537 King Street East | 26.9 m | 6 fl | Proposed

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Plus the market will expand. You'll probably see more than a few similarly scaled proposals and builds all along King between Wellington/Victoria and the Delta -- there could be a lot of people living adjacent to the LRT, and that will create demand for various types of neighbourhood retailers and services.

I'm confused, there's nothing available to develop on between Wellington and Victoria along King... the park beside the funeral home on West Ave?

The retail along King from Victoria to Wentworth is pathetic. I don't see the value in building vacant spots when there's opportunity for the current retail landscape. The past two years have been brutal for the retail industry. Just walk through some of the major malls in the GTA (Square One, Sherway etc) and take note of all the vacancies.

[atnor]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I think that your second point is probably the strongest and most accurate reason for the vacant store fronts.

There is simply a complete lack of high earning residents in downtown Hamilton, especially around the Gore Park area. That is about to very much change. But for now, it is what is it. Affordable housing, and rent control leads to individuals that have little expendable income. I've been saying it over and over again, what this city needs is high end condos with a high end price tag if we ever want to see true revitalization of the core. Thankfully, that appears to be on the horizon - maybe in 5 years.

Totally agree, but by doing so we have to recognize long term residents will naturally be displaced as property values increase.

I empathize but feel it is inevitable if downtown is to further improve.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by atnor

Totally agree, but by doing so we have to recognize long term residents will naturally be displaced as property values increase.

I empathize but feel it is inevitable if downtown is to further improve.

It's the unfortunate reality. It is no one's right to get to live in the city centre of the third largest city in province, as so many housing advocates seem to believe. You want to live in the city centre with all the amenities, shops, parks, restaurants and bars, then you have to pay a premium for that. It's market driven. The going rate for rent is directly decided by the market demand. If someone is willing to pay 2000 dollars per month for a one bedroom downtown, then that is what a one bedroom downtown is worth.

I also don't think less fortunate people getting pushed out is necessarily a bad thing either. They will move to places where rent is more affordable for them, and in a way revitalize that area too.

The fact is this city is seeing massive changes, and a massive influx of new residents to the core. This is an amazing thing that hasn't happened here in literally decades.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by onetimetoomany

I'm confused, there's nothing available to develop on between Wellington and Victoria along King... the park beside the funeral home on West Ave?

The retail along King from Victoria to Wentworth is pathetic. I don't see the value in building vacant spots when there's opportunity for the current retail landscape. The past two years have been brutal for the retail industry. Just walk through some of the major malls in the GTA (Square One, Sherway etc) and take note of all the vacancies.

I was mainly referring to the longer corridor, but there is clear redevelopment potential between West Ave. and Victoria on both sides (vacant lot on the north side and houses that could be renovated or replaced, and potential to do something different with what's on the south). The LRT stop is planned to be at Wellington, so I included it in my comment.

Do you not think the residential growth along the LRT corridor will lead to increased demand for local retail? Or do you not believe there will be a development boost related to the transit improvement?

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

It's the unfortunate reality. It is no one's right to get to live in the city centre of the third largest city in province, as so many housing advocates seem to believe. You want to live in the city centre with all the amenities, shops, parks, restaurants and bars, then you have to pay a premium for that. It's market driven. The going rate for rent is directly decided by the market demand. If someone is willing to pay 2000 dollars per month for a one bedroom downtown, then that is what a one bedroom downtown is worth.

I also don't think less fortunate people getting pushed out is necessarily a bad thing either. They will move to places where rent is more affordable for them, and in a way revitalize that area too.

The fact is this city is seeing massive changes, and a massive influx of new residents to the core. This is an amazing thing that hasn't happened here in literally decades.

The counterpoint, though, is that wealthier residents are able to be more mobile than lower income ones. They can afford to own a car (be it electric or not) and get to their destinations anywhere in the city in 30 minutes or so, while low income transit dependent folks forced into the suburbs then have to contest with two to three buses and hour long commutes to get around.

Luckily, the two don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Ottawa’s downtown has both high end new condos and affordable housing co-ops. Once you add enough of the former a lot of the problems of the latter get diluted, and instead you end up with a thriving diverse and mixed-income area.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

It's the unfortunate reality. It is no one's right to get to live in the city centre of the third largest city in province, as so many housing advocates seem to believe. You want to live in the city centre with all the amenities, shops, parks, restaurants and bars, then you have to pay a premium for that. It's market driven. The going rate for rent is directly decided by the market demand. If someone is willing to pay 2000 dollars per month for a one bedroom downtown, then that is what a one bedroom downtown is worth.

