The Red Condominiums | 23 m | 6 fl

[UrbanWaterloo]

The Red Condominiums
186/188 King Street South, Waterloo
Developer: Momentum Developments (http://www.momentumdevelopments.ca/)
Other Projects: the42 & BPR Lofts
www.redcondominium.ca (redcondominium.ca)

6 Story Building (64 Units) With Ground Level Retail
Similar But Slightly Larger Than the42
Presentation Center Grand Opening September 24, 2011

489 (http://redcondominium.ca/images/home-img02.jpg)

[jay]

Kieswetter has been preping the demolition of 188 King St South for the last 2 days. Hopefully they start construction right away.

Has anyone heard anything about a sales office?

[Spokes]

Are the units definitely for sale? I guess I just always thought they might be rentals when in the council papers it said the project would "provide opportunity for affordable/student housing"

[Greg Moore]

Regarding 186 King St S I found this today on www.icx.ca (http://www.icx.ca).

http://www.icx.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8928250

Excellent Corner Redevelopment Site On King St. S At The Corner Of Allen St. Approx 0.37 Acres With Existing Building Of Approx 7350 Sf. Wide Array Of Uses Permitted On The Site Including Commercial, Residential And Institutional Under Zoning Bylaw. 1.08 Property Being Undersold Under A Modified Tender Bidding Process With A Bid Date Of January 29, 2010. The Vendor Reserves The Right To Change The Bid Date In Its Sole Discretion.**** EXTRAS **** 2nd Agent: Hudson Merritt, 519-340-2318

The price...$1. I'm in. Whatcha wanna build?

[Spokes]

Im really curious what the actual price is. I'd LOVE to see it get redeveloped. Lots of potential for something mid rise there.

[jay]

It's 1.6 million. It's listed somewhere I forget where but I saw that number.

I would love to see this get redeveloped also. 188 King st South is about to get demo'd and it would have been nice for a combined development. What annoys me is that grey building is staying, it would have been nice if it was in the 188 project.

[Spokes]

It's 1.6 million. It's listed somewhere I forget where but I saw that number.

I would love to see this get redeveloped also. 188 King st South is about to get demo'd and it would have been nice for a combined development. What annoys me is that grey building is staying, it would have been nice if it was in the 188 project.

Ya it definitely would have been nice to combine all 3 of those properties, but I have hope for two separate smaller properties if they are done correctly. They should add a good amount of architectural variety in terms of both height and design.

[jay]

True. With 188 being 5 floors: I think the red cross lot could be 9 or 10 and the Allen Square is 6 stories so it would give it a nice variation.

I'm curious if the owners of the apartment buildings a couple homes up on King will sell. They are directly in front of Bauer and they are showing there age. They could probably double the rent that is paid there now if a nicer building was done.

[Spokes]

True. With 188 being 5 floors: I think the red cross lot could be 9 or 10 and the Allen Square is 6 stories so it would give it a nice variation.

I'm curious if the owners of the apartment buildings a couple homes up on King will sell. They are directly in front of Bauer and they are showing there age. They could probably double the rent that is paid there now if a nicer building was done.

Ya now that Bauer's done, and 188 is about to get going we could definitely see some people start selling. Especially if they see the Red Cross building sell.

[UrbanWaterloo]

188 King Street South, Waterloo "Before Shot" - March 26, 2010

http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss203/UrbanWaterloo/Waterloo/188KingStreetSouth-March262010.jpg

[Spokes]

188 King Street South, Waterloo "Before Shot" - March 26, 2010


Does this mean demolition is right around the corner? I sure hope so

[jay]

You beat me to that picture Urban! I was going take one from my balcony. When this starts we will have nice aerial shots of this getting built, with the view from our lofts.

Kieswetter Demolition was there a couple weeks ago taking out interior stuff, but I haven't seen anything since. I thought the Red Cross building would sell already also. I wonder if what is holding it up is someone might be trying to negotiate both property's and the owner of 188 is weighing his options.. Just a thought... It is only March so maybe they want to wait until April and the better weather.

When I look out my window I see lots of options on King that could be re-devoleped. Dairy Queen really stands out for me. The lot is pretty big, and they are a seasonal location. If they wanted to keep it they could move into the bottom of a new building, plus I doubt that location has been updated since the 60's like the Cambridge one by GCI.

[Spokes]

Ya that DQ lot would be perfect! Its a lot deeper than it seems too.

[jay]

Also what's going on with 188 King St South?. I wonder if they shelved the plans until they find out what is happening with the Red Cross Building.

[jay]

Red Cross on King St in Uptown has a sold sign on it. I wonder now that this is sold we will find out what is happening to 188 King St S, beside it. There was supposed to be a 5 story mixed use apartment going there but nothing has happened in months.

I wouldn't be surprised if they will combine the lots in order to make a bigger project. If they do that they should buy the gray house beside 188 also.

[myfaceisonfire]

Red Cross on King St in Uptown has a sold sign on it. I wonder now that this is sold we will find out what is happening to 188 King St S, beside it. There was supposed to be a 5 story mixed use apartment going there but nothing has happened in months.

I wouldn't be surprised if they will combine the lots in order to make a bigger project. If they do that they should buy the gray house beside 188 also.

A little birdie told me that Momentum Developments bought the red cross property and they plan to develop another infill project there. The birdie didn't know if they had also bought the adjacent properties.

Momentum is playing for keeps in in Waterloo, and that's a good thing!

[jay]

Great news!, hopefully it's around 6-8 stories and mixed use.

[Spokes]

A little birdie told me that Momentum Developments bought the red cross property and they plan to develop another infill project there. The birdie didn't know if they had also bought the adjacent properties.

Momentum is playing for keeps in in Waterloo, and that's a good thing!

That's a great thing!!

And I echo Jay's comment too.

[UrbanWaterloo]

Awesome news on Momentum & 186 King Street South (Red Cross)! :cool:

[myfaceisonfire]

A little birdie told me that Momentum Developments bought the red cross property and they plan to develop another infill project there. The birdie didn't know if they had also bought the adjacent properties.

Momentum is playing for keeps in in Waterloo, and that's a good thing!


In the August 23rd Packets there is a letter indicating momentum's desire to not have the red cross building listed as a heritage property. The reason is that they own both 186 King and 188 King. They intend to develop another mixed use development similar to the42. I guess that all but confirms things. Let's hope it goes through!

[WatDot]

In the August 23rd Packets there is a letter indicating momentum's desire to not have the red cross building listed as a heritage property. The reason is that they own both 186 King and 188 King. They intend to develop another mixed use development similar to the42. I guess that all but confirms things. Let's hope it goes through!

Agreed. A project like the42 would be completely appropriate for this location.
Reading Momentum's letter to the Heritage Committee... pure class. Willing to incorporate artifacts of the existing building within the lobby of the new development, photography essay of the entire property, unrestricted access to the property for the Committee. Professionals. I like these guys. :RpS_thumbup:

[Spokes]

Professionals indeed. They do things the right way. One thing that impressed me with them was that at BPR Lofts, they added some public art, not because the city wanted them to, but because they wanted to. Well done!

I support their wanting the Red Cross building left off the Herratige list. As well as the building of a new residential complex on the site.

So after reading the document, they are recommending that the property be added to the register, what does that mean for the future of a project there?

[diego]

Professionals indeed. They do things the right way. One thing that impressed me with them was that at BPR Lofts, they added some public art, not because the city wanted them to, but because they wanted to. Well done!

I support their wanting the Red Cross building left off the Herratige list. As well as the building of a new residential complex on the site.

So after reading the document, they are recommending that the property be added to the register, what does that mean for the future of a project there?

It means that the Red Cross building should be incorporated in some creative way to the new building on its parking lot.

[KevinL]

I trust that preservaton includes the nifty Red Cross stained-glass piece visible from King (if the Association itself isn't keeping it for their new home)?

[Spokes]

It means that the Red Cross building should be incorporated in some creative way to the new building on its parking lot.

Are you saying that's what it means or that's what you think should happen?

[diego]

Are you saying that's what it means or that's what you think should happen?

Well if it ends up being listed as a heritage building and Momentum still wants to build next to it, I'm guessing they would have to incorporate it in some way to the new building. I also think that's what should happen, that house has a lot of potential if it is restored. The contrast between contemporary and traditional architecture is always interesting.

[Spokes]

In the August 23rd Packets there is a letter indicating momentum's desire to not have the red cross building listed as a heritage property. The reason is that they own both 186 King and 188 King. They intend to develop another mixed use development similar to the42. I guess that all but confirms things. Let's hope it goes through!

Is anyone going to the meeting tomorrow night? Im curious to see what they decide, if they go with what staff is recommending, or if they favour Momentum.

[DHLawrence]

Whatever happens, it's really a win-win situation. In one instance, new building. In the other, a new heritage property. If they really want to build, they can always buy lots in the other direction.

[Spokes]

Whatever happens, it's really a win-win situation. In one instance, new building. In the other, a new heritage property. If they really want to build, they can always buy lots in the other direction.

That's a good way of looking at it. Im having a hard time imagining what the project might look like if incorporating the red cross building

[DHLawrence]

I hope they don't. Mixing old and new doesn't work when the old looks like that. I'm rooting for heritage status and buying in the other direction. There isn't much of note on the other side.

[BuildingScout]

I hope they don't. Mixing old and new doesn't work when the old looks like that.

Have you seen the old buildings built into the Hockey Hall of Fame passage? It seems to work pretty well there.

[Spokes]

I hope they don't. Mixing old and new doesn't work when the old looks like that. I'm rooting for heritage status and buying in the other direction. There isn't much of note on the other side.

You're right there's not much else there, but the corner property would be ideal given it's poor land use of that big surface lot (which also looks like crap at such an important intersection)

[DHLawrence]

Doesn't mean it will stay that way. Maybe if the house is designated, the Red Cross and the developers can work a new parking arrangement out so the land can be repurposed. Going with the Red Cross theme, it would look nice as a medicinal plant garden.

[metropolis]

Anyone know what happened here? The minutes on the city site don't show the minutes and the amendments doc opens instead.

[Spokes]

Anyone know what happened here? The minutes on the city site don't show the minutes and the amendments doc opens instead.

So the minutes are posted. Looks like it passed, but maybe an amendment was made for 186 King South and it won't be added to the register:


Moved by Councillor Whaley, seconded by Councillor d’Ailly:

“That Council approve the inclusion of the property identified as 186 King Street South on the non-designated building list based on the historical and architectural evidence reviewed by the Municipal Heritage Committee.”

Motion Defeated
3 Voting in Favour
4 Voting in Opposition
http://www.waterloo.ca/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/CS_CLERKS_Minutes_2010/20100823_Minutes_Council_Meeting.pdf

Can someone confirm this for me?

[metropolis]

Motion Defeated
3 Voting in Favour
4 Voting in Opposition

It looks like it didn't pass. Or am I missing something?

[WatDot]

Looks to me like they singled out 186 King Street South from the initial motion. Everything passed, except the individual motion seeking the inclusion of 186 King Street South. Which in my opinion is great. Momentum has the momentum to move forward now!!! :RpS_tongue: (Cheesy pun I know). I also would make the conclusion that Momentum's willingness to "work" with the Heritage Committee (and City Council) paid off, and they separated 186 from the other properties allowing it to be defeated. Other local developers should learn from this cooperation. Benefits everyone in the long run.

[Spokes]

Ok awesome, that's what I thought it meant. I was happy that they separated it from the others and voted on it on it's own.

Looks like we've got another Momentum project in the pipeline. Thats 3 in what, 3 years?

[metropolis]

Thats 3 in what, 3 years?

More if you include these (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Kitchener,+Waterloo+Regional+Municipality,+O ntario,+Canada&ll=43.476233,-80.525966&spn=0,0.016458&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=43.471776,-80.525529&panoid=JE8KsCxhupro4Qed3nXumA&cbp=12,198.22,,0,-9.55)classy (for a student dwelling anyway) rental apartments.

