SkyscraperPage Forum - 137 George St | ?

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- Downtown & City of Hamilton (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=283)

- - 137 George St | ? | Complete (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245123)

137 George St | ? | Complete

137 George Street will provide permanent housing with supports for 15 women at risk of homelessness in two and 3-bedroom apartments in a low-rise, new modular building.

per CMHC through RHI, which means approval is virtually guaranteed and completion should be within the next 12 months. The new building is described as low-rise but zoning allows up to 14m in height, so probably 3 or 4 floors coming here.

Location: https://goo.gl/maps/6fRMt6S2rbz3muDR7

Demo has begun. Picture taken from a facebook group:

https://i.imgur.com/usEl6ku.png

Wow what a shame. Why would they destroy a heritage building for this..

Do any renders of the building exist? I can't imagine the owners of the surrounding houses are happy about this. What a strange place for a development like this.

I would say shelters for at risk homeless women are probably one of the most acceptable reasons to tear down older housing stock I could imagine? Up there with orphanages.

Very badly needed. Toronto is building a ton of new homeless support facilities right now like transitional housing and new shelters, it’s good to see Hamilton start to join in.

It's just there's so many vacant lots and parking lots in the downtown core....why tear down a beautiful old house like that. They certainly could have found a more suitable place for this.

I once knew a woman who lived on the ground floor in the white house to the left of this.
Many of these places on George are duplexed and triplexed. The owners don't live in them. People can be offended by anything. Personally I'm more offended by that fact that there are women and children at risk by no fault of their own who don't need to be. I am always upset to see old buildings go but are there developers donating empty parking lots for this kind of use? I doubt it.

Vulnerable people getting housing is more important than saving an old house who's only heritage value was it's age. There was nothing special or valuable about it. If it hadn't been torn down for this development no one would've thought twice about it,

I am in no away against helping the vulnerable, I just think the government (I believe this is a federal project) could have found a much more suitable piece of land to purchase and develop into this apartment building. Why they chose to destroy what is essentially a heritage building is beyond me.

It is for developments like these why we no longer have a historical downtown core. Slowly eaten away by new developments, until we're left with what we have today. It just keeps happening, and it's such a shame.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple (Post 9295659)

I'm in agreement here. While I do think homes for vulnerable people is a good goal, there's something to be said about the character of these 100+ year old neighbourhoods. Many of these areas are some of the most dense neighbourhoods in the country, especially when some are converted duplexes and triplexes. I do think a lot of "character" protections is bullshit. If it's a crummy 1960s house, or even a 100 year old house that is burned out or condemned, then build whatever you want in it's place. There are some great examples of this in Hamilton, Toronto and Ottawa. But existing housing of heritage age in decent condition should be protected in some way.

I cannot subscribe to the idea that we must raze the old, for what we now consider to be a good cause. Firstly there are better places like vacant properties, that now remain vacant, and much of what we see as terrible (Jackson Square, Main St, Giant raised pedestrian malls, parking lots, ghetto social housing, were all seen as noble and good causes.

I do think I'd rather see this house torn down for affordable housing, 100%. Much better than demolition for a terrible set back m mansion, but it's still sad regardless. If they demolished the Royal Connaught, or some other large building with zero historical significance but it's historic beauty, many would lament, no matter the cause. There are some of us the appreciate the hand crafted wood, hand laid brick with articulations that make you feel comfortable and homey unlike new neighbourhoods.

This is finally under construction:

https://i.imgur.com/PtHrW5Gh.jpg

That's not progressing very quick, I wonder if they ran into problems somewhere? Could've used the previous building on the site to house people in need all these years.

This project has been moving quickly last couple of months.

Thanks for the update.

Interesting - is that roof framing made of wood? Through the 3rd floor windows it looks like there may be some kind of truss structure in place too... is that the case?

30+ years ago "modular construction" was being promoted. We see it used for some projects, but I think it holds the key to faster construction and quality control so I'd love to see more of it (along with more use of alternative materials like steel)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking (Post 10242036)

The roof is definitely metal. My pictures on UrbanToronto show it a bit closer as they are being placed.