I also don't think less fortunate people getting pushed out is necessarily a bad thing either. They will move to places where rent is more affordable for them, and in a way revitalize that area too.

The fact is this city is seeing massive changes, and a massive influx of new residents to the core. This is an amazing thing that hasn't happened here in literally decades.

I think people should have a right to live where they can be mobile and live an enjoyable life. A big issue in North America is that those lower income résidents get pushed to places where they are less mobile. See senior citizens who end up living in retirement residents and such on the periphery if the city. Gentrification is not a bad word necessarily if that gentrification is used properly, but simply arguing it's great because it pushes the people that make a society difficult out is a little bit sociopathic. Nobody wants those on the fringes living next to them, but these are human beings and they deserve respect. Saying "well you're poor, so go live a 75 minute commute from you retail job" is a terrible reality of North American individualism; "fuck yours, got mine".

It's easy to say "just move somewhere else" but not everyone does that as easily as you might. In addition there's limited other cities in Canada to move to. It's not like Europe where a small town of 35,000 is a walking and cycling dream. 35,000 person towns are farmland with kilomètres between houses.

Many good European cities incorporate affordable housing, social housing and market housing into most developments to ensure there is housing stock for majority of people in an area. See: https://youtu.be/-sA2LeHTIUI

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

I think people should have a right to live where they can be mobile and live an enjoyable life. A big issue in North America is that those lower income résidents get pushed to places where they are less mobile. See senior citizens who end up living in retirement residents and such on the periphery if the city. Gentrification is not a bad word necessarily if that gentrification is used properly, but simply arguing it's great because it pushes the people that make a society difficult out is a little bit sociopathic. Nobody wants those on the fringes living next to them, but these are human beings and they deserve respect. Saying "well you're poor, so go live a 75 minute commute from you retail job" is a terrible reality of North American individualism; "fuck yours, got mine".

It's easy to say "just move somewhere else" but not everyone does that as easily as you might. In addition there's limited other cities in Canada to move to. It's not like Europe where a small town of 35,000 is a walking and cycling dream. 35,000 person towns are farmland with kilomètres between houses.

Many good European cities incorporate affordable housing, social housing and market housing into most developments to ensure there is housing stock for majority of people in an area. See: https://youtu.be/-sA2LeHTIUI

I think I just fundamentally disagree with you. I do not believe it is your right to live wherever you like. You have to work, earn money, and pay the market rate to live in premium areas. Subsidizing housing is absolutely the wrong approach that leads to undesirable areas that are not good for a city. It leads to economic stagnation and general degeneration, as we have so clearly seen in downtown Hamilton.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I think I just fundamentally disagree with you. I do not believe it is your right to live wherever you like. You have to work, earn money, and pay the market rate to live in premium areas. Subsidizing housing is absolutely the wrong approach that leads to undesirable areas that are not good for a city. It leads to economic stagnation and general degeneration, as we have so clearly seen in downtown Hamilton.

People who can’t afford cars getting pushed into the suburbs either means they have to fall into a debt trap to buy a car or waste extra hours of their lives commuting, which gives them less time to spend learning or creating and generally bettering themselves and improving their ability to contribute to society.

And, for those who aren’t working, plenty of them are disabled and need to be close to hospitals and similar infrastructure both for their sake and to avoid government employees having to drive all over the city checking on clients who have been scattered across the outer suburbs by high rent prices.

Then there’s opportunities for working class artists, immigrants, and entrepreneurs being stronger in the city centre. They shouldn’t be punished when they can’t lean on mommy and daddy to give them trust funds to pay for their downtown condo rent where all the opportunities are.

Everyone benefits when there’s some level of rent control and subsidization. You can overdo it, yes, but you can overdo drinking water too.

[StEC]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I think I just fundamentally disagree with you. I do not believe it is your right to live wherever you like. You have to work, earn money, and pay the market rate to live in premium areas. Subsidizing housing is absolutely the wrong approach that leads to undesirable areas that are not good for a city. It leads to economic stagnation and general degeneration, as we have so clearly seen in downtown Hamilton.

And I fundamentally think you're an inconsiderate self-absorbed asshole! Sorry not sorry. Post after post from you... you are constantly looking down on the poor and less fortunate in our city! I'm just tired of it. We get it, you hate the poor and especially the homeless.

