Ophelia (242-262 Queen St S) | 11 fl | U/C

[rangersfan]

This scenario is very strange in that a party can be at this stage of the process and not even have an agreement in place to own the property.

If they do come to an agreement hopefully they can add more height to the project as the adjacent properties have not been given the heritage committee green light.

Over the years that I have been following developments in Waterloo Region I found that Stephen Litt has a very unconventional style to say the least.

[Spokes]

I just don't see how this development has life. Of the three properties two might not be able to be demolished and the third isn't owned by the developer.

[panamaniac]

I just don't see how this development has life. Of the three properties two might not be able to be demolished and the third isn't owned by the developer.

Agree.  If the two heritage houses must be retained, then any project would have to be quite different from what was proposed.  I am reminded of the Polo proposal a few years back on Mill St that never went forward.

[Viewfromthe42]

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/887...r-oneroof/

"The committee heard two versions of the heritage value of the homes. A report prepared for the developer argued that the homes had not particular merit and are similar to others in the Victoria Park heritage district. The city's Official Plan calls for greater density and intensification along Queen Street South, the report says, adding that other highrises surround the heritage homes.

But Leon Bensason, Kitchener's co-ordinator of heritage planning, said in his report to the committee that the homes are in fair to good condition and "are two surviving examples of a declining number of late 19th-century buildings located on Queen Street South" within the heritage district.

But most of the buildings in the Victoria Park heritage district that have been demolished have been along Queen Street, Bensason said. "Without careful planning, visual evidence that this is one of the earliest and most historic streets in the city could decline," the report says. Allowing the demolitions to go ahead could set a precedent for the loss of more homes along Queen, he said."

So even heritage admits there's nothing special about these houses, just that if you don't keep them, then we would have a downtown where people have homes, instead of a downtown where we remember that people with money can help to keep prices up for everyone.

[tomh009]

Right. Nothing special about the houses, and not even in great condition. Given the direction to intensify Queen St S, rather than keeping a few token houses on this block, I fully expect the council to give this a green light. Assuming they work out an agreement with ROOF, that is.

[Spokes]

They do this all the time, they protect properties that aren't special. They frustrate me.

[clasher]

Kitchener heritage committee has rejected Vive's application to demolish the houses at 254 and 262 Queen St S, which the developer owns. It did, however, approve demolition of the OneRoof building, which the developer does not own (say what?).

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/888...-building/

So until Roof finds another spot and sells their building there really won't be any action here?

Also can anyone just get heritage's approval to demolish property they don't own?

[tomh009]

It's interesting that the heritage committee had four people opposing the demolition of the Oneroof building (the vote was 6-4). Does that building have some hidden heritage attributes that I'm not aware of?

[panamaniac]

It's interesting that the heritage committee had four people opposing the demolition of the Oneroof building (the vote was 6-4). Does that building have some hidden heritage attributes that I'm not aware of?

Thinking that demolition of OneRoof could put the other two houses at increased risk?

[mpd618]

Maybe some of you folks want to apply to be on the Heritage Kitchener committee? My guess is that some of the people on it are there because they generally don't want things to change.

[tomh009]

Maybe some of you folks want to apply to be on the Heritage Kitchener committee? My guess is that some of the people on it are there because they generally don't want things to change.

Good point!

Reading the terms of reference, the heritage committee only advises the council so while they may have recommended against the demolition of the two houses, the vote actually has no legal significance, it's only advice for the council.

[tomh009]

Both 254-262 Queen St S and 270 Spadina (Woodside Terraces) will be discussed at the council meeting on the 24th.

[clasher]

Demolition denied for 254 and 262 Queen. Kind of a shame I think... those houses aren't all that special and I imagine they will now just be left to degrade until demolition is needed due to safety concerns.

[Spokes]

My goodness. Not special at all.

Are there occupants in them right now?

[clasher]

I don't think anyone is in either of them, one of them used to be a travel agent but I don't remember what the other way.