"Hamilton's dead. Or is it?" Globe & Mail article

[realcity]

okay.... Cleveland's subway also runs mostly above ground, or under elevated roads *not technically underground* but is another example of a Great Lake subway.

But there is probably not a scarier subway then Cleveland's. If Hamilton had a subway it would probably be like Cleveland. *We're both dump-holes*

We can't even have underground washrooms. We did have underground washrooms once in Gore Park, but our cops and politicians didn't want the hassle. So now people have to wash and piss in the Gore Park fountain.... but I digress.

Wanna see a scary subway
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of0SpmLAqYE

and I love Cleveland. *lived there once long ago for hockey, Garfield Heights to be exact, you know how the US loves the suburbs* but I digress again.

Buffalo's is at grade. I think that's what Hamilton's will look like. But IT HAS to extend to the suburbs, or else it will be as underused as Buffalo and Detroit trains. Do it BIG or else don't do it, and allow let the politicians call it a failure. Same goes for a PanAm stadium. *another digression*

DO NOT do a BRT (BLT I call it, bc it will be breakfast) bc it's a BUS(t).

[drpgq]

Affordable housing at the Connaught? Wow. Market rate condos I could live with, but more affordable housing? I agree with realcity that if there is one thing Hamilton has, it is affordable housing below the Mountain.

Affordable housing seems to me to be similar to a new highway in that supply creates new demand. We already have the new tower on King East and we need more? Cabrini Green here we come.

[emge]

I think the Spallaci building was pretty well done, and I'd rather have housing than a strip club on a main street..... but the Connaught as affordable housing is just ridiculous.

Who's behind that idea/pushing it forward? And seriously, where the **** is the vision? Not just for improving downtown and capitalizing on/going with a reno'd Gore, but the money a renovated Connaught could make. It shouldn't be such a hard concept to grasp.

[markbarbera]

What we need is an approach that reflects the city development philosophy Jane Jacobs advocated. The answer is not simply more jobs, or more housing. It's more jobs and more housing, along with sufficient infrastructure and services to support them (i.e. mass transit, retail, cultural and recreational venues). The revitalization of the core has to focus on all these elements to attract and retain businesses and citizens.

At risk of sounding insensitive, more affordable housing downtown works against this goal. The average disposable income of downtown residents needs to be pushed up if revitalization of the core is to take hold. I sincerely hope that the proposal for the Connaught site has affordable housing as only a small part of an overall plan for the site, which should embrace a mixed-use model. If this is a residential redevelopment with a commercial element and a balance between market value and affordable housing, then it would work. Use the existing buildings for hotel apartments and upscale condos, and build affordable condo units and rentals along Main and John. Link the entire complex with a retail concourse with a couple floors of office space above it.

[emge]

It's not insensitive, it's realistic.

I'd even argue it's more sensitive, since long-term it does little to help people of lower incomes to ghettoize people -- it certainly does less to help them than doing residential with multiple components including affordable housing and bringing multiple income levels to a neighbourhood.

There's a social advantage to living around people who know how to complain if certain things are not up to snuff, even if a person wouldn't have the experience, resources or confidence to do that themselves and have had to live in unsafe or less-than-secure environments on account of it.

And to give people who are causing certain problems the experience of rules being enforced -- an environment in which behaviour must improve, at least as it directly affects others. No free pass on tearing down what's around you - because the others around you do know where to turn, and like it or not, a lot of things are enforced (or not) dependent on neighbourhood and the type of people who call the relevant authorities.

There's also an advantage to living around people who provide a positive example (working, taxpaying, keeping their property clean, etc). There's probably a million more examples, but it's more helpful to encourage mixed-use than just putting people who need help with housing.

That in itself probably sounds a little insensitive, and overly simplistic... but you get the idea. There needs to be balance, not just neighbourhoods for "this type" and "that type" of person, and certainly not downtown as a place where we put everyone who can't afford to live where they choose. That's not good for anyone.



(That said, there is still a need for affordable housing. I ran into two seniors I've known for a couple years on the way home from the store yesterday - one has been waiting 3 years for rent-geared-to-income housing - she works part-time but because of health can only do that, the other for a year or two.

