November 7, 2012 - Reallocation of 2012 Downtown Block Funding (PED12206) (Wards 1, 2 and 3) (Item 8.5):

(a) That the Gore Pedestrianization Project, including a temporary closure of King Street (south side) from James Street to Hughson Street, be
extended until commencement of construction activities associated with implementation of the Gore Master Plan, and that the associated 2013 implementation cost in the amount of $19,100 be funded from the Area Rating Special Capital Re-investment Reserve Account No. 108052;

(b) That the one-time total estimated cost of $120,000 required to procure durable, modular planter boxes and planting material for the Gore Pedestrianization Project be funded from the existing Hamilton Downtown Supermarket Incentive Program Project ID 8201203515, subject to the approval of operating costs set out in Recommendation (c), below;

(c) That funding required to implement the West Harbour Shoreline Rehabilitation and Transient Docks, in the amount of $340,000, be funded from the Hamilton Downtown Supermarket Incentive Program Project ID 8201203515, subject to the approval of operating costs set out in Recommendation (e), below;

(d) That the associated annual operating cost for the West Harbour Shoreline Rehabilitation and Transient Docks, in the amount of $13,600, be referred to the 2013 Operating Budget process for consideration by City Council;

(e) That funding required to implement the continuation of a Social Navigator Pilot Extension Program, in the amount of $90,000, be funded from the
Hamilton Downtown Supermarket Incentive Program Project ID#8201203515;

(f) That funding required for the development of a Downtown Alleyway Study and Implementation of Alleyway Improvements, in the amount of $100,000, be funded from the Hamilton Downtown Supermarket Incentive Program Project ID#8201203515;

(g) That subject to the approval of recommendations (a) – (f), the Hamilton Downtown Supermarket Incentive Program Project ID#8201203515 be closed.

CN derails pitch to move waterfront rail yard

http://www.thespec.com/article/84484...ront-rail-yard

CN has turned down the latest city overtures to relocate the waterfront rail yard that prevents a residential redevelopment of the neighbourhood razed for a failed Pan Am stadium.

A citizens’ group pitched a radical rethink of the west harbour area this summer that calls for parks, stores and condos on lands now dominated by the shunting yard and vacant, city-owned properties in the Barton-Tiffany area.

The plan hinges on relocating the Stuart Street rail yard — an idea CN has repeatedly shot down since an early ’90s push to move operations to Aldershot.

The group asked council to study its plan and approach CN again about its willingness to part with the yard, which is leased to an American rail company until 2018.

But in a recent update for councillors, city manager Chris Murray said a top CN executive has rejected the notion because “the location and design of the yard remains strategically important” to future operations.

In an interview, spokesperson Lindsay Fedchyshyn added CN expects the rail yard to be “a very, very critical component of our operations” beyond 2018, no matter what happens with the existing lease.

The city shouldn’t delay west harbour planning in the hopes CN will have a change of heart, said Councillor Chad Collins, who plans to introduce a notice of motion next week to push ahead redevelopment planning around Pier 8.

“I think everyone believes that rail yard will move someday,” he said. “But the question is, when? I think we have to assume the rail company will be our neighbour in the west harbour for some time to come.”

Architect Bill Curran, who created a blueprint of potential waterfront development near the rail yard, maintains relocation discussions are happening “behind the scenes” at CN.

Curran said he supports implementing a new vision for the empty lots and warehouses at Pier 8 sooner rather than later. But his group wants council to “sit tight” and delay its plan to turn the failed Pan Am stadium site into a largely commercial district.

That was the main land use approved in a recent Ontario Municipal Board settlement that banned residential development near the rail yard.

“That is my nightmare, that we’ll turn that area into another Burlington Street, surrounded by a sea of pavement,” said Curran.

The city has about 20 properties near the rail yard that it could sell, but council also faces a lawsuit from three area landowners who fought the promised Pan Am expropriation.

Ward Councillor Jason Farr said in an email the city is about to start an urban design study for Barton-Tiffany that will include public input. But he added the city is limited by OMB settlement rules requiring a commercial “buffer zone” around the rail yard.

Collins said council needs to prioritize redevelopment planning along the harbour, adding he’d like the city to focus first on revitalizing Pier 8. “We need to have that discussion about what comes first and what comes last.”

Damn it CN rail yard... Are they not at the city's mercy once 2018 comes and their lease expires?

And less importantly:
Google map Barton and Caroline St N and it has both the current levelled land as well as the older images of houses and Rheem factory which pre-existed. A swat team excercise is also being conducted in the older images.

Pretty obvious that CN is holding out for a better deal. The city has a history of caving in, so it's a natural ...

