Waterloo Region Connected
General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Land Development and Real Estate (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Downtowns (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours (/showthread.php?tid=8)



RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - bgb_ca - 08-13-2018

(08-13-2018, 11:23 AM)panamaniac Wrote:
(08-13-2018, 11:15 AM)Ace Wrote: Construction fencing up on Ottawa between King & Charles. Some heavy equipment sitting out back and minor demolition has begun.

Is there a page for what's happening here?

Not for a demolition.  Afaik, there is no redevelopment proposal for the site yet, beyond widening Ottawa St.

If you are talking where the corner pub and that was, it's part of the Ottawa street widening. It was expropriated by the city last year I believe.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - panamaniac - 08-13-2018

(08-13-2018, 10:55 AM)jgsz Wrote: Last week I noticed fencing had been installed at Frederick Mall on the corner of Frederick and Edna.  This morning I saw a backhoe at work.  I assume this is for Tim Horton's.

Jeez, that's been a long time coming.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - ijmorlan - 08-13-2018

(08-13-2018, 01:44 PM)jamincan Wrote: I don't like the idea of having a so-called poor entrance, but I have a hard time justify why it shouldn't be allowed. Airlines separate their premium customers, and we're okay with that; is this really all that different? Some buildings have separate elevators for the penthouses. Some clubs have VIP areas. I'm sure there are loads of other examples, too.

I think “poor doors” are a symptom, not a cause. City governments should make sure that public space is allocated fairly (which usually means away from private motor vehicles and towards transit and active uses, compared to the status quo), and minimize the time spent micro-managing the floor plans of buildings.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - rangersfan - 08-13-2018

Article that voices concerns over the potential demolition of a number of homes (107 Young specifically) , for a proposed 6 story residential project at Young and Weber.

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/8816372-heritage-backers-want-to-stop-demolition/


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - danbrotherston - 08-13-2018

(08-13-2018, 09:03 PM)rangersfan Wrote: Article that voices concerns over the potential demolition of a number of homes (107 Young specifically) , for a proposed 6 story residential project at Young and Weber.

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/8816372-heritage-backers-want-to-stop-demolition/

Build absolutely nothing anywhere ever.

This house is not unique in the city.  It may have a few rarer architectural features, but it has no historical significance to the region that I'm aware of, and there are numerous other examples of similarly styled houses around. I'm not an expert on historical preservation, but it really sounds like this isn't something worth protecting.

Not that I have many details on this development, but a six storey development is a good size and scale, and something we need much more of.  I would hate to see it get derailed.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - panamaniac - 08-13-2018

I wouldn't say it's unique, but Arts and Crafts cottages of that style aren't common in Kitchener, afaik.  It's also true that the structure is in pretty good shape.  It is strange, however, that Haalboom's complaint relates to the Young St house, when both of the Weber St houses (certainly the Motz house) have greater heritage value.  Sometimes, I guess it's just enough to be cute ...


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - tomh009 - 08-13-2018

If someone really values the cottage, they can move it. I suspect you wouldn't need to actually pay anything for it ...


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - GtwoK - 08-13-2018

I actually agree with Haalboom. Weber should be "the line" downtown for building condos. Kitchener has FAR too little pre-1950 (or whatever) homes near the downtown core. We need to build up, yes, but like hell if I'll stand for demolishing every ounce of character and every mature tree in order to do so. I'm tired of bland as hell, boujie retail spaces in the bottom of condos that only very wealthy people can open up shop in. The older houses — especially in these heritage neighbourhoods — are the lasting character of the city. I want to see more of the uniqueness and creativity that houses-turned-retail presents. Like the Yeti, for example. There has to be a balance of both, and I think that "bulldoze everything within 5 blocks of an LRT station" is a foolhardy and dangerous opinion.

On a separate and non-emotionally-charged note: the properties they mention are on opposite sides of Young. They mention the development taking 2 properties on Weber  east of Young, and the one property on Weber West of Young. How are they combining these into the same development? Building over the road?


