Six-Sixty Belmont | 13 fl | Proposed

[cherrypark]

Is anyone able to copy the story into here?

https://archive.md/SDW7J

[Joedelay Highhoe]

Is anyone able to copy the story into here?

You can also open the link in an incognito tab if you're browsing on a desktop.

[Joedelay Highhoe]

There are a few gems in there

“How do you feel that’s not affordable?”

Sorkin responded: “When I listen to you, I have no reason to change my mind that the deal is done. You are acting as a cheerleader for this proposal.”

One woman said the building, which she called a “monstrosity,” would create too much light pollution.

“I can barely see the major constellations,” said Robin Waldman. “The reason I left Toronto is because I couldn’t see any stars.”

[CP42]

Is anyone able to copy the story into here?

https://archive.md/SDW7J

Very well put by Luisa.

[ac3r]

There are a few gems in there

One woman said the building, which she called a “monstrosity,” would create too much light pollution.

“I can barely see the major constellations,” said Robin Waldman. “The reason I left Toronto is because I couldn’t see any stars.”

Ah yes...stargazing in the 10th largest CMA on a heavily illuminated road minutes from downtown. Can't forget about those people.

[Rainrider22]

There’s an unfortunate sense of entitlement in the Belmont Village discussion
The people who live in the area make it clear: they don’t want an 11-storey building. What about those who would like to move to the area, Luisa D’Amato asks

[size=1]By Luisa D’AmatoRecord Columnist
Fri., Feb. 11, 2022timer4 min. read[/size]



We think we live in an innovative, welcoming community. And we do, until someone wants to change something.

This week, dozens of people told Kitchener councillors that the sky will fall if a proposed condo tower, planned on a site near Belmont Avenue and Glasgow Street, is allowed to proceed.

The zoning law allows for an eight-storey building. The developer wants permission to expand the building to 11 storeys, with 132 one- and two-bedroom units.

By downtown Kitchener standards, where a 39-storey tower is being built and a 44-storey building is on the way, 11 storeys is not even worth mentioning.

But this is Westmount, one of the most exclusive neighbourhoods in the city, where many of the residents are not used to being refused.

They smelled imminent defeat, and it wasn’t pretty.

“The deal is done,” said Rafael Sorkin.

He predicted that the distinctive Belmont Village shopping area will be “destroyed” if the building goes ahead and paves the way for other condo towers to arrive.

He criticized the proposal from developer Zehr Group as being too focused on profit, and said it is “running roughshod” over values” such as inclusivity and standing in the area.

That highlighted, for her, another group “that we rarely hear from at these kinds of meetings, but need to consider nonetheless, and that is future residents,” she said.

If someone asked them what they thought about an 11-storey building in Belmont Village, she suggested they would likely be in favour of it.

She said no building can be everything to everyone, but that this building provides a different kind of housing than the many single-family homes that dominate the neighbourhood.

While diversity of housing is important, the 2016 census has revealed that 60 per cent of households in Kitchener are made up of either one or two people, So clearly their needs should be met.

She went on to address the many concerns expressed that the proposed condo tower was not affordable housing. But, she asked, why are condo towers so often pointed at as the “bad guys” in this discussion, when a condominium costs roughly half what a single detached home costs?

Meanwhile, she pointed out that the developer has offered a $250,000 contribution to Menno Homes, which builds non-profit affordable housing and “is able to leverage (that donation) into much more than any private developer could do on their own.”

It was a lot to think about.

Coun. Margaret Johnston suggests the city should conduct a planning review of Belmont Village. Councillors will vote on that review as well as the developer’s request on Feb. 28.

Between now and then, let them consider the needs of the people who would like to move into the neighbourhood as carefully as the opinions of those who are already there.

[tomh009]

Luisa d'Amato, voice of reason? https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...ssion.html

Thank goodness for Melissa Bowman, who came on more than three hours into the meeting and invited participants to look at the issue with fresh eyes.

She said she noticed many of the people who spoke were homeowners of long standing in the area.

That highlighted, for her, another group “that we rarely hear from at these kinds of meetings, but need to consider nonetheless, and that is future residents,” she said.

