General Urban Cambridge Updates and Rumours

[Acitta]

Empty for 30 years, site of former Kress Hotel in Preston to be redeveloped

[Bjays93]

Empty for 30 years, site of former Kress Hotel in Preston to be redeveloped

Seems like there's not an incredible amount of opposition to this which is nice

[Acitta]

Empty for 30 years, site of former Kress Hotel in Preston to be redeveloped

Seems like there's not an incredible amount of opposition to this which is nice

Preston really needs some good development.

[ac3r]

I'm guessing the proposal on Kerr Street won't go ahead. The NIMBYs had a meeting at the beginning of 2021, where they asked the developer to lower the tower heights from 30 and 24 floors to 18 and 18 floors of which the developer and architect agreed to explore. That was then proposed at another meeting a couple weeks later, with the NIMBYs saying that this is still too tall and ruins the look of downtown Cambridge. The developer and architect basically said to them, this is as small as we can get them before it just becomes inviable to continue proposing a smaller development than this.

It's a shame, because the buildings look great (even at 30 and 24 floors) and would be a huge improvement over what currently exists in that area: two, overgrown abandoned plots of land that have sat vacant for years. Cambridge residents will complain about any new developments, often citing that they will destroy the heritage of the city. What heritage? They're abandoned lots full of weeds and rusty old syringes. Here's what they're most likely going to be throwing away...

...so they can preserve the heritage of this.

[Rainrider22]

Let them know that Kitchener is open for business....

[adjlar]

Wow that is a nice looking development and it would be fairly close to the future Main LRT station! I bike around that area quite a bit and it's dumpy looking...

On another note, fighting heritage is silly in this case. This part of town needs some serious cleaning up. This development is placed far enough to the side that it wouldn't interfere with the look of Downtown Galt. Oh NIMBYs...

[ac3r]

Many seem to misconstrue what heritage really means anyway. NIMBYs tend to look at heritage as protecting the existing core as it is today. They think that new developments will either ruin the feel of things or outright demolish existing, historical buildings to make way for something new...which is not the case here. They usually just don't want to see new construction, they want downtown to look like it has always looked since they were growing up. But this is not a small region anymore, we're the fastest growing region in the country. Get with the times.

Heritage protection, from a professional point of view, means preserving existing structures and adding new ones that do not make insignificant the existing ones to look awkward (such as that proposal for a tower on Duke Street in downtown Kitchener, which has a developer who wants to build the tower literally on top of a beautiful old house - and rightfully so, heritage advocates, architects and normal people in the community think that's a stupid compromise).

I think the former is what is keeping Cambridge from having many new developments get approved or even proposed. People want to protect that historical, small town appearance and I can sympathize with that - but you can still build new things beside those old ones. This also seems to be an issue in uptown Waterloo, albeit less so. The 25 floor office tower proposed for Regina Street has stalled as has the Strata project because of NIMBY pushback, with the argument that these tall buildings will ruin the charm of uptown. All I can say to them is: sorry, but what charm? It doesn't have the feel of an old downtown anymore, it's just new low rise commercial fronts everywhere, a few old buildings and bars. I suppose...the more this happens...the more developers will just focus on downtown Kitchener because it has struck a perfect balance between preserving its old buildings and homes and rapidly modernizing with new ones and new infrastructure.

[tomh009]

Yeah, it's not really any heritage that would be lost. The real issue they have is that it would change the character of the neighbourhood -- of downtown Galt, in this case.

Whether that's an acceptable objection is something that the Cambridge council will need to determine, not only for this project but in order to set the direction for future development. If Cambridge and Waterloo continue to push back on intensification, the region will become increasingly Kitchener-centric.

[ijmorlan]

Heritage protection, from a professional point of view, means preserving existing structures and adding new ones that do not make insignificant the existing ones look awkward (such as that proposal for a tower on Duke Street in downtown Kitchener, which has a developer who wants to build the tower literally on top of a beautiful old house - and rightfully so, heritage advocates, architects and normal people in the community think that's a stupid compromise).

Thanks for this whole post. I feel like I agree with it but couldn’t have said it myself. It’s nice to have an architect in the group who can bring a professional perspective.

[Acitta]

Let's hope that Cambridge council has the courage to push back against these nimbys who would rather have an ugly empty lot than a nice new development. Cambridge is in much need of good high density development. Parts of it look like a slum in my opinion.

[ac3r]

Heritage protection, from a professional point of view, means preserving existing structures and adding new ones that do not make insignificant the existing ones look awkward (such as that proposal for a tower on Duke Street in downtown Kitchener, which has a developer who wants to build the tower literally on top of a beautiful old house - and rightfully so, heritage advocates, architects and normal people in the community think that's a stupid compromise).

Thanks for this whole post. I feel like I agree with it but couldn’t have said it myself. It’s nice to have an architect in the group who can bring a professional perspective.

Eric Haldenby - a Professor of Architecture at the University of Waterloo - summed it up best in one word: indignity. He elaborates saying that projects like the Duke Street proposal and Circa 1877 do nothing to preserve the heritage, they in fact perverse and degrade what you are even trying to save. It gets decontextualized - and in my words, just looks ridiculous. And I completely agree. You can see him talk about it here in this great lecture he recently did about our construction boom and our struggle with our local heritage and history (I've linked to the exact moment, but the entire thing is worth hearing): https://youtu.be/aAZ-EMfK_6Q?t=244

It's these exact points which is why I object to QCondos. It will do that exact thing to the old existing structure. It will save a tiny part the façade while stripping away the true value of that old building...for no real reason other than to allow Momentum Developments to have a "nice" looking façade on a tiny portion of the condo tower they are proposing. That's not really heritage at all, apart from being a blatant destruction of our history. And it's stuff like this that makes normal people worry about the loss of heritage and history, especially in a place like Galt. You can build new projects without having to completely turn an existing heritage structure into a Frankenstein like abomination, with old and new in one (which, of course, does not always look bad!) or by destroying the character and feel of historical neighbourhoods. It just needs to be done tastefully - i.e. not like the horror show that Gaslight Condos is turning out to be.

[bravado]

Let's hope that Cambridge council has the courage to push back against these nimbys who would rather have an ugly empty lot than a nice new development. Cambridge is in much need of good high density development. Parts of it look like a slum in my opinion.

As of late, that lot is actually host to a bunch of tents and unsavoury characters. I do not understand how the neighbours prefer the status quo to "too much shade" from new developments.

[Lebronj23]

Not sure if there is a thread for this yet!

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...peler.html

[bravado]

Not sure if there is a thread for this yet!

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...peler.html

That’s really ambitious, consider me shocked once again…

If the SmartCentre plan (and MZO) didn’t kick start a heavy LRT debate in Cambridge, the traffic caused by this development certainly will…

It looks like they're releasing this plan before actually submitting to the city. Will that be looked upon badly by council?

[cherrypark]

Not sure if there is a thread for this yet!

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...peler.html

More info here: http://blackspoint.ca/410-Queen/