64 Main St East | ? m | 18 fl | Approved - Page 38

drpgq · #**741** Posted **Oct 26, 2023, 5:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt602

Looks great but I'll believe it when construction starts. That corner is cursed.

First post in the thread was on Dec 10, 2008. Amazing.

SteelTown · #**742** Posted **Oct 26, 2023, 5:56 PM**

^ and next year will mark 20 years since I've joined SSP

The Oxford (64 Main St East) | 54 m | 18 fl | Cancelled -> 64 Main St East | ? m | 18 fl | Proposed

Hawrylyshyn · #**743** Posted **Oct 26, 2023, 6:09 PM**

(Cross my fingers) but I'm confident it will finally get built

matt602 · #**744** Posted **Oct 26, 2023, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drpgq

First post in the thread was on Dec 10, 2008. Amazing.

I went back and read the entire thing a month or two ago and it was kinda hilarious how many times it looked like this property was finally gonna get developed, yet here we are in 2023 and its still essentially an empty field. They could literally dig a hole and it'll be more activity than we've ever seen there in the last 20 years.

BCTed · #**745** Posted **Oct 26, 2023, 9:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chronamut

What's wrong with all of you this is ugly and generic as hell, esp. Considering all the other renders that we had - is this all we get to have as a city? Brutalistic brick with window punchouts?? Literally the only thing modern architects seems to be able to design are pictureframe jutouts, punched in windows and oddly spaced windows - that's not designing a building - that is moving around generic presets in a cad program. Our city should be ashamed for accepting this as "design". - itll probably be vranich looking too where you'll be able to see the seams between the precast panels and it will look super cheap. I've gotten so sick of this minimalistic approach where there is nothing of actual architectural value to actually look at on the building..

And there is nothing wrong with "faux" heritage, core urban does it all the time - esp in this area where it's rowhouse all the way down.. styles come and go, they just become "heritage" when they've been up for x amt of years. I have no issues with classical designs esp in the core.

Seems hamilton only approves things when you finally propose something thats as ugly as all the other "modern" renders which is just codename for "we designed this this way because it's cheaper but we're going to market it to you as chic so you pay more for less"

Bet the ceilings will be exposed concrete too.. our ancestors could have made generic cutout boxes of buildings too, but they knew that in order to have any sort of self respect a building needed to have some element of craftsmanship. They call it "warm masonry" ok there..

This design will also age TERRIBLY, mark my words. The only semi-okay part of it imo is the restaurant. It literally has some of the most beautiful heritage buildings right across the street - from the revitalized building on the corner to the courthouse to the royal connaught.. sorry I just find this design very disappointing, considering all that's around it. This makes the landmark building look good in comparison, and that's saying something.

No cornices either.

ScreamingViking · #**746** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 1:31 AM**

So the current version is ugly???

Generic in design perhaps, resembling somewhat many proposals I've seen in Toronto on this forum, but it would be a new one for downtown Hamilton. IF this is the most serious one to come through the planning department, then it's got that going for it.

Let's have a look back at various iterations of this Harry turd. These are just the images I could find that are still available, from references past in this thread... a thread that has lots of tangents, interspersed among references to dates of construction right from the lips of the illusionist himself in some cases, issues with city requirements for a setback from Main, money troubles, excuses du jour... you name it. Some names of posters past too, who are missed but hopefully still lurking about.

2009 as a "hotel"... died later that year, back to life a year later (Post 180):

2010 (Post 375):

2011 (via post 382):

2012 (via post 382):

2018... Pensio, under a different owner and looking better (via post 679):

Then it was sold again. And now, we have the latest:

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidcappi

TheHonestMaple · #**747** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 1:48 AM**

I don't think Hamilton had really any appeal as a development area until maybe 2016 or so. Now the demand is solidly there, and Toronto developers are starting to have their eye on this place. I'm going to say this one will happen, and i'll even go as far as to say we see construction start within a year.

ScreamingViking · #**748** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I don't think Hamilton had really any appeal as a development area until maybe 2016 or so. Now the demand is solidly there, and Toronto developers are starting to have their eye on this place. I'm going to say this one will happen, and i'll even go as far as to say we see construction start within a year.

I think you're right.

In the late 2000s things were still near the bottom for the core, but looking up. I gave Stinson a vote of respect about a decade ago given that he was one of the first to do something here... but then he did a whole lot of nothing.

This thread, and the one about the Connaught, probably capture all the drama very well (at least among skyscraper/development geeks)

Innsertnamehere · #**749** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 1:56 AM**

Within a year is a bit tight I think, 2-3 more realistic.

Anyone know who the developer is here?

Canuck905 · #**750** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 2:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Within a year is a bit tight I think, 2-3 more realistic.

Anyone know who the developer is here?

The StudioJCI Instagram post said it was done in collaboration with Core Development Group... I would imagine they are the developer.

Chronamut · #**751** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 2:07 AM**

I still prefer the original designs - they had a classy upscale hotel vibe to them, and .. yes.. cornices lol - I especially liked the third to fifth renderings, which felt more in line with what could have originally been built there during the original time of our citys timeline of say the courthouse and the royal connaught. Not faux heritage, Period style. Say what you will about the guy, but I really liked a lot of his proposed designs - I just wish that they had come to fruition. The 6th render above just feels like an awkward mishmash without cohesion that didn't quite know what it wanted to look like imo, but I would STILL take it over the final rendering - which seems to be of a style that every builder that is starting to creep into hamilton is adopting - bland exteriors - large cut in windows and.. and well that's it. Blockitecture as I call it.

I don't think I'll ever like the minimalist modern craze, nor do I think 100 years from now any of those types will ever qualify for heritage protection. I don't think I'll ever love an entirely featureless brick wall with holes punched in it for windows - It feels very ellen faircloudesque and brutalistic to do that.

and yes, I DO think the newest render is ugly.. sorry. I think the fact people saying "if it has nice enough finishes it CAN look nice" is telling in and of itself. Or.. hilarious, "these are a dime a dozen and generic and bland in toronto, but it'd be a first in hamilton" - oh great we get their stagnant leftovers but hey since we don't have any itll be a novelty..

Guess I've been spoiled by core urban lol

and please don't give me the excuse that hamilton should be lucky to get anything - we're just as old as toronto - we just lost our way somewhere along the way. We deserve nice things too, I hate the excuse people give that "well, you're gonna have to accept some crappy designs first before toronto REALLY decides to throw the money down on some ACTUAL quality in your city" - like we're some sort of charity case that only deserves crap until we are deemed worthy.

..sighs.

but hey, that's just my opinion, and everyone who knows me should have a very clear impression of how I will react to this type of stuff by now, so.. carry on lol.. we'll see if this even gets built.

TheHonestMaple · #**752** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 2:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Within a year is a bit tight I think, 2-3 more realistic.

Anyone know who the developer is here?

I mean we've seen site plan applications and then construction in less than a year. Look at 1 Jarvis. Site plan for that one was 2020, and it started construction in April 2021. I don't think this one will be any different, especially with a Toronto developer with money.

ScreamingViking · #**753** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 3:01 AM**

I guess Harry did pick a colour scheme that was forward-thinking. Perhaps he'd have hit the historical features on the nose!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

2011 (via post 382):

2012 (via post 382):

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyhamont

The red is a weird shade of red, and it really clashes with the grey and beige

source

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyhamont

Construction nearing completion here:

Joe

King&James · #**754** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 3:43 AM**

Interesting that it is Core Developments, they have 73 Hughson N in the mix. But I much prefer that design over this box. To me this is pretty boring looking and way too much concrete (mind you nothing is as quite as ugly as that new build in Dundas - the Centurian, truly horrible concrete bunker). Just hoping the gas station remediation will not skewer development.

Chronamut · #**755** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 6:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I guess Harry did pick a colour scheme that was forward-thinking. Perhaps he'd have hit the historical features on the nose!

I always thought his first render reminded me of the lister block/royal connaught somehow.. and he probably could pulled those colours off ok..

his proposal just felt and looked.. substantial...

also I will mourn the loss of that MASSIVE cornice hahaha..

Beedok · #**756** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 3:47 PM**

Those 2010 prices…

ScreamingViking · #**757** Posted **Oct 27, 2023, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chronamut

I always thought his first render reminded me of the lister block/royal connaught somehow.. and he probably could pulled those colours off ok..

his proposal just felt and looked.. substantial...

also I will mourn the loss of that MASSIVE cornice hahaha..

Is it a loss, when it was just a fantasy?

Markus83 · #**758** Posted **Oct 28, 2023, 4:45 AM**

Holy F! $79,000 for a bloody unit in 2010...ahh where the F did we go wrong?!..yep it is a rhetorical question, the answers are too disturbing.

Innsertnamehere · #**759** Posted **Oct 28, 2023, 4:25 PM**

I mean Stinson is still trying to sell units in Hamilton for $299,000... He's always had unrealistically low sale prices on units and there is a reason he never manages to get crap built. The dude is a con-man.

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...t-105-hamilton

ScreamingViking · #**760** Posted **Oct 28, 2023, 5:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus83

Holy F! $79,000 for a bloody unit in 2010...ahh where the F did we go wrong?!..yep it is a rhetorical question, the answers are too disturbing.

There were some floorplans in that 2009 version LikeHamilton had originally shared. Presumably the 2010 'resurrection edition' kept a similar layout.

Residential "suites":