Welcome Guest!
WIn order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mayfair Hotel | 6 fl | Proposed
#1
I almost hesitate to give this "project" its own thread but I noticed that there were workers or contractors on site yesterday and a small hoarding has been installed on a short section of the sidewalk on Young St.  Something seems to happen for a day or two every number of weeks and then all goes quiet again.

Last I heard, the plan to build a three storey addition on top of the hotel has been cancelled, for structural reasons, although I haven't seen any confirmation of this.

I'm starting to wonder if we'll ever see this redevelopment actually take place?
Reply
#2
(12-03-2014, 02:56 PM)panamaniac Wrote: Last I heard, the plan to build a three storey addition on top of the hotel has been cancelled, for structural reasons, although I haven't seen any confirmation of this.

If so, this is a lame excuse. It is perfectly possible to build an interior steel I frame that carries the load around the present building. It is just a polite way of saying: we didn't wanna do it.
Reply
#3
My reaction when told this was similar but as I said, I have seen no confirmation that it is the case.
Reply
#4
(12-03-2014, 03:48 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:
(12-03-2014, 02:56 PM)panamaniac Wrote: Last I heard, the plan to build a three storey addition on top of the hotel has been cancelled, for structural reasons, although I haven't seen any confirmation of this.

If so, this is a lame excuse. It is perfectly possible to build an interior steel I frame that carries the load around the present building. It is just a polite way of saying: we didn't wanna do it.

To call this a lame excuse is just .... lame.  Smile

There is such a thing as economically feasible.  Downtown Kitchener is not New York or London.  Unfortunately things need to make sense from a financial standpoint.
Reply
#5
(12-03-2014, 07:46 PM)REnerd Wrote: To call this a lame excuse is just .... lame.  Smile

There is such a thing as economically feasible.  Downtown Kitchener is not New York or London.  Unfortunately things need to make sense from a financial standpoint.

Sorry, but I stand by my comment. If it isn't economically feasible then say exactly that: we got no expressions of interest that were commensurable with the cost. None of this lame "structural reasons" excuse.
Reply
#6
Again, I'm not aware that anything has been announced re this project. My comment above was something a third party told me - it is not confirmed.
Reply
#7
(12-03-2014, 08:45 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: Sorry, but I stand by my comment. If it isn't economically feasible then say exactly that: we got no expressions of interest that were commensurable with the cost. None of this lame "structural reasons" excuse.

Simply because "a solution exists" doesn't mean that they need to specify the exact parameters of their economic assumptions. There is clearly an assumed "using the structural capacity of the existing building" restriction, as anything further would have been outside the scope of the proposed work. Retrofitting heritage buildings with steel supporting structures is still the exception, not the rule.
Reply
#8
(12-04-2014, 12:31 PM)Markster Wrote:
(12-03-2014, 08:45 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: Sorry, but I stand by my comment. If it isn't economically feasible then say exactly that: we got no expressions of interest that were commensurable with the cost. None of this lame "structural reasons" excuse.

Simply because "a solution exists" doesn't mean that they need to specify the exact parameters of their economic assumptions.  There is clearly an assumed "using the structural capacity of the existing building" restriction, as anything further would have been outside the scope of the proposed work.  Retrofitting heritage buildings with steel supporting structures is still the exception, not the rule.

I agree. Enough money can fix anything. Economics always has to be considered. There are structural issues here - simple. In my mind, I don't think the developer is being misleading or unfair by saying that (if that's, in fact, what they are actually saying). In any event, hats off to them for taking on this project. They may still be sourcing tenants and could be waiting on detailed tenant requirements before moving forward with completing the project. My understanding is that the inside of the building has been mostly gutted.
Reply
#9
December 7, 2014

[Image: z3TcPMe.png]

[Image: geOuAU2.png]
Reply
#10
So much hope I had pinned on that bit of fencing and wood on the Young St sidewalk, and today it's gone. Sigh....
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links