Tivoli Theatre | ? | 22 fl | Planning

[Chronamut]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

While I think it's technically possible to rebuild what was once there, it's likely cost prohibitive. Most old practices didn't go out of style because of large cultural reasons, but more relating to cost. That's why we see 1950s and 1960s design really popular today, and some classic old designs like board and batten coming back because they are affordable to replicate.

I'd suggest looking to Europe and Asia for better architecture of a modern type. Netherlands especially has some amazingly simple but beautiful architecture that we could easily copy and it would be popular and palatable here. I'm speaking to new buildings, not old ones in Netherlands and Europe.

The stonework I can admit to being cost prohibitive, but the rest was just fancy woodwork practices. Admittedly some of those may not be up to code anymore. Still for every argument I can bring up the core urban rebuttal, in that if a company really wants to, they can still get it done.

I'd be happy to see examples you had in mind, I am open minded, to an extent

To imply a burlington arts center replacement in comparison to what was originally there though feels like a hard slap on the face still though. My problem is there appears to be NO innovation anymore - I can list the go to "styles" of hamilton right here:

precast panels
picture frame like jutouts of concrete clad in panels
curtain wall majority frontage
windows set askew from each other for "interest"
stucco sytrofoam exterior for filler
weird metal jetouts for "interest" either as toppers or strange awnings.
a lack of stone whatsoever esp when it comes to windows.

this doesn't lead to any sort of building innovation - it's just lego building. Our city deserves better considering what already exists.

[TheRitsman]

Kind of generally relevant to downtown more generally, but also this property of course, another payday loan bites the dust, unable to be replaced. I guess if this doesn't get refilled it will indicate there may some actual movement on this:

[Innsertnamehere]

They will need to process a site plan application at a minimum and likely a rezoning, so I doubt they will be evicting tenants too soon.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

They will need to process a site plan application at a minimum and likely a rezoning, so I doubt they will be evicting tenants too soon.

I figure as much, but if they don't begin to lease out exiting tenants then it might be a sign they plan to do something.

[TheRitsman]

FC-23-053: Formal Consultation

"To develop a mixed-use redevelopment that reimagines the Tivoli Théâtre, and add new commercial retail and residential uses"

[ScreamingViking]

2008 -----> 2023

[Chronamut]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

FC-23-053: Formal Consultation

"To develop a mixed-use redevelopment that reimagines the Tivoli Théâtre, and add new commercial retail and residential uses"

"Re-imagines the tivoli theatre eh.." that could be good, or it could be.. dark foreboding.. WHOSE reimagining..

[thmx]

Some potential new information on the Tivoli redevelopment from the 73 Hughson Street North Urban Design Brief (PDF).

On page 4,

"3) 108 JAMES ST. N., ONE 35 AND ONE 40 STOREY TOWER, MIXED USE TOWER"


source

[King&James]

Originally Posted by thomax

Some potential new information on the Tivoli redevelopment from the 73 Hughson Street North Urban Design Brief (PDF).

On page 4,

"3) 108 JAMES ST. N., ONE 35 AND ONE 40 STOREY TOWER, MIXED USE TOWER"


source

Someone on this forum has to do a title search on that full block of opportunity. I remain a sceptic, but wow if all that residential get built, how insanely different it will be and certainly would not have predicted that this quadrant of downtown would ever be the most populated area of all the lands available.

[Hawrylyshyn]

Wow, great catch!

[Chronamut]

..and yet that one parking lot remains entirely empty.. one has to wonder if it will ever be developed..

maybe they should convert it into a REAL park..

[StEC]

Oh please be 40 floors... something will need to break up that glut of 30 floor buildings that will take over this entire area! And yes one parking lot holdout remaining! I'm dreaming of 40, 50 & 70+ floor skyscraper trio taking this lot that will be the new gold standard development in Hamilton with a large format grocery store and a full service LCBO amongst other shopping and dining options in the podium! One can dream.....

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

..and yet that one parking lot remains entirely empty.. one has to wonder if it will ever be developed..

maybe they should convert it into a REAL park..

They’re waiting for someone to break the limit I’m sure give us something really great.

[Chronamut]

Originally Posted by mikevbar1

They’re waiting for someone to break the limit I’m sure give us something really great.

Honestly I think something huge here would just make this entire area feel like you crammed a buncha pencils into a cup.

I'd rather see something really small go here to make the buildings around it appear taller and more impressive, kinda like a central park feeling in new york where its like an oasis surrounded by tall buildings. Cuz what's the point of being in any of those tall buildings if they're just gonna build something huge right beside it and block your view of .. well.. anything? Need staggered heights - not just all 30+ story everything.

I want the city to still have a level of walkability and not just have giant monstrosities on every block - like imo the first stretch of king william still has good walkability - with anything giant being set back a ways. I'd prefer they keep to that feel. 6 story small stuff in the forefront and the skyscrapers pushed back so as not to be noticeable from close up.

