U/C 315 King Street North | 51 m | 17 fl

[WatDot]

This will clearly be updated as things progress, but should prove to be a large development in the near future.
The packaged property has sold. Here is a borrowed 'older' picture from Cambridgite on Skyscraper.

[Spokes]

Im glad it's sold. Kind of. I would have preferred it to be rezoned mixed use rather than mixed residential before the sale, but oh well. But now here's the big part. And it's up to you City of Waterloo. Waterloo has created these great design guidelines, now this is your opportunity to only approve something that meets the high standards that the city deserves. Otherwise it'll be a third stucco box in a row.

Just checked out street view for this one, it looks like there is only one house between 315 317 319 King Street and the lot under construction right now. Or maybe Im seeing things wrong.

If that's the case council has two options in my mind. One, say you can only develop the land if you buy that house and include it, or two, do what they did next door and position the new structure on the lot so that an additional one can be built later on once that house is bought.

[WatDot]

There are 3 houses there still. The homes also have signs on them, if you pass by you will see sold stickers on them too. I'm positive we will see a high rise here as per the zoning but I can't comment on the stucco business...

Guess we'll start hearing more when the demolition permit gets submitted.

[Duke-of-Waterloo]

Thanks for creating a thread for this property/potential development WatDot.

That building in the picture is very ugly. It looks like they forgot to plaster multi-coloured stucco onto the Styrofoam blocks.

[Spokes]

There are 3 houses there still. The homes also have signs on them, if you pass by you will see sold stickers on them too. I'm positive we will see a high rise here as per the zoning but I can't comment on the stucco business...

Guess we'll start hearing more when the demolition permit gets submitted.

I just meant there is one house that wasn't sold in between this block of 3 and the new building (I think its #321). I just hope the city would not be so foolish to approve a building taking up the lots of all three houses (315, 317, 319) while leaving 321 there. I'd rather see them do what they did next door and position the development to the left side of the lot which would allow for the remainder of the lot and 321 to be developed in the future.

[WatDot]

I see what you mean Spokes. Hopefully they don't leave a house in between the two developments. The curb appeal of all the developments along this stretch of King isn't doing anything for me either. Hopefully something will change here with this one.

i.e. Hopefully that billboard drawing was simply done by a real estate agent and not intended to reflect reality!! :P

[mpd618]

I see what you mean Spokes. Hopefully they don't leave a house in between the two developments. The curb appeal of all the developments along this stretch of King isn't doing anything for me either. Hopefully something will change here with this one.

Exactly what kind of curb appeal can we expect from 15-25 story residential towers for which the main requirement from the city is about providing enormous amounts of parking?

[WatDot]

Could start with underground parking but yeah....

[urbandreamer]

Or ground floor retail with 5 floors of parking above disguised with attractive cladding.

[Spokes]

Or ground floor retail with 5 floors of parking above disguised with attractive cladding.

I agree with you about the ground floor retail, but why do above ground parking, why not underground?

[urbandreamer]

^Too expensive. Waterloo land isn't at downtown Toronto levels yet. Spare the expense of going underground and focus on top quality architecture and double height street retail.

[Spokes]

Is it really THAT much more.

[taylortbb]

Is it really THAT much more.

Yes. Surface parking costs about $5,000/space, structure parking is $30,000/space, and underground is $45,000/space. All of those don't include land acquisition costs, which is what makes surface parking expensive, but only in very dense urban areas.

[jay]

I'm with Taylor it's real expensive for underground/structure parking.

[Spokes]

Wow, didn't realize there was that much of a difference.

[UrbanWaterloo]

Here's an updated image with the sold sign.

May 28, 2010

[Spokes]

Proposal for these properties being put forth at council on Monday. 17 storeys, 62 units, 5 bedrooms each. Looks just like it's neighbours. Pathetic. Waterloo's main street being absolutely ruined. Im losing faith very quickly in the city of Waterloo.

Oh, and to top it off, theres a house being left in between these two tall towers. That'll look nice.

[BuildingScout]

Waterloo's main street being absolutely ruined.

That presumes King st was nice to begin with. I agree with you that this is not the way to go, but it is not in any way worse than having a main street lined with single family houses instead of mixed used street front buildings.

[Urbanomicon]

Oh, and to top it off, theres a house being left in between these two tall towers. That'll look nice.

I'm sure the owner of that house isn't particularly thrilled either. The resale value of his/her house likely just dropped a good amount.