The Metz (Schneiders site redevelopment)

[Momo26]

Was trying to find the most recent renderings for this site...brownish buildings right...wanted to show someone. Went through several pages...can someone post it again? Thanks in advance.

[Acitta]

Was trying to find the most recent renderings for this site...brownish buildings right...wanted to show someone. Went through several pages...can someone post it again? Thanks in advance.

I don't think that there have been any new renderings since the ones shown at the public meeting in July 2019. You can find links to those after that date posted by me.

[tomh009]

Another decade long Auburn hole in the ground - yay...

Here is their overall site concept and a rough timeline. Assuming things stay on track, by 2023, we should already have something resembling a neighbourhood, even if many buildings will remain to be built.

   

   

The full presentation is here:
https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGen...e-Metz.pdf

[panamaniac]

What are the chances that they’ll eventually acquire some or all of the properties adjacent to Blocks K and J?

[Acitta]

Another decade long Auburn hole in the ground - yay...

Here is their overall site concept and a rough timeline. Assuming things stay on track, by 2023, we should already have something resembling a neighbourhood, even if many buildings will remain to be built.

Given that the demolition was unexpectedly stopped for a year, I think that any dates on that presentation are probably pushed back by at least that much.

[tomh009]

Here is their overall site concept and a rough timeline. Assuming things stay on track, by 2023, we should already have something resembling a neighbourhood, even if many buildings will remain to be built.

Given that the demolition was unexpectedly stopped for a year, I think that any dates on that presentation are probably pushed back by at least that much.

Quite right. So, the construction of the mid-rise A/B/C buildings and the high-rise D should start next year. 2022-2023 should see the construction of the commercial area near Courtland and Borden. And by 2024 things should look pretty good.

Maybe!

[ac3r]

What are the chances that they’ll eventually acquire some or all of the properties adjacent to Blocks K and J?

They'd most certainly be redeveloped eventually as it's within the Rockway PARTS master plan, but I doubt it would be by Auburn specifically.

[jamincan]

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

[panamaniac]

What are the chances that they’ll eventually acquire some or all of the properties adjacent to Blocks K and J?

They'd most certainly be redeveloped eventually as it's within the Rockway PARTS master plan, but I doubt it would be by Auburn specifically.

I wish more than one developer had been involved in the project from start. It would have been the best way to avoid the "samey samey".

[panamaniac]

What are the chances that they’ll eventually acquire some or all of the properties adjacent to Blocks K and J?

They'd most certainly be redeveloped eventually as it's within the Rockway PARTS master plan, but I doubt it would be by Auburn specifically.

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

Because they can?  Because two main streets are better than one?  Mind games?

[tomh009]

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

A perfectly acceptable one -- do you mean Courtland Ave?

[tomh009]

They'd most certainly be redeveloped eventually as it's within the Rockway PARTS master plan, but I doubt it would be by Auburn specifically.

I wish more than one developer had been involved in the project from start. It would have been the best way to avoid the "samey samey".

That would have really required the property to be subdivided and sold in pieces. I expect Maple Leaf was happy to sell it all in one piece rather than getting into the development game.

[taylortbb]

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

Zoning is the general answer I believe. Courtland is residential on the other side, so it probably requires huge front lawn-style setbacks, probably doesn't allow commercial, etc. On regional roads we heavily restrict driveways because they might slow down traffic. It's all just more 1970s planning that's deeply embedded in our policies, and the attitudes of a lot of people that work at the municipalities.

[Acitta]

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

It is a big property. How would they build on it otherwise? A suburban single detached home development site of the same size would have new streets within it.

[panamaniac]

Why do developers always seem to have to make a new main street in their development when they're already right beside a perfectly acceptable one?

Zoning is the general answer I believe. Courtland is residential on the other side, so it probably requires huge front lawn-style setbacks, probably doesn't allow commercial, etc. On regional roads we heavily restrict driveways because they might slow down traffic. It's all just more 1970s planning that's deeply embedded in our policies, and the attitudes of a lot of people that work at the municipalities.

There are, or have been at one time or another in the past, many commercial uses along the other side of Courtland between Borden and Stirling.