Hey Guest,
Welcome, Join our awesome community where you can discuss on various topics
or Create an Account


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
357 King St East
#31
(02-08-2017, 08:52 PM)embe Wrote: Doesn't look like a very permanent building, does it?

Sure it does - weren't building codes recently relaxed to allow larger and taller wood-framed buildings?
Reply
#32
(02-08-2017, 09:36 PM)mpd618 Wrote:
(02-08-2017, 08:52 PM)embe Wrote: Doesn't look like a very permanent building, does it?

Sure it does - weren't building codes recently relaxed to allow larger and taller wood-framed buildings?

2-storey wood frames have always been allowed!
Reply
#33
Now fully framed, bar the roof.

   
Reply
#34
Why would they close a business and tear down a building just to put up a building the exact same size?
Reply
#35
The business was closing anyway. The building had poor structure and an unworkable layout, I understand, but the footprint was the right size. So they dore down the above-ground structure and put in this configuration instead.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#36
Can someone remind me - is this retail on the ground with office space above?
Reply
#37
I remember this article written Dec 1, 2012 about how the business was shutting down because the owner received an offer for the property.

http://m.therecord.com/news-story/261678...osing-shop

It seems like a long time has passed since then, I wonder if the original redevelopment l plans were more ambitious than what we see today?
Reply
#38
The new building is looking good, a nice fit for the area!  It appears that the ground floor is set up for retail, and the second floor for offices.


Attached Files Image(s)
   
Reply
#39
The choice of brick is a bit odd - they all look nice except the strip between the upper and lower windows; that appears to be plain cinderblock.

Maybe an extra cladding layer is planned above that?
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#40
Maybe intended to be covered by signage or a canopy?
Reply
#41
It appears from the rendering on page one that there is supposed to be a canopy and that the cinder block will be covered with some sort of stucco finish. After looking at the rendering, is B&T actually a confirmed tenant at this location?
Reply
#42
That render also is 5/6 stories so it's safe to say it's not the project that was built.
Reply
#43
Not a fan of the trend of using too many (imo) exterior finishes on buildings. The end result always looks cluttered, to my eye. In this case, they should have stuck with one type of stone rather than two.
Reply
#44
(06-16-2017, 07:14 AM)jamincan Wrote: It appears from the rendering on page one that there is supposed to be a canopy and that the cinder block will be covered with some sort of stucco finish. After looking at the rendering, is B&T actually a confirmed tenant at this location?

That render was for a different building, not 357 King E.
Reply
#45
(06-16-2017, 08:07 AM)tomh009 Wrote:
(06-16-2017, 07:14 AM)jamincan Wrote: It appears from the rendering on page one that there is supposed to be a canopy and that the cinder block will be covered with some sort of stucco finish. After looking at the rendering, is B&T actually a confirmed tenant at this location?

That render was for a different building, not 357 King E.

The one next door right?
Reply


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

              Advertise