King 926 (926 King St E) | 10 fl | Proposed

[cherrypark]

Likely. They're not going to worry that much about such a small height difference. People need to finally accept that the city is densifying. Maybe it's time each city just reviews its zoning laws and amend them for the 21st century already. City of Kitchener, for example, spent tens of thousands of dollars researching their PARTS Plan which should streamline the way for densification of urban areas, but each project is still stuck going through this nonsense due to often archaic zoning laws.

Suddenly "Stick with the plan! (The Official Plan)" might not be such an A+ slogan.

[Chris]

Suddenly "Stick with the plan! (The Official Plan)" might not be such an A+ slogan.

I laughed when I saw these this week. Their arguments are weak so they keep changing them. It’s pretty funny to me. I saw these signs over in the Margaret - Maynard - Ahrens area.

[DK519]

Looks like this one will be going ahead.

   

[Acitta]

Looks like this one will be going ahead.

Link to story:
10-storey rental tower can move ahead on King Street block between Borden Avenue and Dane Street

[jeffster]

Good move. The ION is right there, so it only makes sense to have larger projects (although this one isn't actually that tall...).

[ac3r]

It was already approved in July. Nearby residents just made a last-ditch attempt to stop it or shorten the building, but it was futile on their part. This projects falls within the PARTS plan the City of Kitchener is using, so density around LRT stations within Kitchener is going to happen no matter what.

[Spokes]

A logical project to move forward. If not here, where, right?

[DK519]

They've finally started demolition here.

[ac3r]

Good news! I'm looking forward to seeing this project once completed. The glass will be an interesting feature and quite unique.

However, after exploring the architectural plans a bit more I do wish they didn't make the building so rectangular. I would have kept the same length (it's very long) but have some variation in height to make it less block like while still maintaining the same amount of units, but I think the materials they're using will nonetheless give it positive visual appeal which is needed on this side of downtown.

Edit: For example, something like this sketch on the left. A variation in height would have been nice, with the rooftop having amenity space for residents whilst offering views of the city and a green/living roof on the shorter sections so as to provide an aesthetically pleasing (for those living in higher units) and practical roof - as in being environmentally conscious as well as improving drainage and mitigating heat island impacts. Mechanical features could then be installed on the taller sections. This would also allow most units to have additional windows for light. This would then create even better visual design diversity, allowing for a more unique looking building rather than an elongated rectangle with fancy glass. The height variations would also let the building be less imposing and wall like for neighbouring residents and also lessen the impact of shadows. A simple yet effective improvement on the design:

My ugly trees definitely not to scale, by the way haha...

[tomh009]

That would require separating the two elevators, would it not? (Or increasing the number.)

Visually it would be better, though.