'll take the city to the OMB
Reply
#25
Did this get approved last night?
Reply
#26
Echoing Spokes' question, does anyone know what happened to this project? I wouldn't be surprised if Council deferred this matter again.
Reply
#27
As per the Council Minutes from November 17th, City Council approved the revised 5-storey multiple dwelling with 34 units, rather than the original 6-storey multiple dwelling with 31 units. Unfortunately, the 3-bedroom units that were slated for the original development proposal were not included in the revised proposal.
Reply
#28
Do we know how many parking spots are planned? I'm glad this has passed, but it's not so nice that no larger units were included as a result of neighbours' comments. Still, if there is not an over-abundance of parking, I would say this is a good development.
Reply
#29
I'm pretty sure that there were 34 parking spots planned as part of the original development proposal and that the number of parking spots has stayed the same for the revised proposal.
Reply
#30
Thanks. More than one spot per unit? Yuck.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)