[Spokes]

More if you include these (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Kitchener,+Waterloo+Regional+Municipality,+O ntario,+Canada&ll=43.476233,-80.525966&spn=0,0.016458&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=43.471776,-80.525529&panoid=JE8KsCxhupro4Qed3nXumA&cbp=12,198.22,,0,-9.55)classy (for a student dwelling anyway) rental apartments.

I didn't know that was a momentum project. 5 bedrooms I take it? ;)

[metropolis]

At least it isn't 17 - 25 stories tall and 3 - 5 shades of stucco. Momentum got their start in student dwellings as have a number of local developers. It’s a sure thing around here if you are looking for a fairly steady cash flow. The difference with Momentum is they decided to do something grander once they had that cash flow and by that I obviously don't mean taller student single type apartment buildings (ahem Schembri).

[jay]

188 King Street South is for sale. So I assume the 5 story mix use building is canceled.

I figured this would happen after Red Cross was sold.

[metropolis]

188 King Street South is for sale. So I assume the 5 story mix use building is canceled.

I figured this would happen after Red Cross was sold.

I thought this was going to be combined with Red Cross to make the same project??

[jay]

It could be. But the lots are owned by two separate people right now.

[Spokes]

I thought this was going to be combined with Red Cross to make the same project??

That was my impression too, a Momentum project.

[diego]

Even if it doesn't get built in both lots there's nothing wrong with a mixed use building built only on the Red Cross Property, it's pretty big by itself and in a prominent corner.

[metropolis]

This then may be an opportunity for Momentum to expand their project so we get something equal in stature to what is across King. With the For Sale signs up though I'm thinking they aren't jumping at this because as a seller I would have apprached them prior to listing.

[Greg Moore]

192 King St is for sale now, next to 188 and the Red Cross building.

http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=9946940&PidKey=-1211761242

It would be great to see a big project started there.

[jay]

188 is for sale also. Be nice if whoever bought the one, buys the other and then they could build a 4-6 story mix use condo/apartments

[Spokes]

192 King St is for sale now, next to 188 and the Red Cross building.

http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=9946940&PidKey=-1211761242

It would be great to see a big project started there.

That'd be awesome. Although I think we're most likely going to see the Momentum project on the corner, and then hopefully one that joins 188 and 192. Although I wouldn't put it past Momentum to just grab them all.

[jay]

I'd prefer 2 separate projects around the 4 story range. The lane-way behind the properties helps the traffic flow

I wonder when Momentum will start their project. Around Spring is my guess.

[jay]

So 188 and 192 King St South are both sold. It didn't take long for those property's to sell.

Wonder if the owner of the Red Cross lot bought both of the property's? I'm thinking no, based on if they wanted the land I doubt it would have went on the MLS.

Either way I look forward to hearing what is planed for those lots.

[Spokes]

And since they sold together I wouldn't be surprised if it were the same buyer, and you know what that means, development!

[RangersFan]

I noticed the sold signs today as well, its a good sign. 188 King is really starting to deteriorate.

[UrbanWaterloo]

I was just talking with one of the owners of Momentum Developments, which is why I've moved this discussion into it's own thread. Originally one of the partners bought 188 King on his own. Then 186 King (Red Cross) became available which Momentum acquired. 192 King did recently sell but is not related to this development. Momentum has merged 186/188 together and will be constructing a 6-story building with ground level retail. It will be similar but slightly larger than the42. The majority will be 2 bedroom units, with a few 1 bedroom units as well (they won't be large units, that's not their market). Sales are expected to start in Spring 2011 (April/May). :RpS_thumbup:

[SP!RE]

If by "similar to the42" they mean that it's designed by a good firm like Quadrangle again, I will be extremely excited for this project. And bigger than the42? Excellent! :)

I wonder when we'll see a rendering; maybe they'll put it on their website sooner than April or May.

[Section ThirtyOne]

Wow, that is fantastic news! Thanks for digging up this information UW.

[jay]

Great news! and I'm glad it is going to be a 6-story building. Although I do feel bad for the people living in Bauer that are 7 floors and under, as they just lost their view.

I was hoping 192 would be part of the development. Hopefully the new owners re-design the building similar to what was done with 194. Also curious to see some renderings.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

Great news!

Now I just hope that a relatively continuous streetwall is allowed for subsequent developments nearby. This is definitely a major step in connecting uptown and downtown together.

[FancyNancy]

Thanks for posting this information. I can't wait to see what the condo's will look like. Did they mention if the parking is undergroung or above ground? Parking is a concern in this area.

[Spokes]

My guess would be that there would be underground parking, much like at the42. But that's pure speculation.

I can't wait to see all the details of this project. Combining properties is really awesome too, now 192 King needs to be combined with something else and developed

[jay]

I doubt 192 will be combined based on the fact on whoever owns 194 beside it just spent a lot of money renovating it into offices.

[cht13er]

My guess would be that there would be underground parking, much like at the42. But that's pure speculation.

I can't wait to see all the details of this project. Combining properties is really awesome too, now 192 King needs to be combined with something else and developed

Main level parking, as well as a large underground parking garage with access off Dodd's Lane - more than plenty for the 64 units.

[Spokes]

I wonder if we'll see two retail spaces, just like at BPR and the 42. Im interested to see how they manage the parking on the main level while still fitting in commercial space and a lobby.

[cht13er]

Just came across these ...

243
From Allen (looking S)

242
From Allen&King

241
From King, looking north

240
From King (from Bauer Lofts)

[bcwessel]

I think it's pretty safe to say that Momentum is the benchmark by which all other developers hoping to do business in the region should be judged. I would love for something like this to be proposed for the Warehouse District. Picture this going in on the U-Haul lot across from Kaufman.

[Spokes]

WOW!

This will be one of the best designed buildings in the region! Looks amazing!

[RangersFan]

I really like the look of this, I would really like to see this project come to fruition especially if it looks like that. The Region needs more high quality projects like the ones delivered by momentum developments.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

Sorry everyone. The post with the renders of this development has been temporarily removed until a proper source can be provided and inlcuded for everyone's reference.

If anyone has a source for these renders, please PM a moderator and the post will be restored. Thanks for your understanding.

[myfaceisonfire]

you guys are such a tease

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

I just missed it. :RpS_sad:

[metropolis]

Ok seriously... WTF?! ;)

[smably]

Not cool. Did anyone save them?

[metropolis]

Not cool. Did anyone save them?

LOL. If we don't get pictures can anyone that saw this magical place descibe it? Was it shiny and gleaming, beautiful and sexy. Was it all it could be? ;)

I love how Momentum has this magical aura about it on W2... I don't exclude myself from being drawn to it but its funny.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

LOL. If we don't get pictures can anyone that saw this magical place descibe it? Was it shiny and gleaming, beautiful and sexy. Was it all it could be? ;)

I love how Momentum has this magical aura about it on W2... I don't exclude myself from being drawn to it but its funny.

Haha, I know!

Personally, while I like what Momentum is doing, some of my favourite developments in this region come from Andrin. Their proposal for centre block looks great and they did a pretty good job on Kaufman Lofts as well. My only criticism with the latter was the lack of streetfront retail. However, Momentum is at least a local company, and they sure are leagues ahead of some of the student housing companies that shall remain nameless.

[Trogdor]

LOL. If we don't get pictures can anyone that saw this magical place descibe it? Was it shiny and gleaming, beautiful and sexy. Was it all it could be? ;)

I love how Momentum has this magical aura about it on W2... I don't exclude myself from being drawn to it but its funny.

I can't believe I missed it too. Arg.

[bcwessel]

LOL. If we don't get pictures can anyone that saw this magical place descibe it? Was it shiny and gleaming, beautiful and sexy. Was it all it could be? ;)

I love how Momentum has this magical aura about it on W2... I don't exclude myself from being drawn to it but its funny.

I think the easiest way to explain the renders is a 42/Arrow Lofts mash-up.

[SP!RE]

Did it look like it was also designed by Quadrangle, like the42 Lofts? Or a lower-rung firm?

[bcwessel]

Did it look like it was also designed by Quadrangle, like the42 Lofts? Or a lower-rung firm?

The same quality of design as the42. I like the look of it more, in fact, but that's merely my subjective aesthetic opinion (stronger contrasting distinctions in the window detailing. But, very very similar to what we've seen from them already with the42.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

Renders now available!

These are only conceptual renders of the King Street frontage that will be slightly updated in the coming weeks (landscaping, etc.).

Enjoy everyone! :banana:

[WatDot]

Will be such a compliment to this area of Waterloo. Exciting!

[KevinL]

Utterly gorgeous. A true credit to its neighbourhood and to where the city is going. Outstanding!

[panamaniac]

188 King Street South, Waterloo "Before Shot" - March 26, 2010

http://i576.photobucket.com/albums/ss203/UrbanWaterloo/Waterloo/188KingStreetSouth-March262010.jpg

From the pic it would seem that the front of this building will be in the shadow of the Bauer bldg for part of the day. Not make or break (for me), but perhaps not ideal for a condo.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

I can't think of a more ideal way of building mixed-use corridors in KW. Truly a benchmark for quality development for this region. :RpS_thumbup:

*And this is coming from someone who never thought BPR was anything special.

[urbangeographer]

Looks like they were moving stuff out of the Red Cross building this morning. They had 2 moving trucks. Any idea as to where they are relocating? How soon can we realistically expect things to start moving on this?

[urbandreamer]

What you're all waiting for: my verdict.:D

B+ Looks very good, except the cheesy fake Victorian facades tossed in to appease the locals.... Would move it to an A if they either had all glass or modern interpretation of a facade/and/or just simply more red brick accents on the facade/spandrels. Probably the best-looking modern condo development west of Hurontario (Mississauga.)

Wish the developer success and hope to see the entire strip from Uptown to Downtown fill in with similar quality structures!

[metropolis]

It obviously isn't, but am I the only one that thinks this building looks way too massive to fit on those two lots?

[.FLH.]

It obviously isn't, but am I the only one that thinks this building looks way too massive to fit on those two lots?

I would think that the building is going to be narrow in order to fit. I think the conceptual drawings make the perspective a little off.

[Spokes]

Looks like they were moving stuff out of the Red Cross building this morning. They had 2 moving trucks. Any idea as to where they are relocating? How soon can we realistically expect things to start moving on this?

I can't see ground breaking for at least 15 months. If we think about the time frame for the42 it was around that. They launched around the start of 2008 and broke ground in July 2009. So if they follow the same time line, breaking ground spring/summer of 2012

[panamaniac]

What you're all waiting for: my verdict.:D

B+ Looks very good, except the cheesy fake Victorian facades tossed in to appease the locals.... ............!

Glad to know I am not the only one who had that reaction. If they proceed on those lines, at least they could step back the "storefront windows" to complement the facades.

[cht13er]

I can't see ground breaking for at least 15 months. If we think about the time frame for the42 it was around that. They launched around the start of 2008 and broke ground in July 2009. So if they follow the same time line, breaking ground spring/summer of 2012

Well, it doesn't look like they need to re-zone, just get site plan approval .. so as long as the design is quick I don't see why it should take too long...

[Spokes]

Well, it doesn't look like they need to re-zone, just get site plan approval .. so as long as the design is quick I don't see why it should take too long...

They didn't need to re-zone for the42 either but it still took that long.

They need to comence sales/marketing, then reach the sales target to start construction, then actually demolish the houses and start it. That last part was a huge delay for the42. They were ready to go in early 2009 but didn't break ground until the summer.

Now if sales go a lot quicker things could change, but I'd be surprised. I still can't see ground breaking happening before very early 2012. I hope Im wrong though.

[jay]

They didn't need to re-zone for the42 either but it still took that long.

