Circa 1877 (née Brick Brewery) | 20 fl | Complete

[darts]

I'm the one who considers William the division point. North of union definitely feels more urban, but it still seems very distinct from north of William to me.

I'm with you, walking down King St, at William it really starts to feel like an uptown commercial district

[Viewfromthe42]

http://www.therecord.com/news-story/6547...rick-site/

So a 20-storey condo is proposed close to a similar height employer, the city's core, and next to three similar height condos, nearly directly adjacent to an LRT station, and that makes it out of context? Am I a fan of six floors of parking? No. Do I think that a near-zero setback current setup for a funeral parlour and bare walls of a community centre is inappropriate for a future redevelopment? No. Do I think that a building like this hurts walkability? Putting 300+ bedrooms here *increases* imperative to make the area more walkable than the car- and truck-fest that Brick had been.

[eizenstriet]

Interesting that the nearby condos were objecting to Council. Representatives from The Red and The Bauer Lofts spoke.

[Viewfromthe42]

Interesting that the nearby condos were objecting to Council. Representatives from The Red and The Bauer Lofts spoke.

Wait, what was said by them? And were they representatives from the builders, e.g. Momentum, or from the condo boards or residents themselves? I can always understand residents wanting to be the island in the area; higher sale prices for their more scarce commodity, and more uninterrupted views from their windows, not to mention less construction.

[Watdot]

Interesting that the nearby condos were objecting to Council. Representatives from The Red and The Bauer Lofts spoke.

Will possibly obstruct their view of Uptown and Waterloo Park. Welcome to big(ger) city living. Personally, I think they have no merit and are wasting their time. All of their buildings were supported by the density goals of the City for this area. There's an LRT station right there and density is the number one priority for this immediate area. This won't be the last tower proposed for that area.

[eizenstriet]

Wait, what was said by them?

I don't want to put words in their mouths, as I am giving a precis of what was spoken at some length.

It was not surprising that the Catalina Townhouse people were concerned on various fronts.

The representative from The Red was apparently a resident, and was quietly supported by a group of accompanying people. I would say the core of the objection was the extreme lot coverage. Both street frontages (King and Caroline) were being treated as "front yards", and were meager, and sideyards were practically non-existent. Significant density exemptions were being sought, and the impact was viewed as heavy, perhaps moreover from a precedent viewpoint on that stretch. Shadow and wind tunnel effects were mentioned, as was the problematic nature of ancillary uses with no surface parking.

The speaker from The Bauer Lofts was their property manager, and there were a lot of nodding people behind him. He cryptically referred to a (group?) objecting email which would have been received by Council members, and withdrew from the field. This was accompanied by nods of assent. I suspect more will be heard at a later date.

[Viewfromthe42]

Having no surface parking actually helps ancillary uses, if they're intended, I think. Bauer has public underground parking, but because of the onsite, offsite, and underground options, the least visible underground gets sparingly used; having one, clear, sole option winds up making it an easy and obvious choice.

It's interesting to hear folks in the Bauer building complain about views for them being "ruined," as I'm sure many locals complained that the Bauer would ruin theirs. Also a bit rich that all kinds of local residents helped push for the late addition of Allen as an ION stop on the grounds that the area would start to see more development and densification, and now that the stop has been awarded, arguing against that very development and densification.

Maybe I'll be the first to suggest that this site would be perfect for a no-parking tower, with Uptown a close walk, Bauer's amenities next door, an LRT stop on one side, and the Iron Horse Trail on the other. Save me the six storeys of parking (visitors and ancillary uses might need 1, 1.5), save residents their true fears of car traffic and overflow parking concerns, and give further justification for allowing upzoning.

I'd really like to have a way to put money down, say $1,000, towards a 1-2 bedroom in a suitably located no-parking development, and show councils and developers that there is demand for this.

[MidTowner]

Thanks for going to the meeting and reporting back, eizenstriet.

I really hope the City of Waterloo does the right thing with this one. As you have noted, this is right by an LRT station. If the system is going to work well, we need density around the stations: that's why we are spending a billion dollars on it. We need density here.

As usual, I can understand some of the concerns being raised, but a lot less so in the case of the residents of the other recent condo developments. Are they just trying to close the door behind them so their units maintain their value? It doesn't seem realistic to move into a brand-new development in an area like this, and then expect that there will not be further development.

[schooner77]

I don't think any reasonable people disagree with the idea of the property developing, I think the concern is that it be appropriate for the size of the lot. This isn't a large plot of land, given comparison to what the Bauer and the Red, or 144 and 155 occupy. 6 stories of parking seems a little much.

[MidTowner]

I agree with the notion that six stories of parking is excessive...but I think the solution is to reduce the amount of parking while maintaining the number of units... I would imagine there will be households here who can exist without owning a car, given access to transit and the amenities within walking distance.

[panamaniac]

Interesting that the nearby condos were objecting to Council. Representatives from The Red and The Bauer Lofts spoke.

Residents, I think, not representatives.

[panamaniac]

Wait, what was said by them?

I don't want to put words in their mouths, as I am giving a precis of what was spoken at some length.

It was not surprising that the Catalina Townhouse people were concerned on various fronts.

The representative from The Red was apparently a resident, and was quietly supported by a group of accompanying people. I would say the core of the objection was the extreme lot coverage. Both street frontages (King and Caroline) were being treated as "front yards", and were meager, and sideyards were practically non-existent. Significant density exemptions were being sought, and the impact was viewed as heavy, perhaps moreover from a precedent viewpoint on that stretch. Shadow and wind tunnel effects were mentioned, as was the problematic nature of ancillary uses with no surface parking.

The speaker from The Bauer Lofts was their property manager, and there were a lot of nodding people behind him. He cryptically referred to a (group?) objecting email which would have been received by Council members, and withdrew from the field. This was accompanied by nods of assent. I suspect more will be heard at a later date.

That seems bizarre.  Who manages the Bauer building?

[panamaniac]

I agree with the notion that six stories of parking is excessive...but I think the solution is to reduce the amount of parking while maintaining the number of units... I would imagine there will be households here who can exist without owning a car, given access to transit and the amenities within walking distance.

Depending on the target demographic, the demand could well be for two parking spaces for many of the condos, not for no parking spaces.  One would like to be in that world, but we in K-W aren't there yet.

[tomh009]

The speaker from The Bauer Lofts was their property manager, and there were a lot of nodding people behind him. He cryptically referred to a (group?) objecting email which would have been received by Council members, and withdrew from the field. This was accompanied by nods of assent. I suspect more will be heard at a later date.

That seems bizarre.  Who manages the Bauer building?

If it was the property manager, most likely he was there by the request of the condo board.

[Viewfromthe42]

I agree with the notion that six stories of parking is excessive...but I think the solution is to reduce the amount of parking while maintaining the number of units... I would imagine there will be households here who can exist without owning a car, given access to transit and the amenities within walking distance.

Depending on the target demographic, the demand could well be for two parking spaces for many of the condos, not for no parking spaces.  One would like to be in that world, but we in K-W aren't there yet.

Are we at a point where every development should have very few parking spaces? Probably not. But if we were to look at the neighbouring condos (Red/Bauer/144/155), I think we'd find they have ample parking. If we look at the condo-like living that older students are going for in Waterloo (towers on King between University and Columbia, similar build types), we'd find that even with less than a spot/unit, their parking is anything but full. I think we're ready to have a building with zero parking, or at the very least a condo with fewer parking spots than units. One, in the core of a region of more than half a million, next to the entryways to the busiest cycling and transit corridors, should not be too extreme for our region.