130-142 Victoria Street South | 25 fl | Proposed

[Lens]

My impression of the comments that were published was that, now that the City is getting close to the density targets, perhaps there should be a reevaluation to make sure that things are still going the direction that they should be.  Packing more tall towers into the small space in downtown without giving some thought to other things that would make the downtown more of a complete community, might not be the best option.  For instance, what zoning restrictions are currently in place that limit what could be in the base of a tower?  If the City were looking for dedicated community space (perhaps a community pool, a library, a seniors centre, a day care, or I don't know what), could it happen under the current downtown zoning?  If Downtown Kitchener is clearly becoming an attractive development location, is the planned level of green space actually going to match the level of current project development?  Most of these towers are going to be part of the urban fabric well past our lifetimes, so we've only got one chance to get it right.

Counterpoint: when your city is in boom time and piling up stacks of development fees, maybe its time to put a piece of that towards a stronger, larger planning department that can get that done in a reasonable time frame without (a) having to artificially block up an already supply constrained market indefinitely, and (b) having to spend hours upon hours of staff time on whining on about 1-2 stories of height on high quality midrises like 660 Belmont when there are bigger issues at hand.

AMEN!

[nms]

Or perhaps, if the planning department is getting backed up because of incredible demand, raise the development fees (or perhaps have a "pay a higher price to go to the front of the line"). The Region is in a boom time, I agree. But simply sailing along on unbridled development and hoping that the market will eventually cool down enough to accommodate things like affordable housing or quality green space is not going to work.

[cherrypark]

Or perhaps, if the planning department is getting backed up because of incredible demand, raise the development fees (or perhaps have a "pay a higher price to go to the front of the line").  The Region is in a boom time, I agree.  But simply sailing along on unbridled development and hoping that the market will eventually cool down enough to accommodate things like affordable housing or quality green space is not going to work.

Was in no way implying the status quo was sufficient or good, especially in those two aspects. Rather that a moratorium on new approvals does not achieve either outcome (better wholistic plans or addressing the present supply shortage) and supposes that the current resourcing in the city to manage those developments is sufficient to address the problem in a timely manner and is not a root cause of the problem.

Its a complex issue and you can be simultaneously pro-development and the potential it creates (e.g. - can Kitchener now more reasonably plan to use their Bramm St. property for parkland and a mix of affordable and family housing) while thinking portions of the current process are not good enough (variance in quality of proposals/final builds, actual benefits derived from 'bonusing', parkland allocation with above zoning density, etc.)

[tomh009]

The Region is in a boom time, I agree.  But simply sailing along on unbridled development and hoping that the market will eventually cool down enough to accommodate things like affordable housing or quality green space is not going to work.

It doesn't appear that anyone is waiting for the market to cool down. While much more remains to be done, the region and at least Kitchener have put significant effort into affordable projects, and at least they should make a dent in the waiting lists as they are completed.

[ac3r]

I just remembered this project. I wonder if it will also face the same opposition as Victoria and Park did and if it will also get cancelled since it's basically right next door to that one. It's only 25 floors but that isn't going to matter to NIMBYs, they'll still complain about nonsense like shadows and traffic.

[tomh009]

I'm sure there will be complaints, although probably somewhat fewer.

But, given that it's basically the same height as the Garment buildings next door, and not next to any single-family housing, I can't see the council rejecting this one.

[cherrypark]

Which is disappointing, because I don't see it as nearly as quality in basically any aspect of the proposal other than the perception of the height/shadow impacts of those in the nearby area. Figures.

[Spokes]

If it gets aproved you've got to think that if Vic/Park was 25-30 floors it gets approved too. Not that that should have been the case, but something to think about.

[Lebronj23]

The applicant is working on a resubmission for this project. Possible new design and new height.

[Rainrider22]

Oh wow, I totally forgot about this one...

[Spokes]

Any updates here?

[Lebronj23]

Application submitted for this project :

The applicant is proposing to construct a 3-tower mixed use development with 1 124 dwelling units and 1750 square metres of commercial floor space. A 6 storey podium connects the 3 towers of 25 36 and 38 storeys. Parking (699 total spaces) is provided within the podium and two underground levels as well as surface parking for visitors and commercial units.

[ZEBuilder]

Application submitted for this project :

The applicant is proposing to construct a 3-tower mixed use development with 1 124 dwelling units and 1750 square metres of commercial floor space. A 6 storey podium connects the 3 towers of 25  36 and 38 storeys. Parking (699 total spaces) is provided within the podium and two underground levels  as well as surface parking for visitors and commercial units.

Thats the site plan application for the 3 towers by Dov Capital at Victoria and Park (146 Victoria St S) which makes it seem as if the deal they have with the city to avoid the OLT has been approved. This still hasn't had any updates since it was said that the developer is working on a resubmission.

[Lebronj23]

Updated submission in the applications map. The design is largely unchanged and the height remains the same (25fl)

I do note I’m the rendering that Victoria and Park to the left looks a bittt different…maybe it’s just the angle. It looks a lot more rectangular. 

   

[Square]

Did they give up on this development? I saw today the house beside the pharmacy is getting renovated.