They need to comence sales/marketing, then reach the sales target to start construction, then actually demolish the houses and start it. That last part was a huge delay for the42. They were ready to go in early 2009 but didn't break ground until the summer.

Now if sales go a lot quicker things could change, but I'd be surprised. I still can't see ground breaking happening before very early 2012. I hope Im wrong though.

I agree. These things don't move fast.

144 Park is a prime example.

[bcwessel]

These types of projects are (hopefully) being designed and developed to last for generations, something we can't exactly say for most of what has been built for many decades now. Judging by Momentum's recent successes in Waterloo, I am completely confident that this will be built, and I'm fully willing to wait several years for the kind of quality that is sorely lacking just about everywhere else.

[panamaniac]

While I sympathize with the sentiment, the pace has more to do with bureaucracy and economics than it does with the quality of construction. Developers are not in the business of "generations" any more, I'm afraid. In the case of new condos, how well they are going to hold up over time will have more to do with the way they are run and maintained than the way they were built. I think the best one can hope for is that modern standards are fully complied with and things don't turn out to have been done in a shody fashion (fortunately that seems the exception in the Region as far as I know).

[UrbanWaterloo]

the42 ran into an issue with Laurel Creek being just to the east. They had to move the entrance location to the west side of the building in the event of a 100 year flood. Redesigning and getting approved by the GRCA took many months.

This project won't have to worry about a nearby creek so the approval process should be much quicker. That said, people were initially supposed to move into the42 in August ... August 2009, so expect a few years between now and occupancy. Just don't buy a unit and plan your wedding reception around the first proposed move-in date, as every development always tends to be pushed back (just look at Kaufman, Bauer, or 144 Park). Of course if you're buying a unit as an investment property you'll likely want construction to take it's time, as the longer you wait, the longer your property has to appreciate in value.

I'm really excited about this well designed project. I'd like to echo other's comments that the entire King Street corridor, from Columbia to Ottawa, should be lined with buildings like this.

[Spokes]

I wonder if they'll focus on the same environmentally friendly components as they did in the42

[IEFBR14]

Waterloo condo project depends on rezoning request (http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/306659--waterloo-condo-project-depends-on-rezoning-request)

http://media.mmgdailies.topscms.com/images/fd/47/08fe15154351b1729507004181c2.jpeg


A 63-unit condominium building is proposed for the corner of King Street South and John Street in Waterloo that will feature commercial businesses on the ground floor and residential units above.

Momentum Developments, a Waterloo-based company that does infill developments in the city core, will ask city councillors soon to rezone the land to allow for the mixed-use building that will have six floors and an underground-parking garage.

If the rezoning is obtained next month, marketing and pre-sales could begin in the spring and the Red Condominium will become the third to go up in that section of the historic Mary-Allen Neighbourhood.

This would also be Momentum Developments’ third project in downtown Waterloo, following the 55-unit condominium at 42 Bridgeport Road, and the BPR Lofts at 36 Regina St. North.

Brian Prudham of Momentum Developments said the company assembled two pieces of land, including the old building that housed the Red Cross, to make way for the new development.

If the past is any indication of future sales, the majority of units in the Red Condominium will be sold just days after the marketing campaign begins.

That’s what happened with The42 on Bridgeport Road West.

“At this point in time we have two penthouses remaining, both two-storey penthouses, outside of that everything else is sold,” Prudham said. “We are looking at occupancy shortly.”

Momentum Developments started marketing The42 in 2008.

“The first weekend we were 70 or 75 per cent sold. From there it just went steadily up to 95 per cent. It was quite incredible, actually. Better than we anticipated,” Prudham said.

The second project for the company was the BPR Lofts on Regina Street, which quickly sold out as well.

“Right now there is great demand and not really enough supply,” Prudham said. “The condo market in Waterloo is still in its infancy, there isn’t a whole lot of supply out there and we see a good demand.”

About 70 to 75 per cent of the buyers are young professionals working at RIM, Open Text, the University of Waterloo and Manulife. About 25 per cent are empty nesters and retiring boomers looking to downsize.

“We have got a fairly thriving young population here and they are not all interested in starting out in the suburbs,” Prudham said.

Momentum Development’s rezoning application may have little difficulty getting support among city councillors. The development is in line with the Region of Waterloo’s official plan and growth- management strategy.

Waterloo, Kitchener and Cambridge have all scheduled reviews for 2011 to bring their official plans into line with the Region of Waterloo.

“It’s right on the LRT line. It’s exactly what we are looking for. We want density in the core and on our main public-transit lines. That’s what we are offering,” Prudham said.

Waterloo Mayor Brenda Halloran said the city is aware of the pending request for rezoning the land.

“I know there is a lot of excitement that there will be more intensification along that area. Some people are quite eager to see that happen,” she said.

The two-block stretch of John Street, from Park to King, is fast becoming a high-density node with hundreds of residential units, restaurants, cafes and shops — all on the proposed route for the light-rail transit line.

There are 160 units in the Bauer Lofts, 144 in the building slated for Park and John streets and 63 planned for the Red Condominium.

“It’s kind of a growth area in the Uptown Core, there’s no two ways about it,” Prudham said.

The commercial properties in the ground floor of the Red Condominium should complement the art gallery, specialty tea shop, spa, designer clothing shop and specialty food store in the Bauer Lofts development, Prudham said.

“We hope to offer somewhere in the neighbourhood of 4,000 square feet,” he said. “I foresee retail and stuff similar to what you see over at Bauer Lofts.

“As you know with this kind of stuff, it is kind of a work in progress. It changes with feedback from all the different governing bodies,” Prudham said.

Momentum Developments is a partnership among three Waterloo businesspeople. The Red Condominium will not be their last development in central Waterloo.

“We are, I guess, an infill developer. Our focus is always going to be in the core and along public transit lines. We haven’t made highrise buildings to this point. It has all been mid-rise stuff. I like to think we will keep our focus there, but who knows what the future brings,” Prudham said.

[jay]

Just like the article says I don't think this project will have any problems getting approved.

[cht13er]

I wish that someone had come up with a better name than "Red Condos" though!

[markster]

“It’s right on the LRT line. It’s exactly what we are looking for. We want density in the core and on our main public-transit lines. That’s what we are offering,” Prudham said.
Not even funded, and it's already bringing in the development.

[Spokes]

Just like the article says I don't think this project will have any problems getting approved.

Being on the opposite side of King, the residents of the Catalina townhouses and the Chippendale townhouses shouldn't put up too much of a fuss. But then again, you never know ;)

[Spokes]

Not even funded, and it's already bringing in the development.

Exact same as the Fusion Homes proposed project in downtown Kitchener (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php/889-Fusion-Homes-King-Cameron-Charles-Madison), LRT was a big selling point.

These developers must be looking at it like, even if LRT doesn't happen, these areas will produce a big return on investment, and if LRT does happen it'll be a HUGE ROI.

[Urban_Enthusiast86]

Not even funded, and it's already bringing in the development.

My only worry would be that, if LRT tanked, would developers stop focusing on the cores?

I know some of the opponents of LRT say that intensification shouldn't be dependent on public transit. They say that public transit should be a reaction to those higher densities. Unfortunately that could reduce the quality of developments in the core if every development needed a parking garage that's just as large. :RpS_rolleyes:

[Spokes]

My only worry would be that, if LRT tanked, would developers stop focusing on the cores?

I know some of the opponents of LRT say that intensification shouldn't be dependent on public transit. They say that public transit should be a reaction to those higher densities. Unfortunately that could reduce the quality of developments in the core if every development needed a parking garage that's just as large. :RpS_rolleyes:

I personally don't think so. I think the progress made in the cores alone will continue to spur development, regardless of if LRT is in place or not.

[IEFBR14]

Being on the opposite side of King, the residents of the Catalina townhouses and the Chippendale townhouses shouldn't put up too much of a fuss. But then again, you never know ;)
The issue, not unique to this development, is traffic on Allen that needs to cross Park and then King. There's no traffic light at Park so that during busy traffic periods on Park it's very difficult to cross or turn left. There's a light at King but it takes forever to cycle to green for Allen traffic, again making it difficult to cross King or to make a left turn.

These issues will only get exacerbated with 133 and 144 Park not to mention the Red Condos, both during construction, when there will be other traffic disruptions, as well as afterwards, when there will be hundreds of new residents.

BTW the above comments apply to pedestrians and cyclists at least as much as to vehicles.

[cambridge-city-boy]

This building looks really nice.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

These developers must be looking at it like, even if LRT doesn't happen, these areas will produce a big return on investment, and if LRT does happen it'll be a HUGE ROI.


My only worry would be that, if LRT tanked, would developers stop focusing on the cores?

Smart developers like Momentum know that even if the LRT gets canned next year by fretting Councillors due to a funding shortfall that it will be essential and the only viable solution in 10 years, so it will get built anyways. Considering this, buying land NOW along the LRT is a huge bargain.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

The issue, not unique to this development, is traffic on Allen that needs to cross Park and then King. There's no traffic light at Park so that during busy traffic periods on Park it's very difficult to cross or turn left. There's a light at King but it takes forever to cycle to green for Allen traffic, again making it difficult to cross King or to make a left turn.

These issues will only get exacerbated with 133 and 144 Park not to mention the Red Condos, both during construction, when there will be other traffic disruptions, as well as afterwards, when there will be hundreds of new residents.

One thing I cannot understand is why there's a traffic light at Park and John, but not King and John. Is Park and John seriously a busier intersection than King and John? Also, you'd think Allen and Park should have a traffic light over Park and John any day. My only guess is that this intersection would only be busy for short periods when employees are coming/leaving Sun Life.

With all the residential development in this area, the traffic at Allen and Park will likely double over the next few years. Good thing the all-way stop was added at Caroline and Allen.

[Spokes]

One thing I cannot understand is why there's a traffic light at Park and John, but not King and John. Is Park and John seriously a busier intersection than King and John? Also, you'd think Allen and Park should have a traffic light over Park and John any day. My only guess is that this intersection would only be busy for short periods when employees are coming/leaving Sun Life.

With all the residential development in this area, the traffic at Allen and Park will likely double over the next few years. Good thing the all-way stop was added at Caroline and Allen.

I think it is probably busier mainly because of Sunlife and that sunlife parking garage that's right on the corner. The city probably wanted to stagger the traffic lights too. Although they might end up needing them at all 4 intersections in the near future.

[Pheidippides]

Is it just me or does the new image look like it takes the 192 King lot as well?
http://media.mmgdailies.topscms.com/images/fd/47/08fe15154351b1729507004181c2.jpeg

[Spokes]

Hmmm it might look like it, but everything we've heard including things from the city say it's not. Don't forget, the parking lot is about the size of a 3rd house on it's own.

[Floor2012]

If this comes to market by mid 2011 for occupancy sometime in late 2014 (?), what do we think the sq. ft costs will be?

[metropolis]

Is it just me or does the new image look like it takes the 192 King lot as well?
http://media.mmgdailies.topscms.com/images/fd/47/08fe15154351b1729507004181c2.jpeg

I said a few weeks ago I thought this building looked too large for just those two lots... and now the 63 unit count mentioned in the article vs. the42's 55 on what is seemingly a same(ish) sized lot (if counting only those two properties) and the identical storey count (not to mention the new render and the fact that 192 was sold right around the time the Red Cross was) only enforces that view.

On a different note, though I do like this design it reminds me a little too much of the student buildings run by WLU on King and Lodge (http://maps.google.ca/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=20+Erb+St+W,+Waterloo,+Waterloo+Regional+Mun icipality,+Ontario+N2L+1S8&ll=43.474536,-80.524614&spn=0,0.01811&z=16&layer=c&cbll=43.474708,-80.524662&panoid=Oq3p0tHkChQgPFtFI8eKZA&cbp=12,109.92,,0,-15.58)streets for me to actually desire one of these units I think. This new render in particular, with the metal looking panels on the corner drives this home for me.

