HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #221  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2013, 11:05 PM
matt602's Avatar
matt602 matt602 is offline
Hammer'd
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hamilton, ON
Posts: 4,786
I actually agree with the height restriction on the waterfront. The skyscrapers should be downtown.
__________________
"Above all, Hamilton must learn to think like a city, not a suburban hybrid where residents drive everywhere. What makes Hamilton interesting is the fact it's a city. The sprawl that surrounds it, which can be found all over North America, is running out of time."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #222  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2013, 12:23 AM
Beedok Beedok is offline
Exiled Hamiltonian Gal
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,792
I like a height of 4-8 stories for the area. Anything overly tall there would look awkward. Now something along the lake, that would be nice, but on a pier? That would be awkward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #223  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2013, 2:28 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
I think even eight stories is pushing it a little but I'm happy the City has the right idea with this one.

This sort of scale would be perfect:





It's a blank slate. The possibilities are endless. Let's hope the City gets proper help on this one - not just the in-house planners, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #224  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2013, 3:02 AM
Pearlstreet's Avatar
Pearlstreet Pearlstreet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by realcity View Post
West Harbour real estate sucks for another 50 years...
Surprise!
__________________
Surfing the Hamilton renewal!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #225  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2013, 2:18 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,352
Promise, potential on the waterfront

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/923539--promise-potential-on-the-waterfront

Just as the city is about to take control of a key swath of land on the waterfront, its arm’s-length development agency is moving forward with imminent plans for new buildings at the water’s edge.

The Hamilton Waterfront Trust has put out a call to the development community for proposals for three new buildings: one on the grassy area between the parking lot and the ice rink, a second between the Sarcoa restaurant and the rink, and a third on the eastern end of the former Discovery Centre.

All three areas are owned by the federal government, but are controlled by the waterfront trust under long-term leases.

The call for proposals is wide open, but the trust has several potential commercial or retail uses in mind — such as shops, restaurants and office spaces, maybe even a banquet centre or hotel.

The deadline for interested bidders to apply is Thursday, May 23, said Werner Plessl, the trust’s executive director.

The agency and its other partners, along with the city, should make a decision within a year and the projects could break ground by the summer of 2014.

The trust’s plans are only one facet of the waterfront’s red-hot potential. The area was also one of the stops on a city-led tour Tuesday that highlighted Hamilton’s possibilities to out-of-town developers. According to Councillor Jason Farr, the tour attracted two full busloads — about 80 people.

“My understanding is a lot of these developers, primarily from Toronto, have been hearing the buzz and are eager to see Hamilton first-hand,” Farr said.

The trust’s news comes fresh on the heels of council’s approval of an agreement with the Hamilton Port Authority for control of Pier 7 and Pier 8. The authority was holding the piers under two long-term leases set to expire in 2015 and 2025. However, the deal will put the land back in the city’s hands by this summer.

Though the trust’s plans for its three new buildings are separate from the city’s plans for piers 7 and 8, Werner says both groups are working in close partnership.

“They all fit together. We’re all trying to work on one common goal,” said Plessl.

Councillor Chad Collins, who has spent the past decade working to develop the waterfront, says having the lands on Pier 7 and Pier 8 under the city’s control will make the waterfront trust’s available land much more attractive. Collins says in the past, the fact the lands on piers 7 and 8 were owned by the federal government turned some developers away because their only option was to lease.

“They want to make sure they have that asset after 20, 30, 40 years, and you can’t do that on leased land,” he said.

However, the two opportunities will complement each other, Collins said.

“I think what you’ll find is smaller business might gravitate to the lands that are leased, while the hotel and condo developers will gravitate to lands that are up for sale.”

Though the city is still two to five years away from offering up its land on piers 7 and 8 to the private sector, developers are already poised to snatch it up. Chris Phillips, the city’s waterfront point-person, says preliminary meetings are under way to discuss the land that’s available, the city’s plan and the project time frames.

“We’ve had nothing formally, per se — right now it’s just about creating the environment,” Phillips said. “The key is that we’re moving forward, and we’re moving forward quickly.”

The local development community is also paying close attention.

Vince Molinaro, president of the Molinaro Group, says his company was behind much of the waterfront development in Burlington — and he’d like to do the same in Hamilton.

“We’re quite proud of what we’ve done down here, and we’d like to do the same thing in Hamilton where we have deep roots and a lot of history,” he said. “People are meeting, and things are happening.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #226  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2013, 2:32 PM
c@taract_soulj@h's Avatar
c@taract_soulj@h c@taract_soulj@h is offline
"Pow! Right in the kissa"
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Welland, ON
Posts: 579
I was in Erie, PA over the winter (not the greatest time to visit) but I really liked it's waterfront despite being covered in ice and all. One of the features I enjoyed, was the BiCentennial Tower. I know we have a natural observation point in the escarpment but this would be something neat too!

It's just a simple tower that was dedicated to the citys' bi-centennial year and not that high but I think it would be great if Hamilton had something similar, maybe even perhaps with a restaurant up to or something. Nothing ridiculously high but also the Forks in Winnipeg has something similar too.

http://sailorguides.com/presque/presque_dobbins.html

Thoughts?
__________________
Fawdie (n): Forty ounces of urine-flavored beer
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #227  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2013, 12:57 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,352
Making Burlington beach strip hydro towers disappear a tall order

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/383375...rip-hydro-towers-disappear-a-tall-order/

Ridding Burlington's beach strip of skyline-dominating hydro towers would cost local taxpayers up to $36 million, according to early talks between utility and city officials.

And that estimate doesn't include the price tag of powering down Hamilton's side of the ship canal, either — a cost previously pegged at more than $70 million.


Burlington officials recently met with Hydro One for an "informal analysis" of the cost to move, bury or beautify the wall of 60-metre-tall transmission towers between downtown and the ship canal, said Councillor Rick Craven.

Options range from $8 million to swap out some "oil derrick-type" towers with less obtrusive poles, to $36 million to bury the 230,000-volt transmission lines, said Craven, calling those numbers "ballpark" figures.

"They repeatedly pointed out the city would be paying the costs, if this were ever to go ahead," said Craven, who expects council to request a formal Hydro One report. "Everyone wants to see them removed but the question is how, and how much."

There are 30 lakeshore power towers between downtown Burlington and Van Wagner's Beach, each about the size of the Royal Connaught Hotel.

So far, Burlington has only asked about its side of the ship canal.

"Once you get past the canal, that's Hamilton's responsibility," said Craven with a laugh.

Any plan to reroute the corridor would affect the "visual pollution" on Hamilton's beach strip, too, said Councillor Chad Collins, who wants to be involved in any formal study.

Collins said he asked Hydro One to estimate a relocation cost for the Hamilton side in 2009 and was told "at least $70 million."

Spokesperson Nancy Shaddick said Hydro One won't comment on informal conversations.

But an email to Collins from the utility said burying power lines along the lake would be "difficult if not impossible" due to erosion and environmental concerns.

Another option is to reroute the towers away from the lake and along the harbour side of the beach strip, closer to the treatment plant and port authority lands. But Hydro One told Collins the two cities would have to find a new right-of-way between Burlington and Van Wagner's Road, where the towers veer away from the lake.

If the beachfront towers do come down, area property values would go up "very rapidly," said Hamilton real estate agent Conrad Zurini.

"Conservatively speaking, I'd guess 15 or 20 per cent right off the bat," said Zurini, who cautioned the area is still overshadowed by the skyway and lacks amenities. "Right now, a significant number of people will simply refuse to buy (near a hydro tower)."

As it stands, available Beach Boulevard homes along the power corridor range from a townhome for $280,000 to a three-bedroom "luxury waterfront bungalow" for $880,000.

A hydro tower shuffle could also help the environment, said Collins, because machinery used for maintenance routinely damages sensitive beach ecology.

It might even prevent the odd lawsuit — Burlington settled with a woman who sued in 2007 after a power-line-zapped cormorant fell on her head in Beachway Park.

Craven said a clear skyline at Burlington's beach is likely a couple of decades away. "But part of our job is to cast our eyes 20, 25 years down the road and ask where we're going."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #228  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2013, 5:56 PM
Duckyboy Duckyboy is offline
Recent Hamiltonian
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 142
That's great to hear that they're even thinking about it! It's always boggled my mind that these were located along the beach in the first place; what a waste of waterfront. Even talking about it is a step forward.

