11 Robert Street| 6 fl | Under Construction

[JoeyColeman]

This is not a city-initiated appeal.

[JoeyColeman]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Truthfully, it seems to be staff. It's a vicious cycle though. Staff recommend what they think council wants, remembering that council is a regressive, sometimes idiotic bunch, and so staff don't recommend things that actually make sense.

I've seen little to indicate professional planning staff are basing their recommendations upon political considerations. In fact, they are often differing from the ward feudal lord in their recommendations.

As for number of LPAT files from the municipality of Hamilton, there are many in which the ward feudal lord votes down a project that meets the requirements of the Planning Act, and it ends up at LPAT for approval. Not unusual in other municipalities.

[TheHonestMaple]

This development is honestly perfect for the area. Not very tall, architecturally appealing. All they needed to do was recommend changing the look of the west facing facade, possibly add windows or curtain wall. Why don't they just work with these developers instead of simply rejecting them. I understand that is the purpose of the DRP, but if city staff aren't willing to work with the developer than what's the point?

[catcher_of_cats]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Truthfully, it seems to be staff. It's a vicious cycle though. Staff recommend what they think council wants, remembering that council is a regressive, sometimes idiotic bunch, and so staff don't recommend things that actually make sense.

It's definitely our mediocre staff. Far too many promising staff leave Hamilton for greener pastures, leaving the chaff behind.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by catcher_of_cats

It's definitely our mediocre staff. Far too many promising staff leave Hamilton for greener pastures, leaving the chaff behind.

And who can blame them? Working under the council that they do.

[davidcappi]

It is more often the councillor, not staff.

An example would be the 9 storey building at James and Burlington - full staff support, reports recommending approval, but the councillor didn't want to upset voters in the co-op to the north, so Farr votes against, sending the project to the LPAT where it was obviously approved. Farr gets to shift blame to another party while saving face. Its a tactic used a lot in Toronto too. It's why despite what folks will say, the OMB/LPAT is a necessary force because ultimately local councils just don't feel like adhering to the planning act

[eatboots]

1000x this. Hamilton Clrs will vote against or make a big fuss about things they know that people in their riding wont like but also know is just going to get passed anyways. A huge waste of time and money.

[durandy]

This development is bananas. Zero parking and using 100% of the lot, for a development on a minor side street off James N. This was not what the downtown secondary plan envisioned when zero parking was allowed. Not 28 units. And definitely not on a side street.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by durandy

This development is bananas. Zero parking and using 100% of the lot, for a development on a minor side street off James N. This was not what the downtown secondary plan envisioned when zero parking was allowed. Not 28 units. And definitely not on a side street.

I think it's great. There aren't 28 on street parking spots in the area, so that means purchasers or renters here won't have cars. Furthermore, I live in the area, and the thing about free street parking is that it's just that, free. I had no expectation of finding a spot after a grocery shop home, and regularly didn't and had to park far from my house. It's a reality of living in a city, and not every new unit in the city should have parking.

Add to this the housing crisis where housing unaffordability is making it hard to buy or rent anything, and guess what one of the most expensive parts of a building is? Parking. At $80,000-$100,000 per underground parking spot, it can take up 20% - 30% the cost of a new unit. Many don't have cars, either by choice or necessity. We shouldn't force every new development to have parking. There are loads of units being built in the city with loads of parking, they can buy there if they need a car.

[Innsertnamehere]

Hamilton is one of the few places in this province where living car free is actually fairly easy - especially once the LRT opens and we see improved GO service.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Hamilton is one of the few places in this province where living car free is actually fairly easy - especially once the LRT opens and we see improved GO service.

Hamilton isn't like Toronto, but I knew many people that survived without a car living here for years. Many still do not have a car, many others have moved away to somewhere slightly more suburban and bought a car. We used to have two cars, but found the cost to not be worth it and got rid of one. Plan to sign up for car share in the case we need a second car, but 99% of the time we can survive with a single one and the area is super walkable, so we barely use it. I want to get rid of it, but my partner wants to keep it because she has the fear many car owners have living downtown, around "what about if this happens" where most people without cars can figure it out.

James St area specifically is incredibly walkable. There is a pharmacy, grocer, LCBO, dentist and doctor all within reasonable walking distance. I wouldn't really call this a side street considering it's a single property off the main commercial strip. It's got 5 bars within 5 minute walk and like 15 restaurants.

[Markus83]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

I think it's great. There aren't 28 on street parking spots in the area, so that means purchasers or renters here won't have cars. Furthermore, I live in the area, and the thing about free street parking is that it's just that, free. I had no expectation of finding a spot after a grocery shop home, and regularly didn't and had to park far from my house. It's a reality of living in a city, and not every new unit in the city should have parking.

Add to this the housing crisis where housing unaffordability is making it hard to buy or rent anything, and guess what one of the most expensive parts of a building is? Parking. At $80,000-$100,000 per underground parking spot, it can take up 20% - 30% the cost of a new unit. Many don't have cars, either by choice or necessity. We shouldn't force every new development to have parking. There are loads of units being built in the city with loads of parking, they can buy there if they need a car.

Yes, and agreed. Two years ago, I sold my house on Augusta just East of John St., we lost out almost $75,000 just because there was no drive way, and only street permit parking which then was like $100 / yearly I believe. So, even with a single home, parking is a very valuable piece. Though being downtown, and next to the GO station literally, I mean the walk score was 98 and so many amenities within walking distance, including many HSR routes of all kinds, in all directions. Prime area, and this area not really that much different it seems.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Markus83

Yes, and agreed. Two years ago, I sold my house on Augusta just East of John St., we lost out almost $75,000 just because there was no drive way, and only street permit parking which then was like $100 / yearly I believe. So, even with a single home, parking is a very valuable piece. Though being downtown, and next to the GO station literally, I mean the walk score was 98 and so many amenities within walking distance, including many HSR routes of all kinds, in all directions. Prime area, and this area not really that much different it seems.

I'm surprised by that. The modern downtown Hamilton market does not seem to care about parking spaces. We're at Bay and Barton and our house was more than similar houses with driveways. Our house wasn't the exception either. Seems people are really coming around to not having a car in Hamilton. I even knew some people that lived around St Clair without a car.

[craftbeerdad]

Never owned a car (never even acquired a G2) and as an adult lived in downtown Toronto, Calgary, Toronto (again) and Hamilton (Stinson). Perhaps I've long been ahead of the curve, but I never cared about driving since I was a teenager.

At this point in the lower city, driveways aren't going to inhibit a purchase of a house. It's no different than Toronto and street parking. Prioritizing locale and public transit proximity is key, sure, but with the rise of the sharing economy, and until cars are fully EV infrastructure supported, I won't purchase a car, waste of money (would have held me back even more to purchase a house)

/end old man rant

[TheHonestMaple]

Just a reminder that this development is going before the land tribunal this morning at 10AM.

[TheHonestMaple]

Apparently the hearing will continue on October 27.

https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDe...spx?n=PL210275

[TheRitsman]

How much do we want to bet this goes for sale as soon as it's approved or denied?

[TheHonestMaple]

Why would it go for sale if it's approved?

[Innsertnamehere]

The developer here is Yoke Group I thought? They have built stuff before so I suspect they’ll at least try to build it..

[TheRitsman]

Yoke hasn't built much. They seem mostly like a zoning change and sell flipper. This complete lack of an attempt to propose something appealing seems exactly like that. I get the feeling this is planning flip, similar to what happened at Rebecca and John.