[Stoney Creek] 310 Frances Ave | ? | 44fl, 37fl, 34fl | Approved

[Innsertnamehere]

eh it's a terrible location for this type of density so I'm fine with it as is Even at 1,346 units this is a huge amount of density for this location.

The fact that Maria thinks it's reasonable to force New Horizons to build 53 square metres of amenity space per 2-bedroom unit is hilarious though. Her parking ask *may* be reasonable-ish, but is generally also overly high. The lack of transit access here entirely makes it sort of more reasonable, and I believe the adjacent buildings are oversubscribed for parking, so it sort of makes sense.. but with this development I think HSR could justify bringing some transit service here to try to reduce parking demand. The 44 should be extended down here if you ask me.

The standard for amenity space in the GTA is generally 4 square metres per unit. The fact that New Horizon is proposing 8 is already extremely generous, yet along 53!

[TheRitsman]

God, imagine how delusionally desperate you would have to be to own a 1bdrm 450sqft condo this far away from anything. We do having a housing crisis, but at some point people should just be renting... Buying this far out has very little economic benefit over owning. These won't increase in value by the same percentage we're seeing on average in the city.

[ccheck7]

To be fair, there is merit to owning a small condo at this location.
You're within walking distance of arguably the best park and beachfront in the region (Confederation Beach Park), within cycling distance to Confederation GO, and and it's an extremely convenient location for commuters on the QEW.
My wife and I used to live in this area and many of our neighbors worked at Joseph Brant Hospital as its a quick trip across the Skyway.
Absolutely agree that HSR needs to service this area, and there's little commercial within walking distance, let alone elementary schools, but that will come as the density continues to increase.

While this area is disconnected from Hamilton proper, it really is convenient given proximity to Grimsby, Burlington, and Stoney Creek.

[Beedok]

Some people just need a place to live, rather than interest in investing.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

God, imagine how delusionally desperate you would have to be to own a 1bdrm 450sqft condo this far away from anything. We do having a housing crisis, but at some point people should just be renting... Buying this far out has very little economic benefit over owning. These won't increase in value by the same percentage we're seeing on average in the city.

most of these units will likely be investor units renting out to young people is my guess. The newer buildings next door are mostly investor units, particularly the non-waterfront view units.

the owners here will largely be retirees who buy the larger 2-bedroom waterfront view units, with the smaller units focused on investors.

When I worked in Burlington one of my co-workers rented in one of the newer buildings here, he drove over the skyway to work every day, if you are a single working professional or a couple starting out with both needing cars to drive to work, this type of location appeals due to it's excellent highway access.

Not everyone values walkability over everything, many appreciate that Confederation Park is right next door, the excellent waterfront views, and the easy highway accessibility here. If you don't mind driving to do your groceries this location gives excellent accessibility to parkland and offers great views.

Units in the adjacent buildings actually generally sell for *higher* prices than new condos in Downtown Hamilton right now. Non-waterfront view units here are selling for ~$750/ft, while condos in Downtown Hamilton are selling in the $600-700/ft range still. A waterfront view here bumps prices up an extra ~$50/ft to the $800 range too!

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Some people just need a place to live, rather than interest in investing.

Oh absolutely. But my point is you don't need to own to have somewhere to live. I just don't get why you'd purposely buy an expensive condo on the outskirts of town where you have to drive everywhere in a shoebox. You can live somewhere better for much cheaper, and much less to deal with by renting with all of the benefits of this location. I think some people obsess over ownership too much, and may not be making the best choice. I'm the first to say that while I hate condo living, I see why many like it, but I can't see anyone buying out here without thinking they're "getting into the market". But usually when you're getting into the market, you need to actually be in the market. Buying a $450,000 condo that's worth $480,000 in 5 years is not really in the market, that's leaving you worse than if you had just rented.

I think the demand in this location is largely from investors cashing in on renting to seniors. So it's not really as rosy as people are making it out to be. Whatever floats your boat I suppose for people buying. If you're getting in the market, your aim is to buy housing as an investment. If you're a senior, retired, I suggest renting to simplify things and have liquid assets.

Also to be fair to downtown Hamilton condos. Many are in really rough shape, both the units and the amenity spaces. Meanwhile the condos outside central Hamilton are better maintained. Condos bought downtown Hamilton are filled with people who bought like 20 years ago for $30,000. Same goes on my street. There are unemployed people living in houses worth $1,000,000+ today. Difference is in a condo they're very close to you.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Oh absolutely. But my point is you don't need to own to have somewhere to live. I just don't get why you'd purposely buy an expensive condo on the outskirts of town where you have to drive everywhere in a shoebox. You can live somewhere better for much cheaper, and much less to deal with by renting with all of the benefits of this location. I think some people obsess over ownership too much, and may not be making the best choice. I'm the first to say that while I hate condo living, I see why many like it, but I can't see anyone buying out here without thinking they're "getting into the market". But usually when you're getting into the market, you need to actually be in the market. Buying a $450,000 condo that's worth $480,000 in 5 years is not really in the market, that's leaving you worse than if you had just rented.

