HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 2:21 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
So that's close to 500 units, which will probably bring in about 750+ people to the area I'm assuming.

That doesn't sound too bad.
The new Liuna building at 75 James St S is 644 units by comparison, and this location arguably has better transit access, as well as a much, much larger site.

This has 453 units, which would be about 800 people. Not nothing, but relatively low given it's proximity to downtown and especially the GO Station if you ask me.

The very least that should happen is that it should be all midrises along James with retail at grade, bumping the unit count up to ~700.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 4:05 PM
Markus83's Avatar
Markus83 Markus83 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 478
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcappi View Post
Hmm I'd argue that stacked towns though technically (slightly) larger in square footage often have less usable floor plans compared to similarly sized units in apartments, since so much of the space is dedicated to stairs. Many folks who are downsizing also don't want stairs (my folks are like this. They are old and don't want to climb haha), but for me it's more about the tenure than the built form. They'll likely be for purchase, which is fine, it's just that many folks just don't have the down payment or ability to put the money down on precon but make enough money to rent something higher end (laundry, a.c, dishwasher)

This plan just strikes me as very suburban and car oriented considering its location. No need for towers or anything like that here, but something similar in scale to what's happening at Alexandra Park would have been a good place to start.
Yeah, those are very good points for sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 4:08 PM
Markus83's Avatar
Markus83 Markus83 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
So that's close to 500 units, which will probably bring in about 750+ people to the area I'm assuming.

That doesn't sound too bad.
I live in a 219 unit building with 23 floors and from the word of the on-site management, according to her, there are over 500 people that live here. Just a number to work with or from. Not dismissing your estimate at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 5:11 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus83 View Post
I live in a 219 unit building with 23 floors and from the word of the on-site management, according to her, there are over 500 people that live here. Just a number to work with or from. Not dismissing your estimate at all.
Most government agencies assume an average of ~1.7 people per apartment unit, with higher numbers for other unit types like houses, which are closer to 2.5 people per unit. That average does vary though building to building depending on local demographics, building age, and tenancy type (condo vs. rental vs. affordable housing, etc.).

I imagine the stacked units will be a bit higher than an apartment unit, but not by much. Perhaps 1.8 people a unit.

Last edited by Innsertnamehere; Nov 10, 2021 at 5:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 5:45 PM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton (The Brooklyn of Canada)
Posts: 3,059
Yea, I was going for roughly a 1.5 per unit estimate.
I figured there'd be a big chunk of units with 2 people, and another big chunk with only 1.. the rest will be minimal... so I just averaged it out to 1.5 with a rough estimate of 500 units. Adding up the units now I get 458.

Sure, it could be more dense - but 750+ is decent amount. Plus, it's social housing, so how many are really going to be commuting to Toronto for work? I suspect there won't be many who would live there that would do that.

There's lots of space in the downtown core for high density builds. That's where I'd be more concerned about.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 6:06 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
Yea, I was going for roughly a 1.5 per unit estimate.
I figured there'd be a big chunk of units with 2 people, and another big chunk with only 1.. the rest will be minimal... so I just averaged it out to 1.5 with a rough estimate of 500 units. Adding up the units now I get 458.

Sure, it could be more dense - but 750+ is decent amount. Plus, it's social housing, so how many are really going to be commuting to Toronto for work? I suspect there won't be many who would live there that would do that.

There's lots of space in the downtown core for high density builds. That's where I'd be more concerned about.
All the stacked units are market condos from my understanding - the apartment buildings are the affordable components.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 7:20 PM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
All the stacked units are market condos from my understanding - the apartment buildings are the affordable components.
Anyone know the split, in terms of number of units?

And how many of the affordable units are 2+ bedrooms? (which I believe I've read are in short supply and high demand... many families are living in apartments that are far too small for 2 parents and 2 or 3 kids)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 7:41 PM
Markus83's Avatar
Markus83 Markus83 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 478
I feel, regardless of the low count of affordable housing vs market rate, and above on others, that it is a good thing to integrate these social economic classes so that this project does not become in a way stereotypically as it is sadly, in Hamilton of sole affordable housing surveys that are viewed as less than savory ( just my opinion ), something that will become a flourishing small community like this one can be and perhaps change things for the better in many ways going into the future. One must always hold on to Hope and be willing to make sacrifices and put in physical or some kind of personal work to help see these things come to fruition, and much more. Apologies for ranting on. It's how I feel, this is never an ""I issue, yet a "We" issue. This is Our City and I feel more today than ever so very passionate about making it a place to be Proud of. However small a thing that I can contribute.

