Downtown Update

[atnor]

Originally Posted by LRTfan

Oh, I settled that question in my mind years ago. I mean we have local residents and media honks criticizing Toronto and other ultra-successful cities. Imagine being from a successful city, coming to visit Hamilton, and hearing us complain about successful cities? LOL I'm sure people leave with a clear realization of how we've been so far behind the rest of the world.

Toronto is a shithole whose success has to do with major financing leaving Montreal, not because they have towers.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by LRTfan

I love the double standard of all the social media warriors here too. Anyone from Toronto opening a cafe or building new housing is the Devil and should go back to Toronto.
But if you move here and become a NIMBY interested only in your single family home lifestyle, we praise you and let you run neighbourhood associations.

This exactly!!!

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by atnor

Toronto is a shithole whose success has to do with major financing leaving Montreal, not because they have towers.

Aaaah....no. Montreal saw an exodus of Anglophones during the 1960s, during the wave of Francophone nationalism. Some corporate head offices moved to Toronto (Sun Life), others stayed (Bell). The legal headquarters of the Bank of Montreal is Montreal, but the actual operational hq is in Toronto.

But prior to that,Toronto was challenging Montreal as the financial capital of Canada before WWII. In the 1940s the volume of stocks traded on the TSE surpassed those on Montreal's exchange.

My comment from January: "Toronto's capital inflows are in the billions. Hamilton's is about $1.99 and a large double-double."

[lachlanholmes]

Originally Posted by atnor

Toronto is a shithole whose success has to do with major financing leaving Montreal, not because they have towers.

Successful city with billions in investment, bounds of culture, and an overall stellar place to live = shithole.

You can't reason with stupid.

[Paul29]

Originally Posted by LRTfan

Oh, I settled that question in my mind years ago. I mean we have local residents and media honks criticizing Toronto and other ultra-successful cities. Imagine being from a successful city, coming to visit Hamilton, and hearing us complain about successful cities? LOL I'm sure people leave with a clear realization of how we've been so far behind the rest of the world.

I've lived in Toronto and Ottawa since leaving Hamilton and spent a decent amount of time in Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver over the years. Those cities complain not enough is being done. Hamilton complains too much is being done.

Yeah, Hamilton still has the reputation as the stuck in a time warp steel town resistant to change. I've basically heard that everywhere I've been.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Paul29

I've lived in Toronto and Ottawa since leaving Hamilton and spent a decent amount of time in Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver over the years. Those cities complain not enough is being done. Hamilton complains too much is being done.

Yeah, Hamilton still has the reputation as the stuck in a time warp steel town resistant to change. I've basically heard that everywhere I've been.

Well let's change it for the better, with or without them! They'll come to love it, just as those before them learned to love Hamilton as they changed it.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by atnor

First off, no one here is opposed to development. It goes without saying everyone here would love for Hamilton to shed its image of being a run down crack head city and be seen as an attractive modern city. However, development must be done sensibly. We mustn’t give free reign to the developers; after all, the development review process is allowed via the planning act to give municipalities control of what gets built. I can assure you the various committees that review development applications are not stupid people by any means and are not swayed by neighbourhood associations. Let’s be honest, the report regarding tv city has legitimate reasons to deny the current site plan. It’s not fear of change but rather design and infrastructural deficiencies that held back approval.

Second, brad lamb’s developments are always making concessions. Having spoke to Toronto planners, they said lamb’s developments are always mired in back and forth submissions to reach a compromise.

Let’s not look as Toronto as a model to aspire to, rather let’s see Toronto as a lesson in poor planning and learn from the mistakes they’ve made.

In Hamilton, those committees that review the applications are populated by special interest types and they do listen to the neighbourhood groups, that is the problem in this city. Obviously you haven't figured that out yet. Putting them in charge of deciding what gets built in this city is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. They are a bunch of useless whiny people who figure they can tell other people how they can spend their money. The result has been 40 years of stagnation and rot in the downtown of this city. These developers hold all of the cards, if you push them they will just walk away and take their money with them like they did years ago and this time they will never come back.

As for the developers making compromises they might have some motivation to do that in Toronto where they can make huge amounts of money but here they will just laugh and take their money someplace more welcoming. Beggars can't be choosers and this city is nowhere close to leaving the beggars stage anytime soon.

[atnor]

Originally Posted by movingtohamilton

Aaaah....no. Montreal saw an exodus of Anglophones during the 1960s, during the wave of Francophone nationalism. Some corporate head offices moved to Toronto (Sun Life), others stayed (Bell). The legal headquarters of the Bank of Montreal is Montreal, but the actual operational hq is in Toronto.

But prior to that,Toronto was challenging Montreal as the financial capital of Canada before WWII. In the 1940s the volume of stocks traded on the TSE surpassed those on Montreal's exchange.

My comment from January: "Toronto's capital inflows are in the billions. Hamilton's is about $1.99 and a large double-double."

Ok regardless of when Toronto became the financial powerhouse, it’s success didn’t happen because they had towers.

[atnor]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

In Hamilton, those committees that review the applications are populated by special interest types and they do listen to the neighbourhood groups, that is the problem in this city. Obviously you haven't figured that out yet. Putting them in charge of deciding what gets built in this city is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. They are a bunch of useless whiny people who figure they can tell other people how they can spend their money. The result has been 40 years of stagnation and rot in the downtown of this city. These developers hold all of the cards, if you push them they will just walk away and take their money with them like they did years ago and this time they will never come back.