EDIT: You and Terry Whitehead are probably best friends, seem to be cut from the same cloth!

[atnor]

Originally Posted by StEC

And I fundamentally think you're an inconsiderate self-absorbed asshole! Sorry not sorry. Post after post from you... you are constantly looking down on the poor and less fortunate in our city! I'm just tired of it. We get it, you hate the poor and especially the homeless.

EDIT: You and Terry Whitehead are probably best friends, seem to be cut from the same cloth!

People like you see hate where hate doesn’t exist. Nothing he said indicates he hates poor people.

[TheRitsman]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

I think I just fundamentally disagree with you. I do not believe it is your right to live wherever you like. You have to work, earn money, and pay the market rate to live in premium areas. Subsidizing housing is absolutely the wrong approach that leads to undesirable areas that are not good for a city. It leads to economic stagnation and general degeneration, as we have so clearly seen in downtown Hamilton.

The worst countries on Earth have this ideology identical to yours regarding the poor. The poor get poorer, they commit more crimes as they get more desperate. The world you're hoping for isn't better, it will be worse.

Countries who respect the poor, and try to help them are the best for social mobility and some of the best for low crime. The single most important thing you can do to reduce crime, poverty, and get those people you seem to despise so much into jobs, is give them housing stability. Lack of housing stability is the single most important thing with regard to causing homelessness. The homeless can't work.

That's why I said this is selfishness. You're not having issues, so those that do can get lost. I'd suggest you actually educate yourself on the causes behind the issues you hate. It's easy to look at a beggar and think "wow, what dirty scum". It's a lot harder to recognize this person likely had none of the support you did, even if you think you had a tough upbringing, you had the support of something, whether it was drive, mental health, family, friends, or luck.

Suggesting social housing is a bad idea and those people can get lost is I think the second most egregious comment I've ever seen on this forum. And while I may be able to comment again with you, I do think stating my beliefs is important, especially when I believe a comment to be outrageously inappropriate. I call out racists, I call out sexists, and I will call out classists. That's what I believe you are. A classist. I hope somebody in a higher class eventually rains on your parade so you know what it's like to be hated by someone just because of the amount of money you have or the problems they deem you to have.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by atnor

People like you see hate where hate doesn’t exist. Nothing he said indicates he hates poor people.

Thank you!

I definitely don't hate the poor I'm just trying to point out that it is market pressures that dictate the costs of a city. I don't think people are trying to remove less fortunate people on purpose, it's just the natural progression when a city becomes more economically established.

Apologies if I offended.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

The worst countries on Earth have this ideology identical to yours regarding the poor. The poor get poorer, they commit more crimes as they get more desperate. The world you're hoping for isn't better, it will be worse.

Countries who respect the poor, and try to help them are the best for social mobility and some of the best for low crime. The single most important thing you can do to reduce crime, poverty, and get those people you seem to despise so much into jobs, is give them housing stability. Lack of housing stability is the single most important thing with regard to causing homelessness. The homeless can't work.

That's why I said this is selfishness. You're not having issues, so those that do can get lost. I'd suggest you actually educate yourself on the causes behind the issues you hate. It's easy to look at a beggar and think "wow, what dirty scum". It's a lot harder to recognize this person likely had none of the support you did, even if you think you had a tough upbringing, you had the support of something, whether it was drive, mental health, family, friends, or luck.

Suggesting social housing is a bad idea and those people can get lost is I think the second most egregious comment I've ever seen on this forum. And while I may be able to comment again with you, I do think stating my beliefs is important, especially when I believe a comment to be outrageously inappropriate. I call out racists, I call out sexists, and I will call out classists. That's what I believe you are. A classist. I hope somebody in a higher class eventually rains on your parade so you know what it's like to be hated by someone just because of the amount of money you have or the problems they deem you to have.

Suggesting social housing is a bad idea and those people can get lost

I think you have misunderstood my perspective. I am absolutely not telling anyone to get lost from this city. What I am trying to point out is that cities become more expensive the more desirable they are. I don't want to see anyone get forced out of the city centre, but if they can't pay the rent that others can, than I don't believe it is the taxpayers responsibility to subsidise someone else's rent.

I'm trying to bring some thoughtful conversation to this forum, and I'm being told my comments are egregious, hateful and offensive? It's a bit much, man.

[StEC]

Originally Posted by atnor

People like you see hate where hate doesn’t exist. Nothing he said indicates he hates poor people.

