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
Schneiders Site Redevelopment
#46
It certainly seems possible that there was once a rail spur serving the plant, long since removed, that officially had its property belong to CN that Schneiders just assumed was theirs despite title never changing hands.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#47
(03-14-2016, 06:42 PM)KevinL Wrote: It certainly seems possible that there was once a rail spur serving the plant, long since removed, that officially had its property belong to CN that Schneiders just assumed was theirs despite title never changing hands.

Yes, there was indeed a rail spur at the back of the property, where livestock used to be unloaded back in the day.
Reply
#48
(03-13-2016, 11:25 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Indeed!

I figure nothing of consequence, so why not post it. Whether it's true or not. At any rate, it's 1 step up from "Something's gonna happen at Charles and Gaukel, probably".

I love that this has become our running joke.
Reply
#49
(03-15-2016, 10:31 AM)Spokes Wrote:
(03-13-2016, 11:25 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Indeed!

I figure nothing of consequence, so why not post it. Whether it's true or not. At any rate, it's 1 step up from "Something's gonna happen at Charles and Gaukel, probably".

I love that this has become our running joke.

Haha... you guys are funny. Maybe i'll just delete the charles/gaukel thread and that's it. So incredibly slow, no news on it... oh well.
Reply
#50
(03-13-2016, 07:27 PM)GtwoK Wrote: Heard from my girlfriend that apparently her cousin, who owns a housing development company, has purchased half of the Schneider's property. Supposedly, there was also a struggle with CN about some long-forgotten property ownership. I know no further info than that.

This hasn't even come close to closing the sale yet: http://www.therecord.com/news-story/6394...ve-buyers/
Reply
#51
I'm hearing the info through someone who heard it from someone else, so it's quite possible that by "purchased" she meant "bid on". That being said, it's not like there's any new information to extrapolate from "a housing development company placed a bid on a plot of land".
Reply
#52
Haven't heard any news regarding this in a while, this article from March suspected information would likely be available within a few months.


http://www.570news.com/2016/03/17/multip...kitchener/
Reply
#53
I heard a few weeks ago that there was a serious offer from a developer from Chicago, but it fell through, so the market is up on the market again.
Reply
#54
A blog post from Frank Etherington dealing with a vision for these lands:

https://franketherington.ca/2017/07/04/f.../#comments
Reply
#55
(07-09-2017, 06:56 AM)rangersfan Wrote: A blog post from Frank Etherington dealing with a vision for these lands:

https://franketherington.ca/2017/07/04/f.../#comments

Did anyone on WRC attend the public meeting?  I thought that the idea was to first form a public committee to develop design recommendations.
Reply
#56
The land is still for sale correct?
One last the comments on Mr. Etherington's post recommends building single detached dwellings on the site, I am hoping the opposite occurs.
Reply
#57
(07-09-2017, 10:46 AM)rangersfan Wrote: The land is still for sale correct?
One last the comments on Mr. Etherington's post recommends building single detached dwellings on the site, I am hoping the opposite occurs.

I saw that and had a negative reaction, but it wasn't clear to me whether by "single family homes", he meant detached houses.  I could see an element of rowhouses or stacked townhouses incorporated into the eventual project.  I was a bit surprised at Etherington's suggestion that the warehouses might be saved.  I would have seen the Borden Ave side as the most suited to low-rise development.  Although it may be inevitable, I don't see the site as crying out for high-rise development - good density could be ensured at mid-rise. istm.
Reply
#58
I don't think high-rise residences are a requirement here, no. I would like to see much of the property be midrise, and definitely mixed use - both commercial to serve the residents, and employment space like offices or even low-impact industrial.

A good amount of public space would be key - naturalizing the creek is a big step, but some small parkland and perhaps a public square would also be welcome.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#59
(07-09-2017, 10:46 AM)rangersfan Wrote: The land is still for sale correct?
One last the comments on Mr. Etherington's post recommends building single detached dwellings on the site, I am hoping the opposite occurs.

One persons opinion. I do like Franks idea's though, if it could be implemented. I would think the mid-high-rises would have to be in the back of project, as he said, simply to appease any NIMBY's that are guaranteed to show up if it's fronted on Courtland.

Personally, though, I would like to see a convention centre there too. I know Bingeman's had some plans way back when, unsure if it was this site.

It would also be an alright site if the city got serious with a new arena, but we're probably not going to see anything like that.

Whatever the case, unsure what all could be salvaged from those buildings. You wouldn't think ground contamination would be an issue, but what do I know,
Reply
#60
(07-09-2017, 12:33 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(07-09-2017, 10:46 AM)rangersfan Wrote: The land is still for sale correct?
One last the comments on Mr. Etherington's post recommends building single detached dwellings on the site, I am hoping the opposite occurs.

One persons opinion.   I do like Franks idea's though, if it could be implemented. I would think the mid-high-rises would have to be in the back of project, as he said, simply to appease any NIMBY's that are guaranteed to show up if it's fronted on Courtland.

Personally, though, I would like to see a convention centre there too. I know Bingeman's had some plans way back when, unsure if it was this site.

It would also be an alright site if the city got serious with a new arena, but we're probably not going to see anything like that.

Whatever the case, unsure what all could be salvaged from those buildings.  You wouldn't think ground contamination would be an issue, but what do I know,

There are unliikely to be any NIMBYs of consequence in that neighbourhood.  Unless they've somehow forgotten what the neighbourhood has been living next to for the past century.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)