James North

[markbarbera]

An 80% rent increase sounds like the kind of predatory location-locking techniques big chains like Starbucks routinely practice. The article mentioned that a coffee shop was going to locate there. Who is the new property owner of 259 James North? It would have been nice to get their take on this story.

I guess it's easy to say Tim Francis (and other artists like him) could always find a cheaper place to rent elsewhere in the city, now that their efforts to turn around James North have made the real estate much more valuable for these new property owners. Will Art Crawl be relocating along with the artists as gentrification runs it course?

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^Well said.

And to reiterate what drpgq stated, being away from the Art Crawl might be the end for this artist. It is a shame.

[Jon Dalton]

The article mentioned that a coffee shop was going to locate there. Who is the new property owner of 259 James North? It would have been nice to get their take on this story.

The owners of Hotel Hamilton (home of Mulberry Coffee) bought the building. I guess they aren't worried about competition. The building also houses Needlework (definitely staying put) and Olinda's Fashion.

This isn't the first casualty of rising fortunes on James. I guess a new business puff piece isn't the place for balanced coverage, but another one is glossed over here: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/52...designer-says/

I guess it's easy to say Tim Francis (and other artists like him) could always find a cheaper place to rent elsewhere in the city, now that their efforts to turn around James North have made the real estate much more valuable for these new property owners.

As a recently displaced business owner, it rubs me the wrong way when people suggest moving to Barton St. or elsewhere. (Like, why don't YOU move to Barton Street?) Who decides who is worthy to stay on the street they helped revitalize, and who ought to do just fine somewhere else? Maybe it just hurts because it's true.

My views have changed somewhat since the great 'Fat Cats' gentrification debate circa 2010. You can't fault those with the means for improving old buildings and expecting a profit. However, as Jane Jacobs said, new ideas need old buildings - in which rent no longer finances construction or renovation costs. Those absentee landlords we love to hate, happy to collect the rent and otherwise let nature take its course, maybe deserve a bit more credit.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

'Those absentee landlords we love to hate, happy to collect the rent and otherwise let nature take its course, maybe deserve a bit more credit.'

Yeah...that's more of an accident, though isn't it.

Care to expand a little more on your situation? I understand you recently opened a business - have you been squeezed out?

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

'Those absentee landlords we love to hate, happy to collect the rent and otherwise let nature take its course, maybe deserve a bit more credit.'

Yeah...that's more of an accident, though isn't it.

On second thought, the slumlords may not all be avid urbanists acting purely altruistically, but yeah, they're helping some of us by accident. There are also many responsible non-absentee landlords who maintain their buildings.

Care to expand a little more on your situation? I understand you recently opened a business - have you been squeezed out?

I shouldn't say much here other than yes I was turfed, but not due to a rent increase (somewhat of which I could have afforded) I dodged the bullet this time and found an affordable place nearby. I live in the area and mostly just covet my walk to work.

[interr0bangr]

Originally Posted by drpgq

As an artist though he probably depends a lot on the Art Crawl traffic. If he's no longer on James the people going into his location is going to crater.

That's life/gentrification. I live very close to Barton Village, he's welcome to come setup here.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

I shouldn't say much here other than yes I was turfed, but not due to a rent increase (somewhat of which I could have afforded) I dodged the bullet this time and found an affordable place nearby. I live in the area and mostly just covet my walk to work.

Best of luck.

[drpgq]

Originally Posted by interr0bangr

That's life/gentrification. I live very close to Barton Village, he's welcome to come setup here.

It is, but my point certainly stands that if he moves to Barton Village he won't get any Art Crawl traffic. I assume that's where artists will go next, although the Art Crawl currently sucks up a lot of the art traffic in the city (not saying that's a bad thing, but it can be if you're an artist not on James).

I wonder at what point the art crawl doesn't make sense to have on James anymore in terms of artists. There's still Focus, AGH, Centre 3, the Inc, B Contemporary, the Fellowship, and that one way down James near the track whose name escapes me.

