Augusta - 165 James St S, 14 and 26 Augusta St | ? | 6, 8 & 8 fl | Under Construction

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Yay!!!!!

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

I think one of the neat things about the James lot is that it's been a parking lot since our grandparents were young, since 1959 at least.

CU's track record is best in the city, I'm confident this'll end up looking good. Not too keen on that laneway right onto James, but maybe the DRP will agree with me. The setback isn't too bad either, patios won't be as attractive facing James, especially with Augusta right around the corner. Plus, it keeps consistent with the neighbours, especially the Medical Arts bldg. Won't obscure that sign much at all either.

Let the good times roll

[TheHonestMaple]

Agreed. My only hope is that it gets through the approval process even faster than 14-18 Augusta. The city should be rewarding Core Urban.

[TheRitsman]

DRP Presentation:

• Video Link

https://youtu.be/nxJoRFrJ1jY

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

DRP Presentation:

• Video Link

Video's unavailable

I think this link should work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxJoRFrJ1jY

[TheRitsman]

I guess the city of Hamilton doesn't allow embedding?

[lachlanholmes]

Interesting that the architect shared at the DRP that all of these including the building currently under construction are actually poured concrete construction, not wood as I thought was originally planned.

I am also encouraged to see that a number of panelists suggested a bit more density - and one called on the City to consider variances that would enable that.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Perhaps you fellows could help me figure something out. It's not entirely clear to me if they're building the James-fronting building right to the southern property line, or leaving a gap. I know there's a gap behind the Medical Arts building, but that's on their side of the property line.

Really all I want to know is if we need to just wait for the MA building to fill in their alleyway gap, or if we need to wait this new building to fill in theirs as well.

[lachlanholmes]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

Perhaps you fellows could help me figure something out. It's not entirely clear to me if they're building the James-fronting building right to the southern property line, or leaving a gap. I know there's a gap behind the Medical Arts building, but that's on their side of the property line.

Really all I want to know is if we need to just wait for the MA building to fill in their alleyway gap, or if we need to wait this new building to fill in theirs as well.

They are indeed going to build to their southern property line with the James Street building. The underground parking plan might lead one to believe they aren't though, when in reality the southernmost portion of the ground floor is an interior parking garage entrance and not a laneway parking entrance.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by lachlanholmes

Interesting that the architect shared at the DRP that all of these including the building currently under construction are actually poured concrete construction, not wood as I thought was originally planned.

I am also encouraged to see that a number of panelists suggested a bit more density - and one called on the City to consider variances that would enable that.

I wonder if the price of lumber has changed their tune. I specifically remember at the last DRP for 14-18 Augusta, they said it would be wood frame.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

I guess the city of Hamilton doesn't allow embedding?

Could just be the way the embedding was done. With YouTube, all you need to enter is the last sequence of characters in between the YouTube BB codes. E.g., "nxJoRFrJ1jY" without the "https://youtu.be/"

• Video Link

[TheRitsman]

I've heard from Steve himself that these will now be 8 fl. He said new renders will be on the way and they would be sharing them when they were complete.

[Innsertnamehere]

Site plan application is in - "Mixed use building with at grade commercial and 126 residential units."

I like the scale of the 6 storey building on Augusta, though agree that the James Street building could be taller.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I wonder if the price of lumber has changed their tune. I specifically remember at the last DRP for 14-18 Augusta, they said it would be wood frame.

My understanding was that even before the surge in lumber prices, it was often challenging to make wood construction to pencil out cheaper than concrete due to the structural issues with it. It wouldn't surprise me if concrete worked out cheaper.

Now that they are apparently going for 8 floors, all the more reason to use concrete.

[ScreamingViking]

Could end up being a mix too, with concrete or metal framing on the lower parts and wood on the upper floors, like Gore Park Lofts. I doubt they'd do that for a brand new building though, rather than going with one type of frame all the way up.

[TheHonestMaple]

It's really exciting to see Augusta fill in like this. Looking forward to seeing the north side of the Hughson and Young intersection get developed eventually as well. Generally once one development goes in, the land increases in value and becomes more attractive for other developers.

[Chronamut]

So I've often wondered WHY the city is so against traditional buildings, and I was a bit discouraged at the result in that video, in that if one does a replication then it puts into question the authenticity of when the building was created, leading to a fake heritage/disneyland kinda vibe.

My question is why is it allowed when it is say the arliss shoes restoration, because it's restoring an original design, and why is that different from pretty much the exact same design somewhere else, but new? It seems a silly argument - I mean if you have the skill and the craft to create a neoclassical building, with modern concrete and steel inside, then go nuts. The connaught accompanying building is steel frame and not that old historically, and noone complained about that.

I obv have issues with contemporizing everything as I feel contemporary design often communicate a lack of knowledge and of craftsmanship of the old ways, where pride and design were focused on in architecture, and I kinda worry we are losing this craft, so they really shouldn't be discouraging these kinda projects when they come up simply because they basically don't have a "glass box" plopped on top to make it adhere to contemporary standards. There is more to architecture than glass and steel boxes, and while I do agree a fusion of old and new is often ideal, it is not always.

Obv. I'm a bit biased on this as I clearly favour the historic side of the city - as it's why people come here to film movies, because of the character and soul of the buildings, and the pride, which I feel contemporary buildings lack.

Just let core urban do their thing people - they are awesome at it.

[TheHonestMaple]

They're likely going to turn out something like 59 King St E, which looks great.

[Chronamut]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

They're likely going to turn out something like 59 King St E, which looks great.

The problem is that the city doesn't want NEW buildings to look like that - they want them more like templar flats - the olympia club got a pass because it was basically a heritage building restoration. I heard these are being redesigned for 8 stories.. I am wondering if they've "plopped" something on top - I hope not..

I do still have issues with building 3 though.. the brick one - no brick stonework inserts, no stamping of the metal accents - just kinda intimidating looking . Since it's core urban I still have faith in their designs, I just question if they've stripped all architectural details off this one for a reason or if they simply aren't showing them in the render..



In all honesty though it really is hard to tell if there ARE any architectural brick details in this image.. there might be on the corner there or that may just be render artifacting.. just kinda feels ellen faircloudesque..with black. and the ellen faircloud building should not be the inspiration for anything imo. It's very out of character with the other 2 buildings proposed and being built on this block, which are beautiful - and we know how the one next door will generally look as it's very similar to the olympia club restoration.

[lachlanholmes]

Looks like the James Street building (Building #2) has 'officially' grown from 6 to 9 storeys and 40 to 56 units; while the Augusta/Hughson building (Building #1) has grown from 6 to 8 storeys and 50 to 70 units. Good stuff!