01-12-2016, 05:11 PM
(01-12-2016, 05:01 PM)Owen Wrote:(01-12-2016, 04:51 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: ...and Bauer may well have only been able/willing to preserve the façade due to the density they were allowed to place on that lot, going many, many stories above the preserved façade height.
If we were to have a neighbourhood that could not even see the main street or density node having zero opposition to, or even support of increased height/density for a given site, it could even be a first for the region, let alone anywhere else.
But to be fair, the Bauer facade that was preserved was only a single floor - here we've got 4 floors. In addition, there is a lot of planning/urban design support for terracing additional floors above a facade as a way to minimize impact. To one of my earlier points, I doubt you would ever have a tall building here without enormous neighborhood opposition, but 6 or 7 stories is not inconceivable (top one or two being terraced back), with a lot of room to expand the first 4 floors behind the existing building on Shanley.
I would argue that there's a difference between terracing on a main road like King and doing so here. On a road like King, you might be trying to preserve the view from the sidewalk on the opposite side. You already expect that, say, the Igloo building in Kitchener will appear very different from the East side of King than it will from Charles (massively tall) than it will from Duke or Weber (obstructed by other mid-rise buildings).
This particular development would stand out in the whole neighbourhood with any additional floors, terracing or not.