21 Weber St W + 149-151 Ontario St N | 20 fl | Proposed

[Acitta]

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/933...-building/

[panamaniac]

Looks like they've changed the pic since I saw the piece a couple of hours ago. The render of the full tower was notable mainly for the random pattern of balconies sticking out on the Ontario St side.

[UrbanCanoe]

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/933...-building/

Here are the images from the Record article:

       

It looks like the RBC building has been removed and replaced with a treed park.

[panamaniac]

It might just be a better render, but I think I don't hate it ...

[tomh009]

The randomness is at a tolerable level, and the way the house is integrated is only slightly goofy.

Yes, I can definitely live with this one. Nice to see the intensification reaching over to Weber St.

[KevinL]

Much nicer, yes. Hilarious about the RBC removal from the render.

[Rainrider22]

I like it !!! Best part is, the developer did it on their own. Although, think about how much money they are saving by not having to parking now because they cant...

[Tony_Plow]

I'm normally all for keeping heritage buildings.  Obviously, K-W has had a very poor track record in this regard.  

However, in the present case, I don't think the building in question is particularly noteworthy (no scale; no street presence; not particularly unique; plus it's already surrounded by office towers.)
  
The developer should have been allowed to tear it down IMO.  

I still shake my head that the City of Kitchener allowed the Lang buildings on Joseph St. to be torn down (save for Deloitte's building).

[jeffster]

I'm normally all for keeping heritage buildings.  Obviously, K-W has had a very poor track record in this regard.  

However, in the present case, I don't think the building in question is particularly noteworthy (no scale; no street presence; not particularly unique; plus it's already surrounded by office towers.)
  
The developer should have been allowed to tear it down IMO.  

I still shake my head that the City of Kitchener allowed the Lang buildings on Joseph St. to be torn down (save for Deloitte's building).

Right, and that's exactly why this developer doesn't want to go through the headache of all that. If they can save "the clock tower" (Back to the Future reference, not Kitchener) then there will be no moaning,

Anyway, I like the design, very interesting.

[panamaniac]

I'm normally all for keeping heritage buildings.  Obviously, K-W has had a very poor track record in this regard.  

However, in the present case, I don't think the building in question is particularly noteworthy (no scale; no street presence; not particularly unique; plus it's already surrounded by office towers.)
  
The developer should have been allowed to tear it down IMO.  

I still shake my head that the City of Kitchener allowed the Lang buildings on Joseph St. to be torn down (save for Deloitte's building).

The Record piece describes it as a "unique example of a working class home".  I can't think of another example in Kitchener of a double bay duplex from the 1870s.

[KevinL]

Yeah, I think it's pretty unique in general - the yellow brick isn't overly common in homes, nor is the particular style.

[tomh009]

The Record piece describes it as a "unique example of a working class home".  I can't think of another example in Kitchener of a double bay duplex from the 1870s.

I think "working class" is a bit exaggerated. I find it hard to believe that a factory worker could have afforded (half of) this house in the 1870s.

[panamaniac]

The Record piece describes it as a "unique example of a working class home".  I can't think of another example in Kitchener of a double bay duplex from the 1870s.

I think "working class" is a bit exaggerated. I find it hard to believe that a factory worker could have afforded (half of) this house in the 1870s.

When you compare to the (slightly later) detached houses in the DTK periphery that were home to factory workers, it doesn’t seem like a big stretch.

[tomh009]

I think "working class" is a bit exaggerated. I find it hard to believe that a factory worker could have afforded (half of) this house in the 1870s.

When you compare to the (slightly later) detached houses in the DTK periphery that were home to factory workers, it doesn’t seem like a big stretch.

How much later ones are you referring to? 1920s was definitely not the same as 1870s. Factory work in the 1800s definitely did not pay well. This is before unions, and a labourer might have been paid only something like five cents an hour (say $4 per week, given the long hours) and a small apartment with two bedrooms might cost $5/month. These ones are much bigger than that ...

My expectation is that this house might have been originally occupied by skilled craftsmen, trades or white-collar professionals (such as bookkeepers or managers).

[Spokes]

Definitely an improvement. Still room for improvement though.

Great density however for that location