Last edited by Markus83; Nov 10, 2021 at 7:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2021, 3:42 AM
TheRitsman TheRitsman is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingViking View Post
Anyone know the split, in terms of number of units?

And how many of the affordable units are 2+ bedrooms? (which I believe I've read are in short supply and high demand... many families are living in apartments that are far too small for 2 parents and 2 or 3 kids)
You can review the submission docs at the DRP webpage: https://www.hamilton.ca/develop-prop...n-review-panel
__________________
Hamilton Downtown. Huge tabletop skyline fan. Typically viewing the city from the street, not a helicopter. Cycling, transit and active transportation advocate 🚲🚍🚋

Follow me on Twitter: https://x.com/ham_bicycleguy?t=T_fx3...SIZNGfD4A&s=09
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2021, 3:36 PM
Markus83's Avatar
Markus83 Markus83 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 478
I saw the pictures on the page prior but I didn't see a source link. Maybe I missed it.



https://www.hamilton.ca/sites/defaul...eid=1f2173e598
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2022, 12:53 AM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,889
Preparation to demolish Jamesville in Hamilton’s North End underway

The former City Housing complex will be razed by the end of August, councillor says

https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilto...tyhousing.html

At age 83, Silverio Alcatrao wonders if he’ll be around to see the vacant Jamesville complex in Hamilton’s North End transformed into a mixed-income community.

“Only God knows,” the longtime North Ender said with chuckle as he looked at the townhouses that have been empty and boarded up for years.

But he hopes the redevelopment of Jamesville — a 91-unit subsidized community built in 1969 — happens soon to help ease a housing crunch.

“People need a place to live.”

The demolition has been delayed, but the derelict units will be flattened by the end of August, Coun. Jason Farr said.

That will leave the 5.4-acre property between James, MacNab, Ferrie and Strachan streets ready for the big construction job.

“The demolition process has begun,” Farr told The Spectator.

As Alcatrao strolled by Thursday, workers were erecting a chain-link fence around the property.

An excavator was on-site. Water and sewer lines must be capped and other utilities disconnected before bulldozers eventually raze the old CityHousing units.

“It’s not going to be an easy job, man,” Alcatrao said. “But I like it.”

The city acknowledged receipt of The Spectator’s request to interview staff about the project, but only responded to some questions via email Thursday.

A spokesperson noted abatement work for asbestos inside the units starting in March and utility disconnects could take a few months.

The city began relocating tenants from Jamesville in 2015, with the last of them moving out three years ago ahead of the planned redevelopment.

“I think there’s a lot of North Enders, especially, that have been anxiously awaiting to see some action on that site,” Farr said Thursday.

A host of issues — including a development agreement between the project’s partners and environmental hurdles at the former industrial site — contributed to delays, the Ward 2 councillor said.

“It’s just a due-diligence process that maybe took longer than any of us would have liked, including the residents.”

CityHousing’s private partners in the 500-unit-plus project are FRAM and Slokker, Melrose Investments Inc., Marz Developments Inc., and Homes by DeSantis.

The municipal housing provider will retain 46 rent-geared-to-income units on the site, while 45 units are to be replaced in a future building at Bay and Cannon.

Meanwhile, non-profit Indwell aims to build as many as 115 deeply affordable units at Jamesville, which is to have denser forms of housing like stacked towns.

For Alcatrao, who has lived just north of Jamesville since 1992, the boarded-up homes where friends of his used to live are a sore sight.

“It’s sad,” he said, noting the homeless people he sees downtown huddling in the cold. “It’s terrible.”

With skyrocketing property values, it’s not easy to buy a home nowadays in the historically working-class North End, he pointed out. “You try to buy a house here.”

Farr acknowledged that observers have “quite rightly” pointed out the townhouses have sat empty during a housing crunch.

“This is the start of a process that’s going to put a little bit of a dent” in the affordability crisis, he said.

In recent years, CityHousing has executed a strategy to sell real estate assets and put the proceeds toward denser, mixed-income communities.

A staff report last year noted the 91 subsidized units at Jamesville were “incurring increased costs for maintenance” as they got older.

The planned 364 private units are the “enabling financial mechanism” for the site’s “revitalization” and increased density of the mixed-income redevelopment.

