+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Land Development and Real Estate (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Urban Areas (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed (/showthread.php?tid=1626)
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - ac3r - 10-26-2021
(10-25-2021, 09:36 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Where did you find the shadow impact analysis?
It's in the urban design brief I linked here: https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/showthread.php?tid=1626&pid=96950#pid96950
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - JeffH - 10-26-2021
(10-25-2021, 11:20 AM)westwardloo Wrote:(10-25-2021, 10:17 AM)taylortbb Wrote: I don't know the specific developer, but they're based in Toronto and this is their first project in the region. So it's not one of the usual suspects.This is the best news I have heard all day! Finally Toronto players are recognizing the potential of the region. This should bode well for the quality of proposals across the region.
Yeah....Toronto Developers........expect Toronto pricing of north of $ 1000/ft for condos........
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - panamaniac - 10-26-2021
The documents, if I read them correctly, suggest that the "affordable" 450 sq ft units would go starting at $368G.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - CP42 - 10-26-2021
(10-26-2021, 10:02 AM)panamaniac Wrote: The documents, if I read them correctly, suggest that the "affordable" 450 sq ft units would go starting at $368G.Unfortunately, with the way the market is trending, that doesn't seem that far from reality by the time this is built.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - tomh009 - 10-26-2021
(10-26-2021, 10:02 AM)panamaniac Wrote: The documents, if I read them correctly, suggest that the "affordable" 450 sq ft units would go starting at $368G.
These are not income-geared, so not useful to (most of?) the people waiting for affordable housing in the region. But $368K (or possibly somewhat less) is certainly far more attainable than the $500-600K that single-family houses sell for now.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - panamaniac - 10-26-2021
(10-26-2021, 11:15 AM)Vtomh009 Wrote:True, although when one compares the cost per sqft ...(10-26-2021, 10:02 AM)panamaniac Wrote: The documents, if I read them correctly, suggest that the "affordable" 450 sq ft units would go starting at $368G.
These are not income-geared, so not useful to (most of?) the people waiting for affordable housing in the region. But $368K (or possibly somewhat less) is certainly far more attainable than the $500-600K that single-family houses sell for now.
”Affordable” seems to have become something only the wealthier half of the population can afford.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - tomh009 - 10-26-2021
(10-26-2021, 11:25 AM)panamaniac Wrote:(10-26-2021, 11:15 AM)Vtomh009 Wrote: These are not income-geared, so not useful to (most of?) the people waiting for affordable housing in the region. But $368K (or possibly somewhat less) is certainly far more attainable than the $500-600K that single-family houses sell for now.
True, although when one compares the cost per sqft ...
”Affordable” seems to have become something only the wealthier half of the population can afford.
Not everyone needs (or wants) a 2000 sqft house, though, and living in/near downtown can also enable car-free existence, further reducing costs.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - danbrotherston - 10-27-2021
(10-26-2021, 11:42 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(10-26-2021, 11:25 AM)panamaniac Wrote: True, although when one compares the cost per sqft ...
”Affordable” seems to have become something only the wealthier half of the population can afford.
Not everyone needs (or wants) a 2000 sqft house, though, and living in/near downtown can also enable car-free existence, further reducing costs.
This is on point. And we really must stop this cultural assumption that everyone wants or needs a big house.
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - rangersfan - 10-28-2021
Wow liking this project from the quick look I have had!
RE: 146 Victoria St S | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - Lebronj23 - 10-28-2021
(10-28-2021, 07:12 AM)rangersfan Wrote: Wow liking this project from the quick look I have had!
From the docs it seems the development has a name - ‘Victoria and Park’
RE: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - Spokes - 10-29-2021
WOW! How did I miss this thread and this project. This is truly beautiful. I'm very impressed. Victoria getting a lot of nice projects. Hopefully it can become an improved area for pedestrians moving forward. Somehow.
RE: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - danbrotherston - 10-29-2021
(10-29-2021, 12:55 PM)Spokes Wrote: WOW! How did I miss this thread and this project. This is truly beautiful. I'm very impressed. Victoria getting a lot of nice projects. Hopefully it can become an improved area for pedestrians moving forward. Somehow.
This is very much on point. I hate it the way it is, it needs to improve (it's one of the reasons I sold my house), but I don't have much in the way of hope, the region does not have any plans to make this happen, and even when they do have plans, they often fail even then.
RE: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - Spokes - 10-29-2021
Is there anything that you could think of that would make it better? In a perfect world?
RE: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - GtwoK - 10-29-2021
I've long thought it would be nice to see wider sidewalks and a tree-lined boulevard down the center of Victoria (a la what the plans are for University ave?), but I doubt that would ever happen. Especially not if a potential Ion pt 3 might run down that way.
RE: Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed - danbrotherston - 10-29-2021
I mean, I think pretty clearly it could go down to 3 lanes with the middle being an intermittent turn lane.
That would leave room for bike lanes, maybe even wider sidewalks.
That's not a perfect world, that's like, easy to achieve today...with literally zero sacrifices from anyone. Safer for everyone, handles same traffic volume, the fact we won't do this speaks to the inflexibility and car centric policies of our regional government.
In a particularly ambitious world, we would make significantly more changes, restrict to two lanes, limit speed to 40km/h, limit access to the residential areas in behind to just Joseph and Charles Sts., make more pedestrian crossings, more ped space, cycle tracks, combine with removing Park St. as a through road through Vic Park. Etc.
This would require actual changes to our culture and society, rather than just pols ignoring the fear mongering from a few loudmouth anti-change folks, who are afraid of nothing.