In the meantime, one's living in a small bedroom of a friend's house, the other in a most-certainly unsafe apartment where the tenants leave the exterior doors open, and it has been broken into before. It's doubly unsafe because he's deaf and cannot tell if anyone is coming inside. That's not safe, and it's not acceptable.

Those are the type of people who most need real affordable housing - working, paying rent, but they can't afford places with privacy or safety. But what they don't need is to be put in a building with people who for various other reasons, self-inflicted or not, are going to make even a newly constructed building into an unsafe environment. The types that would finally get a rent-geared-to-income place and then walk right into the rent-to-own Easyhome furniture store next door to Access to Housing... but those businesses thrive because they offer easy solutions in neighbourhoods where people don't see other options. And if the neighbourhood was more mixed, we wouldn't have crap like that there...)

[bigguy1231]

I would rather see them pull the building down and turn it into a parking lot before turning it into low income housing and I am not a fan of parking lots in the downtown.
Turning this fine old building into public housing is totally inappropriate. Turning into housing of any kind is inappropriate. I think something creative like an office condo, where suites are sold to businesses might be a novel idea.

[realcity]

Here's an idea. You know the parking lots at Wilson and Rebecca? Affordable housing *Build a new fricken building*

Why does everything in this city have to be a building conversion? According to LIUNA the Lister reno is more expensive then a new building. If that's true then build a building, don't convert a former 4 star hotel to affordable housing.

[SteelTown]

The Lister is more expensive because of the massive mess, orginal drywall, etc was still inside. The Connaught is a gaint empty shell, no drywall just beams supporting the building. You can start immediately with the Connaught. With the Lister Block as you can witness it takes months to clean up and gut the place before you can even start the real work.

[Jon Dalton]

I hope to God that subsidized housing in the Connaught is just a rumour. Who would argue that apartments in this one of a kind location would not rent? They may not be as sexy to developers but plain old fashioned rental units are how money was traditionally made in downtown housing. I do know alot more people looking for decent 1 or 2 bedroom aparments than $200,000 suites or 'investment properties', but maybe that's just the people I hang around with.

[realcity]

Okay not just Lister but it's common sentiment that most all building conversions are more expensive then building new. Remember the Connaught already has had about $12 million dollars put into it to get it to this stage. ($4 million was taxpayers money).

Plus empty land is less $ then land with a building on it. All around if you have a blank piece of land it is most definitely cheaper to buy and build on then buy land with a building and do a reno conversion.

[realcity]

To answer the question in the title of this thread, before this turns into a subsidized housing thread.

The world and Canada experienced 20 straight years of growth and prosperity. One of the biggest bullruns in history. Since the end of the early 90s recession everywhere (almost everywhere) in the country went on a building boom tear and job growth.

Hamilton located in the middle of a sea of prosperity during those 20 years went into hibernation. I would even argue that we declined. The downtown, retail, office vacancy everything got worse.

Let's go back 20 years ago.

I worked in Jackson square in early 90s and remember all the stores were full. I can ever remember the Eaton Centre fully occupied right to the third floor. My friend worked at the Foot Locker or Collegiate (sports store on the third floor). The Eaton Center had first class retail, the type of stores you see in Lime Ridge now. The retail along King was of better quality, there was still a department store downtown, not a payday advance loans every 3rd store. The Effort Trust Mall was worth going to. The Right House had fur coats and expensive jewellery stores.

Transit use was three times higher then it is now. There were expensive & fine dining restaurants, La Costa, La Boca, Shakespeare's, Martins Steak House, The Aquarium, Trocadero, one on York by the Family Fitness, the restaurant in the what is now Jackson's food court. Eaton Center had a nice one on the third floor, more cocktail lounge. Sheraton's cocktail lounge. You could barely get a table at Sheraton's Sunday Brunch. How many fine dining places are there now? Sports bars and Pubs.

The Connaught was thriving and hosting big functions in the ballrooms. The Connaught retail mall was full. The Sheraton was hosing weddings and conventions. The convention centre was actually hosting conventions. I think even the Lister had tenants then, the Tivoli was a Famous Players, there were lots of clubs a vibrant nite life. Tier 1 concerts at Copps, Guns n Roses, Metallica etc during their peak were playing Copps.

