City of Hamilton General Discussion Thread

[TheRitsman]

The airport employment lands are already part of the urban boundary so no expansion necessary for them to develop.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

The other thing to remember is this may all be a delay tactic. Staff and councillors (mostly) know that no urban boundary expansion is a good thing. It will increase shouting prices which is good for real estate investment downtown (bad for housing for people, but that's another fish to fry). Expansion will also mean more assets that need to be repaired longer term. Even if boundary expansion is allowed, it won't happen for years, and that means we may get a liberal or NDP provincial government that says "nevermind, no urban boundary expansion"

This is what I've been saying should be the "sales pitch" to those who don't understand the issue, or have a simplistic view that because Canada is big and we have lots of land there should be no problem with growing our cities outwards.

The suburbs tend to have loudest voices when it comes to complaints about rising property taxes. But I doubt many who live there actually know why their tax bill gets bigger. Home value assessments being higher on average is one reason (which nobody complains about when it comes time to sell ) but another key factor -- probably the biggest one, IMO -- is the nature of the places where those homes are located: all that infrastructure spread over a large area is costly to maintain and very expensive to rehabilitate or replace.

The Ford government doesn't really care about that. It won't be around when the bills start to rise and municipalities are screaming for more provincial money or more tools to generate revenue.

[ScreamingViking]

Generally speaking I think Terry is right, and property buyers will pay for that. But he's ignoring the infrastructure and service costs of extending the urban area, for which ALL of the city's residents and businesses must pay (not that there won't be costs to intensify... but a lot of that may involve upgrading older infrastructure that would need to be done regardless)


Public’s say on Hamilton’s firm-boundary growth plan sought
Draft of city’s overarching planning document guided by November decision to halt sprawl

https://www.thespec.com/news/council...ng-growth.html

Teviah Moro
The Hamilton Spectator
Thu., Jan. 20, 2022

The city will ask the public to weigh in on a plan that corrals 30 years of expected growth into Hamilton’s existing urban footprint.

Council voted to seek feedback on the draft official plan updated to reflect a frozen urban boundary Wednesday.

The proposed overarching planning document — which factors in a projected spike of 236,000 people by 2051 — will also be sent to the province for comment.

The draft official plan addresses a range of hefty issues, including climate change, affordable housing and public transportation, as Hamilton grows denser to a forecast population of 820,000 people over the next 30 years.

“I think it’s ... a very welcome strategy moving forward,” Coun. John-Paul Danko said.

Not everyone on council agrees, including Terry Whitehead, who said his opposition boiled down to supply-and-demand economics.

“We just now artificially increased the value of land.”

At a “fairly high level,” the draft plan includes housing types to accommodate the forecast growth within the existing urban area, said Jason Thorne, the city’s general manager of planning and economic development.

The city expects Hamilton will have to double its rate of intensification — infill development in the built-up area — to 80 per cent to hold the boundary firm and meet provincial growth predictions.

This means that out of 109,880 housing units, 88,280 would be directed to built-up parts of the city, while 21,600 would be in “greenfield” areas slated for development.

Hamilton’s existing urban area can handle that, but policy changes for “some gentle intensification” in low-density neighbourhoods are needed, planning director Steve Robichaud said.

Think triplexes, fourplexes and townhouses in residential areas where single-family, detached homes predominate, and buildings with up to six units along their peripheries.

...

Full story here

[TheRitsman]

The thing our councillors really need to understand is a better idea of city building. Everyone wants lower taxes, and lower housing prices. Well you have to actually use your brain to accomplish both. Look at KiWi. Property taxes on that property are increasing by $1.2million per year, but there is no way the cost to service that building will be an additional $1.2million per year. This is what was discussed in the study about sprawl vs infill in Ottawa where sprawl cost Ottawa tax payers $600/year additionally each, where infill saved them $400/year or something.

Now this will have a negative effect on housing prices if it is not followed up with new policies around zoning by laws, parking minimums, and appeals from citizens against as of right buildings.

[lachlanholmes]

Councillor Whitehead is correct to say that freezing the urban boundary will inflate land values — just like the new DTSP and the related pre-zoning did to lands in the core back in 2018! Funny enough, I can't remember him speaking up about his concerns back then...

Ultimately though, land value is just one out of dozens of factors being balanced when engaged in high level planning, like building a municipal growth plan — and though I suspect I'm more sympathetic than others to the argument that land value doesn't get enough attention during high-level planning exercises, land values are most definitely not the sole factor impacting cost of housing, but Whitehead seems to imply they are, at least from the quote in the article.

---

As to the actual plan, I haven't had the chance to have a look through it so far, so take this with a grain of salt, but if Robichaud and Planning's opinion is that we can meet the targets just through tinkering with gentle density, then I'm REALLY concerned about how realistic the City's plan actually is.

The cited examples are good and all, and I'm happy to see them allowed, but they really don't come close to meeting our housing needs. The "adequate zoned capacity" argument against development/density/etc. is really such a fallacious concept considering how it never plays out in practice, but it seems like that's what the City's target is, which really seems to me like planning for failure.

[drpgq]

Well bet on existing single detached housing to continue going up in price. I'm skeptical of how many units can be added through gentle density but happy to be proven wrong.

[ScreamingViking]

Opportunities abound, but the city will need to consider related policies. Where I live, we could easily add one or two units where our alley garage is... but we'd probably need alley snow clearance (which the city does not do) and the fire department would need vehicles that can access the alley (which I don't think they have)

[TheRitsman]

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/cont...rdability.html

[Chronamut]

one of these days we're going to end up looking like hong kong - like someone took a buncha pencils and stuck them into a cup.. no sun at ground level just a massive amt of people crammed into a small space.. imagine what happens when infrastructure breaks down in those types of places..

[Chronamut]

maybe we should just stop trying to grow the population of canada and be content with the population we have.. why does it have to keep getting bigger and bigger..

we keep importing people from all over the world yet can't even address the poverty issues of the people already native to here.. (native being relative to how long they've existed here generational wise)

[TheHonestMaple]

Because our entire system is a Ponzi Scheme. We have to bring in several hundred thousand people each year to pay for the CPP of the growing population that is retiring. Unfortunately, as we bring in more people the problem only gets worse and we then need more people to pay for the CPP of those before them. It's a vicious cycle, and I have no idea how it ends but probably not good.

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

one of these days we're going to end up looking like hong kong - like someone took a buncha pencils and stuck them into a cup.. no sun at ground level just a massive amt of people crammed into a small space.. imagine what happens when infrastructure breaks down in those types of places..

Weird, when I was in Hong Kong there was plenty of sun at the ground level. Have you been to HK?

[Chronamut]

Originally Posted by onetimetoomany

Weird, when I was in Hong Kong there was plenty of sun at the ground level. Have you been to HK?

Probably depends on where you are there, position of the sun etc - with all those tall buildings - my grandparents have been to hong kong, I admittedly have not - and it was a bit of an intentional exaggeration on my part in that with so many skyscrapers they probably never see the sun - im sure they do but a large amt of it is obstructed.

The point I was trying to make is if you have too many big buildings there will be some places eternally cast in shadow - you see it in some areas of toronto, the canyon areas - they tend to be cold with wind tunnel effects too - not a fan.

case in point residential skyscrapers in hong kong:



If the people on this forum had their way this is what every street would feel like in hamilton.



Like a buncha pencils stuck in a cup.

[Hawrylyshyn]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

maybe we should just stop trying to grow the population of canada and be content with the population we have.. why does it have to keep getting bigger and bigger..

we keep importing people from all over the world yet can't even address the poverty issues of the people already native to here.. (native being relative to how long they've existed here generational wise)

Because they're more likely to vote a certain way

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

maybe we should just stop trying to grow the population of canada and be content with the population we have.. why does it have to keep getting bigger and bigger..

we keep importing people from all over the world yet can't even address the poverty issues of the people already native to here.. (native being relative to how long they've existed here generational wise)

Economy of scale. If we want to have decent public transit between our cities, and to be better able to pay for the massive amount of infrastructure it already takes to connect our cities, we need more people. We have the 7th most roads and 5th most roads of any country 37th largest population. Going by wikipedia, we have the highest number of rail kilometres per capita of any country. That’s expensive for us to run. Immigration helps us reverse that, and then be better able to address poverty that exists in the country.

And, as for looking like Hong Kong, that does sound pretty nice, because then we could turn large chunks of the current sprawl into forested parkland.

[Pulkvedis Pods]

Carisma Pentecostal Church Main Street by Pulkvedis Pods, on Flickr
Carisma Pentecostal Church conversion to apartments1 by Pulkvedis Pods, on Flickr

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

Probably depends on where you are there, position of the sun etc - with all those tall buildings - my grandparents have been to hong kong, I admittedly have not - and it was a bit of an intentional exaggeration on my part in that with so many skyscrapers they probably never see the sun - im sure they do but a large amt of it is obstructed.

The point I was trying to make is if you have too many big buildings there will be some places eternally cast in shadow - you see it in some areas of toronto, the canyon areas - they tend to be cold with wind tunnel effects too - not a fan.

case in point residential skyscrapers in hong kong:

If the people on this forum had their way this is what every street would feel like in hamilton.

Like a buncha pencils stuck in a cup.

The photo you posted looking up is a courtyard for an apartment complex. I figured that you in fact had not been to HK because as I mentioned it’s bright along the many streets walking as a pedestrian. Perhaps reference a city that you’ve experienced to better support your points, exaggeration or not, your making statements based on photographs and not lived experience.

[Chronamut]

The point is that hamilton doesn't want to be toronto - and a lot of people on this forum.. don't seem to understand that.. we don't want 80 story buildings everywhere and we don't want a ton of people crammed into our city - even now when i go for walks at say bayfront park its just choked with a disgusting amt of people - never used to be - we like to be a midsized city.

As for paying for infrastructure, perhaps if this country managed its tax money a bit better we wouldn't have half the problems we do.. but you know how that goes..

hamilton has survived for 2 centuries on a lot less, and we used to actually have more intra-city infrastructure - hell we used to have a rail line all the way to buffalo.

[atnor]

Originally Posted by Chronamut

maybe we should just stop trying to grow the population of canada and be content with the population we have.. why does it have to keep getting bigger and bigger..

we keep importing people from all over the world yet can't even address the poverty issues of the people already native to here.. (native being relative to how long they've existed here generational wise)

Careful now, you’re verging on bigotry and white supremacy

In all seriousness there’s nothing wrong with arguing we should limit immigration and anyone that appeals to bigotry and racism aren’t worth your time. But unfortunately all major parties are in on the Ponzi scheme that is the century initiative.

Hold your nose and vote PPC. Who cares what the Reddit and Twitter folk think and say no to mass immigration.

[TheHonestMaple]

Originally Posted by atnor

Careful now, you’re verging on bigotry and white supremacy

In all seriousness there’s nothing wrong with arguing we should limit immigration and anyone that appeals to bigotry and racism aren’t worth your time. But unfortunately all major parties are in on the Ponzi scheme that is the century initiative.

Hold your nose and vote PPC. Who cares what the Reddit and Twitter folk think and say no to mass immigration.

It's crazy how hard the media worked to vilify Bernier and his new party. Literally nothing about that party's platform is 'xenophobic' , 'racist' or 'full of hate'. The media these days has gone off the rails