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.

Dear WRConnected Users: Three whole years! We've grown so much over the past three years, and much of that is because of you, the amazing WRConnected Users. But like any other website, there are costs associated with running it. To this point it has been funded out of my own pocket. As some of you may already know, we accept donations. Some of you have made donations (thank you!). This helps cover all of the background costs associated with running this site. If every user were to donate $1 we would more than cover our yearly expenses. If WRConnected is useful to you, take a minute and help keep it online for another year. Any donation is helpful. Thank you.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Urban Cambridge Updates and Rumours
#91
It's not really any less ‘heritage’; the original GRR bridge there was plain and functional.
Reply
#92
No, there's not, I'm just pointing out the inherent contradiction, where council will demand heritage fit, style, size from developments, no matter the cost in terms of finishes or potential units foregone.

But when they are constructing a far more visible object in a protected viewscape, they toss those constraints right out the window.
Reply
#93
(04-06-2017, 12:27 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: No, there's not, I'm just pointing out the inherent contradiction, where council will demand heritage fit, style, size from developments, no matter the cost in terms of finishes or potential units foregone.

But when they are constructing a far more visible object in a protected viewscape, they toss those constraints right out the window.

It’s easy to spend other people’s (developers’) money.
Reply
#94
Instead of a simple bridge, they should build a space for people to enjoy the river. Think of the piers around LA or in Florida. Build it wide enough (at least in a segment of the bridge) to be able to have kiosks, snack bars, etc. Those things provide a revenue stream towards the cost and attract people.
Reply
#95
(04-06-2017, 09:15 AM)KevinL Wrote: Amazing how the politicians' opinions of the project alter with the change in price...

If they went for the 'over budget' design option, everyone would bitch about how they can't stick to budget.  They would also probably need to go for more rounds of studies ...

Good to just see it getting done.
Reply
#96
I'd be happy if they just used a regular old girder bridge like you find on railways all over. Would be a nice shout-out to its former use.
Reply
#97
Would it be possible to put up the no-frills version of the bridge first, and add some enhancements later? I think as time goes on it may become more popular and accepted, and thus more politically feasible to upgrade.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#98
The bridge is kind of a waste, there is a bridge 3 minutes walk from there and the main street bridge is 5 minutes away.
Reply
#99
It's in a rapidly urbanizing section of the core that could benefit from the connectivity. It also helps that it will not carry vehicles - pedestrians can have a more peaceful river crossing and enjoy the downtown experience more.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
The former South Waterloo Agricultural Society could see new life as a mixed use project, the idea has been pitched by its new owner to the city.

http://m.therecord.com/news-story/730627...tail-space-
Reply
Sounds like a good plan to me. It's a bit cut off from the rest of town, but could bring a lot of attention to the area.
Reply
I thought this was a new thing, but Google Maps suggests it's been like this since September: this building in Preston is fenced off with the windows broken out. With a new gas station on one side and a seemingly occupied building set back on the other side, I can't imagine there's redevelopment potential, but it's not impossible.
Reply
Hope I'm posting this in the right section.

Cambridge councillors approve Gaslight District proposal

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/kitch...-1.4151452
Reply
Psst: http://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/s...645&page=3
Reply
Ooops! Thank you, DHLawrence.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)