05-01-2023, 07:55 AM
Condo tower on Victoria Street in Kitchener would include park space, more than 170 two- and three-bedroom units
https://archive.ph/lgOSi
https://archive.ph/lgOSi
200 Victoria St S | 45 fl | Proposed
|
05-01-2023, 07:55 AM
Condo tower on Victoria Street in Kitchener would include park space, more than 170 two- and three-bedroom units
https://archive.ph/lgOSi
05-01-2023, 01:35 PM
It'll be interesting to see what the VPNA will say about this project. Victoria and Park faced immediate opposition with the usual complaints...traffic, not enough schools but also the usual "there are not enough 2+ bedroom units". Well, here's a project with a lot of them, so what will they go with this time? I'll take a guess they'll use the argument that it doesn't fit the character of the neighbourhood and will cast shadows.
05-01-2023, 02:07 PM
(05-01-2023, 01:35 PM)ac3r Wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the VPNA will say about this project. Victoria and Park faced immediate opposition with the usual complaints...traffic, not enough schools but also the usual "there are not enough 2+ bedroom units". Well, here's a project with a lot of them, so what will they go with this time? I'll take a guess they'll use the argument that it doesn't fit the character of the neighbourhood and will cast shadows. There won’t be enough* affordable units, it’s too easy… * translation: there’s literally no amount that would satisfy NIMBYs ** even more cynical translation: we will invent anything to not have those people living nearby.
local cambridge weirdo
05-01-2023, 02:25 PM
"Poor people need houses too...! Won't somebody please think of the poor? They need homes! Oh, no, not here though. Not in my backyard."
05-01-2023, 02:55 PM
(05-01-2023, 02:25 PM)ac3r Wrote: "Poor people need houses too...! Won't somebody please think of the poor? They need homes! Oh, no, not here though. Not in my backyard." Reviewing prior letters from by-law amendments in the CPNA area circa '00s, the current affordable housing apartments were quite unwelcome as well as a few townhouses.
05-01-2023, 06:49 PM
(05-01-2023, 07:55 AM)Lebronj23 Wrote: Condo tower on Victoria Street in Kitchener would include park space, more than 170 two- and three-bedroom units Oh noooooooos!! 3-bedroom apartments will get a downvote from councillor Chapman! We can't have that! RIP 200 Victoria St Proposal.
05-02-2023, 07:21 PM
I didn't realize how much of this block this project will fill. I did notice that the Regional staff are recommending that the site vehicle entrance and exit be limited to Park St on account of the nearby railway crossing across Victoria St. Would it be too much to expect the entrance to this development to line up with the entrance to Vic&Park?
05-02-2023, 11:24 PM
Looks like they are pretty much aligned by the lots they are taking over/aligned with based on the urban design briefs for each.
05-03-2023, 07:55 AM
(05-02-2023, 07:21 PM)nms Wrote: I didn't realize how much of this block this project will fill. I did notice that the Regional staff are recommending that the site vehicle entrance and exit be limited to Park St on account of the nearby railway crossing across Victoria St. Would it be too much to expect the entrance to this development to line up with the entrance to Vic&Park? It doesn't look like they own the house that would allow them to line up with that driveway. What if the park st entrance went straight into the parking garage, and the Victoria St entrance was just a turnaround for pickup and drop offs. It would minimize Victoria St access and still let the building have a "front" entrance.
05-26-2023, 07:25 PM
City staff is recommending approval for this project coming at the June 5th planning meeting.
https://pub-kitchener.escribemeetings.co...ntId=10685
05-26-2023, 09:59 PM
(05-26-2023, 07:25 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: City staff is recommending approval for this project coming at the June 5th planning meeting. I swear all these people who are complaining about this in the public comments don't understand that Kitchener is no longer a small city like we're expected to grow to about half a million by 2051 based on the Regional Official Plan and the only way that is possible is if there is densification, it is at the edge of a MTSA where they want density so these people are going to get a tall building regardless of what they say. Like yes having the idea of having mid rise everywhere is a great idea but these people seemingly lack the understanding that based on the current zoning structure that is impossible and there would be even more pushback on something like that. This isn't even mentioning the fact that they're complaining about affordability in the comments, basic supply and demand is lost on those people, if you build more supply you will lessen the demand and in theory will make things more affordable, obviously that doesn't work in the current market only because we have so little supply but over time it should hopefully help. These people really just need to shut up and deal with it at this point. The only good thing about this is hopefully Chapman isn't able to talk about it because she lives around the corner.
05-26-2023, 10:22 PM
(05-26-2023, 09:59 PM)ZEBuilder Wrote:(05-26-2023, 07:25 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: City staff is recommending approval for this project coming at the June 5th planning meeting. Seems like only a handful of comments. The project will be approved.
05-27-2023, 12:51 PM
Boomer NIMBYs hate new big things. Who knew?
06-06-2023, 05:12 PM
Get a load of Chapmans husband appearing as a delegate for this if you want a good laugh.,
At 39 min mark https://pub-kitchener.escribemeetings.co...ng=English
06-06-2023, 05:47 PM
(06-06-2023, 05:12 PM)Lebronj23 Wrote: Get a load of Chapmans husband appearing as a delegate for this if you want a good laugh.,Oh my god… he literally goes and speaks against every single proposal in the city. I had no idea he is Debbie’s husband, but it makes sense because they are both so incredibly out of touch with reality. Sitting there in their single detached home that has increased by >200%, pushing back against any opportunity for anyone else to have an opportunity at an affordable home anywhere near them. Is it ever questioned whether it is a conflict of interest that Debbie and her husband’s primary goal is to limit housing affordability and protect the value of their own real estate? How does she bring an unbiased view to any vote that may benefit future residents? She can’t. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|