[markbarbera]

There is also Julia Veenstra Studio, which is an artist-owned and operated studio gallery at 167 James North.

[davidcappi]

I live at 318 james North, and there used to be a vintage store below us that was priced off the street, yet our three bedroom is incredibly affordable at $945 for the unit.

[Jon Dalton]

Originally Posted by drpgq

I wonder at what point the art crawl doesn't make sense to have on James anymore in terms of artists. There's still Focus, AGH, Centre 3, the Inc, B Contemporary, the Fellowship, and that one way down James near the track whose name escapes me.

Also there's Blue Angel gallery, Art at 231, and You Me Gallery which is near the tracks. Plus art on display at many other businesses such as Mulberry. Upper floor studios also open during the crawl.

The art crawl got started with a handful of galleries and it could exist as such again on a less art-heavy James or a different street the artists are pushed to. The momentum on James however has a lot to do with a bylaw amendment exempting street vendors on one street one day a month. Some businesses take exception to that as the vendors have become more profit and less art based. Businesses who pay rent on stores and have to deal with bylaws find it unfair that others can come in and undercut them on their busiest day. I personally don't have a beef, but have definitely heard it and as the street becomes more commercially successful I wonder how long the city will keep this in place.

[palace1]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

The momentum on James however has a lot to do with a bylaw amendment exempting street vendors on one street one day a month. Some businesses take exception to that as the vendors have become more profit and less art based.

Didn't know there was a bylaw amendment allowing street vendors on Art Crawls.
The street vendors I've seen are generally amateur artists and I assume spaces in front of vacant/closed storefronts is first come first served without any formal application process.

I can't think of anything I've seen that would be profitable based on one day a month aside from a few out-of-town boutiques who have done pop-up shops.

One conflict that I do see is Tourism Hamilton promoting food trucks in front of the Lister Block when there are so many brick-and-mortar restaurants on James St. N.

[mattgrande]

Originally Posted by davidcappi

I live at 318 james North, and there used to be a vintage store below us that was priced off the street, yet our three bedroom is incredibly affordable at $945 for the unit.

That's because rent increases for residential can only be at the rate of inflation. There's no restriction like that for commercial.

[thistleclub]

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

a bylaw amendment exempting street vendors on one street one day a month

Interesting. Anyone got a PDF link or a date that this amendment was introduced? (Presumably post-2011.)

[Jon Dalton]

Zucca Bar is on the market:
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetail...rtyId=15203849

Interesting because it's been years since it was shut down for selling coke and it's just sat there. Also this and the recently sold Sam's Hairstyling building across the street seem to establish the market value of an average slice of James N. pretty close to 1/2 a mil.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

I wonder if James N has caught up to or perhaps even surpassed similar properties at the opposite end of the street - James S.

[Jon Dalton]

^Wouldn't be surprised - and James South can be a brutal street to run a business on. The lack of on-street parking has really hurt the shops there.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

It wasn't so long ago that the Spec and CHCH were running stories on why James N was so much sh*ttier than James S. Things can change in a big hurry.

[matt602]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

It wasn't so long ago that the Spec and CHCH were running stories on why James N was so much sh*ttier than James S. Things can change in a big hurry.

I'd imagine that converting the street to two way was pretty fundamental to beginning that change. Don't think there were too many art galleries on that strip back then.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by matt602

I'd imagine that converting the street to two way was pretty fundamental to beginning that change. Don't think there were too many art galleries on that strip back then.

I'm guessing there's a lot more than that. Going around Ottawa I've seen two way streets that look on par with the more depressing parts of Main, while some of the more thriving regions of the city have a number of one way streets. The influx of artists from Toronto probably has as much or more to do with skyrocketing Toronto rent than James being two way.

I do think there's a number of side streets that should be made two way so things are less of a maze, but King and Main have a number of other issues that need attending. Turn them two way without anything else and you'd probably just get two version's of Bronson St. in Ottawa.