I could be wrong, but I don't think the city owns the rail yards and is leasing it to CN until 2018.

My impression is that CN owns it, and that they are leasing it to another rail company until 2018.

The article lacks detail about the subject. What intrigued me was this part:

You are correct.

CN owns the land and there is absolutely nothing the city can do to change that. The city couldn't even expropriate if they wanted to since those lands are only subject to federal regulation.

West Harbour real estate sucks for another 50 years , the rail yards are staying

I don't see why it's even such a big deal. The yard is very rarely used and when it is, is usually done so late at night. CN has really downsized their operations there over the last 15 years. Lots of big, successful cities have downtown waterfront railyards. It seems more like pointless NIMBYism to me.

Yeah, you're probably right.

However, the yard can be a little noxious at times and when cars are being shunted around and connected, etc., it's loud enough to shake windows.

Ideally, work would progress with or without the yard there but I think we're gonna have to work around it for a few decades...

Getting started on Pier 8 is a well-overdue idea, though. That land is priceless, though I'm sure any plan they come up with will not take advantage of the property. Anyway, the way things go, it'll probably be another decade before they break ground on anything at Peir 8.

City will start developing key Hamilton waterfront lands

By Samantha Craggs, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/stor...velopment.html

The city is taking control of critical land it owns on Hamilton's waterfront, and plans to open it up to developers.

Councillors voted Tuesday to terminate leases with the Hamilton Port Authority (HPA) for Piers 7 and 8, waterfront lands they envision will soon have bustling commercial and residential properties.

If the land is developed according to council's plan, it will change the face of Hamilton, said Coun. Chad Collins.

“It's an image changer not just for the waterfront, but the city as a whole.”

The big prize is Pier 8, which is the large slab of land flowing east of Williams Fresh Cafe, Sarcoa and the skating rink.

The city acquired the piers in 2000 as part of a sweeping rearrangement of port ownership that came out of a court battle between the city and the federal government.

But part of the settlement was a ruling that meant use of the lands stayed in the hands of the Hamilton Port Authority. It had 15- and 25-year leases that allowed it to keep the lands in port uses. Collins said. The city has been trying to gain back use of the land ever since.

The city will sign a memorandum of understanding with HPA for lease transfer and partial early termination. The HPA's lease on Pier 7 was scheduled to expire in 2015. The Pier 8 lease expired in 2025. Large portions of the land are currently being used for storage.

The HPA worked with the city “every step of the way” to reach the agreement, said Bruce Wood, president and CEO.

“The transfer of the property at Piers 7 and 8 is an exciting and important step in the ongoing development of the West Harbour, and we are pleased to do our part,” he said in an email.

As part of the agreement, HPA will lease a city-owned property south of Pier 22, adjacent to the city's recycling facility, Wood said.

“We have been experiencing exceptional growth in the last five years, so we can make good use of new available space, bringing new business activity to Hamilton.”

Developers are already interested in building on Pier 7 and 8, and have been for years, city manager Chris Murray said. There could even be development in the next two years.

“This is one of those situations where we don't have to drag anyone to a meeting to get them interested in this part of Hamilton,” he said.

Residents are in favour of developing the piers too, Coun. Bernie Morelli said.

“I can tell you when I look (at the plan), I can't help but be excited.”

Tom Raczynski was one of about half a dozen Hamilton residents fishing off the pier on Wednesday. He worries that new development will mean the end of fishing there.

He likes the idea of residential and commercial development better than a previous council idea, which was putting a stadium there.

“(Councillors) come up with some humdingers,” he said.

But the right development would make a positive difference.

“As far as making Hamilton better, yeah, it'd be great.”

Awesome!!! Just as the article suggests, this could be a game-changer for the city.

When I've got more time I'll post some pics of what I envision for Piers 7 and 8...others should do the same.

I'm a bit confused... Which piers are 7 & 8?

http://media.mmgdailies.topscms.com/...e87d50a81a.jpg
TheSpec
http://www.thespec.com/news/local/ar...the-waterfront

Here is a map of the general land use for the piers from the Setting Sail: West Harbour - Secondary Plan

http://i46.tinypic.com/eur0n8.jpg
Source

Wow, they're thinking of putting residential down there? I had no idea.

sweet spot
 

Great couple high density zones for some really talls.

The 2 high density zones are existing buildings unfortunatley.

Everything new that will be built on the piers has a medium density maximum. Lets hope that developers can change the city's mind on that. I'd love to see some new high density buildings on the waterfront so the Marina & Harbour towers don't look so lonely.


Imagine if something like Riccio Towers was built in the center of the pier with medium density buildings around it... :slob:
...or maybe something like the new Bridgewater Development in Burlington.

This is good!