200 Victoria St S | 45 fl | Proposed

[Bjays93]

This would be great for the area if it gets built as is imo

[jshamont]

Does anyone know who the developer/ owner behind the numbered company is?

[Lebronj23]

Rome logistics

[Spokes]

This will likely be another one that ends up going to the OLT.

Edit: Also you should be able to edit the thread title. I don't believe you need a mod to do it.

Come on now, there's no election coming up to influence their decision.

Love this project and all of the density along Victoria right now.

[CP42]

https://archive.ph/0RH27

[tomh009]

https://archive.ph/0RH27

Yes? What is it?

[ac3r]

The bar is so low for The Record that it's just sad and it seems to get lazier and lazier ever since they shut down the local offices, moved to Toronto and canned virtually all the staff. Just take shit online like free information posted on the cities/region websites, copy + paste WRPS police reports or lurk Reddit posts and regurgitate it in more words. Occasionally, they reach out to someone they find on the internet to set up an interview and that's that. I mean, remember the story about the school girls who were selling lemonade last weekend because their friend got bullied and had her glasses broken? They found that thanks to Reddit. Articles like this? Scraped from the City of Kitchener website. I guess they have like 2 "journalists" like Jeff Outhit who has his NIMBY friends on speed dial when he wants to write a hit piece about development and Luisa D’Amato who gets paid to publish what are basically Facebook blog rants.

I was curious what a subscription costs per year (unsure, since it is just showing me a 1 year long discounted price) and the tagline on the subscription page unironically says: "We don't repeat. We report." Lol...

[tomh009]

I was curious what a subscription costs per year (unsure, since it is just showing me a 1 year long discounted price) and the tagline on the subscription page unironically says: "We don't repeat. We report." Lol...

We pay $7.99/month and I'm quite happy with the value for that. And it's not a I'll-cancel-unless-you-give-me-a-discount rate, either.

[nms]

At the risk of being that person that complains about added density, that stretch of Victoria is going to get pretty crowded for all manner of traffic (pedestrian, bikes, scooters, cars etc). What options does the City (or Region) have to pre-emptively expand the road allowance to make room for things like wider sidewalks or bike lanes or, heaven forbid, street trees? For instance, I know that many suburban neighbourhoods include a hefty City allowance between the road and the street, usually to allow for sidewalks at some point the future. If the existing buildings fell into that that new allowance, could the City set something up where any new construction would automatically forfeit the road allowance?

If the the section from King St to Strange Street is expected to become a parade of towers, a 1.5 meter wide sidewalk next to an onstreet bike lane plus 1 or two lanes of traffic is just not going to cut it in the pretty near future.

[KevinL]

It's a regional road, and their engineers are not well known for doing things like reducing vehicle lanes or otherwise accommodating non-vehicular users. They'll happily put in multi-use paths - when there's room in the right of way. Unfortunately that doesn't apply here.

[cherrypark]

At the risk of being that person that complains about added density, that stretch of Victoria is going to get pretty crowded for all manner of traffic (pedestrian, bikes, scooters, cars etc).  What options does the City (or Region) have to pre-emptively expand the road allowance to make room for things like wider sidewalks or bike lanes or, heaven forbid, street trees?  For instance, I know that many suburban neighbourhoods include a hefty City allowance between the road and the street, usually to allow for sidewalks at some point the future.  If the existing buildings fell into that that new allowance, could the City set something up where any new construction would automatically forfeit the road allowance?

If the the section from King St to Strange Street is expected to become a parade of towers, a 1.5 meter wide sidewalk next to an onstreet bike lane plus 1 or two lanes of traffic is just not going to cut it in the pretty near future.

Don't know much, but I recall that during the Vic & Park committee review there was lots made out of the road allowance/offset for "road widening" with the explanation that was just right of way and could be for bike lanes or sidewalk and not just more road lanes (hopefully).

Second part of that is I believe that section of Victoria is coming up for a revised EA and design review, so the timeline to update it not too far off, though likely constrained by it being after these projects are complete.

I am generally pretty sympathetic to added density in the absence of easier pathways to approve mid-rise leading developers in this direction. That said, it's a pretty tall proposal for what should be headed towards transition areas. But if the height means eliminating the parking podium on cost basis and they maintain some public realm improvements at ground level, I'm less fussed personally (and living within the block).

[ac3r]

Heh. I know this forum is very /r/fuckcars but you still need to remember that cities require roads to function. Victoria is always going to remain an important arterial road, though it could certainly be improved in terms of street scape and safety. But there's probably zero chance it is ever less than 4 lanes (well, it's 2 once you go west of the Iron Horse Trail) because it's such an important piece of infrastructure.

[ijmorlan]

Heh. I know this forum is very /r/fuckcars but you still need to remember that cities require roads to function. Victoria is always going to remain an important arterial road, though it could certainly be improved in terms of street scape and safety. But there's probably zero chance it is ever less than 4 lanes (well, it's 2 once you go west of the Iron Horse Trail) because it's such an important piece of infrastructure.

Several times here we have discussed the idea of putting the “arterial” function on Shirley Ave.

Victoria St. in no way needs to be built as an arterial road. East of the expressway Shirley Ave. can take the load, while west of the expressway it’s only 4 lanes for a few blocks through Downtown and then it reduces to 2 lanes until it reaches Lawrence Ave., so it’s pretty hard to believe that reducing the 4 lane section down to 2 lanes would cause much trouble.

[nms]

I wasn't suggesting changing the number of vehicle lanes through here, but I was more wondering whether there was an opportunity for the Region (since they own the right-of-way) to pre-emptively expand the right-of-way in order plan to non-vehicle infrastructure (trees! transit shelters!). I understand that there are already neighbourhoods in Toronto which have very narrow sidewalks and no opportunity for expansion now that the new taller buildings were built right up to the sidewalks. Short of bulldozing the condo buildings (not going to happen) or removing the vehicles (not going to happen either), there are no opportunities to expand the pedestrian rights-of-way.

[ZEBuilder]

I wasn't suggesting changing the number of vehicle lanes through here, but I was more wondering whether there was an opportunity for the Region (since they own the right-of-way) to pre-emptively expand the right-of-way in order plan to non-vehicle infrastructure (trees! transit shelters!).  I understand that there are already neighbourhoods in Toronto which have very narrow sidewalks and no opportunity for expansion now that the new taller buildings were built right up to the sidewalks.  Short of bulldozing the condo buildings (not going to happen) or removing the vehicles (not going to happen either), there are no opportunities to expand the pedestrian rights-of-way.

Many of the new developments do include land for road widening. For this development there is a small chunk of land for the widening of Victoria, the 3 towers at the corner of Victoria and Park by Dov Capital also include space for widening and same thing with the property between that development and the 100 Victoria complex. So developers seem to have some requirement to allow space for future road widening.