Television city condos | 109 m | 32 & 32 fl | Under Construction - Page 21

Dr Awesomesauce · #**401** Posted **Jan 10, 2018, 11:51 PM**

Probably in the minority on this one. It's pretty clear to me the scale of this project is out of whack with the neighbourhood. I mean, 40 stories is a bit jarring. That said, I wouldn't necessarily stand in the way of it getting built.

But if it does go t*ts up, Lamb has no one to blame but himself. Arrogance can be an asset in his field but it can also really affect one's ability to make smart decisions. He has not engendered himself to the city in a particularly positive way so...

durandy · #**402** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 1:22 AM**

My fear is that if this one collapses, it, combined with the Connolly and numerous other projects staggering along, will really subdue other developers. Frankly, not a single downtown building of any architectural value has been built in the current renaissance. Some good adaptive reuse, but nothing truly bold. The DRP was supposed to encourage innovation but all it's done is maintain the status quo. And that's not surprising because the DRP is made up of the status quo. It's looking less like NIMBY to me and more like 'thats not the way we do things in Hamilton'.

LRTfan · #**403** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 1:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by durandy

My fear is that if this one collapses, it, combined with the Connolly and numerous other projects staggering along, will really subdue other developers. Frankly, not a single downtown building of any architectural value has been built in the current renaissance. Some good adaptive reuse, but nothing truly bold. The DRP was supposed to encourage innovation but all it's done is maintain the status quo. And that's not surprising because the DRP is made up of the status quo. It's looking less like NIMBY to me and more like 'thats not the way we do things in Hamilton'.

Pretty sure we should hold off on using the word 'renaissance'. We've had a few buildings built. Better than none, I agree. But we are WAY behind every other city in Canada and any city worth emulating in the US.
We need multi-million dollar urban residential investments like this. We should be working hard to possibly see a renaissance happen someday....that will never happen with our politicians and the tiny group of social media activists who have their ears.

Sehnsucht · #**404** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 3:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

Probably in the minority on this one. It's pretty clear to me the scale of this project is out of whack with the neighbourhood. I mean, 40 stories is a bit jarring. That said, I wouldn't necessarily stand in the way of it getting built.

But if it does go t*ts up, Lamb has no one to blame but himself. Arrogance can be an asset in his field but it can also really affect one's ability to make smart decisions. He has not engendered himself to the city in a particularly positive way so...

I certainly agree that BL needs to shoulder some of the responsibility, but not much. Know your market, after all, and that his plan would be bound to meet with resistance.

However, it's innovative and bold, and somebody has to be first. So I don't really call it his arrogance necessarily. He wants to bring an innovative, quality product to Hamilton. What's the crime in that? How do you fault that?

Look, I think we all agree that over the course of the next twenty years, it would be nice to see a totally transformed skyline, one with multiple towers in the 30 to 40-storey range, with a sprinkling of 20-storey towers. Just imagine.

It has to start with one. So let's support this guy and get more 'feet on the street,' as someone just posted (really like that--so Jane Jacobs).

atnor · #**405** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 4:25 PM**

While I don't think this build is totally innovative as it looks like any high-rise along the Gardiner, I wouldn't be opposed if it was approved as is; although I do understand the concerns associated with the height, number of units, etc. I would love to see its traffic impact study.

The worst part of this build is that it's close to 181 Jackson St W....ewww, nasty.

movingtohamilton · #**406** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 4:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by durandy

... It's looking less like NIMBY to me and more like 'thats not the way we do things in Hamilton'.

^ This!

Chronamut · #**407** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atnor

While I don't think this build is totally innovative as it looks like any high-rise along the Gardiner, I wouldn't be opposed if it was approved as is; although I do understand the concerns associated with the height, number of units, etc. I would love to see its traffic impact study.

The worst part of this build is that it's close to 181 Jackson St W....ewww, nasty.

people used to eww lock st and ottawa st, and now look at them - one pasts junk is another futures treasure

LRTfan · #**408** Posted **Jan 11, 2018, 9:56 PM**

Just stumbled upon this today....Ottawa has finally lifted it's height restrictions. New tallest tower on the way.... This is also known as a city open for business.

http://www.claridgeicon.com

Innsertnamehere · #**409** Posted **Jan 12, 2018, 12:07 AM**

Ottawas height restrictions are still in place downtown. That building is in the burbs, outside the height restriction.

