210 Heritage Dr, Kitchener | Stacked townhomes, 26 units

[Bjays93]

I actually had a conversation with my uncle the other day and he made a pretty valid point, about how there are large million dollar homes being built nearby just off of lackner in a brand new subdivision, where they could be building with much more density, and are choosing to sandwich a ton of homes on to a one acre lot in an older subdivision here.

As I said before. I dont think the density here is the issue, but the way it's being proposed in a mature neighborhood like this isnt that great.

Isn't that quintessential NIMBY, though? "Build it somewhere else, just not where I can see it"?

Mature neighbourhoods are exactly where we should be building these sort of things, in order to increase the density of those neighbourhoods. Otherwise we just perpetuate the "sprawl or shoeboxes in the sky" trap we are currently in by not building any missing middle housing.

Instead of Kitchener current exclusionary zoning regime or the not-better-at-all CRoZBy scheme, we need to make the lowest, least dense tier of residential zone allow triplex, fourplexes, townhomes, three-storey walk-ups, stacked townhomes, and low-rise apartments in addition to single family homes.

"Mature neighbourhood" just seems like a euphemism for "neighbourhood character", which was already fraught with problems if you know the historical context.

My mature neighbourhood comment was not meant to suggest they can't build density here, there' an apartment (albeit an ugly one) right across the street from this development. I'm more talking about the context of stacked townhouses, and the ugly parking lot that comes with this one. I wouldn't read too much into what I was trying to say. 

Ideally you'd see something get built that doesnt involve paving over an acre of forest in an area that's been able to flourish and grow for years. My mature comment to that extent had more to do with the state of the nature around here, as opposed the age of the buildings themselves. Trees and wildlife take time to foster and grow. I love kitcheners old subdivisions because they are like urban forests. Eventually newer ones will be like that too but it's not something that should be taken for granted. 

As for the other comment about why they would need to cut down more trees. The lot extends well past what you see as green space on satellite view, and into the forest. There are a significant portion of trees they'll be taking out on the one end of the lot. 

On an note unrelated to this development. Obviously it depends on the context and who's saying it but theres nothing intrinsically wrong with wanting to keep "neighbourhood character" and one should be able to separate character aesthetically to that of demographic makeup. I think it's totally valid to want something to fit in aesthetically to the context of what's around it without bringing demographics into it. 

People may use aesthetics as an excuse to say only single family detached houses can go on a site, but that's not a valid argument. There are many ways to increase density while keeping with the surrounding context. Material selection is the main factor.