It's his entire post history I'm taking into account. TheRitsman nailed it with the term "classist" I'm just tired of it.

@TheHonestMaple I appreciate your contributions to the forum with your construction photos just not your opinions in regards to the less fortunate who live in our city!

[TheHonestMaple]

Anyway. My apologies if I offended. It was not my intention.

I think Hamilton is becoming a brilliant place to live and I want to see this momentum continuing. I think there's a place here for everyone, and I definitely don't want to see anyone forced out on purpose. Wasn't the point I was trying to make, and in the future I'll try to be more considerate on the topic.

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Anyway. My apologies if I offended. It was not my intention.

I think Hamilton is becoming a brilliant place to live and I want to see this momentum continuing. I think there's a place here for everyone, and I definitely don't want to see anyone forced out on purpose. Wasn't the point I was trying to make, and in the future I'll try to be more considerate on the topic.

It's important that discussions have varied perspectives as that reflects the reality of the world that we live in. I don't believe you needed to apologize. The personal attack on you seemed uncalled for. There's a way to express ones disappointment without the name calling.

[TheHonestMaple]

Thank you, I think a wide variety of opinions is important as well. Otherwise this forum would just become an echo chamber and no new ideas would be shared.

StEC has made the accusation that my entire post history is full of hate on the less fortunate. That is absolutely not true. I have made a number of comments about how I believe that owner occupied condo developments are better for the city than rent subsidized social housing. And I also have stated many times that I believe gentrification is a positive thing. I stand by that. I believe that bringing in more high earning condo residents will bring the capital this city centre needs to support the small businesses that we all love. I don't believe that this makes me a classist. I think we all want to see Hamilton become a better place, we may just have different visions on how we get there. I absolutely do not support pushing the less fortunate out of their homes, I have simply stated that market pressures should determine cost of living in our city not artificial methods.

I do acknowledge however that it is a touchy subject for some.

[atnor]

I don’t know if it’s the general political climate or mainly prevalent in online discussions but can we stop saying people with different ideas of governance and economics make a person hateful?

Leave this attitude at reddit.

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Thank you, I think a wide variety of opinions is important as well. Otherwise this forum would just become an echo chamber and no new ideas would be shared.

StEC has made the accusation that my entire post history is full of hate on the less fortunate. That is absolutely not true. I have made a number of comments about how I believe that owner occupied condo developments are better for the city than rent subsidized social housing. And I also have stated many times that I believe gentrification is a positive thing. I stand by that. I believe that bringing in more high earning condo residents will bring the capital this city centre needs to support the small businesses that we all love. I don't believe that this makes me a classist. I think we all want to see Hamilton become a better place, we may just have different visions on how we get there. I absolutely do not support pushing the less fortunate out of their homes, I have simply stated that market pressures should determine cost of living in our city not artificial methods.

I do acknowledge however that it is a touchy subject for some.

Wasn't the lower city quite neglected and incredibly affordable for a very long time? So I can understand the fear of not wanting to see the potential of Hamilton squandered and reverting back into a dilapidated place.

I agree that 'luxury' condo development within the downtown is necessary to move Hamilton forward.

Anyway it would be nice to see this project go a bit higher maybe 8 or 10 storeys. I still stand by my remarks earlier that retail space here isn't necessary given the vacancies and lower quality retailers nearby. This area is decades away from legit gentrification.

[urban_planner]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Anyway. My apologies if I offended. It was not my intention.

I think Hamilton is becoming a brilliant place to live and I want to see this momentum continuing. I think there's a place here for everyone, and I definitely don't want to see anyone forced out on purpose. Wasn't the point I was trying to make, and in the future I'll try to be more considerate on the topic.

Don't apologize, people get so offended so easily. I don't necessarily want to see the poor/crack addicts/people with mental health issue get pushed out however some horrible planning crimes were committed downtown putting all these outreach centres downtown. Look at that park across from fire station one. You have the Core Urban centre and then around the corner is the Wesley centre then on John across from the Capri is another Drug facility. What kind of Bullshit it that. As much as we on this site see all that great things happening downtown the general view from the rest of the city is that Downtown is still rundown, sketchy and dangerous. These facilities are a big part of why that is. Same with the Salvation Army across from "Copps" again another terrible spot for that. I realize core urban is moving and I think the salvation army is too but at least once will still be in the core. We need a better plan.