If someone asked them what they thought about an 11-storey building in Belmont Village, she suggested they would likely be in favour of it.

Melissa rocks!

[danbrotherston]

Melissa very much does indeed rock!

FWIW....it's surprising to see D'Amato on the right side of a discussion...

It's surprising because while she has in the past been strongly divisive against cyclists, she is here, arguing for inclusivity to new people.

[Lebronj23]

These people acting like they are proposing the Gehry Towers there - it’s an 11 story building for crying out loud

https://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/gehry-towers

[Rainrider22]

Good article in the paper commenting on all the support for this project. The letters and emails don't seem to get the same voice or acknowledgement as people who attend the meeting. In my experience, people that take the time to put words to paper often have busy lives and may not be able to attend a meeting, so for them this is the way to voice their opinion. I hope counsel takes the letters into serious consideration.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...llage.html

[cherrypark]

Good article in the paper commenting on all the support for this project.  The letters and emails don't seem to get the same voice or acknowledgement as people who attend the meeting.  In my experience, people that take the time to put words to paper often have busy lives and may not be able to attend a meeting, so for them this is the way to voice their opinion.  I hope counsel takes the letters into serious consideration.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...llage.html

Glad for Liz (and Luisa) taking a balanced approach and elevating some of the less vocal opinions through her writing. This project is a clear case study that a parade of local anti-change residents to council does not reflect all of the stakeholders in the decision. I hope council takes note of their position and the benefits when one worries a bit less about 2-3 extra stories on a building.

[danbrotherston]

Good article in the paper commenting on all the support for this project.  The letters and emails don't seem to get the same voice or acknowledgement as people who attend the meeting.  In my experience, people that take the time to put words to paper often have busy lives and may not be able to attend a meeting, so for them this is the way to voice their opinion.  I hope counsel takes the letters into serious consideration.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...llage.html

Glad for Liz (and Luisa) taking a balanced approach and elevating some of the less vocal opinions through her writing. This project is a clear case study that a parade of local anti-change residents to council does not reflect all of the stakeholders in the decision. I hope council takes note of their position and the benefits when one worries a bit less about 2-3 extra stories on a building.

This article was excellent. Put things in context. I feel like it can actually move the dial on projects like this.

[cherrypark]

Amendment passed at council last night approving 10 stories (1 story reduction proposed by Zehr) with sale of the laneway from Belmont to Claremont (i.e. - behind 678 as well, which I believe Zehr Group also owns). Sounds like Councillor Johnson's motion to have a planning review done is probably the next order of business in the saga.

Delegates were a local resident in an 11 story condo speaking in favour and criticizing the weight of aesthetic arguments; delegate lawyering (by VP and Gen. Counsel at Christie Digital, no less) that the by-law notwithstanding clause is unclear on whether 50% increase pertains to both 8 stories or 25m height should be (as 'a story' is not defined, saying it should be a hard cap at 8 (the the planner clearly stated she spoke to the original drafters that was not the intent); and then some further misplaced lawyering bordering on conspiracy about a missed signature on the hard copy submissions.

For: Ioannidis, Johnston, Davey, Schneider, Galloway-Sealock, Singh, Vrbanovic, Michaud
Opposed: Chapman, Marsh, Gazzola

Not sure the loss of the extra floor is going to appease the hardest opponents but I personally think the process has landed on a good final development in spite of a question whether the effort spent was truly worth it. Here's hoping Zehr maintains their vision for the laneway. Zac made mention that Victoria St. Market is in discussions as one of the ground floor tenants, which I am not sure if it was new news.

Record article: https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...llage.html

[danbrotherston]

I think it's better than an outright rejection.

But I'm so tired of this "fake compromise" that politicians do. Nobody who opposes this will be satisfied with 10 stories, but there'll be a dozen or more families or individuals who won't be able to find housing in the neighbourhood.

[Rainrider22]

Dan, I couldn't agree with you more ! One story will not make any difference on the impact of the neighborhood. It is so typical of our local politicians. Penny wise and pound foolish.