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:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 3.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Victoria and Park | 25, 36, 38 fl | Proposed
The Record article didn't really delve into the council's rationale for rejection, apart from Debbie Chapman, so it's not clear what it would have taken to pass the vote. $2M to affordable housing is something at least. Maybe a height closer to Garment St would have been accepted?

"Next to an established neighbourhood" is an unreasonable complaint, though: unless we start putting the new density on farmland in the townships, it's always going to be next to an established neighbourhood.
Reply


It seemed based on the questions a lot of hay was made out of potential traffic impacts (real or perceived), which council seemed unwilling to accept were adjusted based on historical variance for the pandemic and that a proposal was recommended by both sets of staff. They also really could benefit from using a different term than "road widening" for the regional land allocation since repeated explanations still didn't convey it wasn't necessarily vehicular ROW (though skepticism is perhaps merited).

If the developer takes this to the OLT, I think they are still getting it through. Perhaps it could be less tall for the location, but staff also repeatedly pointed out is neither abuts a zone for low density / single detached and its across the road from blocks that do.
Reply
Disgusting, I hate the VPNA and their nimby bullshit they're always on about. The Iron Horse towers didn't ruin the neighbourhood neither will the condos I hope get built on the other side of the IHT. So sick of this shit, none of these councillors seem to give a shit about affordable housing when it comes to approving new subdivisions and no one seemed to care about all the other ugly-ass buildings that they approved downtown, like they'll generate traffic on narrow streets that can't be expanded but somehow people still manage to drive everywhere in Kitchener without a lot of problems.
Reply
(06-21-2022, 12:20 PM)clasher Wrote: Disgusting, I hate the VPNA and their nimby bullshit they're always on about. The Iron Horse towers didn't ruin the neighbourhood neither will the condos I hope get built on the other side of the IHT. So sick of this shit, none of these councillors seem to give a shit about affordable housing when it comes to approving new subdivisions and no one seemed to care about all the other ugly-ass buildings that they approved downtown, like they'll generate traffic on narrow streets that can't be expanded but somehow people still manage to drive everywhere in Kitchener without a lot of problems.

righteous ️‍🔥

Yup...I'm very disappointed by my former neighbourhood (we weren't actually in VPNA but we were across the street from it). I've met some very toxic individuals from there. But the most shocking thing was people who live in my former building...a condo tower...who live in condos only slightly larger (and with a more traditional, space in-efficient layout) than the proposed ones....who are arguing against the building, on the grounds that nobody should want to live in those apartments.

It really boggles the mind.
Reply
(06-21-2022, 12:43 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Yup...I'm very disappointed by my former neighbourhood (we weren't actually in VPNA but we were across the street from it). I've met some very toxic individuals from there.

You were in the Cherry Park neighbourhood, right? CPNA is regrettably only less active in that they are less organized. CPNA president didn't hesitate to delegate and invoke the neighbourhood to back up her opinions...

Personally enjoyed that "people living in 600 sf units don't contribute to a community" and that "renters aren't invested in building community" as two wildly unopposed remarks from delegates. This session really missed Councillor Singh to push back on that classist and nuclear-families-only crap. As if some of the most active organizers in the city don't live in small apartments or that you need to have a family and kids to count in building a community.
Reply
I was involved with this project and said if it didn't go ahead, I'd never do architectural work in Waterloo Region again. So, see ya later, I guess, I'll stick to working in actual progressive cities. Enjoy the shitty fucking SRM skyscrapers instead.
Reply
There's one very common theme with most of the people who say not in my backyard. Can you figure it out?

[Image: Qgxc1pB.png]
Reply


They all look like miserable twats
Reply
(06-21-2022, 03:10 PM)ac3r Wrote: I was involved with this project and said if it didn't go ahead, I'd never do architectural work in Waterloo Region again. So, see ya later, I guess, I'll stick to working in actual progressive cities. Enjoy the shitty fucking SRM skyscrapers instead.

