Welcome Guest!
WIn 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:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Urban Cambridge Updates and Rumours
#81
Linden Crossing on Eagle Street in Preston is now inhabited.
Reply
#82
Newest rumour: Dickson Bowl is going to close in May and be torn down with a condo tower replacing it.
Reply
#83
Given the opposition thrown at the Southworks proposal, it'll be interesting to see how this goes down. Location would fit well with the end of ION phase 2 line and the redevelopment it is primarily built to promote.
Reply
#84
(03-06-2017, 12:45 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Given the opposition thrown at the Southworks proposal, it'll be interesting to see how this goes down. Location would fit well with the end of ION phase 2 line and the redevelopment it is primarily built to promote.

It can join in with Petes Junk and the laundromat across the street and what I presume was an old factory located behind pete's junk.
Reply
#85
Sometimes I wonder if the bus terminal itself wouldn't be a good redevelopment site. A site closer to the highway would probably suit intercity buses much better, and LRT should mean fewer bus routes terminating in Galt.
Reply
#86
A new low-rise "affordable condo" development is under way near George Street and Blair Road in Galt. The existing low-rise apartment building has been demolished and the site cleared for the foundation pouring.

Also in Galt news: the pedestrian bridge architects have walked away from the project: http://www.therecord.com/news-story/7228...m-project/
Reply
#87
http://www.therecord.com/news-story/7228...m-project/

Cambridge politicians went with the cheapest option for a pedestrian bridge over the river, and destroyed the design so much that the architects are backing away, refusing to have their names on this piece.

Let this be of note, coincidentally, that on this day in Kitchener, we hear of a proposal on Margaret (http://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/s...9#pid34839) where in order to please Heritage, one of two adjacent buildings will be 60% shorter, and contain less than one fifth of the units of its neighbour. For the sake of heritage in a very tucked away area will we defend this choice.

But in Cambridge, crossing the river, being one of the few objects able to be seen up and down the shoreline, and one of the only structures crossing the river, well, we actually don't need the heritage features and details we originally said were critical, because that costs some money, and it's clearly not worth it.

*facepalm*
Reply
#88
Sad sad decision on the bridge. Opportunity wasted IMO
Reply
#89
Amazing how the politicians' opinions of the project alter with the change in price...
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#90
Sounds like the bridge was drastically over budget.

Some architects will work with you on value engineering. Others won't.  It seems like this one didn't want to compromise their vision.

There's nothing wrong with trying to build to budget.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 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