I honestly don't understand the obsession with height - noone at ground level sees anything past the first 6 stories anyways, only looks "impressive" from far away and the designs are usually so cookie butter bland its really just the height that's a wow factor, not the architecture itself.

I wouldn't even care personally about height in this city - torontos height always gives me a bit of anxiety - I'd rather just all the podiums look good. Hamilton is at a loss atm for high quality tower buildings so I'd rather NOT something huge and horrible go in - we already have our landmark dildo - we don't need another even blander even higher dildo to rival it lol..

If we're not careful our city is going to have no warmth left and become just a giant cold city where regions all isolate from each other - can't support intensification while also sacrificing what makes hamilton hamilton and inviting in the first place.

[ScreamingViking]

Tower height =/= walkability. Variety is important, but I think there's going to be plenty of that even if most of the core's development is tall buildings vs. mid- and low-rises (which I think will get built too).

What the city needs to do is ensure that the lower 1-2 floors are "friendly" -- have developers include retail and services (in spaces that actually get leased) and the DeRP should offer guidance on breaking up glass walls to help the podiums feel more varied and less sterile.

Took me a few mins to orient myself around that building diagram, in terms of the direction. Thanks for posting it thomax (and the design brief) and it's great to have you contributing again... seems like it's been a while!

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

Honestly I think something huge here would just make this entire area feel like you crammed a buncha pencils into a cup.

I'd rather see something really small go here to make the buildings around it appear taller and more impressive, kinda like a central park feeling in new york where its like an oasis surrounded by tall buildings. Cuz what's the point of being in any of those tall buildings if they're just gonna build something huge right beside it and block your view of .. well.. anything? Need staggered heights - not just all 30+ story everything.

I want the city to still have a level of walkability and not just have giant monstrosities on every block - like imo the first stretch of king william still has good walkability - with anything giant being set back a ways. I'd prefer they keep to that feel. 6 story small stuff in the forefront and the skyscrapers pushed back so as not to be noticeable from close up.

I honestly don't understand the obsession with height - noone at ground level sees anything past the first 6 stories anyways, only looks "impressive" from far away and the designs are usually so cookie butter bland its really just the height that's a wow factor, not the architecture itself.

I wouldn't even care personally about height in this city - Toronto height always gives me a bit of anxiety - I'd rather just all the podiums look good. Hamilton is at a loss atm for high-quality tower buildings so I'd rather NOT something huge and horrible go in - we already have our landmark dildo - we don't need another even blander even higher dildo to rival it lol..

If we're not careful our city is going to have no warmth left and become just a giant cold city where regions all isolate from each other - can't support intensification while also sacrificing what makes hamilton hamilton and inviting in the first place.

The space is very well-suited for a good cultural institution- not necessarily a park again (we tried that, and I'd rather we leverage a new lot for something else than waste valuable downtown land on rectifying a poorly-planned park next door than just fixing the damn thing) but more like a new library, community centre, secondary or post-secondary school, collaborative/mixed-use offices ala the Well or another kind of social gathering space. You can certainly incorporate something tall, which is what the private landowners will want, but it is up to the CITY to ensure whatever goes there is built around some kind of cultural institution. I will report back at some point with a more refined idea, but you are right that if it just becomes condos, we run the risk of creating our very own sterile 'new' condo quarter akin to CityPlace or Toronto's Waterfront in general. We do not have a downtown in place to leverage that kind of mistake, as this area is to be part of that rejuvenated downtown once more. It cannot be that if it is *just* another condo. And a park can be part of the site, too, I just don't see it really being practical to turn the entire thing into one.

That aside, the towers themselves are more than appropriate (that north of the site in question). Really, some height variety is good for our blocks that will just see 30-storey towers otherwise, but we all know that and I don't want to sound like a broken record. If that proposal is well thought-out, then the city's hands ought to be tied when it comes to asking for a reduction. The Jackson proposal appears to be the test this time around.

[TheRitsman]

I think the Olympia being vacant has a lot more to do with King St being what it is, and that Core Urban is picky about what it rents to.

[SteelTown]

Updated story on plan to demolish the Tivoli Auditorium

In place of it, the developer will make a separate Planning application to build two tall buildings of 32 to 35 storeys each. #yhmcc #HamOnt

https://twitter.com/joeycoleman

[Rg2016]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Updated story on plan to demolish the Tivoli Auditorium

In place of it, the developer will make a separate Planning application to build two tall buildings of 32 to 35 storeys each. #yhmcc #HamOnt

https://twitter.com/joeycoleman

Truly amazing, we need more of these type of proposal!

[Berklon]

I *think* it looks good, but I'd like a more detailed render to get a better idea.