Great work MIT! Some shovels in the ground will tempt others to get a move on their own projects. Blanchard comes to mind.

Nice work MeIsThomas. :cheers:
Have you ever thought about contributing to the city's SSP diagrams? There are getting to be a few gaps on that listing now.

I too think the additional height is welcome, especially with the Artizen planned not far to the south, and the potential for other lots north of King William to see infill over the longer term. I could see the city asking the developer to create more of a setback though.

I'm with Mark on this one. I'm wondering if the whole project will come to pass though. I'm also wondering if maybe 22 stories is their opening offer and then look like they are compromising when they come back with plans for 15 stories.

I'm wondering if they'll have a mix of setback options 1 and 2. So the 4th and 5th floors are set back, then 6 oneward stick out more than 4 and 5, but not all the way.

I knew that there are a lot of buildings missing, but I never gave it a thought to make drawings for them myself. I looked up all the instructions of what you have to do to submit drawings, and unfortunately it's a bit too much for me right now with school and everything. I'll have another look at it in the summer when I'm on break.

thespec.com - Developer hopes to take Tivoli to new heights

By Matthew Van Dongen

Preliminary redevelopment plans for the historic Tivoli Theatre property include a 22-storey condo tower.

The 73-metre-high tower — more than triple the current permitted height on the James Street North property — would allow 106 condo units and three commercial floors in addition to a restored theatre.

Developer Domenic Diamante said in an interview the "very preliminary" plans could change as a result of ongoing discussions with the city, but added "we do need that height."

"On a small site, you have to go to a certain height to make it possible … from a financial perspective," he said.

Diamante declined to put a value on the ambitious project, but added he hopes to have a "clearer view" of what comes next in a few weeks, including whether a rezoning application is needed.

In addition to exceeding the permitted height, the proposal suggests fewer parking spots than required for a development of this size.

Members of the Beasley Neighbourhood Association are "paying attention with interest" to evolving plans for the property, said co-president Matt Thompson.

He said the group has no default objection to a particular building height, but added "we're certainly in favour of a high level of public engagement," particularly when it comes to preserving the historic theatre.

Ward Councillor Jason Farr said he was surprised by the proposed height, suggesting that sort of bylaw change "would not be minor in nature."

But Farr added he's still excited to see a development proposal given the "stagnant history" of the site on an otherwise rebounding section of James Street.

Diamante purchased the theatre last year for $900,000 from a charitable dance organization run by his wife, Belma Gurdil-Diamante.

The Canadian Ballet Youth Ensemble is still involved in planning to restore the theatre, said Gary Santucci, a director with the group. The organization bought the derelict 140-year-old building in 2006 for $2 from the Sniderman family, of Sam the Record Man fame.

Over time, the city has committed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the theatre in loans, grants and the cost of demolishing the front of the building.

I really think Hamilton should lose this height restriction.. For a city of this size it's ridiculous to maintain a status quo..
Secondly! Parking isn't everything when you live close to where you work or commute from..
Change needed with current council!
I've grown tired of these fossils coagulating change...
:shrug:

The height restrictions have been in place since the 80's thanks to former councillor Geraldine Copps who had some kind of height phobia I think. So the current council is not to blame.

For the most part councils in the past have waved the restriction when asked to do so on a case by case basis.

Pretty well every city on earth has some height restrictions. Some are a matter of bedrock and soil stability. Others an issue of what infrastructure can support (not just roads, but the water lines too). I'm sure there's other fully valic reasons that I'm not able to think of too.

I don't think there should be NO height restrictions but they should definitely be looked at on a neighborhood or BIA basis. High-rise towers should definitely be allowed at places like King and James or Main and Bay. I think it makes sense for an area like James North though, at least North of Wilson.

I don't remember when, but I do remember height restrictions were set for buildings in the core so as to not block the view from the mountain.... that was long ago....

Hopefully more like Burlington's 17 25 21-storey Strata than Hamilton's 6 11 12 15 10 6 "10-storey" Grand.

Parking crunch? Tivoli hopes to stack cars
(CBC Hamilton, Samantha Craggs, June 20 2014)

The company behind the Tivoli condo project is proposing the city's mechanized car stacker to solve the development’s future parking problems.

The developers are proposing a 22-storey development at the old Tivoli Theatre, on James Street North, which could see as many as 65 condos in addition to commercial space and the restored theatre. But with more developments happening in the James North area, parking is increasingly an issue.

Diamante Holdings hopes to use an automated parking stacker. Such machines are common in New York and Toronto, but they’ve never come to Hamilton. The devices increase parking capacity of a lot by automatically lifting a car to a slot in a multi-level storage structure, where cars are stored more closely together, and then retrieving the car when the driver wants to use it again.

The company hopes to include an indoor one at the Tivoli site, which would fit the maximum amount of cars in the small space, said Berardo Diamante.

“As developments downtown increase, (car stackers) are going to come up more and more,” he said. “To have enough parking to get the site going, it’s just too tight otherwise.”

Parking, he said, is “something that can completely prevent things from being built.”

Read it in full here.


Setting aside the novelty of a car stacker, nine days ago this project was being described as consisting of "106 condo units and three commercial floors in addition to a restored theatre."

Aren't car stackers really expensive?

On the number of units front, I would trust the official number rather than a news story.

http://i57.tinypic.com/2ziuc6w.jpg
Source

Larger Size:


http://i59.tinypic.com/2rcpmhj.jpg
Source

Larger Size:

Would be great if those were from a set of working drawings.

Not sure whose version is most credible at this stage. Just noting the discrepancy.

Stackers or otherwise, it's encouraging to see the diagrams relegate parking to sub-grade.

As has already been pointed out, this project - if completed - will push the owner of the strip mall (M Beume) to make changes. That corner property could make a tremendous impact on the area.

http://msarch.ca/system/assets/attac...ium/Tivoli.jpg

Source

That looks fantastic! The podium allows for a consistent streetwall, and the tower would be a unique addition to the skyline (assuming the final design keeps the spirit of this rendering).