(09-03-2019, 08:57 PM)Square Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2019, 08:38 PM)jgsz Wrote: [ -> ]The buildings look taller than the ones in the SIXO render. How many floors in the tallest building?
Somewhere I read 28 and 19 storeys. The SIXO had a tower being 30 storeys. I'm wondering if it will have 4 residential buildings or just these two?
This is just the first phase (of 3?), no?
does anyone has info on pricing?
(09-03-2019, 09:02 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2019, 05:41 PM)Momo26 Wrote: [ -> ]Gotta say there are a lot more 347 (yah you read that right) to 499sqft units than I expected from the 'un-Toronto'...
This is disappointing and frustrating. Those units are so small, I wish developers would stop this nonsense.
I am too. My hype went from 9 to 2/10 for this project. There's nothing note worthy about this project anymore.
Very disappointing for a “Landmark” development
Oooof. Are they seriously going to sales with such garbage renderings??? They don't even look finished!?!
(09-03-2019, 06:50 PM)moe242324 Wrote: [ -> ]To be very honest, i don’t like these renders or how the buildings looked considering this is supposed to be the focal point of KW, downtown Kitchener.
It is very underwhelming to say the least.
I enjoyed the old Sixo midtown renders more
Guarantee this has something to do with how much 'parkland' hand to be preserved (or in this case, created) in order for it to be approved.
(09-03-2019, 09:11 PM)Adrian Wrote: [ -> ]does anyone has info on pricing?
Pricing isn't released yet but Duke Tower condo prices should be similar.
(09-03-2019, 09:11 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2019, 08:57 PM)Square Wrote: [ -> ]Somewhere I read 28 and 19 storeys. The SIXO had a tower being 30 storeys. I'm wondering if it will have 4 residential buildings or just these two?
This is just the first phase (of 3?), no?
I think you are right. I did read that these two are phase 1, but like Rangersfan said, I wish they would show all the plans.
(09-04-2019, 12:04 AM)jeffster Wrote: [ -> ] (09-03-2019, 06:50 PM)moe242324 Wrote: [ -> ]To be very honest, i don’t like these renders or how the buildings looked considering this is supposed to be the focal point of KW, downtown Kitchener.
It is very underwhelming to say the least.
I enjoyed the old Sixo midtown renders more
Guarantee this has something to do with how much 'parkland' hand to be preserved (or in this case, created) in order for it to be approved.
Did the City impose special requirements on this development?
tomh009 Wrote:MidTowner Wrote:An e-mail went out on the weekend with the floor plans. Unfortunately, not a single three-bedroom unit available. Probably practically no families will live here.
I fail to understand why all families need three bedrooms.
Well, I never did say "all families need three bedrooms." Many families with one or two, particularly young, children will be fine in two bedroom units. When we had our first child, we were in a one bedroom apartment- though I have to tell you that we weren't there much longer.
Some young families will live here- but very, very few. Not only are there no three-bedroom units, but the majority of the rest of the units are bachelors, one bedroom, and one bedroom plus den. You can not have a child sleep in a den.
I personally agree with you that kids can share rooms and a two-bedroom apartment can accommodate a family of four, especially when there are lots of public amenities nearby. But most families nowadays want (not "need") kids to have their own rooms. There are few families who will choose to buy a 750 square foot two-bedroom apartment, so I stand by my statement that practically no families will live in this development. Unfortunately.
Ya this is definitely underwhelming, but hard to totally judge given we don't know what the rest of the property will look like
As a side note, when did this become a landmark development. I always thought it was an important one given its size but never a critical one
(09-04-2019, 07:35 AM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]tomh009 Wrote:I fail to understand why all families need three bedrooms.
Well, I never did say "all families need three bedrooms." Many families with one or two, particularly young, children will be fine in two bedroom units. When we had our first child, we were in a one bedroom apartment- though I have to tell you that we weren't there much longer.
Some young families will live here- but very, very few. Not only are there no three-bedroom units, but the majority of the rest of the units are bachelors, one bedroom, and one bedroom plus den. You can not have a child sleep in a den.
I personally agree with you that kids can share rooms and a two-bedroom apartment can accommodate a family of four, especially when there are lots of public amenities nearby. But most families nowadays want (not "need") kids to have their own rooms. There are few families who will choose to buy a 750 square foot two-bedroom apartment, so I stand by my statement that practically no families will live in this development. Unfortunately.
I unfortunately agree. Not to mention that's a really small space for a family of 3
I haven't given up hope, but I think they need to post alternate photos of the renderings stat.
(09-04-2019, 07:33 AM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ] (09-04-2019, 12:04 AM)jeffster Wrote: [ -> ]Guarantee this has something to do with how much 'parkland' hand to be preserved (or in this case, created) in order for it to be approved.
Did the City impose special requirements on this development?
That's what I am wondering, unless another phase is going to blow us away.
Making things that aren't a park look like a park is pretty standard in condo renderings. Lots of condo renderings with conveniently placed trees, that don't exist in reality, and just happen to block that ugly neighbouring building.
My interpretation is that they're still not sure what they're doing the rest of the site, and the exact scale and office/residential mix will depend on how sales of the first phase go. So for now they just show it as trees, rather than the ugly worn-out parking lot it actually is.