(06-02-2021, 04:19 PM)Votemac Wrote:

(06-02-2021, 03:12 PM)ac3r Wrote: Here's some bullshit drivel from The Record, as expected. Unsurprisingly, Debbie the Boomer Chapman is against it, stating that the city needs more parks...does she really expect them to build a park where this parking lot is? There does not seem to be any real argument in this op-ed piece, other than building tall, building bad, need more grass.

Edit: here is a digital version of the article: https://outline.com/mA3PST

Credit for the image goes to /u/KitchissipiIONer on Reddit.

Lu*sa D'Am*to articles are literal toilet paper

(06-04-2021, 08:55 AM)cherrypark Wrote:

(06-04-2021, 12:57 AM)taylortbb Wrote: It seems to me like 1 Vic is exactly how it should be done, and it bothers me this project has a parking access from Charles St. The fewer driveways crossing DTK sidewalks the better, that's what the laneway is for. I feel like the laneway congestion can't possibly be delaying people more than a few seconds.

Speaking as someone who walks in the area regularly, that part of Halls Lane is effectively a driveway in from a notably short block between Charles and Victoria intersections, and it leads to some less than ideal pedestrian interactions there because Victoria is so busy. Its in a tough spot but I don't think more cars entering Victoria there would necessarily be more favourable than driveway access to Charles.

(06-07-2021, 06:46 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-04-2021, 08:55 AM)cherrypark Wrote: Speaking as someone who walks in the area regularly, that part of Halls Lane is effectively a driveway in from a notably short block between Charles and Victoria intersections, and it leads to some less than ideal pedestrian interactions there because Victoria is so busy. Its in a tough spot but I don't think more cars entering Victoria there would necessarily be more favourable than driveway access to Charles.

Yes, but the laneway also accesses Francis. Access should just be restricted at Victoria for emergency only, and all vehicles should access off Francis.

Limiting driveways is something we should do more of, but ultimately something we are utterly pathetic about in the region, we've got plazas with 2-3-4 driveways in a few dozen meters onto an arterial stroad. It's like we're trying to make bad roads.

But specific locations are always justified somehow.

(11-24-2021, 10:07 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: There been some resubmission docs on Nov 11th, nothings changed drastically that I can see 

https://app2.kitchener.ca/AppDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting_Documents_List_617248.pdf

Not sure if this render is old or not. Also, is this now called TTK condos?? I hope not. Lol so we have DTK and TTK…


https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/us/ttk-condos

(11-24-2021, 10:07 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: There been some resubmission docs on Nov 11th, nothings changed drastically that I can see 

https://app2.kitchener.ca/AppDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting_Documents_List_617248.pdf

Not sure if this render is old or not. Also, is this now called TTK condos?? I hope not. Lol so we have DTK and TTK…


https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/us/ttk-condos

(11-25-2021, 12:56 PM)TMKM94 Wrote:

(11-24-2021, 10:07 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: There been some resubmission docs on Nov 11th, nothings changed drastically that I can see 

https://app2.kitchener.ca/AppDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting_Documents_List_617248.pdf

Not sure if this render is old or not. Also, is this now called TTK condos?? I hope not. Lol so we have DTK and TTK…


https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/us/ttk-condos

I noticed on Buzz Buzz Home website it says 40 Floors Not 44 Floors 🤔 I hope it's just a typo and not a reduction of floors. I wonder What TTK even stands for? That's Tall Kitchener? LOL

(11-24-2021, 10:57 PM)Bjays93 Wrote:

(11-24-2021, 10:07 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: There been some resubmission docs on Nov 11th, nothings changed drastically that I can see 

https://app2.kitchener.ca/AppDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting_Documents_List_617248.pdf

Not sure if this render is old or not. Also, is this now called TTK condos?? I hope not. Lol so we have DTK and TTK…


https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/us/ttk-condos

Holy hell I hope not. I had low enough expectations for the first iteration. yikes

(11-24-2021, 10:57 PM)Bjays93 Wrote:

(11-24-2021, 10:07 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: There been some resubmission docs on Nov 11th, nothings changed drastically that I can see 

https://app2.kitchener.ca/AppDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting_Documents_List_617248.pdf

Not sure if this render is old or not. Also, is this now called TTK condos?? I hope not. Lol so we have DTK and TTK…


https://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/us/ttk-condos

Holy hell I hope not. I had low enough expectations for the first iteration. yikes

(11-26-2021, 11:28 AM)cherrypark Wrote:

(11-24-2021, 10:57 PM)Bjays93 Wrote: Holy hell I hope not. I had low enough expectations for the first iteration. yikes

Maybe a difference in taste but I would take this look every time over the DTK condos wall of spandrel. At least the balconies here, and if they keep the curved corners, give it some more visual interest.

(11-26-2021, 12:01 PM)panamaniac Wrote:

(11-26-2021, 11:28 AM)cherrypark Wrote: Maybe a difference in taste but I would take this look every time over the DTK condos wall of spandrel. At least the balconies here, and if they keep the curved corners, give it some more visual interest.

The curved corners are likely to be the first thing to go in the inevitable cost-cutting.