HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #441  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2018, 4:11 PM
CaptainKirk CaptainKirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcappi View Post
The reason I heard the heights were levelled was to reduce shadows on John/Rebecca park. Oh wait, that park isn't even built yet.
And one small block away there's Gore park. I don't get it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #442  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2018, 4:18 PM
Chronamut's Avatar
Chronamut Chronamut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainKirk View Post
And one small block away there's Gore park. I don't get it.
shadows don't fall from the building onto gore park if I recall - they span out at a 45 angle north eastward to northwestward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #443  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2018, 4:32 PM
LRTfan LRTfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcappi View Post
The reason I heard the heights were levelled was to reduce shadows on John/Rebecca park. Oh wait, that park isn't even built yet.

This would only be an issue in mid-winter, late afternoon.... if people want full sun 100% of the time, move to Florida or the country where there's no buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #444  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2018, 8:45 PM
CaptainKirk CaptainKirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronamut View Post
shadows don't fall from the building onto gore park if I recall - they span out at a 45 angle north eastward to northwestward.
I should have been clearer. The point I was trying to make was, why have another park so close to Gore park? Especially when it inhibits developing prime Hamilton real estate.

I think a top notch development at King & Hughson should trump a redundant park. Gore park is so close.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #445  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2018, 9:30 PM
Crapht Crapht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18
I have to agree. A total of 60 floors would be more elegant as one tower at 45 floors and one at 15 floors. IMO. Partial shadow on a park is sometimes a relief in the summer. Embrace the shadow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #446  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2018, 5:41 PM
drpgq drpgq is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hamilton/Dresden
Posts: 1,331
Are floors 2, 3, and 4 offices or retail?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #447  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2018, 5:41 AM
Crapht Crapht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18
Interesting perspective... if you draw a straight line down York Blvd or if you enter the city that way this property is directly in front of you behind FirstOntario Centre. More height and quality design would make for epic vantage point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #448  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2018, 5:51 AM
Chronamut's Avatar
Chronamut Chronamut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainKirk View Post
I should have been clearer. The point I was trying to make was, why have another park so close to Gore park? Especially when it inhibits developing prime Hamilton real estate.

I think a top notch development at King & Hughson should trump a redundant park. Gore park is so close.
or have parks on top of buildings - imagine all that underutilized rooftop space
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #449  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 5:33 AM
bigguy1231 bigguy1231 is offline
Concerned Citizen
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,116
It looks like the city is going to OK this development.

https://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-st...r-kresge-site/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #450  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 7:07 AM
scootaround's Avatar
scootaround scootaround is offline
NIMBYism helps no-one.
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguy1231 View Post
It looks like the city is going to OK this development.

https://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-st...r-kresge-site/
Union friends want tall tower and preferential treatment, they get it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #451  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 3:15 PM
LRTfan LRTfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by scootaround View Post
Union friends want tall tower and preferential treatment, they get it.

Not exactly. They wanted 34 stories. City Hall is acting line a bunch of clowns with this new 30-storey obsession. It's going to drive away investment that we desperately need.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #452  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 7:08 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,202
They revisit it from 34+26 to 30+30, no? That's the same GFA, just reconfigured.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #453  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 7:35 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 18,186
King at Hughson | 97.5 & 97.5m | 2 x 30 fl | Proposal -> King at Hughson | 97.5 & 97.5m | 2 x 30 fl | Approved
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #454  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 8:03 PM
LRTfan LRTfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
They revisit it from 34+26 to 30+30, no? That's the same GFA, just reconfigured.

you are correct, but it's so petty and small-townish. What are we accomplishing by lowering it 4 floors?? And in the Rebecca St thread, you'll see they've denied the proposal for 40. Will only consider 30. Again, what are we accomplishing??
This is all because some folks in the DNA got the ear of city hall and came up with this boogey-man 'escarpment height' idea in order to gain opposition to TV City.
We've had several buildings taller than the escarpment for 45 years. And in that time, I'm going to guess the city has received exactly zero complaints about it.
When have you ever overheard someone say "can you believe we have buildings taller than the escarpment here?!" It's a red herring, boogeyman fabricated by a bunch of NIMBYs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #455  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 8:43 PM
Sehnsucht Sehnsucht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRTfan View Post
you are correct, but it's so petty and small-townish. What are we accomplishing by lowering it 4 floors?? And in the Rebecca St thread, you'll see they've denied the proposal for 40. Will only consider 30. Again, what are we accomplishing??
This is all because some folks in the DNA got the ear of city hall and came up with this boogey-man 'escarpment height' idea in order to gain opposition to TV City.
We've had several buildings taller than the escarpment for 45 years. And in that time, I'm going to guess the city has received exactly zero complaints about it.
When have you ever overheard someone say "can you believe we have buildings taller than the escarpment here?!" It's a red herring, boogeyman fabricated by a bunch of NIMBYs
Well said. Height restrictions are utterly preposterous. I've yet to hear a logical reason for them that isn't anchored in petty NIMBY-based self-interest.

The reality is that it will take our city some adjusting--once they see a few 30 storey towers on the skyline, they will become habituated (dare I say 'warm'?) to the concept of 40-plus storeys.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #456  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 10:18 PM
King&James's Avatar
King&James King&James is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 305
I would echo the argument that the city folk (would be nice to know who these people actually are) , holding some fascination on height limits, probably have been lucky not to have needed to defend arbitrary number for lack of any economics that would support or need extra density via height. No limits on lot coverage alone can achieve nominally the same return that say one that restricts (10 storey full lot,vs 40 storey at 25%). Just that you probably end up with a more interesting streetscape if you limit coverage and remove height caps.

So I say bring on the height, let Century 21 be lost in the new landscapes and not forever remain the 70s icon that we have all become too familiar with.

Also and as complete aside, why are there no outrages against building towers along the mountain crest (recall condo going up at Mountain Park and Upper Wentworth without any complaints that the escarpment look and feel would be taken away).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #457  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2018, 10:45 PM
LRTfan LRTfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by King&James View Post
I would echo the argument that the city folk (would be nice to know who these people actually are) , holding some fascination on height limits, probably have been lucky not to have needed to defend arbitrary number for lack of any economics that would support or need extra density via height. No limits on lot coverage alone can achieve nominally the same return that say one that restricts (10 storey full lot,vs 40 storey at 25%). Just that you probably end up with a more interesting streetscape if you limit coverage and remove height caps.

So I say bring on the height, let Century 21 be lost in the new landscapes and not forever remain the 70s icon that we have all become too familiar with.

Also and as complete aside, why are there no outrages against building towers along the mountain crest (recall condo going up at Mountain Park and Upper Wentworth without any complaints that the escarpment look and feel would be taken away).
good thoughts....and yes, re: the escarpment buildings. There is a 22 storey building on the escarpment...making it the tallest building in the city, equivalent to 52 stories when you factor in the 30 storey escarpment height. Why no outrage there?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #458  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2018, 3:11 PM
atnor atnor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRTfan View Post
good thoughts....and yes, re: the escarpment buildings. There is a 22 storey building on the escarpment...making it the tallest building in the city, equivalent to 52 stories when you factor in the 30 storey escarpment height. Why no outrage there?
Because it’s not 52 stories lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #459  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2018, 3:54 PM
LRTfan LRTfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by atnor View Post
Because it’s not 52 stories lol.

Lol...true. But it kinda is according to their ridiculous logic.
Oh, better example: the condo at Upper Wentworth at Mtn Brow. 12 stories. So, equivalent to 42 stories and literally overlooking the downtown core.
Why do we allow city hall to talk about the escarpment as if it's some wild, protected nature preserve, but on the other hand see it lined with buildings and urban development? It's a totally false narrative with no substance or logic. Just rooted in NIMBYism
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #460  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2018, 4:24 PM
atnor atnor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRTfan View Post
Lol...true. But it kinda is according to their ridiculous logic.
Oh, better example: the condo at Upper Wentworth at Mtn Brow. 12 stories. So, equivalent to 42 stories and literally overlooking the downtown core.
Why do we allow city hall to talk about the escarpment as if it's some wild, protected nature preserve, but on the other hand see it lined with buildings and urban development? It's a totally false narrative with no substance or logic. Just rooted in NIMBYism
I believe the protection of the escapement is beyond municipal jurisdiction and is protected by the province. Anything that has been approved along or on the escarpment has been done by the Niagara Escarpment Commission, not the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.