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.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Station Park (née SIXO) | 28 + 20? + 12? + ? fl | Proposed
Was this site considered for downtown development fee exemptions?
Reply


When you say downtown development fee exemptions, does this mean some government break given to the developer that they would normally have to pay in a suburb? Is it common in other big cities, a la downtown Toronto etc?
Reply
(01-07-2019, 10:26 AM)Spokes Wrote: Was this site considered for downtown development fee exemptions?

No, iirc.
Reply
(01-07-2019, 10:49 AM)Momo26 Wrote: When you say downtown development fee exemptions, does this mean some government break given to the developer that they would normally have to pay in a suburb? Is it common in other big cities, a la downtown Toronto etc?

Any time a development is started, there are fees the developer has to pay to the city.  For a long time Kitchener waived those development fees in Downtown to encourage development projects but that is stopping soon.

Did I get it right?
Reply
(01-07-2019, 11:19 AM)Spokes Wrote:
(01-07-2019, 10:49 AM)Momo26 Wrote: When you say downtown development fee exemptions, does this mean some government break given to the developer that they would normally have to pay in a suburb? Is it common in other big cities, a la downtown Toronto etc?

Any time a development is started, there are fees the developer has to pay to the city.  For a long time Kitchener waived those development fees in Downtown to encourage development projects but that is stopping soon.

Did I get it right?

Yup. The fees in theory should pay for the shared infrastructure that the development will rely on, i.e., we (the city) payed to build sewers to take away waste water and storm water, private developers should have to pay for the right to benefit from that.

In practice, I'm not sure how closely tied these fees are to the value or cost of the service they're paying for.  Specifically, large developments in DTK *should* pay less than suburban sprawl developments because they make more efficient use of this infrastructure, but I have no idea if they do.
Reply
(01-07-2019, 11:29 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(01-07-2019, 11:19 AM)Spokes Wrote: Any time a development is started, there are fees the developer has to pay to the city.  For a long time Kitchener waived those development fees in Downtown to encourage development projects but that is stopping soon.

Did I get it right?

Yup. The fees in theory should pay for the shared infrastructure that the development will rely on, i.e., we (the city) payed to build sewers to take away waste water and storm water, private developers should have to pay for the right to benefit from that.

In practice, I'm not sure how closely tied these fees are to the value or cost of the service they're paying for.  Specifically, large developments in DTK *should* pay less than suburban sprawl developments because they make more efficient use of this infrastructure, but I have no idea if they do.

Yes they do, at least to some extent, although I don't know the extent to which they do or don't reflect actual cost of service:

https://www.kitchener.ca/en/building-and...nt-Charges
Reply
(01-07-2019, 11:41 AM)panamaniac Wrote:
(01-07-2019, 11:29 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Yup. The fees in theory should pay for the shared infrastructure that the development will rely on, i.e., we (the city) payed to build sewers to take away waste water and storm water, private developers should have to pay for the right to benefit from that.

In practice, I'm not sure how closely tied these fees are to the value or cost of the service they're paying for.  Specifically, large developments in DTK *should* pay less than suburban sprawl developments because they make more efficient use of this infrastructure, but I have no idea if they do.

Yes they do, at least to some extent, although I don't know the extent to which they do or don't reflect actual cost of service:

https://www.kitchener.ca/en/building-and...nt-Charges

Thanks!  That is interesting, I'm glad there is some consideration.
Reply
(01-07-2019, 10:26 AM)Spokes Wrote: Was this site considered for downtown development fee exemptions?

Nope, I believe that the boundary stopped at Victoria. I remember there was talk about extending the boundary but that never happened.
Reply
I had a feeling it was Victoria but wasn't sure. Thanks!
Reply
Article on the sale of Sixo to VanMar
Reply
Interesting. Haven't been by to see the new sign (as the image shows in that article). You can already tell just by the design/color scheme alone, that the whole feel of the project has changed.
Reply
$30 million.  Wow.  

I found this interesting:

Quote:Zehr Group is still quite keen on the potential of the site, but ended up selling the property, which includes Zehr Group's offices, because it needed a financial partner in such a large project, said Zac Zehr, the group's manager of development.

"Sixo was, we felt, too big for our company alone," he said. But when Zehr Group put out a request for proposals for a partner on the project, it became clear that potential partners were interested in owning the land, so "a sale would have to happen," Zehr said.
...

Zehr Group is still involved in the Sixo project as a property manager helping to look for tenants.

Interesting that they're still involved
Reply
Perhaps a bit of a consolation prize. From what I have heard, at least 1 building (of no less than 4!) will be made-for-rent. Zehr might get kicked back the equivalent of 1 month for every lease signed (usually the going rate) - chump change obviously. But more so involved to keep their name in it/have name published in the plethora of news articles/coverage that will be coming in the next few years and beyond.

This development is supposed to be the IT development folks. Again, from what I've been told - like nothing ever seen before in the K-W region.
Reply
The SIXO plan included a rental tower, "west" of the mansion.

What do you mean by "supposed to be the IT development"?
Reply
Original plan had an office building too, is that the "IT Development"?
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links