Hamilton has so much potential for water front & mountain brow properties, but they'e shot themselves in the foot for most of it. Scenic Dr. & Mountainbrow Blvd. wreck what could have been endless lengths of houses sitting of the edge of cliffs, and the trail along Van Wagners stop any property there from being truly "waterfront"; only Hamilton waterfront properties I can think of are the small streets Lakegate & Church, then a bunch in Stoney Creek. The towers just add to the lack of interest.

Regardless, I'm happy to hear this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #229  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2013, 12:58 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
So much of the waterfront - in the Golden Horseshoe - is cut off to the public, so it's great that people can actually use the Beach Strip. It's better to share, isn't it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #230  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 1:09 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,352
Waterfront Trust has a short list for new Pier 8 development

http://yourhamiltonbiz.com/waterfront-trust-has-a-short-list-for-new-pier-8-development

A short list of qualified preferred operators has been chosen for three new buildings on the nine-acre federally owned waterfront on Pier 8.

In early June, the Hamilton Waterfront Trust board of trustees met to review the potential developers.

In April and May, the Waterfront Trust held site meetings and tours for potential bidders for the site.

The board will meet July 9 to finalize the short list and hopefully issue the RFP to those preferred operators.

Werner Plessl, executive director of Hamilton Waterfront Trust, said some Hamilton companies have expressed interest but he said he was not able to comment on the number of interested operators.

Plessl said it could take three months to make a decision.

“It is an ongoing process, but I want this done as soon as possible.”

The Waterfront Trust has identified three potential development zones at Pier 8:

Zone A: The 800-square-metre grassed area is identified for a four-storey building, which could be connected to the existing HWT Centre. The land is located on the western portion of the site between the HWT Centre and an outdoor skating surface to the south.

Zone B: The 1,300-square-metre grassed area has potential for a new building with water, sanitary sewer, bell, hydro and gas service nearby. The area is located on the south of the HWT Centre and east of the outdoor skating surface and north of the mechanical building.

Zone C: The 2,000-square-metre grassed/asphalt area also has potential for a new building. The land is adjacent to Hamilton harbour and the waterfront trail.

The hope is that construction will start by May 2014.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #231  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 6:45 PM
Duckyboy Duckyboy is offline
Recent Hamiltonian
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by pEte fiSt iN Ur fAce View Post
So much of the waterfront - in the Golden Horseshoe - is cut off to the public, so it's great that people can actually use the Beach Strip. It's better to share, isn't it?
Ideally, yes, it is better to share.

Although, in these cash-strapped times (which seems like forever, for Hamilton), I'd imagine that they'd have wished for a whole bunch more mountain brow & waterfront properties to reap large amounts of property taxes from.

The Mountain Brow blvd is not very good for homeowners & pedestrians alike; the road is too close to the edge, making the only places to enjoy the view a few feet away from speeding cars. And if you're a homeowner, then like I said, your property is not truly on the edge of a cliff...

But yes, a nice mix of private & public access would be best for all, I'd assume.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #232  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2013, 1:36 AM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 7,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckyboy View Post
Ideally, yes, it is better to share.

Although, in these cash-strapped times (which seems like forever, for Hamilton), I'd imagine that they'd have wished for a whole bunch more mountain brow & waterfront properties to reap large amounts of property taxes from.

The Mountain Brow blvd is not very good for homeowners & pedestrians alike; the road is too close to the edge, making the only places to enjoy the view a few feet away from speeding cars. And if you're a homeowner, then like I said, your property is not truly on the edge of a cliff...

But yes, a nice mix of private & public access would be best for all, I'd assume.
I actually prefer the Beach Strip and the brow the way they are. I think those are both public resources and it's best that public access is maximized. While beach- and brow-front properties would be worth a pretty penny and likely provide more in property tax, the value of public access is far greater.

It would be nice if there were wider strips of parkland between the escarpment edge and Mountain Park Rd. and Mountain Brow Blvd (especially the latter where it runs north-south) but at least there is pedestrian access along the majority of it through the old city.

One can point to so many things that Hamilton planners have done wrong over the years, but whether by design or not, that's one thing that was right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #233  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2013, 2:51 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
For whatever reason, I can't visualise those proposed developments. Can somebody provide a link to the plans, please and thank you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #234  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2013, 4:45 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,729
Canada Day Fireworks Light Up Bayfront and Pier 4 Parks

The public is invited to attend the City of Hamilton’s annual Canada Day celebration on Monday, July 1, 2013 at Bayfront and Pier 4 Parks.

Enjoy more than ten of Ontario’s finest food trucks serving up Southern BBQ, Greek specialties, First Nations cuisine, poutine, grilled cheese, tacos, hot dogs and ice cream from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Local entertainers will perform throughout the parks starting at 6:00 p.m., including the Hamilton Aerial Group, face painters, balloonists and more!

The fireworks display will start at dusk (approximately 10:00 p.m.). Fireworks will be launched from the north-west point of Bayfront Park requiring a section of the park to be closed on Monday, July 1 starting at 8:00 a.m., reopening on Tuesday, July 2 at 12:00 p.m.

The Canada Day fireworks display draws over 30,000 people to the waterfront. Residents are strongly encouraged to walk, bike or take the complimentary HSR shuttle bus to the event to minimize traffic as there is limited public parking available in the area. The shuttle bus service starts at the east side of John St. (just north of King St.) and ends in Pier 4 Park. Shuttle service begins at 6:00 p.m. Signage will be posted at both bus stop locations.

Just a reminder to all who plan on heading to Canada Day Celebration at Bayfront and Pier 4 Parks, the Canadian National Railway (CN) is replacing the railway bridge on Bay Street North. To safely facilitate the work, Bay Street is closed from Strachan Street to Stuart Street. The work is expected to be completed by mid-December....

The public is asked to bring a non-perishable food item to support the Welcome Inn Community Centre’s Emergency Food Pantry, which serves over 14,000 people in Hamilton every year. Food donations can be dropped off at the Information Tents in Bayfront and Pier 4 Parks.

Residents are reminded that personal fireworks and sparklers are not permitted in city parks or on city property. All city parks are smoke-free, and dogs are not permitted in the parks during this event.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #235  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2013, 12:57 PM
mattgrande's Avatar
mattgrande mattgrande is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,245
I really have to give props to the city when they get something so right. The tall ships, the fireworks, the free shuttle, all the bands, vendors, food trucks... It was a great weekend. Everything seemed to work perfectly (with the exception of the weather on Friday night), and thousands of people were able to enjoy our waterfront.

If I wanted to re-open old wounds, I'd talk about the stadium, and how we can clearly get lots of people in and out of downtown without issue... but that's a talk for another day.
__________________
Livin' At The Corner Of Dude And Catastrophe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #236  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2013, 6:25 AM
lucasmascotto's Avatar
lucasmascotto lucasmascotto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 356
Residents face uncertainty as their Burlington Beach homes could become parkland
Hamilton Spectator

Feel a hot breeze on a sultry Saturday at high noon; slide off your sandals and stand ankle deep in the cool lake.

Facing the Burlington Beach shoreline, you would have no clue that houses exist here.

But they do, a hundred paces away, along the waterfront trail, concealed by trees and bushes, no two houses the same, quaint and quirky and pretty.

And not just houses, but rather homes. Memories, first loves, dreams.

Those who have lived with Lake Ontario in their back yards, some for decades, have long been contemplating their existence — that is, whether it will continue here or not.

The threat of the government forcing them to sell their homes in order to turn the entire Burlington beach strip into parkland has existed since at least the late 1970s.

The families living in about 30 homes along Lakeshore Road remain in the crosshairs, but the issue may finally be coming to a head. A recommendation at Conservation Halton to get rid of the homes was recently narrowly defeated on a 6-6 tie vote (several members of its board of directors were not present).

But the issue still has to move through Burlington city council, and then Halton Regional council in late summer and early fall.

Jim and Marie Milner would love to see the question put to bed in their lifetimes — most of which they've spent on the beach.

They were born in Hamilton and their families moved to the beach when they were kids. They met here in the late 1940s, hanging out at White Towers Snack Bar beside Marie's childhood house, where you could get a foot-long for less than a quarter.

They married in 1955 and have lived in the same little house for 42 years, near where Eastport Drive meets Lakeshore, in the shadow of the Skyway.

They bristle at how those who want to take away their place keep calling them "cottages," as though their home is temporary.

"We're here because we want to be here. … All our kids grew up here," said Jim. "We've never been anywhere else."

The Milners are players in a drama on the beach that has been going on for a very long time. Historically the beach communities on the Hamilton and Burlington sides of the lift bridge canal were unique and separate from the cities proper.

Ultimately, debate arose over whether the beachfronts should have a residential component at all. Politicians elected to pursue property acquisition — or "expropriation," depending on your point of view — to convert the property into parkland.

In Hamilton, 269 of 685 properties were acquired between 1976 and 1985 before the city abandoned the policy in the face of heated neighbourhood opposition and the escalating cost of buying the properties.

Instead, the city put in a sanitary sewage system and saved the beach community, which has since prospered and is now considered a prime and not inexpensive place to live.

But Halton Region has continued to officially support acquisition, although not actively in recent years. Between 1976 and 2000, the region bought and tore down 129 cottages and houses, most of them near the water and on leased land.

The 30 homes that remain are privately owned. The cost to the region of buying those properties is estimated at $10 million.

(The region designates the land as parkland, Burlington's official plan designates it as residential low density and mixed-use.)

A primary argument in a conservation authority staff report for demolishing homes near the beach is potential flooding.

None of the homes have basements. But the Milners say they have seen it all. They've been here with the lake at its highest and nastiest, including Hurricane Hazel in 1954 when sandbags were piled on the beach. And they have never had a flood.

Conservation authority board member Alan Elgar, who voted to support property acquisition, says he's concerned for the safety of residents.

"You think about Calgary — there had never been flooding like that before there, either."

Some residents have invested heavily in their homes and have no wish to sell them, especially to a government authority that will almost certainly not pay market value.

Elgar counters that residents have known for years that land acquisition remained the region's policy.

But resident Chris Collier laments the mixed signals. After his home suffered fire damage a few years ago, he asked regional officials if they wanted to buy his property. The answer was no, so instead he upgraded his home, which is now one of the most impressive on the street.

Burlington councillor Marianne Meed Ward opposes acquisition, saying flooding seems a non-issue. She says the amount of parkland to be gained by demolishing homes is negligible, public access to the beach is already assured, and the cost for buying out properties is more than they can afford.

"The main issue is the human factor, the history there," she said. "It would be morally unconscionable to move out homeowners — for what? To add more parking?"

Those who cycle and walk the waterfront trail behind the homes often enjoy stopping to chat with a beach resident, even have a glass of water or use their washroom in an emergency. One cyclist said she feels safer using the trail knowing that people live here.

Collier shakes his head when considering how long talk of expropriating their property has been going on.

"My dad explained it to me years ago, how they are trying to take our homes — and now I'm explaining it to my kids. How much longer will they hold us for ransom?"

Richard Hodge hasn't lived here long, but has no desire to leave. He arrived about six years ago with his wife, Helen, and their three sons. The renovated former hotel was a dream home after moving out of their cramped house in the city.

Hodge lives here with his boys, all in their 20s, and a tiny teacup Yorkie named Bella. A civil engineer, Hodge built a spectacular deck from which they can see the lake.

But Helen is not here to take in the sunlit horizon. She died of leukemia.

"It was her dream to have a home on the beach," he said. "You never know what life has in store."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #237  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 12:04 AM
Dr Awesomesauce's Avatar
Dr Awesomesauce Dr Awesomesauce is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BEYOND THE OUTER RIM
Posts: 5,889
'Conservation authority board member Alan Elgar, who voted to support property acquisition, says he's concerned for the safety of residents.'

Just let people be, man. I've never understood this policy. Get a new hobby.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #238  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 5:33 AM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 7,442
This is one issue where I think Hamilton got it right, and Burlington did not.

There is value in waterfront park land. There is also value in community. There is no reason you can't have both in the same area.

I really hope wisdom prevails. The flood risk may exist, but comparisons to Calgary are ridiculous (and you have one of the city's most important pieces of infrastructure located down there too - if flooding is an issue, was that a good decision, way back when?). And the cost factor is important too, especially in comparison to what you'd gain.

If money is to be spent, let's start with trying to do something about the hydro towers. There's a bigger "value" payoff in that, in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #239  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 5:37 PM
Duckyboy Duckyboy is offline
Recent Hamiltonian
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingViking View Post
If money is to be spent, let's start with trying to do something about the hydro towers. There's a bigger "value" payoff in that, in my opinion.
Couldn't agree more!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #240  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 1:15 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is online now
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,352
They are starting $600,000 upgrade to the sewer on Pier 8.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.