![]() |
282 MacNab North | ? m | 21 fl | Proposed
|
wonderful....great architect too.
Build it |
There are a lot of design motifs happening there... I'd like to see it simplified. The brick base is nice, and I enjoy the idea of the three ascending volumes to break the building up, but they don't feel coherent to me, especially the upper level. I think they'd be better off sticking to one kind of cladding for the entire building rather than having three distinct shifts in material (brick/metal/glass)
|
Quote:
|
From the link above:
Quote:
|
|
why? too dense near a go station. ridiculous. im telling my kids to leave hamilton for a future.
|
Yeah, it's ridiculous. I skimmed through the report to the planning committee which mentions targets for density and efficient land use in Places to Grow etc., but notes opposition based on things like traffic and parking concerns. Where are the numbers for this? Are 300 new units actually going to cause a traffic jam on MacNab Street? I doubt it. It also gives a lot of credence to the existing built form of 2 storey houses in the area, but doesn't mention the adjacent James Street corridor which has been specifically designated for higher building heights. I know most people if offered the choice would rather not have an apartment building across the street from their house, but if we can't build something like this a stones throw from James St and next to the GO station, where will we actually allow it? We're in a housing crisis and people need places to live, and in light of that I think it's pretty selfish for people to oppose things like this.
|
Quote:
Second: why wouldn't you want a medium density condo near you? I wouldn't mind it personally. If I bought downtown, which I plan to, I don't mind medium and even high density buildings near me, it's expected and it means more people keeping stores I love open. |
This is actually the most insane thing I've ever heard !!! Not only should there be density in this particular spot but it should also be a high-rise and maybe even a few .... Why does Burlington get everything right and here in Hamilton we have a few loud residents controlling the city ?!?!?
|
|
Can someone share contact information for the councilor or whoever would be best to contact to comment on the denial?
|
Quote:
My recommendation, though, would be to write an email to all members of the plannng committee (members found here), CC the clerk ([email protected]) and include a note that you want your comments to be included on the public record. You can find all city councillor emails here. |
thanks for that. also interesting you can have your comments on record. sounds like an an old tradition in democracy.
|
I will be submitting comments to this. This is getting ridiculous.
|
Also to note, the 'Setting Sail' secondary plan, which has been used to stop so many north end applications, was created in part by one of the City's 'expert witnesses' against Television City (at this week's OMB hearing), Tim Smith of Urban Strategies Inc. Who also sits on Hamilton's Design Review Panel.
It runs deep. |
Let’s not kid ourselves here. The parking to units ratio is horrible with less than 0.5 spots per unit and no visitor parking.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Besides, my hunch is that the City is more caught up on the height and density than they are with the parking ratio. Alas. I might carve time out on Tuesday to speak in favour but it’s demoralizing to put in this amount of time advocating only for the City’s policies to continue to get worse. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 4:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.