Near the Red Hill Valley Parkway, CityHousing is a partner with a private consortium that has demolished townhouses to build more than 600 market homes. CityHousing’s new 10-storey apartment building has risen on the site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2022, 1:47 PM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,553
Long past time to get going. People can talk about how this has sat while there are homeless waiting for something better than shelters/tents/nothing, but had the city kept this going to help the current crisis there would be outcry once the plan got in motion (e.g., "you can't demolish those now... people are living there")

I think there should have been a larger social housing component, but if that's actually addressed more broadly then progress is being made.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2022, 4:29 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,889
Jamesville Social Housing Redevelopment | ? | 3 to 6 fl | Proposed -> Jamesville Social Housing Redevelopment | ? | 3 to 6 fl | Under Construction


It seems like they (the City and the developers) have all their ducks in a row and have begun to demolish the property, so I feel switching this to Under Construction is valid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2022, 6:16 PM
Canuck905 Canuck905 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 40
Council approved the OPA and ZBA for this site in August. It looks like the Neighbourhood Association is now appealing this decision:

https://www.northendneighbourhoodass...-redevelopment
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2022, 7:03 PM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,553
I agree with them about the missing retail opportunities, but there are limitations on what can be done re: tree canopy with a complete redevelopment like this, and you've got Bayfront park just a few hundred metres west and Bennetto lands a block east as public green space.

I'm going to guess their "transportation considerations" involve traffic.

Anyone know more specifically how this conflicts with Setting Sail and the James Street North Mobility Hub Study. Setting Sail seems like it's getting dated by now... didn't they start thinking about that in the early 2000s? Before more recent development activity/plans along the waterfront?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2022, 6:17 PM
JoeyColeman JoeyColeman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hamilton Ontario
Posts: 135
There was no appeal filed to the City of Hamilton.
The OLT stated two weeks ago they had not received any appeals.

While there is the potential of an odd loophole, I'm fairly confident in saying this means there is no appeal.
__________________
www.thepublicrecord.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2022, 9:08 PM
Canuck905 Canuck905 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyColeman View Post
There was no appeal filed to the City of Hamilton.
The OLT stated two weeks ago they had not received any appeals.

While there is the potential of an odd loophole, I'm fairly confident in saying this means there is no appeal.
Hi Joey - Thanks for the clarification! Appreciate it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2022, 7:31 PM
davidcappi's Avatar
davidcappi davidcappi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,992
Setting Sail is from 2005 - it should not continue to be cited or relevant nearly 20 years later as the economic and cultural landscape of the city has changed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2022, 1:19 PM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcappi View Post
Setting Sail is from 2005 - it should not continue to be cited or relevant nearly 20 years later as the economic and cultural landscape of the city has changed.
Many probably disliked that plan, and now it's convenient to say "but we have a plan in place!" I'd wager there is much about this development that aligns with the principles and policies of that plan anyway (and it seems to me that's what it was mostly about, not "we shall build THIS here, and THAT there...")

Things haven't quite set sail yet, but it won't be long before they have.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2023, 5:33 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 19,889
Hamilton housing development stalled by railway’s appeal

https://www.insauga.com/hamilton-hou...Jw_VsabSzhy0o4

For over a decade, the wheels have been in motion to build the Jamesville development, more than one-third of which would be affordable units in a city beset by a housing crisis. It would be close to Bayfront Park, the West Harbour GO Station, and trendy James Street North. But the demolition work has ground to a halt to due to the Canadian National railway (CN) filing an appeal with the Ontario Land Tribunal on the grounds that the homes would be too close to its rail yards.

A letter to City of Hamilton city clerk Andrea Holland was sent by CN’s legal counsel on Sept. 14. It became public knowledge on Thursday when Ward 2 Coun. Cameron Kroetsch shared it on social media. Kroetsch took office in mid-November after his election victory on Oct. 24, where he defeated three-terms representative Jason Farr.

“Sensitive uses should not be permitted within 300 metres of rail yards, as rail yards have an area of influence of 1,000 metres where negative impacts can occur on the proposed use,” notes lawyer Katarzyna Sliwa of Dentons Canada law firm in the letter to Holland and the city.

“… CN was not opposed to the (official plan amendments and zoning bylaw changes involved to approve the project)provided that the impact of the adjacent rail operations were accounted for and mitigated, as required,” Sliwa adds, noting that CN wishes to resolve the issues without a hearing.

Ninety-one units of affordable housing were removed when the townhomes were condemned. The plan was to build 16 apartment blocks on the site. All told, it would include 160 affordable units and close to 300 stacked townhouses that would be available on the open market.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Downtown & City of Hamilton
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:39 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.