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.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1593 & 1603 Highland Rd W | 13 & 16 fl | Proposed
#16
The neighbourhood is a bit odd - while this would replace some single homes, the adjacent properties are all light industrial (transport, storage, etc). That entire wedge between Ira Needles and Trussler is a bit of an orphan of road planning, in a way.
Reply


#17
(11-13-2020, 02:27 PM)KevinL Wrote: The neighbourhood is a bit odd - while this would replace some single homes, the adjacent properties are all light industrial (transport, storage, etc). That entire wedge between Ira Needles and Trussler is a bit of an orphan of road planning, in a way.

It's like it's a different village (without shops). When going to IRA Needles, towards Waterloo, you look to your left, and yeah, that tiny neighbourhood is all by itself. Literally.

Unsure how the apartment would make a difference, but I would think it would make the neighbourhood feel less lonely and by itself.
Reply
#18
The OLT has voted in favour of this proposal. Construction to start next year

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fww...bunal.html
Reply
#19
Such a weird location for a high density development, but I guess we're past the point where all towers/skyscrapers will be built in the cores. They'll be springing up all over the region going forward.
Reply
#20
Hopefully we get the same result at Victoria and Park should the developer decide to take it the the Land Tribunal. I feel like there should be some sort of penalty to cities that reject proposals that are then approved by the OLB. Not sure how that would work, but this project was just delayed by a year unnecessarily. Now each unit will cost that much more to build, which ultimately will be passed on to the person occupying the unit.
Reply
#21
Still a win for the NIMBYs. Less poor people in their neighborhood.
Reply
#22
(07-12-2022, 10:18 AM)westwardloo Wrote: Hopefully we get the same result at Victoria and Park should the developer decide to take it the the Land Tribunal. I feel like there should be some sort of penalty to cities that reject proposals that are then approved by the OLB. Not sure how that would work, but this project was just delayed by a year unnecessarily. Now each unit will cost that much more to build, which ultimately will be passed on to the person occupying the unit.

Feels like a bit of a slippery slope... I'm open to disagree with the conclusion on this one but I see them as opposites. Here the OLT, in my view, approved something that wasn't truly a fit for the area, while Victoria and Park by relation may be more justified to its location. Not sure the city should be penalized in either or both cases. 

Frankly the cost to manage that appeal and loss of compromises promised to the city should be disincentive enough (as said by pro-approval councillors in the Victoria & Park review).
Reply


#23
(07-12-2022, 11:21 AM)cherrypark Wrote:
(07-12-2022, 10:18 AM)westwardloo Wrote: Hopefully we get the same result at Victoria and Park should the developer decide to take it the the Land Tribunal. I feel like there should be some sort of penalty to cities that reject proposals that are then approved by the OLB. Not sure how that would work, but this project was just delayed by a year unnecessarily. Now each unit will cost that much more to build, which ultimately will be passed on to the person occupying the unit.

Feels like a bit of a slippery slope... I'm open to disagree with the conclusion on this one but I see them as opposites. Here the OLT, in my view, approved something that wasn't truly a fit for the area, while Victoria and Park by relation may be more justified to its location. Not sure the city should be penalized in either or both cases. 

Frankly the cost to manage that appeal and loss of compromises promised to the city should be disincentive enough (as said by pro-approval councillors in the Victoria & Park review).

I do agree that it could be a slippery slope, probably not a realistic solution. There have just been a couple downtown proposals recently that Council has allowed NIMBY's to dictate the initial outcome of the project, which stings a little. 

This proposal seems odd, but the region only has so much more room for sprawl. I think we will be seeing more of these types of proposals on the fringes of the cities in years to come. Its too bad the planners at our region are not the most forward thinking people and have not created master planned community nodes on the peripheries that are dense walkable neighbourhoods, similar to what you would see in Copenhagen.
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