Hamilton Waterfront - Page 8

bigguy1231 · #**141** Posted **Jul 13, 2012, 11:28 PM**

The railyards, unfortunately, aren't going anywhere soon.

Unless the city comes up with the cost for the yards and the expense of moving them there is no chance CN will give them up. Add to that the cost of remediation and we are probably looking at a billion or so dollars. Even if the city got their hands on the lands they wouldn't be able to sell them off to make their money back. The land just isn't that valuable from a market value perspective, because of the costs for remediation.

Then we'd have all the Nimby's in the North end trying to tell the developers what they can or cannot build making it impossible for them to make any money. At the price the city would have to pay turning it into parkland would be a non starter, there's just too many other priorities that need to be tended to in this city, before we pay that kind of price for greenspace.

You can dream all you want, but then reality sets in and it becomes a nightmare.

Dr Awesomesauce · #**142** Posted **Jul 14, 2012, 1:07 PM**

That's all true. However, I'm not sure the rail yard would actually require remediation because building on that site isn't really the focus. It has more to do with moving it so some decent residential can get built on Stuart etc. It's true, though, cleaning the CN yard would be cost-prohibitive; an astronomical sum of money.

People also talk about - someday - building on the brownfields of the NE industrial sector. To clean that land would be mind-blowingly expensive. It'll never happen.

Pigeon · #**143** Posted **Jul 16, 2012, 4:48 PM**

.

durandy · #**144** Posted **Jul 17, 2012, 12:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

The railyards, unfortunately, aren't going anywhere soon.

Unless the city comes up with the cost for the yards and the expense of moving them there is no chance CN will give them up. Add to that the cost of remediation and we are probably looking at a billion or so dollars. Even if the city got their hands on the lands they wouldn't be able to sell them off to make their money back. The land just isn't that valuable from a market value perspective, because of the costs for remediation.

Then we'd have all the Nimby's in the North end trying to tell the developers what they can or cannot build making it impossible for them to make any money. At the price the city would have to pay turning it into parkland would be a non starter, there's just too many other priorities that need to be tended to in this city, before we pay that kind of price for greenspace.

You can dream all you want, but then reality sets in and it becomes a nightmare.

There are nimbies in every neighbourhood, if a developer knows what they're doing they'll negotiate that. It wasn't the NEN that made Setting Sail nonresidential, it was CN. Look at the Witton Lofts, I believe that's in the North end, and White star finallyy has a green light for their condo on Bay. Condos don't need to remediate, they can encase the dirt in concrete.

The real obstacle is the value CN places on the land. But if Bratina et al care as much about this as they say then it might not be that outlandish to think that they swap this for another parcel. Insert some sweeteners in the deal.

I don't know what NuclearNerd means about 'bad redevelopment money' in Setting Sail. There's no money in setting sail. It's a secondary plan. It would have seen the whole area turned into condos and medium density streetfront retail, with maximum 2 metre setbacks and no drive-thrus, had CN not blocked the mixed use.

markbarbera · #**145** Posted **Jul 17, 2012, 12:18 PM**

Setting Sail has not been changed to non-residential. CN's appeal has only changed the zoning for the land between the yard as far south as Murray Street. Granted, this accounts for a large portion of the land covered in Setting Sail, but not all the land. The land on the north side of Barton as far north as Murray between Bay And Queen remains zoned median density residential, and Bay between Murray and Stuart is low density residential (the White Star property)

The obstacles to moving the rail yards are cost and the availability of an alternate site somewhere in Hamilton along the CN line, bearing in mind the yard needs to be in close proximity to the heavy industry and the port that it currently serves. Unfortunately there was a suitable alternate site on Centennial by the QEW but council had a civic vision for a Walmart there. Anything further east wouldn't be very practical in serving the port or the Harbour's industrial sites, and it's doubtful that enough land could be assembled for a replacement yard in between Centennial and it's present site.

flar · #**146** Posted **Jul 17, 2012, 12:35 PM**

I wonder if there's anywhere more central to put the rail yard, maybe in the Sherman to Gage area. There seem to be a lot of abandoned/semi-abandoned industrial lots around there.

markbarbera · #**147** Posted **Jul 17, 2012, 8:45 PM**

The difficulty is finding contiguous land the same size as the current yard, which is about 1km long and 150m wide (plus 150m buffer from residential).

SteelTown · #**148** Posted **Jul 20, 2012, 9:50 PM**

Interior and patio photos of the new restaurants at Pier 8

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...4464845&type=3

matt602 · #**149** Posted **Jul 20, 2012, 11:10 PM**

Not bad at all. Looks like we're starting to really put together a nice waterfront destination. I was down at Spencer Smith in Burlington a week ago before seeing all of this and was thinking that Hamilton is woefully behind on the waterfront but I definitely take that back now.

Pearlstreet · #**150** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 2:57 AM**

I walked through this area today and was blown away! IT IS GORGIOUS! Look out Spencers in Burlington, get ready for competition!

I couldn't stop taking pictures!!!

Dr Awesomesauce · #**151** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 5:30 AM**

Add a few palms and it'll have the feel of a sexy, tropical oasis. It's gonna be great.

thistleclub · #**152** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 11:49 AM**

More coverage in today's Spec:

"Werner Plessl, executive director of the Waterfront Trust, says Sarcoa is the first significant private investment in the waterfront.... The partners have a 20-year lease on about half of the building. The Waterfront Trust, in turn, has a 43-year lease from the federal government, which closed the high-tech parks museum at the end of 2010."

I'm glad this venue has been refreshed & am interested to see where it goes from here, but what will really be a "significant" "game changer" is not a sublet from the feds but a private sector from-scratch development of comparable calibre.

Dr Awesomesauce · #**153** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 12:42 PM**

Seeing what's happening down at Pier 8 puts me in mind of Toronto's Sugar Beach. That would be an amazing addition to these new restaurants.

SteelTown · #**154** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 4:26 PM**

http://www.thespec.com/photozone/765974

Berklon · #**155** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 8:40 PM**

I'm very impressed.

realcity · #**156** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 11:28 PM**

I hope they get rid of all the bees/yellow jackets that swarm that area and ruin the patio at Williams

realcity · #**157** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 11:32 PM**

I don't like the name.

realcity · #**158** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 11:37 PM**

Sarcoma. is a skin cancer diseasese,
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/Sarcoma...tissue-sarcoma

Dr Awesomesauce · #**159** Posted **Jul 23, 2012, 11:54 PM**

Some really good pics from the Spec. It looks like they've added some palms; it really sexes things up.

This location is a licence to print money, even though it's not the waterfront, as some like to go on and on and on about.

I hate to say it but whatshisname is right. The name Sarcoa isn't great and does put one in mind of bad things: sarcoma, sacrasm, sarcoidosis, sarcophagus, Sarnia etc.

Anyway, it'll succeed in spite of that but it should probably be addressed.

SteelTown · #**160** Posted **Jul 24, 2012, 2:04 PM**

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/stor...estaurant.html