18-30 King St East | 106.9m | 32 fl | Proposed

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^Don't let the jerks in this town wear you down. We're entering a new era in Hamilton and it seems most people are on board. Just gotta keep the pressure on the City and developers to do better. In the end, it'll feel like you've lost way more than you've won but that's the game so many of us have chosen to play. It's thankless.

I shouldn't talk I suppose. I have left Hamilton due, in part, to these sorts of situations. According to some, my current home has lost over half its heritage buildings in the past decade. It's a complete free-for-all - Hamilton is far from the exception.

When you love cities and architecture, you're often left feeling exhausted and beaten. In the end, many give up and move to the suburbs - that's the urge people must fight.

[interr0bangr]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilt...ings-1.3147433

[NortheastWind]

Originally Posted by davidcappi

Knock them down already. I'm so over this debate. Build something new that utilizes the lots behind them.

I would agree if the proposal from Blanchard was something that utilized Gore Park. Something that was welcoming. Instead he proposed a parking garage.

[Katrillion]

I don't think he should go too tall at all. You wouldn't want the buildings to block too much sunlight from Gore Park.

[HillStreetBlues]

I was in the Gore yesterday, before I read the article posted above about those murals. My wife and I were looking at them from the middle of the park where the music was being played, and were not impressed. I don’t mean to denigrate the art itself (I am no artist and no critic expert, either), but with the style (somewhat spare, not in a bad way) and size of the murals, they were not able to do much to cover the depressing state of the buildings. They also seemed to be directly on the plywood hoarding, and existed along with ‘Danger’ signs and the like. I appreciate that the artist would do what he can to help make the space more inviting, but it’s terrible that this situation is allowed to exist in the heart of the City. It’s terrible any year, but when we are purportedly hosting many out-of-town guests, it’s even worse.

I know that these buildings will likely be torn down, and suspect that they will be replaced by nothing for a long while. They’ve already been absolutely neglected, even exposed to the elements, for years now. It will be really pathetic if it happens, though- Gore park is the very centre of Hamilton. Standing there should be a very positive experience. Instead, we have some of the most important buildings in terms of the City’s heritage being neglected and allowed to deteriorate. Everything should be done to have them preserved and utilized, preferably as more than just facades. They are older than our country in some cases, and can not be replaced if demolished.

[davidcappi]

I don't think he should go too tall at all. You wouldn't want the buildings to block too much sunlight from Gore Park.

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west though, so that means the park has consistent overhead sun for most of the day. The height of the buildings wouldn't really impact that. Obviously whatever they build should fit contextually with the neighbourhood, but I am not worried at all about height affecting sunlight.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by davidcappi

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west though, so that means the park has consistent overhead sun for most of the day. The height of the buildings wouldn't really impact that. Obviously whatever they build should fit contextually with the neighbourhood, but I am not worried at all about height affecting sunlight.

Obviously a real shade study would need to be done, but it’s not right to say that it would receive sun “most of the day.” Katrillion is right that shading would quickly become a concern with increasing height here. At no time of year is sun “overhead”- even on June 21, in Hamilton the sun is only (I shouldn’t say “only”- but it’s not overhead) at 70 degrees above the horizon. When it’s above the horizon, it is usually well south of east and west.

Imagine sitting in Gore Park at solar noon on a day near the autumn solstice, when the sun would be around 45 degrees from the horizon, its highest point. A hundred feet from the building, if it’s a hundred feet tall, you are in its shadow. In December, it’s probably a lot closer to reality that Gore would be in shadow “most of the day” than in sunshine. Keeping in mind that this is supposed to be an important public gathering place.

Katrillion’s concern is very valid, in short.

[Beedok]

So what you're saying is it has the potential to add shade and protection from the sun on hot summer days? Sounds good to me. Build it tall!

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by Beedok

So what you're saying is it has the potential to add shade and protection from the sun on hot summer days? Sounds good to me. Build it tall!

More like cast Gore Park into a darkness that lasts from September to April. You'll still get some of davidcappi's [almost] overhead sun in the middle of the day in the summer.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

More like cast Gore Park into a darkness that lasts from September to April. You'll still get some of davidcappi's [almost] overhead sun in the middle of the day in the summer.

Well, shade is still nice.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^I'm curious about your obsession with 'tall' buildings. What is it that makes them so vastly superior to something more human scaled in your opinion?

