Downtown Update

[TheRitsman]

Just wanted to share in the case not everyone here knew. Urban Toronto has become far more active with developments outside Toronto, in part by adding a city filter.

Many of the posts here are duplicated on the Urban Toronto forum: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/forums/buildings.5/?prefix_id=2

I've been checking both, but might stay there more often and post there. The site is better designed, has a great map and database system, has actual staff running it, and is more local to the GTHA. Many people from Toronto post in the Hamilton threads and have better connections to many experts who know more behind the scenes stuff.

I'd suggest you check it out if you are checking here already regularly. I will likely migrate much of my time spent here to there as I prefer the uncluttered forum structure where there aren't like 500 active threads for every single topic despite having maybe 20 or 30 active members.

[Berklon]

Yeah, I started checking it out last week when I noticed more posts there.

I clicked on the "Hamilton" button/filter and voila - all Hamilton related posts (ie. the exact link you've provided).

Surprised at how active the Hamilton forum is over there.

[mikevbar1]

I am primarily on UrbanToronto now under @Sunnyside. However, SSP still has some good utility for its discussion. I would rather have everyone here today be present than fragment members across two platforms and diminish the quality of discussion here. I think avid posters should make a UT account because their commentary will go alot further there. It has influenced how I post here now actually.

With that said, unless we can ensure 100% of folks move over, I think in any case no one should turn their backs on SSP. The ecosystem is present, and the two ecosystems (for Hamilton) are working alright in parallel- its the UT side that will primarily benefit from our members here, giving Hamilton a bigger voice and more intimate local knowledge etc. On the other hand, we can all gain some really valuable professional-level insight/intellect on questions that tend to fizzle out here. That is why I prefer UT at a glance; the quality of discussion matches and exceeds the best of what happens here on an hourly basis, never mind daily or weekly. So again, to any posters reading this, make a UT account! But don't leave here. SSP is like the insider circle, and UT is the public forum.

[King&James]

Ok I made a UT account as well, will need to see if it is simple from a list perspective. Hoping on UT adding photos is easier than the multi step process I need here.

[urban_planner]

I plan on opening an UT account as well. I like the overall layout there.

[StEC]

I've been on UT for a long time but I post more frequently here. They definitely have a more modern forum and active community. I mainly just follow the Toronto threads there but will keep an eye on the Hamilton ones more often now.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by King&James

Ok I made a UT account as well, will need to see if it is simple from a list perspective. Hoping on UT adding photos is easier than the multi step process I need here.

UT has a built in image hosting platform.

The one gap it has is right now its only really built for specific project threads. Other threads like “downtown update” or “Hamilton airport” are sectioned off to other parts of the forum which don’t have location tags I believe.

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

UT has a built in image hosting platform.

The one gap it has is right now its only really built for specific project threads. Other threads like “downtown update” or “Hamilton airport” are sectioned off to other parts of the forum which don’t have location tags I believe.

Hence why SSP still has a great role to play. So much better for catch-all or high-level discussions. It's individual developments that fare better on UT.

I for one am excited for us to bring some better local perspectives to UT... The development discussions can and do benefit from those with industry knowledge even if they aren't local. But there is a noticeable ignorance/lack of understanding of local circumstances, perspectives, and general knowledge of Hamilton. I've noticed this, especially in the respective LRT thread, so I'm hoping we can all make up for that (our) absence going forward, haha.

It might be enticing for some to know that there are people in the industry who frequent the site as well, some who post and some who don't. So if it's your thing, what gets said has a greater (albeit small nonetheless) chance of having a real impact.

[TheRitsman]

Not suggesting it replace this spot until maybe sometime in the future, but just wanted to mention it because I think it's an invaluable resource as of late.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by Berklon

Yeah, I started checking it out last week when I noticed more posts there.

I clicked on the "Hamilton" button/filter and voila - all Hamilton related posts (ie. the exact link you've provided).

Surprised at how active the Hamilton forum is over there.

I just joined today. Looking forward to interacting with some of you Hamiltonians there too

[matt602]

Was downtown a few hours ago for the first time in a few months and the urban canyon forming at Bay really hit me. Its getting pretty imposing.

20230722_180807 by Matt Leboeuf, on Flickr

[Wigs]

neat!
(if only Main and King were no longer 1 way speedways through downtown)

[Pulkvedis Pods]

403-415 King Street E, which IIRC belongs to Metrolinx?? has seen its last structure - the former YOKE group house 415 King East, which sat on the corner with Victoria has now been demolished. Assuming that this is part of the LRT project, that leaves an over 1/2 acre empty lot to play with. Again, IIRC the LRT plan doesn't call for a station there. Does anybody have some inside info on what is planned for this lot?? The interactive Hamilton development map doesn't show anything.

[TheRitsman]

Draft Regulations Report for Parking Regulations and minimums which will go to Planning Committee for discussion and approval for public comment is available to read:

https://pub-hamilton.escribemeetings.com...sh&Agenda=Agenda&Item=31&Tab=attachments

[Innsertnamehere]

July permit information is out.