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - panamaniac - 08-13-2018

(08-13-2018, 11:17 PM)GtwoK Wrote: I actually agree with Haalboom. Weber should be "the line" downtown for building condos. Kitchener has FAR too little pre-1950 (or whatever) homes near the downtown core. We need to build up, yes, but like hell if I'll stand for demolishing every ounce of character and every mature tree in order to do so. I'm tired of bland as hell, boujie retail spaces in the bottom of condos that only very wealthy people can open up shop in. The older houses — especially in these heritage neighbourhoods — are the lasting character of the city. I want to see more of the uniqueness and creativity that houses-turned-retail presents. Like the Yeti, for example. There has to be a balance of both, and I think that "bulldoze everything within 5 blocks of an LRT station" is a foolhardy and dangerous opinion.

On a separate and non-emotionally-charged note: the properties they mention are on opposite sides of Young. They mention the development taking 2 properties on Weber  east of Young, and the one property on Weber West of Young. How are they combining these into the same development? Building over the road?

The Weber street houses are the Motz house on the "south-east" corner at Young and the Ontario Gothic cottage immediately to the east of it.  So both on Weber "east" of Young.

I don't think "bland" is a word that would describe what is being proposed, if the renders in the heritage report are accurate.   It also has no retail component, I don't think.

I would agree that Weber St should be the "line" on that side of DTK - a line of mid-rises (the proposal is six storeys, I think).


EDIT:  Wait, no, I think that would be "north-east".  (!)


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - tomh009 - 08-14-2018

(08-13-2018, 11:17 PM)GtwoK Wrote: I actually agree with Haalboom. Weber should be "the line" downtown for building condos. Kitchener has FAR too little pre-1950 (or whatever) homes near the downtown core. We need to build up, yes, but like hell if I'll stand for demolishing every ounce of character and every mature tree in order to do so. I'm tired of bland as hell, boujie retail spaces in the bottom of condos that only very wealthy people can open up shop in. The older houses — especially in these heritage neighbourhoods — are the lasting character of the city. I want to see more of the uniqueness and creativity that houses-turned-retail presents. Like the Yeti, for example. There has to be a balance of both, and I think that "bulldoze everything within 5 blocks of an LRT station" is a foolhardy and dangerous opinion.

I don't think anyone is proposing to demolish every house, cut down every tree and bulldoze everything.

But on the other hand, I don't think we should assign heritage designation to every house, either. "Far too few older homes" is hard to argue with as the criteria are subjective. But there certainly are many hundreds of pre-war homes in the downtown area (roughly ward 9), likely well over a thousand. And many of them are protected, including the entire Victoria Park neighbourhood, so there is little risk of all of them disappearing.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - danbrotherston - 08-14-2018

There are a dozen or so larger buildings in the downtown core east of Weber St. I can think of already, many are quite old.

Larger buildings, of the 3-6 storey variety do not threaten a community, this is that type of building. If they were proposing a 30 storey tower, I'd be somewhat more critical. This development is "within reason".

I really don't think we should be drawing any line against sustainable development. If there is historic value to the buildings they might be worth saving but I don't think "cute" cuts it, every single house in the core you'll find someone who finds something about it cute or charming, and something unique.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - panamaniac - 08-14-2018

If the render in the heritage report is accurate, the proposed building would be about 1 to 1.5 storeys taller than the neighbouring apartment block.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - Chicopee - 08-14-2018

It'd sure be nice to see some of the already dead space in and around the core built upon first. Look at how many vacant lots and parking lots there are. But instead century homes are being torn down, while vacant lots persist.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - tomh009 - 08-14-2018

(08-14-2018, 06:15 PM)Chicopee Wrote: It'd sure be nice to see some of the already dead space in and around the core built upon first. Look at how many vacant lots and parking lots there are. But instead century homes are being torn down, while vacant lots persist.

We cannot dictate to the owners of private properties that they must build something. We can try to encourage, but we can't force them.


RE: General Urban Kitchener Updates and Rumours - Chicopee - 08-15-2018

(08-14-2018, 10:11 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(08-14-2018, 06:15 PM)Chicopee Wrote: It'd sure be nice to see some of the already dead space in and around the core built upon first. Look at how many vacant lots and parking lots there are. But instead century homes are being torn down, while vacant lots persist.

We cannot dictate to the owners of private properties that they must build something. We can try to encourage, but we can't force them.

Never did I suggest that we could or would dictate what property owners can do.