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues

More like cast Gore Park into a darkness that lasts from September to April. You'll still get some of davidcappi's [almost] overhead sun in the middle of the day in the summer.

Cast into a darkness? We're talking about shade here, not Sauron's storm clouds advancing from Mordor to blot out the sky.

Various parts of Gore Park do fall under building shadows now, particularly in the late afternoon. I've never found it that dark when they do.

That said, I would love it if (and it's seemingly a big IF at this point the way Wilson Blanchard is handling this property) the existing buildings could be kept, fronting something a few floors taller in the back, with a large tower facing Main. I think that kind of scaling makes more sense here, given what most of King is like between James and John. It would also help reduce shadowing issues on the park.

[coalminecanary]

that white wash is a travesty.

sure, build a tower behind them but there is absolutely zero reason to tear those buildings down. Zero. not even a new "tallest" deems it necessary when there are entire blocks pre-razed that can support such pie in the sky dreams.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Cast into a darkness? We're talking about shade here, not Sauron's storm clouds advancing from Mordor to blot out the sky.

My post quoted Beedok's, in which he said "So what you're saying is it has the potential to add shade and protection from the sun on hot summer days?" We were both being facetious.

I'd be curious about the answer to Dr. Awesomesauce's question as well.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

^I'm curious about your obsession with 'tall' buildings. What is it that makes them so vastly superior to something more human scaled in your opinion?

The Earth has limited space, and even more limited farmland. We've sprawled so much that we need to clamp down double time.

That and I don't see highrises as any less human scaled than a 3 floor building, and they're far more impressive. So it allows you to put even more people into the neighbourhood while fighting sprawl better and preserving heritage buildings that folks seem to love so much.

[king10]

Originally Posted by Beedok

The Earth has limited space, and even more limited farmland. We've sprawled so much that we need to clamp down double time.

That and I don't see highrises as any less human scaled than a 3 floor building, and they're far more impressive. So it allows you to put even more people into the neighbourhood while fighting sprawl better and preserving heritage buildings that folks seem to love so much.

I think those issues are better directed at the suburbs. Not the downtown core. Regardless if a 3 storey or 30 storey is built, there isn't going to be the issue of "sprawl" at king and James downtown which has already been built up for 200 years.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by king10

I think those issues are better directed at the suburbs. Not the downtown core. Regardless if a 3 storey or 30 storey is built, there isn't going to be the issue of "sprawl" at king and James downtown which has already been built up for 200 years.

A 30 story building is taking a few hundred people more who might have otherwise ended up in the suburbs.

[king10]

Originally Posted by Beedok

A 30 story building is taking a few hundred people more who might have otherwise ended up in the suburbs.

we have a shit ton of U/C and proposoals for condos in vacant lots downtown.

We aren't going to lose any more people to the suburbs by not building another one here when the cannaught already has plans for 3 more towers and theres a proposal for another condo tower across the street at the old bingo place.

Not ever development needs to be 30 plus stories. variation is good.

There may not even be enough demand to meet the current construction boom as is.

Toronto has a massive downtown. They still have massive suburbs. If people dont want to live downtown, they won't. Regardless of how many high rises there are. Better planning has to happen in the suburbs to prevent urban sprawl. Mid rises in the suburbs, good transportation, less power centres etc.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by king10

we have a shit ton of U/C and proposoals for condos in vacant lots downtown.

We aren't going to lose any more people to the suburbs by not building another one here when the cannaught already has plans for 3 more towers and theres a proposal for another condo tower across the street at the old bingo place.

Not ever development needs to be 30 plus stories. variation is good.

There may not even be enough demand to meet the current construction boom as is.

Toronto has a massive downtown. They still have massive suburbs. If people dont want to live downtown, they won't. Regardless of how many high rises there are. Better planning has to happen in the suburbs to prevent urban sprawl. Mid rises in the suburbs, good transportation, less power centres etc.

I'm just saying if this does go through then I hope it's tall. Especially if the heritage buildings are lost. I want the downtown to be more urban. In general tall is better. Toronto's massive suburbs mostly grew during a lull in highrise building, and the suburbs are growing a lot more slowly now the Toronto is tossing up a tower a day. Highrises work. In part because they give the suburban folks the privacy they're after by being good and distant from the street.

[king10]

Im not against highrises by any means. I just dont think every new development downtown needs to be a highrise.

3 to 9 story buildings also add density and variation.