Welcome Guest! In 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. Click here to get started.

Dear WRConnected Users: Three whole years! We've grown so much over the past three years, and much of that is because of you, the amazing WRConnected Users. But like any other website, there are costs associated with running it. To this point it has been funded out of my own pocket. As some of you may already know, we accept donations. Some of you have made donations (thank you!). This helps cover all of the background costs associated with running this site. If every user were to donate $1 we would more than cover our yearly expenses. If WRConnected is useful to you, take a minute and help keep it online for another year. Any donation is helpful. Thank you.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Virerra Village | ?m | 35fl, 33fl, 29fl, 29fl | Proposed
(09-02-2017, 10:11 AM)panamaniac Wrote:
(09-02-2017, 09:56 AM)urbd Wrote: This is the key point. I heard from someone in the development industry (and involved in the bidding process) that the latest market analysis supports a 10-12 storey building at most. This is due to everything that is coming in the pipeline: SIXO, Charlie West, 345 King, 100 Vic, and a number of other Downtown projects that haven't been announced.

I don't necessarily disagree, but the scale/height of the bolded projects will also be subject to market conditions, including whatever develops at the Hub.  Time will tell, but even with a lengthy staging period, I'm sceptical that SIXO's towers, for example, will be of the height originally suggested.

No one really knows everything that hasn't been announced yet, but there is no doubt that there will be substantial supply of condominium space built in DTK over the next five years or so.  The transit centre is further out than that, though -- and the critical point is that it's very difficult to predict the demand for the condo units in the core (rental units not listed above, and that market does tend to be distinct).

On top of that, I recall that the transit centre is proposed to have office space -- and that's something that we might well be running low on five years from now, as there are no major commercial projects (bar whatever SIXO will have) announced in the core.
Reply
(09-02-2017, 05:14 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(09-02-2017, 01:56 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: No problem! I wasn’t sure what you were getting at, but now I understand. Just to be clear I was talking about the same person. You’re right to ask for some sort of factual backup for the concerns raised. For myself there are locations near me that I expect will see some significant redevelopment over the next few years and decades, and mostly I’m looking forward to seeing how the city evolves, even if some of what happens is not my personal top choice.

Just figured out that Mcparkhill likely lives on Parkhill Crt which will have a direct line of site to this development, if it goes ahead as planned. I'm guessing no one there wants a skyscraper built in their area.

I wonder if he lives in one of the ones backing on Courtland? I suggested above those would be ripe for redevelopment. Or somebody could buy the rest of the houses on Parkhill, and Parkhill itself, and convert the whole thing into a big podium + tower(s) on Courtland.
Reply
(09-02-2017, 07:43 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(09-02-2017, 05:14 PM)jeffster Wrote: Just figured out that Mcparkhill likely lives on Parkhill Crt which will have a direct line of site to this development, if it goes ahead as planned. I'm guessing no one there wants a skyscraper built in their area.

I wonder if he lives in one of the ones backing on Courtland? I suggested above those would be ripe for redevelopment. Or somebody could buy the rest of the houses on Parkhill, and Parkhill itself, and convert the whole thing into a big podium + tower(s) on Courtland.

I do think that will be very very far down the list of redevelopment.  I don't think this city is ready for demolishing houses for denser developments, and also, there's a huge amount of empty land and parking lots to develop first.
Reply
(09-02-2017, 08:49 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(09-02-2017, 07:43 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I wonder if he lives in one of the ones backing on Courtland? I suggested above those would be ripe for redevelopment. Or somebody could buy the rest of the houses on Parkhill, and Parkhill itself, and convert the whole thing into a big podium + tower(s) on Courtland.

I do think that will be very very far down the list of redevelopment.  I don't think this city is ready for demolishing houses for denser developments, and also, there's a huge amount of empty land and parking lots to develop first.

Probably correct. Unless there is a master master plan behind this.

I think the project will be wonderful once it's completed -- assuming it gets done.
Reply
Are there any diagrams that show how the roads will be reconfigured to provide access? I can't picture how it can work.