There was no less then 5 good size advertising agencies, with clients like Jaguar, Smirnoff, Dofasco, Firestone, IBM, Westinghouse. There were big accounting firms, investment banks, insurance companies. Stelco Tower was near full occupancy.

Recent progress is the Art Crawl. The only think built with any significance was the New Federal Bldg (which sucks). And I think the second phase of CIBC towers in 1991. The TH&B station reno. Spallaci, and I struggle to find much other good news. McMaster has improved.

Is Hamilton dead? Yes, or else you could say it's on life support.

Why should we not expect the next economic bull run (starting somewhere in 2010) to evade Hamilton again?

[matt602]

It sickens me to think that people are actually considering affordable housing for a building that was built as a 5 star hotel and once had royalty staying within it's walls. I'd rather see the building burn to the ground than it converted to affordable housing. It was built as a hotel, it always *was* a hotel and it should always *be* a hotel. This building is not a dime a dozen, it's about as unique as they come. There are hundreds of other buildings within the core alone that could be used as affordable housing. Leave the Connaught alone.

[flar]

Originally Posted by realcity

To answer the question in the title of this thread, before this turns into a subsidized housing thread.

The world and Canada experienced 20 straight years of growth and prosperity. One of the biggest bullruns in history. Since the end of the early 90s recession everywhere (almost everywhere) in the country went on a building boom tear and job growth.

Hamilton located in the middle of a sea of prosperity during those 20 years went into hibernation. I would even argue that we declined. The downtown, retail, office vacancy everything got worse.

Let's go back 20 years ago.

I worked in Jackson square in early 90s and remember all the stores were full. I can ever remember the Eaton Centre fully occupied right to the third floor. My friend worked at the Foot Locker or Collegiate (sports store on the third floor). The Eaton Center had first class retail, the type of stores you see in Lime Ridge now. The retail along King was of better quality, there was still a department store downtown, not a payday advance loans every 3rd store. The Effort Trust Mall was worth going to. The Right House had fur coats and expensive jewellery stores.

Transit use was three times higher then it is now. There were expensive & fine dining restaurants, La Costa, La Boca, Shakespeare's, Martins Steak House, The Aquarium, Trocadero, one on York by the Family Fitness, the restaurant in the what is now Jackson's food court. Eaton Center had a nice one on the third floor, more cocktail lounge. Sheraton's cocktail lounge. You could barely get a table at Sheraton's Sunday Brunch. How many fine dining places are there now? Sports bars and Pubs.

The Connaught was thriving and hosting big functions in the ballrooms. The Connaught retail mall was full. The Sheraton was hosing weddings and conventions. The convention centre was actually hosting conventions. I think even the Lister had tenants then, the Tivoli was a Famous Players, there were lots of clubs a vibrant nite life. Tier 1 concerts at Copps, Guns n Roses, Metallica etc during their peak were playing Copps.

There was no less then 5 good size advertising agencies, with clients like Jaguar, Smirnoff, Dofasco, Firestone, IBM, Westinghouse. There were big accounting firms, investment banks, insurance companies. Stelco Tower was near full occupancy.

Recent progress is the Art Crawl. The only think built with any significance was the New Federal Bldg (which sucks). And I think the second phase of CIBC towers in 1991. The TH&B station reno. Spallaci, and I struggle to find much other good news. McMaster has improved.

Is Hamilton dead? Yes, or else you could say it's on life support.

Why should we not expect the next economic bull run (starting somewhere in 2010) to evade Hamilton again?

That's what happens when a city loses like 50,000 jobs.

[realcity]

Just 50,000

I think there was more to consider. Some cities did some reinventing. Pittsburgh is always considered to be an example and perhaps Baltimore, Lower Manhattan was a hole in the 60s & 70s.

The difference is that there has been absolutely NO POLITICAL WILL or LEADERSHIP for 40 years. Not even a tiny bit.


There is nothing more democratic then 'getting what one deserves'. We vote for them, we get what we deserve.


*new NDP new new slogan. "Get what you deserve. Vote NDP"*