Any sense on whether there is a case they bring back substantially revised proposal or if there is the ammunition to go to the OLT?

Really disappointed we're losing out on a quality building and substantial activation of that intersection, to say nothing of $2M for affordable housing developments and their plans to maintain permanent affordability within the designated units in this development.
Reply
(06-21-2022, 01:26 PM)cherrypark Wrote: Personally enjoyed that "people living in 600 sf units don't contribute to a community" …

It occurs to me they probably contribute more, on average, to the community. Somebody who lives in an apartment of that size probably wants to get out once in a while. If somebody lives in a 6 bedroom McMansion, there is really no need to go elsewhere.
Reply
(06-21-2022, 04:05 PM)cherrypark Wrote:
(06-21-2022, 03:10 PM)ac3r Wrote: I was involved with this project and said if it didn't go ahead, I'd never do architectural work in Waterloo Region again. So, see ya later, I guess, I'll stick to working in actual progressive cities. Enjoy the shitty fucking SRM skyscrapers instead.

Any sense on whether there is a case they bring back substantially revised proposal or if there is the ammunition to go to the OLT?

Really disappointed we're losing out on a quality building and substantial activation of that intersection, to say nothing of $2M for affordable housing developments and their plans to maintain permanent affordability within the designated units in this development.

Not really sure since the design was handed off to the developer so it's basically up to them to decide how to proceed. They could take it to the OLT and possibly win. One of the few good things about the Ford government is that they'll gladly support stuff like this. They would hand out MZOs left and right, for example to the massive SmartCentre development that'll be built in Cambridge so I can't see them objecting to a handful of old boomers who want to fantasize about small town 1950s Kitchener. They could also scale back the development but from what I understand they didn't want to do this since they had hopes the City of Kitchener would be on board (and financially, a developer is going to want to maximize the potential), but something feels like it shifted lately and now they're being a bit more regressive.

We'll have to see what happens but this project could now be officially dead...which sucks because it was a beautifully designed proposal with retail and usable space which is seriously lacking downtown. The city will let IN8/SRM and other developers build these awful ugly skyscrapers that are basically nothing but tiny 1 bedroom units with no commercial space but this or the condo on Belmont that would have actually brought new character to that area. But a proper big city development with good architectural design and commercial/publicly usable space? Apparently that's going too far.
Reply
(06-21-2022, 04:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(06-21-2022, 01:26 PM)cherrypark Wrote: Personally enjoyed that "people living in 600 sf units don't contribute to a community" …

It occurs to me they probably contribute more, on average, to the community. Somebody who lives in an apartment of that size probably wants to get out once in a while. If somebody lives in a 6 bedroom McMansion, there is really no need to go elsewhere.

So true. I mean...who is more likely to go out and enjoy and even contribute to a growing, vibrant downtown? Geriatric old white people that probably don't even go outside now because "we're becoming like Toronto! Crime, traffic, homelessness!"...or progressive, young people looking to make the Region of Waterloo a cool place to be now that they've made it their home? Spoilers: certainly not the angry old people who are going to be in a retirement home in the suburbs in 5 years.
Reply
Really disappointed by the decision.
Reply


I wrote them an email expressing my complete shock and disappointment for the situation, for what it’s worth. I had some good replies from some councillors that are just as baffled as I am. Here is the email list if you want to copy and paste and send your own.

bil.ioannidis@kitchener.ca
debbie.chapman@kitchener.ca
scott.davey@kitchener.ca
dave.schnider@kitchener.ca
john.gazzola@kitchener.ca
christine.Michaud@kitchener.ca
kelly.galloway-sealock@kitchener.ca
paul.singh@kitchener.ca
margaret.johnston@kitchener.ca
Sarah.Marsh@kitchener.ca
berry.vrbanovic@kitchener.ca
Reply
I emailed the mayor expressing my disappointment. Really shortsighted.
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