I hope it goes through at the full, proposed height!
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
I imagine road access will be from Block Line, and opposite Hillmount. Perhaps another access at the far north end on Courtland.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
(09-03-2017, 08:55 AM)KevinL Wrote: I imagine road access will be from Block Line, and opposite Hillmount. Perhaps another access at the far north end on Courtland.

The Record article linked earlier in the thread by somebody else claims that “Access to the site would be created by opening up Hillmount Street.”

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/752...residents/

I think this would mean that the intersection with Hillmount would become 4-way (and presumably have an additional LRT crossing). I would not expect to see vehicular access from Block Line. The site is not actually all that deep so the access would be almost on top of the intersection with Courtland. Hillmount is about halfway up so I wouldn’t expect to see a second entrance off Courtland.
Reply
I seem to recall something in the plans including a Block Line access. There's about 40m between the bridge parapet and the LRT tracks to fit one in.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
The original render shows an access to Block line; plus for a structure that large there would need to be more than one access for emergency access purposes.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
Is this simply a case of optimistic developers simply hope that their development will jump all of the hurdles first to allow them to fill up first while any building that follows will suffers from lower occupancy. I know that there are suspicions that parts of Northdale are currently overbuilt due to the rush to build as quickly as possible. Time will tell.
Reply
Other than the Drewlo commie blocks on Fallowfield, I don't see who they'd be competing with.
Reply
(09-05-2017, 06:42 PM)nms Wrote: Is this simply a case of optimistic developers simply hope that their development will jump all of the hurdles first to allow them to fill up first while any building that follows will suffers from lower occupancy.  I know that there are suspicions that parts of Northdale are currently overbuilt due to the rush to build as quickly as possible. Time will tell.

Northdale is mostly student housing. The City of Waterloo simply allowed too many to go up in to short of time.

I think the vacancy rate in Kitchener is low enough to allow for a massive build like this as most of the other places being built are condos.

I'd also imagine this is going to be a really long project, and once it gets started, probably 3-5 years to finish.

It's a good spot, centralized enough.
Reply
And I think it'll be largely a different target audience than the Drewlo project at King/Madison/Charles/Cameron. SIXO might have some rental but unclear when those would be built, and they will surely be targeting a higher-end market segment.
Reply
(09-05-2017, 08:23 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(09-05-2017, 06:42 PM)nms Wrote: Is this simply a case of optimistic developers simply hope that their development will jump all of the hurdles first to allow them to fill up first while any building that follows will suffers from lower occupancy.  I know that there are suspicions that parts of Northdale are currently overbuilt due to the rush to build as quickly as possible. Time will tell.

Northdale is mostly student housing. The City of Waterloo simply allowed too many to go up in to short of time.

Is this really the case? I see lots of doom and gloom about how they're building more bedrooms in the new towers than there are new students, but belief that that's a problem depends on assuming no student rentals should ever stop being student rentals. One of the biggest problems of UW/Laurier was how students spread out into Lakeshore, Uptown, Beechwood, etc and took over detached houses. The new towers have gotten lots of students to move from these houses into them, and many of the houses are now converting back into single family homes. This seems to me like a great way for Waterloo to grow, and accomodate new families that want detached houses without more suburban sprawl. It probably also improves lots of students living conditions who now get apartments built more for their needs.

Given the generally low vacancy rate in KW I'm not concerned at all that we're building too many apartments. I think it's planning finally catching up to what the market has wanted for far longer.
Reply
(09-05-2017, 08:23 PM)jeffster Wrote: Northdale is mostly student housing. The City of Waterloo simply allowed too many to go up in to short of time.

Which is not a City problem. Developers of towers are substantial businesses that can make their own decisions of whether it makes sense to build. The City’s role in throttling the process should be limited to providing information about projects in the permitting process so that developers have the information they need to make their decisions. Supposedly, we don’t live in a planned economy.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)