As for the developers making compromises they might have some motivation to do that in Toronto where they can make huge amounts of money but here they will just laugh and take their money someplace more welcoming. Beggars can't be choosers and this city is nowhere close to leaving the beggars stage anytime soon.

Of course they listen to neighbourhood groups, it is part of the planning review process. The way you explain things it’s like the committees show up in the morning and call the neighbourhood groups to review the application, which is moronic. You are simply wrong that the neighbourhood association calls the shots, they never had any bearing on the work I review.

I’ll tell you one thing, obviously you haven’t figured it out yet but Hamilton’s stagnation in the past has more to do with downturns in our economy than building restrictions.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by atnor

Ok regardless of when Toronto became the financial powerhouse, it’s success didn’t happen because they had towers.

You're the only person here connecting those dots! Toronto's towers are directly tied to a massive influx of people who live work and play in that city. The attitude of many in small-minded fear-of-strangers Hamilton =stay away.

[HamiltonBoyInToronto]

Originally Posted by atnor

Ok regardless of when Toronto became the financial powerhouse, it’s success didn’t happen because they had towers.

No the success didnt happen because of the towers but the towers happened because of and as a sign of the success ....

[HamiltonBoyInToronto]

Originally Posted by atnor

Toronto is a shithole whose success has to do with major financing leaving Montreal, not because they have towers.

if you think Toronto is a "shithole" i'd be very interested to hear what you think of Hamilton .... or better yet, any other majorly successful city in the world

[atnor]

Originally Posted by HamiltonBoyInToronto

No the success didnt happen because of the towers but the towers happened because of and as a sign of the success ....

See and that’s what I’m getting at, hamilton cannot compete with Toronto’s economy. The notion that Hamilton isn’t a successful city because we follow through with a development review process, and sometimes don’t approve projects on first application (very common in every city) is bogus.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by atnor

I’ll tell you one thing, obviously you haven’t figured it out yet but Hamilton’s stagnation in the past has more to do with downturns in our economy than building restrictions.

While I do think Hamilton's "anti-business" climate has held the city back for far too long (people from outside the city rightly cite it as an impediment) I think you're bang on about stagnation from the late 1970s and especially the 1980s-90s and early 2000s. There was little market for ANY development in the central city.

It's a city in transition, coming out of that perhaps but transition is now a positive evolution. It now has one of the most diverse economies in Canada, but I think that's in part to do with the subtractions it's had to absorb, as much as the innovative influx. We're seeing demand for development follow now. While I think strict height limits are rather arbitrary, it's best to manage that development smartly and I think there's more room for discussion and negotiation than people may realize.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by atnor

See and that’s what I’m getting at, hamilton cannot compete with Toronto’s economy. The notion that Hamilton isn’t a successful city because we follow through with a development review process, and sometimes don’t approve projects on first application (very common in every city) is bogus.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. During the late 70's and 80's I was active at city hall serving on a number of committees and attending council meetings regularly. I saw what was happening and heard what the developers and their representatives were saying both in public and behind the scenes. Those developers walked away from this city because of unreasonable demands and restrictions just like we are seeing today. Almost every one of those parking lots that have been around since that time had a proposal that was abandoned by a developer because of city halls demands.

As for your earlier comment about the downtown declining in the 70's and 80's it wasn't really evident at that time. It wasn't until the early to mid 90's when real decline happened with the closing of the department stores. During the 80's on a weekend night the downtown was packed with people. There were bars and restaurants all along King street that were busy until closing time. Back in the early 90's when the Jays won their first World Series all the people in bars emptied out into the streets and there had to be 10,000 people on King Street celebrating. It has only been in the last 20 years that we have seen the real decline. It is getting better but it isn't even close to what it was.

[LRTfan]

Plans are being prepped for a development application of the Corktown Plaza on John South into a mixed-use complex including 2 rental buildings of 34 and 31 stories.
Architect is rumoured to be www.corearchitects.com

I'm sure the Corktown neighbours group will react with same petty, small-mindedness as the DNA does all the time. One great thing about these recent rental proposals is it exposes the phoney's who say they care about Hamilton's rental market or lack of housing options etc.... yet as soon as someone proposes a building in the DOWNTOWN CORE to house these types of much-needed homes, they all act like the world is coming to an end. Ummm, you live downtown surrounded by high-rise buildings. And apparently love it. Chill.

This is 5 rental buildings now proposed downtown to my knowledge....the first 3 are being opposed by neighbourhood groups (Bold and MacNab, 2 buildings and Wellington/Charlton, 1 building next to the Claremont) , and I expect the same will happen here.

[drpgq]

Yeah one thing I was thinking about today, with regards to the DNA and these projects is that you have the members of the DNA board living in houses opposing dense high rise housing that is way more efficient in terms of carbon emissions (for a variety of reasons). The average person living in Television City will emit way less than the average person in a house in Durand.

But someone walking down Caroline might not get as much sun.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by LRTfan

Plans are being prepped for a development application of the Corktown Plaza on John South into a mixed-use complex including 2 rental buildings of 34 and 31 stories.
Architect is rumoured to be www.corearchitects.com...

That's great! Good luck. The NIMBYs will go nuts.

[ScreamingViking]

Bring it. With this and the Metro City proposal, John St. S will be forever improved. Even if a few storeys remain untold.

[LRTfan]

Yes, huge potential for John Street to gain a retail street wall on these 2 mega-blocks slated for redevelopment. This is where Hamilton can shine over the next couple of decades: rebuilding our city on parking lots, or small plazas.