[Spokes]

Don't let the number of units weigh too much, Momentum has already said they're going to be different units that are in the42. The owner of Momentum said that they won't be large units (not that they were huge in the42). They also said that it's definitely just 188/186 and that while 192 sold at the same time they didn't buy it. Combine that with council documents talking about the proposed development on only 186 and 188 King South.

You're right though metropolis, the lots are nearly identical in size. Comparing the42's lot here (http://maps.google.ca/maps?oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&q=bridgeport+and+peppler,+waterloo&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Bridgeport+Rd+E+%26+Peppler+St,+Waterloo,+Wa terloo+Regional+Municipality,+Ontario&gl=ca&ll=43.468289,-80.520489&spn=0.000905,0.002642&t=h&z=19) and this lot here (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=188+king+st+south,+waterloo&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=188+King+St+S,+Waterloo,+ON+N2J+1P7&gl=ca&ei=VRAeTbaHHcahnAf-1vXKDg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ8gEwAA) they're very very similar in size.

Looking at the above rendering, Im wondering if they'll use tinted glass or if it just looks that way.

[UrbanWaterloo]

If this comes to market by mid 2011 for occupancy sometime in late 2014 (?), what do we think the sq. ft costs will be?

Given that the BPR Lofts are being sold at $350-375/sq ft (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php/319-BPR-Lofts-16m-4-fl?p=22235#post22235), I think it's safe to say prices at the Red Condominiums will be at least $375-400/sq ft, and possibly low 400's depending on what's included in the standard finishes, building amenities, etc..

[Floor2012]

Given that the BPR Lofts are being sold at $350-375/sq ft (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php/319-BPR-Lofts-16m-4-fl?p=22235#post22235), I think it's safe to say prices at the Red Condominiums will be at least $375-400/sq ft, and possibly low 400's depending on what's included in the standard finishes, building amenities, etc..

I'm thinking of buying an investment unit in the RED building. They are planning some studio apartments in the 425 sq. ft. range. But are these sq. ft. prices sustainable? Right now there seems to be the demand, but once all the apartment buildings are built in the Barrelyards will the supply be greater than the demand in the downtown area. How much are these prices driven by current demand and when will the bubble break where these prices will drop back to reflect the real cost of construction? All advice welcome.

[mpd618]

I'm thinking of buying an investment unit in the RED building. They are planning some studio apartments in the 425 sq. ft. range. But are these sq. ft. prices sustainable? Right now there seems to be the demand, but once all the apartment buildings are built in the Barrelyards will the supply be greater than the demand in the downtown area. How much are these prices driven by current demand and when will the bubble break where these prices will drop back to reflect the real cost of construction? All advice welcome.

I think it will take decades before the Barrelyards area will get the liveliness that uptown / midtown King Street will have within five.

[Spokes]

Given that the BPR Lofts are being sold at $350-375/sq ft (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php/319-BPR-Lofts-16m-4-fl?p=22235#post22235), I think it's safe to say prices at the Red Condominiums will be at least $375-400/sq ft, and possibly low 400's depending on what's included in the standard finishes, building amenities, etc..

Ya I would likely agree. Depending on when they go on sale that is. If they launch this thing soon they might match the BPR Lofts price, but I think we're looking around the $375/sq ft mark, that's my prediction.

[UrbanWaterloo]

will the supply be greater than the demand in the downtown area

Although one can never fully predict the future and there are risks to any investment, I personally don't believe the condominium supply is outstripping demand in our downtown areas.

Canada's A Growing Country: ~1% per annum, so even if we just hold our own within the country, we should still expect our population to grow by thousands every year.

Local Investments Drive Higher Local Growth: throughout Waterloo County/Region's history, we've constantly showed the ability to reinvent ourselves. Even though large parts of our workforce are no longer employed at Seagrams or Kaufmans or Kitchener Frame, we now have new companies to drive our local economy. Many of our current employers will one day join the history books of this area. No doubt it will be a sad day when that happens, however worrying about potential losses is the pessimistic view of our future. Instead I'd rather look at the huge opportunities we're currently planting. Developments like the Stephen Hawking Centre at Perimeter Institute, UW Quantum-Nanotechnology Centre, UW Engineering V or UW Engineering VI aren't just structures, but have the potential to grow our economy (and therefore population). New global discoveries might very well be made in Waterloo Region that could even make RIM look small in comparison. It's these types of investments which have brought us from being the 15th largest CMA in Canada 50 years ago, to the 10th largest today, to what I believe will be the 7th or 8th largest Canadian CMA sometime this century.

Add in Places To Grow, demographic shifts and LRT, and I think we'll see 800-1000 urban condo units coming on stream annually by the end of this decade.

[benjaminbach]

I'm thinking of buying an investment unit in the RED building. They are planning some studio apartments in the 425 sq. ft. range. But are these sq. ft. prices sustainable?

Did you get pricing & floor plan info from them?

[Floor2012]

Did you get pricing & floor plan info from them?

I don't have plans or pricing. And to avoid confusion...I understand that they are planning some studio apartments starting from 425 sq. ft in size. (not to be confused with per sq. ft. cost).

[benjaminbach]

I don't have plans or pricing. And to avoid confusion...I understand that they are planning some studio apartments starting from 425 sq. ft in size. (not to be confused with per sq. ft. cost).

Gotcha, thanks. That'll make Kaufman seem spacious!

[Lynne]

Does anyone have more info about these condos? Size and price would be good to know.

[Spokes]

Does anyone have more info about these condos? Size and price would be good to know.

None of that has been released yet. Should happen soon though. We'll have it here on WW as soon as it's public knowledge. Maybe even sooner ;)

[jay]

I know they have been doing soil sampling on the site for the last couple of days

[Dhussey]

Had a viewing at the BPR lofts and was told that the the website for RED would be, redcondominium.ca and would be live in 3 or 4 weeks (from Feb 26th).

Any thoughts on how BPR lofts and RED will compare in terms of appreciation and rent per unit? If you were to compare apples to apples (sqft, finishes, etc).

[benjaminbach]

Had a viewing at the BPR lofts and was told that the the website for RED would be, redcondominium.ca and would be live in 3 or 4 weeks (from Feb 26th).

Any thoughts on how BPR lofts and RED will compare in terms of appreciation and rent per unit? If you were to compare apples to apples (sqft, finishes, etc).

They're both going to be great projects. BPR is already built, so prices are a known quantity. RED is as of now unpriced, so it's hard to compare. Momentum builds nice properties - I'd guess you'd do well with either one.

If you're looking for more personalized & detailed advice, send me a DM and we can go grab a tea/coffee uptown and chat.

[metropolis]

Had a viewing at the BPR lofts and was told that the the website for RED would be, redcondominium.ca and would be live in 3 or 4 weeks (from Feb 26th).

Any thoughts on how BPR lofts and RED will compare in terms of appreciation and rent per unit? If you were to compare apples to apples (sqft, finishes, etc).

If you try redcondominium.ca (http://redcondominium.ca) it brings up a working site already. Not much there but its up!

[Dhussey]

Must just have launched it this afternoon because I just check just after posted, pretty cool

[Greg Moore]

You can now register there.

[UrbanWaterloo]

Notice of Complete Application and Informal Public Meeting
March 23, 2011 | City of Waterloo | Link (http://www.waterloo.ca/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=78&mid=526&def=News%20Article%20View&ItemId=1514)

Council Chambers, City Hall
Waterloo City Centre
100 Regina Street South
Monday April 4, 2011
No earlier than 6:30pm

Official Plan Amendment No. 82
Zoning By-law Amendment Application Z-11-04
Momentum Developments
186 & 188 King Street South
Uptown Ward 7, City of Waterloo

The Applicant is proposing to amend the City’s Official Plan by applying a Special Policy Area to the subject lands to increase the permitted density. The lands are currently designated “Commercial” on Schedule “A” and “Medium Density, 6 Storeys” on Schedule “A2” in the Official Plan. The applicant is also proposing to rezone the subject lands from ‘Commercial Two – 6’ (C2-6), to ‘Commercial Two-6’ (C2-6), with site specific provisions. The purpose of these amendments is to facilitate the development of a 6 storey, mixed use building containing commercial uses at grade and 63 residential units above.


http://www.waterloo.ca/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/NEWS_images/11--3-23_Z1104_Map.gif

[mpd618]

More details of this project are available here at the city's page (http://www.city.waterloo.on.ca/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabID=2830). There will be an informal public meeting Monday (today) at the 6:30 pm Waterloo City Council meeting. You can register with the clerk to speak by 10am.

[urbandreamer]

What's going on with this project? Is it going on sale soon or delayed 'til 2012?

[Dhussey]

Yea I wouldn't mind know what's going on, was pretty excited about this one. I know they are still busy with 42 Lofts, they still have some components to finish (Green Roof, my bread and butter)

[mpd618]

What's going on with this project? Is it going on sale soon or delayed 'til 2012?

Timely question. The formal public meeting (http://www.waterloo.ca/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=1&mid=449&def=News%20Article%20View&ItemId=1621) for the rezoning is next Monday. I remember it getting a disturbingly cool reception by both staff and council at the informal public meeting, so I would strongly encourage anyone who can to speak in favour of this development. The elements that require variance from the zoning code are precisely the things that make it a good urban development - less parking, an actually urban setback as opposed to what Allen Square has, etc.

Yes, you, general reader of Wonderful Waterloo. Get out there and make yourself heard. It needs to be more voices at play in these discussions than NIMBYs and planners content with ever-so-slight massaging of the status quo. (Sorry, City of Waterloo planners, but that means you. Welcome to the 21st century - let me introduce you to the High Cost of Free Parking (http://www.raisethehammer.org/article/072).)

[plam]

Timely question. The formal public meeting (http://www.waterloo.ca/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=1&mid=449&def=News%20Article%20View&ItemId=1621) for the rezoning is next Monday. I remember it getting a disturbingly cool reception by both staff and council at the informal public meeting, so I would strongly encourage anyone who can to speak in favour of this development. The elements that require variance from the zoning code are precisely the things that make it a good urban development - less parking, an actually urban setback as opposed to what Allen Square has, etc.The staff report supports the request for increased density, but does not support zoning for a restaurant due to alleged lack of parking. It's not like we're getting an LRT nearby or anything...

[markster]

The staff report supports the request for increased density, but does not support zoning for a restaurant due to alleged lack of parking. It's not like we're getting an LRT nearby or anything...
Nor are there any large condominium towers built or planned nearby.

[Anderson3133]

I can't wait to receive more information about this project. Seems like a good little condo for the area.

Hopefully Momentum continues on their current path given the recent success of the42.

[mpd618]

The staff report supports the request for increased density, but does not support zoning for a restaurant due to alleged lack of parking. It's not like we're getting an LRT nearby or anything...

That initial staff report is linked here (http://www.waterloo.ca/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabID=2830). This is what the report says:


Staff do not support adding the use ‘restaurant’ (being more than 15 seats) in this location given the limited on-site commercial parking and no designated on-site loading space. Restaurants tend to generate higher levels of vehicular traffic, require an on-site loading area, and require an outdoor garbage disposal area. The proposed development only has indoor garage disposal, no-loading space, and only three (3) onsite commercial parking spaces** designated for the ground floor commercial space. Limited on-site commercial parking means that a traditional restaurant’s parking demands could not be met on-site, which could result in undesirable on-street parking in the Mary-Allen neighbourhood and/or unauthorized parking on nearby private property.
Let me take some liberties with a translation: Oh my God, people might not find parking on site! Oh my God, someone might actually want to park on a residential side street! Oh my God, spillover parking is a nightmare (in that the problem is in our heads (http://www.reinventingparking.org/2011/07/whos-afraid-of-spillover-bogey.html))! We have no idea what residential parking permits and pay parking are, and we don't care to find out! Oh yeah, and all you losers who walk, cycle, or take transit to a restaurant? You're all suckers, and if you want to eat out, you better pay up for all the free parking for everyone else.

You say there are restaurants in uptown and downtown without on site parking? Nonsense. Anyway, why would anyone want to go somewhere without free parking? Quit asking stupid questions about parking - planners know what's best and you don't know jack about how cities work. Now let me get to my car, I've got a long trip home.

[RangersFan]

Yeah planning in Waterloo has been very sporadic over the years (Northdale), Uptown Waterloo (pretty good, but most development has fell into their lap due to the area's great success), a mayor against Rapid Transit and the struggle for more parking at the HSBC and now the Red Condominiums. I don't get why the city would have an issue with it, the builder is ultimately going to foot the bill if their decisions are not successful.

Not sure whats going on in this city anymore.

[WatDot]

That is a very troubling and confusing report. Unless they are trying to push the developer into creating more underground parking, guess that could be another aspect.

[mpd618]

That is a very troubling and confusing report. Unless they are trying to push the developer into creating more underground parking, guess that could be another aspect.

Didn't you know? The solution is always more parking. Or, you know, just build a few townhouses there and call it a day - that's the kind of density we really like, and it minimizes impacts on the surrounding neighbourhood. Best not to build any amenities, as that would compete with The Boardwalk.

[WatDot]

Yeah I guess I kind of answered my own question... of course they are looking for more parking (underground).
Nevertheless, they should ease up on it here. Pay parking and permit parking on the streets surrounding is inevitable. Not worth pushing a good development away today over. This area is the growth end of the traditional dense "core". Plenty of restaurants along that traditional part of King with apartments above and little to no immediate parking. That's also the area of the City with the most ambiance and a history of success.

[markster]

The draft new official plan makes much reference to (paraphrased) "minimizing the impact of parking" which, in the details, does not mean reducing the amount of parking at all, but rather forcing everyone to build structured parking.

[WatDot]

The draft new official plan makes much reference to (paraphrased) "minimizing the impact of parking" which, in the details, does not mean reducing the amount of parking at all, but rather forcing everyone to build structured parking.

Thank you for the clarification.
Personally, I think that's a good way of pushing away sketchy developers and crappy building plans. Realistically, the price of structured/underground parking is so high that you are going to jeopardize losing out on some quality developments. A prime example is the Weston Hotel and Conference Centre on Willis Way. As a City of Waterloo taxpayer I would of sucked up the increase in taxes to put a parking garage in, because the spin-off would be immense for Uptown and in essence the City. A healthy Uptown means increased tax revenue. Nickel and dime'ing is only so good to a certain point.

[mpd618]

The Council Packet (http://www.waterloo.ca/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/CS_CLERKS_Minutes_2011/20110815_Packet_Council_Meeting.pdf) (PDF) for Monday contains the full staff report and recommendations starting on page 59. Overall they are recommending approval of the development. But they are not allowing restaurants (because everyone drives to them, you see) and are substantially limiting the range of permitted retail uses. Because apparently it is city policy that Serious Retail ought to be in Uptown or at malls, but on regular main streets? Of course not, that would threaten our precious little Uptown!

Maybe I am over-reacting, and should be happy that this is going forward mostly unscathed. But then again, the amount of work that the city has required from the developer so far and the number of barriers to this development boggles the mind. It's only six storeys and only 84 bedrooms. By contrast, take a look at page 37 of that document, where the city rubber-stamps demolition of two buildings on a different portion of King Street in order to put up a 10 storey building with 175 bedrooms and no commercial.

Is that really the message our city should be sending to developers? I would rather our city be making it easy for new development to, frankly, city-build - rather than making it easy for malls, new subdivisions, and cheap student towers.

[Greg Moore]

Waterloo planners and anyone with governing sway in the development of Waterloo suck at foresight. There is a ton of ugly student centered garbage building going on. There is high demand for mixed use and condominium development yet there is almost none going on.

The official plan is a joke. It's got these "nodes", but most of them people will have to drive to. They also fail to address the deficiencies in areas that could be extremely efficient places to live, like Columbia and Albert, and instead make people drive to one of their planned nodes.

Neighborhoods should be allowed to morph in to useful and efficient places to live.

Waterloo is trying to push water up hill with a rope. It's time get rid of the planners.

[RangersFan]

The Council Packet (http://www.waterloo.ca/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/CS_CLERKS_Minutes_2011/20110815_Packet_Council_Meeting.pdf) (PDF) for Monday contains the full staff report and recommendations starting on page 59. Overall they are recommending approval of the development. But they are not allowing restaurants (because everyone drives to them, you see) and are substantially limiting the range of permitted retail uses. Because apparently it is city policy that Serious Retail ought to be in Uptown or at malls, but on regular main streets? Of course not, that would threaten our precious little Uptown!

Maybe I am over-reacting, and should be happy that this is going forward mostly unscathed. But then again, the amount of work that the city has required from the developer so far and the number of barriers to this development boggles the mind. It's only six storeys and only 84 bedrooms. By contrast, take a look at page 37 of that document, where the city rubber-stamps demolition of two buildings on a different portion of King Street in order to put up a 10 storey building with 175 bedrooms and no commercial.

Is that really the message our city should be sending to developers? I would rather our city be making it easy for new development to, frankly, city-build - rather than making it easy for malls, new subdivisions, and cheap student towers.

Also to add, this new development looks like it will continue the trend of recent Waterloo student housing developments that we all love so much. It looks like it will offer a variety of colours in scattered locations: brown, tan, grey, with small windows, some brick, with a mostly stucco exterior. Wonderful Waterloo!

[WaterlooNative]

But they are not allowing restaurants (because everyone drives to them, you see) and are substantially limiting the range of permitted retail uses. Because apparently it is city policy that Serious Retail ought to be in Uptown or at malls, but on regular main streets? Of course not, that would threaten our precious little Uptown!
What's been the parking situation with the Bauer property? Do staff anticipate more parking challenges in the area once 144 Park construction begins and reduces parking in the area? Should you talk to planners, give them some solutions to dealing with the parking issue. Either that, or offer to answer their phone when the Mary-Allen folks call about the additional cars in their neighbourhood. Yes, ideally people will walk, bike or transit to the commercial area. When out with my family, I don't have the luxury to take the time to do any of the three, so I drive.


Maybe I am over-reacting, and should be happy that this is going forward mostly unscathed.
Is the weather getting to you? :RpS_smile:

[mpd618]

What's been the parking situation with the Bauer property? Do staff anticipate more parking challenges in the area once 144 Park construction begins and reduces parking in the area? Should you talk to planners, give them some solutions to dealing with the parking issue. Either that, or offer to answer their phone when the Mary-Allen folks call about the additional cars in their neighbourhood.

As I mentioned before - if or when parking on side streets becomes an actual thing, give (or sell) residents parking passes and put up designated paid parking areas on street. Price the parking at a rate high enough that there are always available spots. Invest the revenues into neighbourhood parks, amenities, and so on - when the neighbourhood has something in demand (street space for parking), it should be able to benefit from it.

There are churches in that area, which could easily have plenty of paid parking during the vast majority of the week. Allen Square has underground and surface parking which could easily be public paid parking on weekday evenings and weekends. Zoning requirements for tons of parking to be self-contained in every development means that there can be no cross-use of parking and no market forces in operation.

There is no parking problem in this area. The problem is in the planning department, and the view of parking as an entitlement instead of as a resource that has costs and which can be used less and more efficiently. Instead of forcing the creation of ever more parking even as our streets aren't getting any wider, they should focus on breaking down the barriers to a market for parking.

[eizenstriet]

I would like to call out the wild card solution to development-generated parking pressures which has been expressly advanced a few times in this thread: pay parking and/or permit parking on nearby residential streets.

What say you to issues of noise, congestion, fumes, stress to pedestrians, danger to children, loss of their own parking amenities, simple loss of enjoyment of peace and quiet?

Should it cause uneasiness to in effect advocate the expropriation without compensation of a significant feature of the quality of life of these residents?

I feel the City should quite naturally balk at doing this to its longest-standing taxpayers.

Yet the city has already approved developments which are not self-sustaining in terms of parking. It has not declared that they are not self-sustaining, but it has taken comfort in the rosy projections of developers’ consultants hired to fudge this issue.

If the cumulative effect is causing city officials second thoughts, I give them credit. If little resistance was being shown on an ongoing basis, I would have to infer that the strategy was that of gradually increasing the temperature of the water in the lobster pot such that the target doesn’t notice that it is being boiled.

Still, that is a step away from suggesting that the lobster be put on the menu.

[plam]

Are you saying that we generally don't have enough parking in Waterloo? I find that hard to believe.

In any case, requiring more parking does not reduce the amount of traffic to a place. I'd think that it would tend to increase the amount of traffic. In fact, I can tell you that this happens in my personal experience; I rarely drive to judo because it's often a hassle to park there. (That happens because one comes in at the switchover between classes, when you'd need twice the amount of parking that you would otherwise need. Doubling the amount of parking is not a rational response to that problem!) On the other hand, if people are less inclined to drive to a place, then they may use other means of transportation.

Of the issues that you listed ("noise, congestion, fumes, stress to pedestrians, danger to children, loss of their own parking amenities, simple loss of enjoyment of peace and quiet"), the only one that's addressed by not requiring parking to be built into a new development is loss of parking near one's house. And that is exactly the issue that residential parking permits handle.

On the other hand, including more parking drastically reduces the quality of a development as well as walkable density between developments. Surely we can be more creative than that.

[ViewFromThe42]

Considering it is going to likely be split lower level, you aren't likely to see much in the way of parking nightmares from anything on the lower level. I walk from the42 down past where this will be for Dairy Queen, and have never had problems leaving parking behind to eat at Uptown 21/King Street Trio/Janet Lynn's/Marbles/Yukiko's, to name a few. What this does likely allow for are more small scale, unique eating options, on the scale of King Street Trio or Yukiko's, and you certainly have the walking success to keep those afloat.

The big risk comes from trying to remove all options. Not only would it hurt the ability of the units to sell and drive down their prices (commercial units), you start to breed your own version of Northdale, a bunch of towers full of people, but nothing for them. In all likelihood though, you wind up with what happened at BPR. They added bakery and tea house to the list of options for the commercial unit, and now the bottom is taken up by Waterloo Networking instead.

[WatDot]

Uptown 21/King Street Trio/Janet Lynn's/Marbles/Yukiko's

I'm glad you mention those restaurants as they are great examples. If they were in buildings that were forced to be developed with a certain high number of parking spots I am positive we wouldn't have them today. The restaurants would not be able to afford the quality (or even get started) because of extremely high rent, as required to cover the developers costs of "parking spots" and minimal sq ft of rentable space. If they make more rentable space, more parking is required keeping costs high. It's an ugly formula right now that will drive away small, boutique businesses from Uptown.

Uptown should be all about the boutique type of business when it comes to retail/restaurants. Uptown is not a big box centre and parking requirements should reflect that. It's a community located in the core. Businesses with the same "City enforced policies" to those in the suburbs cannot compete, nor should they try to. Uptown Waterloo is a separate community and the policies should reflect that.

[mpd618]

Uptown should be all about the boutique type of business when it comes to retail/restaurants. Uptown is not a big box centre and parking requirements should reflect that. It's a community located in the core. Businesses with the same "City enforced policies" to those in the suburbs cannot compete, nor should they try to. Uptown Waterloo is a separate community and the policies should reflect that.

The same things apply to every part of town. I think we should aspire to have more of our city be like uptown, rather than forcing everything but a small piece of the city to look like big box hell (low-density car-oriented) or like North York (high-density car-oriented). The staff report indicates that they do not believe this development would be part of uptown, therefore certain retail uses shouldn't be allowed as they would compete with uptown. Which is a very narrow - perhaps blinkered - view of how this city should grow.

[garthdanlor]

The staff report indicates that they do not believe this development would be part of uptown, therefore certain retail uses shouldn't be allowed as they would compete with uptown.
What about Bauer? Why was that development allowed? It doesn't seem to have a huge amount of non-resident parking yet it has a nice selection of shops and restaurants that if not considered part of their narrow definition of Uptown, must surely then compete with it.

[mpd618]

What about Bauer? Why was that development allowed? It doesn't seem to have a huge amount of non-resident parking yet it has a nice selection of shops and restaurants that if not considered part of their narrow definition of Uptown, must surely then compete with it.

I have the sense that big developers with mega-projects have an easier time getting around regular rules - both good and bad ones. Bauer, the Boardwalk, greenfield subdivisions, the BarrelYards.

[RangersFan]

So this would not be considered Uptown? If so I really think the city needs to really take a hard look at what is considered Uptown and what is not.

[Newgrad]

So this would not be considered Uptown? If so I really think the city needs to really take a hard look at what is considered Uptown and what is not.

Who determines the boundaries of Uptown? Does the BIA have input? I wonder what the position of the Uptown BIA would be on this.

[BuildingScout]

Who determines the boundaries of Uptown? Does the BIA have input? I wonder what the position of the Uptown BIA would be on this.

There might be several definitions (e.g. uptown business association might have its own), but for all practical purposes the zoning laws define it: it is Uptown so long as it is zoned for Uptown-like shops. At some point zoning changes and it is no longer uptown.

[WatDot]

The same things apply to every part of town. I think we should aspire to have more of our city be like uptown, rather than forcing everything but a small piece of the city to look like big box hell (low-density car-oriented) or like North York (high-density car-oriented). The staff report indicates that they do not believe this development would be part of uptown, therefore certain retail uses shouldn't be allowed as they would compete with uptown. Which is a very narrow - perhaps blinkered - view of how this city should grow.

I totally agree we should aspire to have our entire City avoid the big box hell. Along with a long list of reasons why, we simply do not have the boundaries to sustain the big box model in Waterloo. The boundaries of Uptown must expand to include Allen and King immediately. The growth is too intense not too. I am hoping that one day the first floor of the Red Condo development could be renovated to accommodate a restaurant. Glad to have developers like Momentum continue to push forward in Waterloo while continuing to be meet with short-sighted government.

[metropolis]

On being part of Uptown the report is contradictory in that for commercial purposes it states this development is not part of Uptown though later in the report it talks about the Places to Grow Act having an Uptown minimum of 200 jobs and residents per hectare and that this development would take the core from 180 to 186 jobs and residents, drawing the city closer to the requirement. Seems to me they are having the definition fit their agenda as needed.

Bauer has a massive amount of parking. There isn't a ton of surface lot parking but there is an underground lot available to visitors that is huge and for the time free of charge so the city could not have an issue there.


What say you to issues of noise, congestion, fumes, stress to pedestrians, danger to children, loss of their own parking amenities, simple loss of enjoyment of peace and quiet?



eizenstriet, in terms of the issues you bring up with street side parking, firstly regarding stress to pedestrians and danger to children, nothing should make a you as a subdivision pedestrian more nervous than someone doing a bonsai reversing out of their driveway while you walk or your kids play in the middle of what are essentially small dead end streets every few feet. As a pedestrian I feel considerably safer walking down a road where cars are parked along the curb forming an effective wall against 3 ton + pieces of steel hurtling down the roadway at 50 + km/h and no driveways.

Assuming residents have driveways (as Mary Hill residents do) I also fail to see how someone loses their own parking amenities if I park along what is a public roadway in front of their house? This "parking amenity" does not belong to those residents but to everyone.

Lastly, study after study has proven that not only does vibrancy of urban life have positive health benefits it encourages the city to invest in infrastructure that encourages further urbanity (read slower and reduced traffic) and therefore no loss of enjoyment of peace and quiet. In this case that could easily mean turning more of the local streets into one ways with parking along one side of the road perhaps with curbed bumpouts for crossing along the side where cars are parked. That would mean walkers and kids now have only one lane of traffic to cross instead of two, making them even safer. These streets then are easy for familiar locals to navigate and confound those who are from outside the neighbourhood slowing down traffic further, discouraging congestion and causing fewer fumes. All this is achived with very minimal investment on part of the city.

None of this is rocket science, it only requires the local planners to think outside of the box and they don't need to go far as this sort of things has been done in many communities (like inner Toronto subdivisions) with great effect.

[mpd618]

The project was approved unanimously as in the staff recommendation (portions of which I criticized). Momentum is hoping to start construction within a couple of months.

[plam]

The project was approved unanimously as in the staff recommendation (portions of which I criticized). Momentum is hoping to start construction within a couple of months.

In all fairness, the staff recommendation did suggest accepting zoning for a coffee shop/tea room. I still think a restaurant would have been better, but then again, I didn't show up.

[ViewFromThe42]

It would be nice to have places in UpTown casually ask customers at the till whether they came by foot, bike, car, or transit, start to dispel some of the myths. Would be a plus for them too: if they could show that they don't generate parking needs, they wouldn't be forced to pay (and waste space) for as much parking.

[panamaniac]

Or it might show that many customers come to Uptown by car (although they might not admit if they thought the poll was intended to "dispel some of the myths").

[markster]

In all fairness, the staff recommendation did suggest accepting zoning for a coffee shop/tea room. I still think a restaurant would have been better, but then again, I didn't show up.
At least with the development going forward as-is, it will be suitable for a restaurant to one day move in, after the ridiculous worries over parking are dispelled.

I'm just not going to get my hopes up too much about what will inevitably live in those retail units. A portion of it will almost certainly be offices of some kind, BPR style.

[WatDot]

That's exactly it. I would think the building is still the same, restaurant/no restaurant. One day we will have a City that wakes up and smells more than the coffee... might still become a restaurant one day.

Oh and hats off to Momentum. Keep on in Uptown Waterloo!! :RpS_thumbup:

[BuildingScout]

Or it might show that many customers come to Uptown by car (although they might not admit if they thought the poll was intended to "dispel some of the myths").

I'd say that the real myth is that parking is critical to the success of Uptown businesses. People routinely pay outrageous prices and put up with great parking hassles to shop in fashionable districts in other cities.

A healthy mix of restaurants, cafes, bars, shops, bookstores, sport-goods stores, movie houses, diners, art supply stores, street performers, galleries, and clothing stores will bring people in, even if it takes several drives around the block to find an empty parking spot.

Not surprisingly, now that Uptown offers more of these it is livelier than it has ever been.

[MidTowner]

Absolutely silly about the parking requirements- BuildingScout is spot on that quality services and amenities will attract motorist clientele, even is parking is costly, or difficult to find. And there enough potential pedestrians (especially down the road, with a few more buildings like this).

A few people have said that the report was unclear on whether it considered this to be Uptown. What is the general consensus here? I am not sure where Uptown begins (William, I guess I would have said), but I like the idea of that dense area moving down King towards Kitchener- between the Bauer Lofts and the Breithaupt Block is only 1.6 kilometers, and I can see much of it becoming a lot more dense one day.

[Newgrad]

A few people have said that the report was unclear on whether it considered this to be Uptown. What is the general consensus here?

Who determines the Uptown boundaries? Is it the city council or the Uptown Waterloo BIA? I`d like to know the BIA`s opinion on this discussion. Would they like to expand the area or would they consider any expansion as competition?

[bzmwillemsen]

I'm so excited for this!!! I'm seriously looking into getting one of these condos! Great to hear that it's moving along.

[Uptowner]

For what it's worth, the Uptown Vision Committee uses the "WUWU" borders for the Uptown. WUWU = Westmount/Union/ Weber/University.

[WatDot]

For what's it worth, the Uptown Vision Committee uses the "WUWU" borders for the Uptown. WUWU = Westmount/Union/ Weber/University.

Wow that's a massive area... and not that I disagree with it. The set back, zoning and overall feel of Uptown (King from Central to William) should be extended today to Union. Development in this area is screaming for it. It's extremely frustrating that City planners are putting parking in the forefront of intensification.

[ViewFromThe42]

As mpd618 pointed out in his presentation yesterday, with respect to zoning, from south Kitchener to the north end of UpTown, the only area not zoned for mixed use is William to Union. It seems strange and backwards to waste such prime space on what is otherwise the exception to a potential-filled Central Transit (and Central Use) Corridor.

[WaterlooNative]

For what it's worth, the Uptown Vision Committee uses the "WUWU" borders for the Uptown. WUWU = Westmount/Union/ Weber/University.

I think that WUWU would be a great re-branding for the area. I think the Uptown BIA area may only include commercial properties that touch Caroline, King or Regina.

[1231]

.

[markster]

Not bad layouts.
They thankfully avoid "welcome to my kitchen" syndrome. And U-shaped kitchen counters are awesome.
I see a many units are super-small and begging to become student (perhaps grad student) rentals.

Standard complaints apply about lack of 3 bedroom units; this won't be getting any families out of single-detatched homes.

[panamaniac]

Given the kind of freehold housing you can buy in K-W for what it would cost to buy and carry a three bedroom condo, I suspect we are still many years away from seeing families with children moving into condos, although a two bedroom might appeal to a couple with a pre-schooler, I suppose.

On the other hand, if a family were bound and determined to go urban condo, they could always purchase two units at pre-sale and combine them into one larger unit.

[BuildingScout]

I see a many units are super-small and begging to become student (perhaps grad student) rentals.


I seriously doubt students would be able to afford the rent on these units. I think they have young RIM and Google employees in mind.

[diego]

I seriously doubt students would be able to afford the rent on these units. I think they have young RIM and Google employees in mind.

You'd be surprised. Quite a few students rent (some own) at the Bauer Lofts, I lived there for a year!

[BuildingScout]

You'd be surprised. Quite a few students rent (some own) at the Bauer Lofts, I lived there for a year!

True, but I think the Red Condominiums are priced at nearly 50% more per square feet than the Bauer Lofts.

[panamaniac]

Have prices been announced?

[Dhussey]

You'd be surprised. Quite a few students rent (some own) at the Bauer Lofts, I lived there for a year!

Wow they better be using some high end finishes, should be an interesting transition from BPR Lofts

[BuildingScout]

Have prices been announced?

Not as far as I know, I was extrapolating from the BPR lofts.

[eizenstriet]

Metropolis – I appreciate the thoughtfulness you gave to my concerns. You raise interesting questions going to the two sides of the coin represented by the status of existing inner city residential neighbourhoods.



eizenstriet, in terms of the issues you bring up with street side parking, firstly regarding stress to pedestrians and danger to children, nothing should make a you as a subdivision pedestrian more nervous than someone doing a bonsai reversing out of their driveway while you walk or your kids play in the middle of what are essentially small dead end streets every few feet. As a pedestrian I feel considerably safer walking down a road where cars are parked along the curb forming an effective wall against 3 ton + pieces of steel hurtling down the roadway at 50 + km/h and no driveways.

The vision I have is exactly that of the effective wall of parked cars with 3 ton pieces of steel hurtling by. In the midst of this would be distracted driveway reversers trying to see an opening and pedestrians doing a nervous dance to walk down or cross a street.

This is precisely the converse of the environment people were seeking when they originally moved to these old neighbourhoods. These were the treed, quiet oases which did not ring of urbanity. The houses were not temples to the car. There were one car garages or no garages, rather than two car garages with residences squeezed in behind. These residents were the original granola eaters who didn’t want suburbia. The pleasantness of these quiet islands as places to stroll is still appreciated by office workers taking a break at lunch hour. Now, in a great irony, these locales are in danger of becoming The Neighbourhood of The Car.

It’s not just their handiness as the wild card solution to development-generated parking pressures. They are also handy as traffic pressure releases. Even now (and even without the annual closure of Park Street), arriving and departing office workers course through their vicinity, and some of these drivers are in a big hurry. While the LRT will get some people out of their cars, the density it attracts will bring other changes, and the cars which will always exist may seek ways to maneuver around King Street.


Assuming residents have driveways (as Mary Hill residents do) I also fail to see how someone loses their own parking amenities if I park along what is a public roadway in front of their house? This "parking amenity" does not belong to those residents but to everyone.

A street is by its very nature “public”, but this begs the question “To what extent?” To use reductio ad absurdum, I suppose my 20 buddies and I could decide to have a regular Sunday afternoon road hockey game. We would drive our 21 cars to a block of our choice in Lakeshore Village, park there, and set up our game on the adjacent block. If I suggested to a resident coming out to have a talk with us that “the street belongs to everyone”, he would have good reasons to debate with me and might even beat me up. By purchasing a dwelling abutting a street, he acquired some reasonable expectations to certain local “ownership” of amenities attached to it. He shouldn’t have to tell his family coming over for Easter dinner to park 3 blocks away because other people need the street. If my buddies and I decide to have a few cool ones after the game at Beertown and parking is limited, it would be presumptuous of me to recommend that they just use the Visitors Parking at The Red Condominiums.

My examples are ridiculous. My point is that throwing down the wild card of using the parking resource of nearby residential neighbourhoods as a solution to development-generated parking pressures created by under-specification is to some extent exporting a problem and expropriating someone else’s quality of life. The really tough question is “To what extent?”


Lastly, study after study has proven that not only does vibrancy of urban life have positive health benefits it encourages the city to invest in infrastructure that encourages further urbanity (read slower and reduced traffic) and therefore no loss of enjoyment of peace and quiet. In this case that could easily mean turning more of the local streets into one ways with parking along one side of the road perhaps with curbed bumpouts for crossing along the side where cars are parked. That would mean walkers and kids now have only one lane of traffic to cross instead of two, making them even safer. These streets then are easy for familiar locals to navigate and confound those who are from outside the neighbourhood slowing down traffic further, discouraging congestion and causing fewer fumes. All this is achived with very minimal investment on part of the city.

When I lived for a time in the High Park area of Toronto, I observed at first hand the technique of turning more of the local streets into one ways with parking along one side of the road. I don’t think it was any traffic-calming favour to the residents. It was a necessity to accommodate the endless circling of parking space seekers without creating gridlock. I myself was one of the circling vultures. I was driving slowly and carefully while attempting to exercise the privileges of my parking permit, but I was emitting particulate matter nonetheless. I have relatives in The Beach in Toronto, and I do the same dance to get close to their place while competing for parking with the patrons of the Queen Street district and competing for speed with the detourers who don’t want to be stuck behind the Red Rocket.


None of this is rocket science, it only requires the local planners to think outside of the box and they don't need to go far as this sort of things has been done in many communities (like inner Toronto subdivisions) with great effect.

I really gave the City planners credit some years ago when they showed courage in closing roads and creating a bit of a maze in the Mary-Allen neighbourhood. In my opinion, it nipped in the bud the problem of high-speed short-cutting drivers and saved one of the most interesting and historic districts in K-W. The voiced objection to doing this was that their streets were needed to take traffic through the downtown.

However, the challenges to such areas on the near horizon are orders of magnitude greater and solutions (other than taking the easy way out) will require good faith and integrity from City decision-makers and maybe a bit of rocket science.

[mpd618]

The presentation centre (http://redcondominium.ca/contact.php) will be opening on September 24 at the 42 on Bridgeport.

[uptownfoodcritic]

It will be Uptown. The BIA can ask them to be part and as long as they agree they are part.

It was my understanding that Bauer provides 100+ parking spaces which is why they got permission to build their retail.

Even so, I have talked to some of the non-Vincenzo's / Bauer Kitchen retailers and they get regular complaints from customers that parking is difficult to find and that people do not like to drive to the Bauer businesses. I have not personally found that to be the case but I know the area well enough to find the parking if I need it.

There is still not enough population base in Uptown to support all of the businesses there. Parking needs to be supplied so that the sprawl-dwellers will deign to get in their vehicles are come uptown. I really don't think that it would be a huge issue to have a restaurant in the Red building though. Most of the parking would be used 6 pm and later and lots of the parking in that area clears up at that time of the day. A little inventive thinking on the part of the planners would let them see that. I know they can do it since they talked all about it back in the days when they were looking at the Waterloo Town Square mega-project that was approved and went nowhere (thankfully).

[Good neighbour]

Is there really a market for studio apartments? Who will rent or purchase a unit without a separate bedroom/sleeping area?

What would rents be like in this area for a studio apartment of 550 sq. ft.?

[DHLawrence]

I just moved to Windsor for work for the year and I was looking for studio apartments because I didn't want to haul so much furniture down for a job that may not last. Couldn't find anything decent; all the buildings with studio apartments were total dives. I ended up finding something that was far larger than I need, but still costs less than I'm used to paying. I'm using the bedroom space for storage and I'm sleeping on a daybed in the main room.

[BuildingScout]

Is there really a market for studio apartments? Who will rent or purchase a unit without a separate bedroom/sleeping area?

What would rents be like in this area for a studio apartment of 550 sq. ft.?

There is a market. I would estimate it would consist of young professionals moving here, such as RIM/Google hires as well as postdocs, rich grad students and young professors. I would peg demand in the low hundreds, since people would not stay in those for more than a year or two.

In terms of rent, $750 with a yearly lease and $1100 with month to month rent.

[benjaminbach]

There is a market. I would estimate it would consist of young professionals moving here, such as RIM/Google hires as well as postdocs, rich grad students and young professors. I would peg demand in the low hundreds, since people would not stay in those for more than a year or two.

In terms of rent, $750 with a yearly lease and $1100 with month to month rent.

Here is my prediction: No one will be renting for that cheap at RED.

[RyHam]

In terms of rent, $750 with a yearly lease and $1100 with month to month rent.

A typical studio apartment in Red will likely be priced in the mid 200s. It's hard to justify rents of less than 1200 for such a place.

[benjaminbach]

A typical studio apartment in Red will likely be priced in the mid 200s. It's hard to justify rents of less than 1200 for such a place.

Sounds about right.

[UrbanWaterloo]

Half-sold already! I was at the VIP Sales event tonight and by the time I left 27 units had already been sold. The studios seemed very popular, with most of them being spoken for. :RpS_cool:

[Good neighbour]

Half-sold already! I was at the VIP Sales event tonight and by the time I left 27 units had already been sold. The studios seemed very popular, with most of them being spoken for. :RpS_cool:

What were the prices? ...studios, larger units?

[Section ThirtyOne]

What were the prices? ...studios, larger units?

A price list for this development would be amazing if someone has one!

[benjaminbach]

They have 1+ den, and 2 bed units left. All studio and 1 beds sold

[benjaminbach]

A price list for this development would be amazing if someone has one!
I have a price list, not scanned though. If there is a unit you're interested in, shoot me a msg and I'll let you know.

[Good neighbour]

I have a price list, not scanned though. If there is a unit you're interested in, shoot me a msg and I'll let you know.

Can you let us know what the price range was on the studios and 1 bedrooms that have sold out?

[benjaminbach]

Can you let us know what the price range was on the studios and 1 bedrooms that have sold out?

Over at my website I have posted some details on what sold, and what is left, including some pricing information.

Link: http://www.benjaminbach.com/featured/red-condominiums-in-waterloo-are-over-half-sold-out-already/

(http://www.benjaminbach.com/featured/red-condominiums-in-waterloo-are-over-half-sold-out-already/)If you have any questions I can answer, let me know here, on my blog, or on twitter (@ (http://twitter.com/benjaminbach)benjaminbach (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/member.php?u=591) )

[Greg Moore]

Any price per square foot information? I know what I paid at 144 Park and I'm curious how much more this is going for.

[benjaminbach]

Any price per square foot information? I know what I paid at 144 Park and I'm curious how much more this is going for.

What size unit are you interested in sq ft data? Let me know, I'll provide it

Thanks

[Good neighbour]

What size unit are you interested in sq ft data? Let me know, I'll provide it

Thanks

Are sq. ft. costs calculated using the internal floor space? I notice that some of their plans only show total space which I've seen some developers use to make it appear that their sq. ft. costs are lower.

[Good neighbour]

Were they selling extra parking spots? If so, at what cost?

[benjaminbach]

Are sq. ft. costs calculated using the internal floor space? I notice that some of their plans only show total space which I've seen some developers use to make it appear that their sq. ft. costs are lower.

Momentum does not have a price per square foot, they have a price per unit. Any reference you see to $ / sq ft is from an observer or purchaser making their own calculations.

When I calculate $ / sq ft & buildable GFA with clients, I use interior space.

[metropolis]

Glad to see sales are off to a strong start but what’s with the odd floor plans? Who does one bedroom plus den units with a second bathroom that has a second bathtub even though the ensuite in most cases is tiny, lacking a standalone shower or second sink. Most of the master closets seem underwhelming also. I do like the sunrooms though. Much like Westmount Grand it strikes me as odd that someone would want to live in the corner unit facing Allan and King on "display" through those big windows. This seeming privacy issue could be addressed through the placement of balconies along this wall. Those corner units at the Westmount Grand are mostly all still available. I wonder how they are doing here?

[RyHam]

A few napkin calculations reveal that the typical per sq. ft. cost is roughly $380 to $400. This puts it a bit higher than the units currently for sale at The 42.

[thusenth]

Glad to see sales are off to a strong start but what’s with the odd floor plans? Who does one bedroom plus den units with a second bathroom that has a second bathtub even though the ensuite in most cases is tiny, lacking a standalone shower or second sink. Most of the master closets seem underwhelming also. I do like the sunrooms though. Much like Westmount Grand it strikes me as odd that someone would want to live in the corner unit facing Allan and King on "display" through those big windows. This seeming privacy issue could be addressed through the placement of balconies along this wall. Those corner units at the Westmount Grand are mostly all still available. I wonder how they are doing here?

+ 1

There are some very odd floorplans in this development. The floorplan for Suite 213 to me seems the most out there. One where a den, bedroom, and master bedroom were off the entrance, then to access the living/dining/balcony, you have to walk through the middle of the kitchen.

[benjaminbach]

Here is an update on pricing & availability:

The most affordable units left are $359,900. This is for a 1 bedroom + den on the 2nd floor, 1016 total square feet - 958 sq ft interior space (about $375 per interior square foot), and they go up from there (there is also a second unit at $359,900, and a few in the $360s).

If you want the full availability, send me a DM

[benjaminbach]

The floorplan for Suite 213 to me seems the most out there.

Suite 213 sold opening night

[metropolis]

Suite 213 sold opening night

Just out of interest how are #01 units doing (201, 301, etc.)? Looking at Westmount Grand the corner facing units would seem to be the hardest sell so I'm curious.

[amward]

I'm coming in a little late on this one, but here goes...


There are churches in that area, which could easily have plenty of paid parking during the vast majority of the week. Allen Square has underground and surface parking which could easily be public paid parking on weekday evenings and weekends. Zoning requirements for tons of parking to be self-contained in every development means that there can be no cross-use of parking and no market forces in operation.

There is no parking problem in this area. The problem is in the planning department, and the view of parking as an entitlement instead of as a resource that has costs and which can be used less and more efficiently. Instead of forcing the creation of ever more parking even as our streets aren't getting any wider, they should focus on breaking down the barriers to a market for parking.

I agree with mpd618 on much of this. Some observations, as I live on Allen St E near King St:

The only issue I have with parking in Mary Allen is the large number of folks who appear to work at Allen Square and shuffle cars around throughout the day on weekdays to try and get around the 2 hour on-street time limit.
In the evenings and on weekends the on-street parking is rather under-used (save for Sunday mornings with all the churches in the neighbourhood).
My understanding, given the current zoning, is that technically the churches aren't allowed to sell parking, as they are zoned residential (GR2 or GR2A, IIRC). Certainly there are some folks who park in the church lots on weekdays and don't do so for free.


I have to say that I quite enjoy the foot traffic generated on Allen St when an event is happening on King St (parades, car-free days, buskers, jazz festival). I definitely don't believe there is a parking problem in the neighbourhood. The highest demand for on-street parking in front of our house is Sunday morning as those attending the 2 churches on Allen St compete for spaces.

Personally, I'd vote for leaving the Mary Allen neighbourhood parking as it is (free, 2 hour limit 8am-6pm M-F) and wait to see if there really is a problem. My guess is that visitors of the Red Condo residents in the evenings will be a bigger burden on the on-street parking than customer parking for a restaurant at that location.

[benjaminbach]

Just out of interest how are #01 units doing (201, 301, etc.)? Looking at Westmount Grand the corner facing units would seem to be the hardest sell so I'm curious.

Units 301, 401, 601 show as available.

It should be noted that these are 2 bed corner units, 1175 total square feet (including a terrace) on 3 and 4, and 1780 sq ft total space on the Penthouse level.

The floorplan for 301 & 401 is on my site if you're interested http://goo.gl/wrJah

[mpd618]

I'm coming in a little late on this one, but here goes...

Thanks for sharing your observations, and welcome to the forums!

[benjaminbach]

The sales centre for RED is now open, on the ground floor of the42. There is a very nicely decorated 600 sq ft model suite inside the presentation centre.

If you're interested in a unit here, let me know, I'd be happy to help.

[insider]

Is anybody wondering how fast has this been selling? 50% in 3 hours at a presales event. Also, Momentum has another interesting project coming up on Erb St., stay tuned.

[ViewFromThe42]

A very nice touch in the model suite was the inclusion of Resource Furniture's line of what people would think of as Murphy Beds. They have come a long, long way since those days, and I'm thrilled to see them being shown in condos; will definitely be a consideration for when we want to change things up here, or get a new place. So many people are used to living in houses vastly larger than one would need, and so innovative ways of saving space or using space for multiple purposes are unfamiliar but very much key to better living in urban areas and condos.

[panamaniac]

Is anybody wondering how fast has this been selling? 50% in 3 hours at a presales event. Also, Momentum has another interesting project coming up on Erb St., stay tuned.

I wish Momentum would take on the Barra Castle site on Queen Street.

[benjaminbach]

Is anybody wondering how fast has this been selling? 50% in 3 hours at a presales event.

It is over 60% sold now, from what I've heard. Lots of interest from residents and investors in this one.

[metropolis]

Is anybody wondering how fast has this been selling? 50% in 3 hours at a presales event. Also, Momentum has another interesting project coming up on Erb St., stay tuned.

50% was sold in the weeks leading up to general sales opening when it was open to brokers. Stating this happened in 3 hours is simply untrue.

I imagine and hope this anticipated Erb project is the old LCBO site?

[benjaminbach]

50% was sold in the weeks leading up to general sales opening when it was open to brokers. Stating this happened in 3 hours is simply untrue.

I didn't make the initial statement, but the first 50% of sales occurred in the opening night, a couple weeks ago (as noted by others on this board). I believe most of the initial sales were Momentum VIPs and past purchasers, not just people represented by brokerages like ours.

I don't think what insider said was "simply untrue."

[metropolis]

I don't think what insider said was "simply untrue."

Sorry I misread the statement as selling within 3 hours on Saturday and missed the "pre" in the sales event part. I blame lateness of day :RpS_razz:

[Anderson3133]

Has anyone gone to the open house? Is their model suite built?

I was going to go check out the Friday night at 6pm Grand Opening to the general public but didn't really like too many of the remaining suites.

Hopefully the rumored Erb Street condominium (as mentioned elsewhere on this forum) has a little bit more functionality to the suites.

[benjaminbach]

Has anyone gone to the open house? Is their model suite built?

I was going to go check out the Friday night at 6pm Grand Opening to the general public but didn't really like too many of the remaining suites.

I've been through it with clients, they have a very nice model suite inside the sales centre at the42.

[Anderson3133]

Is it an actual suite or is it like 144 Park where they had separate bathrooms and what not?

Thanks for the prompt reply by the way.

[ViewFromThe42]

It is an actual suite, very clever use of space for a one bedroom unit, partly thanks to Resource Furniture.

[Anderson3133]

Thanks for the response ViewFromThe42

How do you like your unit at the42?

I've really liked the aesthetics of the42 and Red so I'm hoping Momentum develops more in the near future.

[ViewFromThe42]

Very much enjoy my unit here. Grew up in a house, and have had over a dozen student rentals in the city, but this is perfect for life right now. Still waiting on some of the features to take shape, such as the commercial units and amenities, but it's great living right now.

[Section ThirtyOne]

I noticed today that fencing has gone up around the site. This is usually a good sign that demolition will be beginning soon, yes?

[UrbanWaterloo]

Ideally, although we did see a year between fencing going up (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php?t=17&p=11157#post11157) at 144 Park and demolition (http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/showthread.php?t=17&p=32768#post32768). Still a sign of progress though! Here's an aerial view taken during yesterday's Oktoberfest Parade.


October 10, 2011

http://www.wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2010,%202011%20-%203%20R.JPG

[myfaceisonfire]

There was a crew on site today with heavy equipment. They were just taking down the back of the green house when I drove by. Not sure if this is just in preparation or if they are infact starting demolition at, more or less, the same time as 144park.

[benjaminbach]

There was a crew on site today with heavy equipment. They were just taking down the back of the green house when I drove by. Not sure if this is just in preparation or if they are infact starting demolition at, more or less, the same time as 144park.


I saw a Kieswetter Demolition truck on site yesterday morning (maybe today?)

[UrbanWaterloo]

October 13, 2011

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2013,%202011%20-%203a%20R.JPG

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2013,%202011%20-%203c%20R.JPG

[UrbanWaterloo]

The green house is gone...

October 23, 2011

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2023,%202011%20-%201c%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2023,%202011%20-%202%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2023,%202011%20-%203%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2023,%202011%20-%204a%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20October%2023,%202011%20-%204b%20R.jpg

[UrbanWaterloo]

All demolished now...

November 3, 2011

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20November%203,%202011%20R.JPG

[Anderson3133]

Momentum has now put up pictures of the model unit located in the42 onto their website for anyone who is interested.

[metropolis]

Where are sales at? If memory serves the42 seemed to sell faster than this with only the penthouse units taking much longer to sell. Though it also felt like with the42 Momentum plastered the city with marketing material whereas I mention this project to people and more often than not they are unaware of it. Wonder why they didn't market as aggressively, maybe they thought they could ride the coattails of their reputation alone?

[bzmwillemsen]

Where are sales at? If memory serves the42 seemed to sell faster than this with only the penthouse units taking much longer to sell. Though it also felt like with the42 Momentum plastered the city with marketing material whereas I mention this project to people and more often than not they are unaware of it. Wonder why they didn't market as aggressively, maybe they thought they could ride the coattails of their reputation alone?

Probably because they have had no problem selling. the42 was really their first project with this level of creativity.

[Anderson3133]

They kind of did ride their coattails a little. Didn't they sell around 50% in pre-sale to friends/family/recent buyers?

[ViewFromThe42]

They sold out both all 1 bedroom and bachelor units, and all units under $300K if I remember correctly. Possibly it was coattails that they bet on, but also the condo market when selling the42 was different than today; pretty much just Bauer. Today, we have a huge selection of condos. While you might want to cut through the market with even heavier advertising, I only have to open the first doors at Conestoga to see advertising for both Westmount Grand and Arrow Lofts, yet I know that my home here is definitely better designed and located than either for my taste and desire.

[Anderson3133]

They sold out both all 1 bedroom and bachelor units, and all units under $300K if I remember correctly. Possibly it was coattails that they bet on, but also the condo market when selling the42 was different than today; pretty much just Bauer. Today, we have a huge selection of condos. While you might want to cut through the market with even heavier advertising, I only have to open the first doors at Conestoga to see advertising for both Westmount Grand and Arrow Lofts, yet I know that my home here is definitely better designed and located than either for my taste and desire.

Without a doubt. I truly love the42 and I had been following its construction for years. I hope they keep up the seemingly excellent work as Waterloo's condo market continues to strengthen. I was originally quite interested in a unit at Red but found their layouts to be kind of odd for some of the units and their was a lot of square footage if it was a one + den. I was hoping for some around the 700 square foot range.

[panamaniac]

They sold out both all 1 bedroom and bachelor units, and all units under $300K if I remember correctly. Possibly it was coattails that they bet on, but also the condo market when selling the42 was different than today; pretty much just Bauer. Today, we have a huge selection of condos. While you might want to cut through the market with even heavier advertising, I only have to open the first doors at Conestoga to see advertising for both Westmount Grand and Arrow Lofts, yet I know that my home here is definitely better designed and located than either for my taste and desire.

You are right about there being more competition at the moment, but Red should do very well as it is particularly centrally located, as is 144 Park. Even in a place as small as KW, it really does come down to location if you are planning to live in the unit - in my case, I jumped to buy at Arrow Lofts as it is perfectly located for my needs. Had I been looking at an investment, I suppose I might have looked around a bit more.

[ViewFromThe42]

I was originally quite interested in a unit at Red but found their layouts to be kind of odd for some of the units and their was a lot of square footage if it was a one + den. I was hoping for some around the 700 square foot range.

When things slowed at the42, they took what used to be solid two floor units and split them into smaller, single floor units. Why not stop by their office in the mixed use portion of the42 and have a chat, see if something can't be worked out? Maybe nothing comes of it, but getting your desired setup may well be a possibility once you start to chat.

[marral]

I've put $$ down on a unit at the Red (plan to occupy it myself), and am excited about the project. I'm not concerned that it's not 100% sold - I think the % is fairly far ahead of other projects in the area. I did a fair amount of research before investing, including talking with others from The 42. Momentum does have a good rep.

I do agree that some of the layouts at The Red are, well, unusual.

The recent addition of LRT stops is wonderful (and sensible, given existing and planned housing in that immediate vicinity). I'm also happy about the amount of materials that were able to have been reclaimed / salvaged from the buildings that were torn down.

Momentum has just issued its first newsletter on the project, and is calling for layout changes - they want mechanical/electrical reviews by Feb 1, so they're moving along at a good clip.

I'm looking forward to ground breaking.

[UrbanWaterloo]

A few feet down now...

January 22, 2012

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20January%2022,%202012%20-%201a%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20January%2022,%202012%20-%201b%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20January%2022,%202012%20-%202%20R.jpg

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red%20Condominiums/Red%20Condominiums%20-%20January%2022,%202012%20-%203%20R.jpg

[myfaceisonfire]

I keep expecting progress to stall on this if only because it is so unusual for any (non-student) development around here to be on schedule. It's nice to see work progressing. Thanks for the updates UW.

[UWaterloo]

Just checked out the website - looks like a nice development that will add a little density to the area.

[metropolis]

A few feet down now...

January 22, 2012

http://wonderfulwaterloo.com/wdrive/Developments/Waterloo/Uptown/Red Condominiums/Red Condominiums - January 22, 2012 - 3 R.jpg


UrbanWaterloo, I would love to see a better view of how close the adjoining house is to that excavation given that there are units in the project that will face exclusively onto this adjoining house. This entire block is being zoned for 6 storey mixed use so it is concievable that one day those residing in these side units will have no view beyond that of a wall a mere few feet away. Odd Momentum would design the building this way.