Annoyingly, the City only uploaded the summary sheet, not the detail list, so I don't have individual permit data to share.

July was another strong month, with $194 million in permit value issued. Not quite June with over $500 million.. but still strong.

Both the YTD and rolling 12-month permit values remain at record highs, albeit only slightly.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

Draft Regulations Report for Parking Regulations and minimums which will go to Planning Committee for discussion and approval for public comment is available to read:

https://pub-hamilton.escribemeetings.com...sh&Agenda=Agenda&Item=31&Tab=attachments

For those that don't like to read long, rambling staff reports, City Staff are basically planning on implementing 4 parking standards for the city based on area:



Zone A would eliminate parking minimums entirely.

Zone B would require 0.5 parking spaces per unit plus 0.15 visitor parking spaces per unit, so a total of 0.65 spaces. This is roughly equal to what is required downtown right now, albeit with visitor parking and a lower resident ratio.

Zone C would require 0.85 spaces per unit and 0.25 visitor parking spaces per unit, for a total of 1.1 spaces per unit. This is slightly above existing rates.

As a whole I'm very supportive of this - though I don't think the suburban parking standards need to be increased, and I think the boundary of Zone A should probably be shrunk down to just below the Mountain and west of the Red Hill. Otherwise, it looks good.

I also greatly appreciate the inclusion of visitor parking, which is much more important than resident parking to ensure is provided. Even Toronto retained a small visitor parking requirement with their elimination of resident parking requirements. It's sort of crazy that Hamilton didn't have a visitor requirement before this.

[TheHonestMaple]

Can someone explain to me the benefit of eliminating parking minimums?

Seems to me like it just inconveniences the consumer, and helps developers increase their profit margins while simultaneously sky rocketing the cost of a parking spot.

[johnnyhamont]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Can someone explain to me the benefit of eliminating parking minimums?

Seems to me like it just inconveniences the consumer, and helps developers increase their profit margins while simultaneously sky rocketing the cost of a parking spot.

You could take a whole course on this so we can't offer the long answer here.

The medium answer is decently well summarized in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXLqrMljdfU

The short answer is that building parking is very expensive so eliminating mandatory minimums in a city like Hamilton could flip dozens of potential housing project from being not financially viable to being financially viable, getting us lots of needed new housing. There's trade-offs like you're referencing, which is why the minimums are not being eliminated city-wide, but in strategic areas where consumers are least inconvenienced because of proximity to rapid transit, other public transit (HSR, bike share, scooters and car share) and commercial amenities.
It's also important to note this isn't a ban on new parking construction - developers can still choose to build as much parking as they feel consumers are willing to pay for, but this approach allows the market to choose how much parking is worth the cost of building it rather than having the government regulate the market by requiring parking regardless of whether it's demanded by the market.

[TheRitsman]

Many climate focused, urban focused, and housing supply focused channels have done videos on this topic.

ClimateTown: https://youtu.be/OUNXFHpUhu8

Vox: https://youtu.be/Akm7ik-H_7U

City Beautiful: https://youtu.be/-XscydK-3LI

Parking reform has a great website dedicated to this topic. It's American focused but applies to Canada as well: https://parkingreform.org/what-is-parking-reform/

And lastly, it's just a matter of choice of private land owners. Whether that be developers, or homeowner or landlords. If I don't want to own a car, why am I required to build/pay for/leave space for a car? We don't require a laundry plug in every room in case a future owner wants to move their laundry machine, so why do we require by law the construction of a parking spot for every single unit of housing?

To add to that last point, removing parking minimums isn't a ban on building parking. Show me a brand new condo or apartment that doesn't have a laundry machine or dishwasher. I'll wait. Funny thing is that they're not required by law to include. Developers, owners and property owners include them because they need to, to be able to rent out or sell the units. The same.thing applies to parking spots. Cars are not water, nor food. They are not a necessity for every single human, and so the storage of them at an incredibly high cost that slows building construction, increases costs to everyone, including you dear taxpayer, and encourages car ownership which affects the climate, should not.be mandated under threat of law. If a builder wants to include them, they can, but they shouldn't be required to.

[TheHonestMaple]

Thanks for the videos. I feel like it's an idea that sounds good in theory, but in a society that is very car dominant like North America, I fear it would make the cost of parking in the downtown so cost prohibitive it would actually discourage people from living downtown in the short term. Most of our downtowns simply aren't walkable full communities right now (jobs, shopping, etc), and we still very much rely on cars to complete daily living. Hamilton is pretty close to being a complete downtown (like Toronto), but not quite there yet. I think that might change in the next 10 years though.

In general I like the idea though, it would be nice for our downtowns to completely not rely on cars. I just hope all aspects of the policy are well thought out.

The point about this accelerating construction sounds valid though, and I welcome that.