I think the demand in this location is largely from investors cashing in on renting to seniors. So it's not really as rosy as people are making it out to be. Whatever floats your boat I suppose for people buying. If you're getting in the market, your aim is to buy housing as an investment. If you're a senior, retired, I suggest renting to simplify things and have liquid assets.

Also to be fair to downtown Hamilton condos. Many are in really rough shape, both the units and the amenity spaces. Meanwhile the condos outside central Hamilton are better maintained. Condos bought downtown Hamilton are filled with people who bought like 20 years ago for $30,000. Same goes on my street. There are unemployed people living in houses worth $1,000,000+ today. Difference is in a condo they're very close to you.

You really need to get around this city. It's not on the outskirts of the city, it is in the middle of an already highly developed area of the city. This is more infill than anything. It is also lakefront which makes it highly desirable.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Oh absolutely. But my point is you don't need to own to have somewhere to live. I just don't get why you'd purposely buy an expensive condo on the outskirts of town where you have to drive everywhere in a shoebox. You can live somewhere better for much cheaper, and much less to deal with by renting with all of the benefits of this location. I think some people obsess over ownership too much, and may not be making the best choice. I'm the first to say that while I hate condo living, I see why many like it, but I can't see anyone buying out here without thinking they're "getting into the market". But usually when you're getting into the market, you need to actually be in the market. Buying a $450,000 condo that's worth $480,000 in 5 years is not really in the market, that's leaving you worse than if you had just rented.

I think the demand in this location is largely from investors cashing in on renting to seniors. So it's not really as rosy as people are making it out to be. Whatever floats your boat I suppose for people buying. If you're getting in the market, your aim is to buy housing as an investment. If you're a senior, retired, I suggest renting to simplify things and have liquid assets.

Also to be fair to downtown Hamilton condos. Many are in really rough shape, both the units and the amenity spaces. Meanwhile the condos outside central Hamilton are better maintained. Condos bought downtown Hamilton are filled with people who bought like 20 years ago for $30,000. Same goes on my street. There are unemployed people living in houses worth $1,000,000+ today. Difference is in a condo they're very close to you.

when I was discussing downtown condos for Hamilton I was referencing the newer buildings only. The older ones sell for so much less they aren't really comparable.

A unit in this part of Stoney Creek that sells for $500k would likely sell for $450k downtown in a new building for example.

Again, your view is that you prefer walkability, but there are many people who see the waterfront views and accessibility to confederation park here being great and would rather have that than being able to walk to a coffee shop or restaurant. Different priorities doesn't make it wrong, and the pricing of the two areas indicates that many people are willing to pay more for it. People aren't buying here just because it's the cheapest area to live, the Stoney Creek Waterfront actually has the highest prices per square foot of the entire city for condos.

Waterfront access has a huge premium all around the world. There is a reason Miami is basically a giant line of condos along the beach - same thing here, in Toronto, and Mississauga. The condo market is strongest close to the lake as people will pay for the views.

I bike through this neighbourhood regularly in the summer time and my experience of the people who live in the adjacent buildings isn't exactly "full of seniors" - lots of younger couples, young families in the townhouse blocks, and seniors as well. It's a very diverse mix of population.

[LikeHamilton]

Stoney Creek skyscraper plan headed to tribunal hearing

By Richard Leitner Reporter The Spec.com Tue., Jan. 11, 2022

The developer hoping to build three skyscrapers near Stoney Creek’s lakeshore is appealing a decision by the city’s committee of adjustment to deny the project relief from municipal zoning standards to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

“I knew they would,” Maria Pearson, the area’s councillor, said of New Horizon Development Group’s challenge of the Dec. 9 rejection of its application for seven minor zoning variances for a two-hectare vacant property at 310 Frances Ave.

New Horizon unveiled a revised plan in November to cut the height of the three proposed towers to 38, 44 and 33 storeys, down from an original 48, 54 and 59 presented three years ago, reducing the overall number of residential units to 1,346 from 1,830.

But Pearson said council never envisioned what is being proposed even though it approved a mixed-use commercial zoning for the property in 2010 that didn’t limit building height or the number of residential units.

She said although she’s pleased the revised plan reduces floors and units “quite considerably,” she remains especially concerned about the proposed relief from zoning requirements for parking and amenity space.

New Horizon is proposing 1.25 parking spaces per unit, rather than the required 1.5, and 8.8 square metres of amenity space per unit regardless of size, rather than the required 18 square metres for one-bedroom and 53 for two-bedroom units.

Based on the revised plan, which calls for 1,208 one-bedroom and 138 two-bedroom units, the towers would be shy 336 parking spaces and have about 40 per cent of the required 29,058 square metres of amenity space.

While New Horizon has said it can add parking spaces if there is market demand, Pearson said she doesn’t understand how that will happen, a concern because there are already parking problems in the neighbourhood.

She said COVID-19 has reinforced the need for amenity space, also in short supply in the area north of the Queen Elizabeth Way between Green and Millen roads, which has several other larger condo developments.

“There’s no place for people to go; it’s just so jam packed," Pearson said. “These people are living in condos of five, six, seven hundred square feet. They need a place to get out.”

New Horizon didn’t respond to a message seeking comment, but managing director Jason Garland told the committee of adjustment the parking standard doesn’t match market demand and the amenity space requirement is “extraordinarily high.”

He rejected the committee’s suggestion the application be paused to resolve the issues in dispute.

“That’s what we’ve been doing for the last three years,” Garland said, asking for a decision. “We’re never going to solve the amenity puzzle.”

Viv Saunders of the Lakewood Beach Community Council, one of three residents who spoke against the application at the Dec. 9 meeting, said she’d expected the appeal.

She said residents hope to become a party to the tribunal hearing because they’re worried New Horizon and the city will reach a settlement that doesn’t address their concerns about all seven variances.

Saunders said the development’s proposal to substitute residential uses for commercial space on the ground floor, for instance, is contrary to the bylaw’s intent to provide needed commercial amenities in an area that has “zero.”

It also makes the plan to reduce parking spaces even more questionable because people will still have to drive to buy anything since there’s no bus service, she said.

“They all intermingle,” Saunders said of the zoning variances. “We’re of the strong belief that what’s in the bylaw should stay,” she said. “It’s really all or nothing.”

Efforts to get more information on the appeal were unsuccessful. A spokesperson for the Ontario Land Tribunal said it had yet to receive a copy and the city didn’t provide details by deadline.

[Innsertnamehere]

https://pub-hamilton.escribemeetings...umentId=306825

The drama continues here. Seems like the city is trying everything they can to deny this one.

Following the denial of the minor variance, the city has now denied the SPA application for lack of zoning compliance (as the zoning varaince was also denied).

These modifications did not address the previous concerns from staff regarding meeting
the intent of the Stoney Creek Zoning By-law No. 3692-92. Staff denied the Site Plan
Control application on December 21, 2021 (see Appendix “I” attached to Report
PED19115(a)). As per Sections 41(12) and (12.01) of the Planning Act, an appeal to
the OLT may only be submitted if the municipality fails to approve the plans and drawings within 30 days after they are submitted or if the owner is not satisfied with the
requested conditions.

So it looks like New Horizon is off to appealing both their CoA decision and their site plan application... Not typical to see a site plan application appealed.

Also, New Horizon's has predictably appealed the CoA application. They've got David Bronskill managing the appeal, probably the best planning lawyer in the province for a variance appeal that is actually a pretty straightforward open and shut case. It's like bringing a nuclear weapon to a knife fight. The variance will get approved at the OLT, and now the site plan will as well, with the city losing control of actually influencing the design of the building.

[ScreamingViking]

It's like they refuse to admit they effed up by not limiting the scale of this before.

Time to work WITH the developer, instead of against them. And yeah... the city is going to have to bend over on this one after the tribunal stamps it!!

[ohhimark]

https://www.thespec.com/local-stoney...ce=parsely-api

[drpgq]

Looking forward to this.

[johnnyhamont]

Stoney Creek lakeshore skyscraper bid gets taller, cuts parking



'New Horizon Development Group’s latest plan calls for condominium towers of 40, 44 and 49 storeys and 1,492 residential units on a two-hectare vacant property at 310 Frances Ave.

That’s up from 33, 38 and 44 storeys and 1,346 units in the plan rejected by the city in December, and that is the subject of the appeal, scheduled to be heard by the OLT in early January.

While the new plan increases the height of one of the parking podiums, or garages, to eight storeys from five, it proposes fewer parking spaces per unit — 1.15, down from 1.25 and below the city’s required 1.5 — for a total shortfall of 522 spaces.

The proposed amenity space per unit is still less than half of city requirements, despite being boosted by a square metre to 9.8.

New Horizon president Jeff Paikin said the latest plan is still more modest than the original December 2018 proposal, which called for towers of 48, 54 and 59 storeys and 1,836 units....
...."

https://www.thespec.com/local-stoney...s-parking.html

[Innsertnamehere]

towers look a lot better at least. Wonder what the new heights are, this will likely be the tallest building in the city for a good while if approved.

[drpgq]

I have to admit I'm enjoying this. Viv Saunders head is exploding.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by drpgq

I have to admit I'm enjoying this. Viv Saunders head is exploding.

Viv would protest a detached home proposed to be developed in Stoney Creek because it's 4 parking spaces would be "excessive". She finds a problem with every development east of the Red Hill.

[StEC]

I'm LOVING THIS.... getting KING Toronto (by Westbank) vibes but a tall version! I mentioned on the reddit discussion that we need to get regular transit service on the North Service Rd ASAP and this built yesterday.

[GeneralLea]

This looks pretty good, even if it'll be a bunker from the outside.

[bigguy1231]

I think this is the developers saying FU to the city after downsizing and the city still giving them a hard time. I would have liked to see them go back to the original proposal, but this will do.