Bjays92

Bjays92

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
4,081
The submitted applications are for the development of five, 15-storey apartment buildings, including five levels of parking. The proposed development provides for a total of 991 dwelling units (a combination of one, two, and three-bedroom apartment units and two-storey townhouses wrapped around the rear of the parking structures) and 1,176 parking spaces. The application also proposes 693 bicycle parking spaces and 3,964 square metres (42,668 square feet) of amenity area. A new public parkette has also been proposed on the adjacent property to the east of 193 Water Street South, known municipally as 62 Highman Avenue, and will include a pedestrian connection between the proposed development and the public amenity area. Furthermore, the applicant has proposed to donate five units to the City of Cambridge for affordable housing purposes.

Article:
www.cambridgetoday.ca

Proposed Water Street development details show five 15-storey buildings totaling 991 units

The developer has offered to donate five units for affordable housing purposes
www.cambridgetoday.ca www.cambridgetoday.ca

Renders:
E8WUhe6.png
wfbkmfy.png


Massing:
ZNmCLAF.png
UTehBsg.png


Personally I think this is an excellent location for this density, though it will almost certainly face fierce opposition. I do however shudder at the idea of 5 identical towers, in spite of the designs looking ok-ish. The 5 affordable housing units is a joke.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Also the location is hilarious. It's basically a rural road with barely even a sidewalk.
Click to expand...
Yes but that can easily be remedied. The area itself is far from rural. The largest park in the city is like a 5 minute walk from here, the river trails a 3 min walk, and downtown a 10 minute walk. It's a very good location for a development of this scale.

AlbertC said:
One or two of these would be fine, but 5 of 'em becomes too relentlessly monotonous for me to support.
Click to expand...
Totally agree 5 of these is far too repetitive.

Reminds me a bit of this recent disaster in waterloo

ZomqWqs.png
 
Bjays92 said:
Personally I think this is an excellent location for this density, though it will almost certainly face fierce opposition.
Click to expand...
Immediately east of these at the top of the slope is a neighbourhood of single-storey ranch style bungalows, some semi-detached, some 2-storey towns, very mid-20th century American Canadian Dream. Buildings backing on this site would currently have a view over the Grand River Valley with views of the river at least in the winter if in the summer the view is blocked by trees in full leaf. Those people will go apoplectic.

42
 
To me, they would be weird looking in interesting ways if built to the renders. I'm pretty sure they won't be built that way though...
 
Just wow this is awful.

Feels like a fortress

Also..........holy @W#$ ...................659 mature trees to be cut down!

***********

Ugh, this one was approved in Sept '22
 
This is the parcel in question (roughly), in aerial pics:

1674578131691.png


I can't fathom how this isn't public parkland.

Amazingly, the majority of the site is not in the floodplain:

1674578464868.png


This is what the address looks like from Water Street South, River to left, Site to right:

1674578569904.png
 
Yea the tree loss here is something I'm less than thrilled about. The location is fine on paper but what they're doing with this parcel of land is less than desirable.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top