LRTfan · #**410** Posted **Jan 12, 2018, 2:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Ottawas height restrictions are still in place downtown. That building is in the burbs, outside the height restriction.

A developer took the city to the OMB stating that can't limit heights in a downtown hood. Not surprisingly, the city lost. New towers are coming to downtown now.

I would love to see a developer do the same here.

King&James · #**411** Posted **Feb 13, 2018, 10:23 PM**

Phase 1 sold out?

https://twitter.com/davidcapizzano/s...0%7Ctwterm%5E1

LRTfan · #**412** Posted **Feb 13, 2018, 10:50 PM**

reposting this here from Downtown Update

sorry for the multiple posts...just saw this pop up on my wire.

http://ward2news.ca/wp-content/uploa...EB-13-2018.pdf

OMB approves 26 storey building in Burlington that was rejected by council.
Here is the kicker, and of utmost relevance for Hamilton:

The OMB cited the Places to Grow Act, the designation of downtown Burlington as a major regional centre, and proximity to a transit hub as a reason for their decision. They made a clear point of mentioning how Places to Grow sets minimum growth targets, not maximum. And they also made note of other nearby buildings built or approved at similar height: 17-23 stories.

Very good new for Brad Lamb IMO

TV City is 500 metres from a future LRT Stop at King/Queen, 550 metres to the MacNab/Main transit terminal, and 750 metres to the GO Station.

Also, TV City is located within the Urban Growth Centre as outlined by Places to Grow:

Zmonkey · #**413** Posted **Feb 15, 2018, 4:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by King&James

Phase 1 sold out?

https://twitter.com/davidcapizzano/s...0%7Ctwterm%5E1

What is the price per square foot the building was selling for?

realcity · #**414** Posted **Feb 15, 2018, 7:44 PM**

Look what happened to Thistle Club buildings. The thing is they would oppose this if it was 12 floors, 20 floors. There is no difference on the street with a 40-story tower than 20. I hope Lamb does this. Good news about OMB citing Places to Grow Act for Burlington.

LRTfan · #**415** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 4:51 PM**

got a notice from the city on this....being denied by staff.
Because Hamilton doesn't need new downtown residents..... the single home owners continue to run the show

JoeyColeman · #**416** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 6:10 PM**

Staff report is here: https://pub-hamilton.escribemeetings...umentId=146156

The well-reasoned report explains that staff can support a tall building on the site; with the proper design characteristics expected of a tall building on the site in relation to the surrounding neighbourhood and at street level.

The box tower design does not conform with plans, does not interact well at street level on Hunter, and does not represent the tall building design plans of the City.

This is not a debate about height, this is a debate around design (of which height and size are part of)

matt602 · #**417** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 6:13 PM**

Those sound like pretty reasonable demands to me.

durandy · #**418** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 6:29 PM**

There is a lengthy discussion about height and the relationship with wesanford. This seems to be one of the main issues with it. The massing and setback pieces seem to be fixable, but not that.

I'm surprised there is no opposition to 0.6 parking spaces per unit. Isn't that really low? The site isn't really that close to any LRT stop. Even if that got approved I'd foresee a really hard time selling 200 units with no parking.

JoeyColeman · #**419** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 6:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by durandy

Even if that got approved I'd foresee a really hard time selling 200 units with no parking.

Parking is not so much an issue if there are Airbnb's in the sky, a lot of the units are being marketed to investors.

LRTfan · #**420** Posted **Mar 14, 2018, 9:38 PM**

cities in the Golden Horseshoe boom, while others lag and stay half boarded up. Remember, it's 100% on purpose. NO accident.
I love how a complex that would be welcomed in TO or NYC doesn't match up to Hamilton's prestigious design guidelines. hahahahaha....what a town we've got here.....

Our new gateways on the QEW and 403 should be this: