1 Jarvis Street | 44m | 15 fl | Under Construction

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by mikevbar1

Id call this a good thing and a fun fact I wasn’t even aware of. With the way zoning has contributed to many contemporary urban issues and providing housing supply, as-of-right zoning really helps streamline what is already a complicated and laborious process. Glad to learn Hamilton’s taking a proactive approach.

What I’m curious about now is why we have a plethora of as-of-right zoning. I suspect it lies in either a) planning have enough time on their hands to create secondary plans and the various zoning designations, or b) legacy zoning that allowed/allows for ample development which didn’t come in the past as a result of our economic slump. Option c) is that Hamilton is actually just really on the ball planning-wise now

Most municipalities like using something called "section 37", which comes from, well, Section 37 of the planning act. Section 37 allows for municipalities to require additional funds for community improvements in exchange for increases in development height and density above that required in the zoning by-law.

This means that many municipalities purposefully keep zoning very restrictive and outdated to ensure basically every development needs to file a rezoning, which 1. allows for increased input from council (more power), 2. allows for increased community input (as-of-right development does not need to hold a public meeting), and arguably most importantly, 3. gives councillors millions of dollars to spend as they please in their ward.

Hamilton, for whatever reason, has never used Section 37 agreements, even on projects which have required rezoning. I believe this is largely driven by decades of little to no investment in the city, causing the city to not use them in an effort to keep development costs low. Hamilton also has unusually low development charges and gave tax breaks to new development until very recently in order to encourage it.

So for Hamilton, 3. doesn't exist and it makes a lot more sense for politicians to support as-of-right zoning.

Regardless, the Ford government is getting rid of Section 37 charges in September and replacing it with a new, more consistent funding tool which is not dependent on rezoning (which Hamilton is planning on using now). I imagine we may see a lot more municipalities in Ontario create as of right zoning as a result since the $$$ from Section 37 agreements is no longer there.

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

IIRC Hamilton also has a lot of as-of-right zoning across the LRT corridor.

The Eastgate Mall redevelopment has several 20-storey buildings proposed as that is the as-of-right density they already have that they can move on while their zoning amendment is processed for the taller buildings.

Generally Hamilton is very unusual in Ontario by having a significant amount of as of right density, most municipalities have existing zoning being very restrictive.

Thank you everyone that shared information, much appreciated. I'm left thinking that the demand to develop across the lower city just isn't quite there yet, unlike neighbouring cities... if there's great as of right zoning. How is a street like Barton not seeing more development in place of all the decrepit store fronts? Is the demand/interest in Hamilton just not there yet?

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by onetimetoomany

Thank you everyone that shared information, much appreciated. I'm left thinking that the demand to develop across the lower city just isn't quite there yet, unlike neighbouring cities... if there's great as of right zoning. How is a street like Barton not seeing more development in place of all the decrepit store fronts? Is the demand/interest in Hamilton just not there yet?

I think specific areas are more challenging for various reasons. Barton is a case where other economic changes may need to happen before we start seeing a lot more development (e.g., more jobs in the north end, as old properties are redeveloped for new commercial/industrial purposes). Right now it's probably a great corridor for buying properties, but to be profitable developing them other factors are at play.

[Innsertnamehere]

Barton still has economic viability issues, it's a pretty rough part of town generally.

Right now development makes sense in the areas of Hamilton which command the highest rents - i.e. James north and Downtown.

Over time that will spread around, but for now, that's were developers can make money so that's where they are going.

[onetimetoomany]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Barton still has economic viability issues, it's a pretty rough part of town generally.

Right now development makes sense in the areas of Hamilton which command the highest rents - i.e. James north and Downtown.

Over time that will spread around, but for now, that's were developers can make money so that's where they are going.

Are there not ways that a city could incentivize or attract development to an area that is in need of it where both parties benefit. Waiting around for it to maybe hopefully someday creep it’s way seems passive and unproductive.

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Most municipalities like using something called "section 37", which comes from, well, Section 37 of the planning act. Section 37 allows for municipalities to require additional funds for community improvements in exchange for increases in development height and density above that required in the zoning by-law.

This means that many municipalities purposefully keep zoning very restrictive and outdated to ensure basically every development needs to file a rezoning, which 1. allows for increased input from council (more power), 2. allows for increased community input (as-of-right development does not need to hold a public meeting), and arguably most importantly, 3. gives councillors millions of dollars to spend as they please in their ward.

Hamilton, for whatever reason, has never used Section 37 agreements, even on projects which have required rezoning. I believe this is largely driven by decades of little to no investment in the city, causing the city to not use them in an effort to keep development costs low. Hamilton also has unusually low development charges and gave tax breaks to new development until very recently in order to encourage it.

So for Hamilton, 3. doesn't exist and it makes a lot more sense for politicians to support as-of-right zoning.

Regardless, the Ford government is getting rid of Section 37 charges in September and replacing it with a new, more consistent funding tool which is not dependent on rezoning (which Hamilton is planning on using now). I imagine we may see a lot more municipalities in Ontario create as of right zoning as a result since the $$$ from Section 37 agreements is no longer there.

I didn’t know any of this, thank you for the thorough response! This does seem to fall in line with what I’ve seen when zoning is brought up in other cities, and definitely explains why cities ask for so much elsewhere. There’s a precedent for every development that it is inherently “not allowed”, putting the given city on a pedestal and in a position of power before a design review can take place, or application processed. It’s little tidbits and differences like this that make Hamilton such a unique and interesting place; it explains why we get projects that the city adamantly dislikes (310 Frances comes to mind) but are nonetheless permitted due to zoning (or the lack thereof in that case).

I think this approach is better, as it allows for a more natural and market-based approach, but might also introduce challenges to newcomers who aren’t familiar with our development process. It’s certainly ironic that in a city with such a greedy and incompetent council we have managed to keep one of the more easily abused powers out of their hands. Overall, this approach is especially valuable in a city where its common knowledge that new investment isn’t guaranteed, nevermind seen as a right (looking at all these other Ontario cities). Despite section 37 changes I think our approach will continue to make it easy enough for developers to build as it seems to be a mindset of the city that has manifested into policy. The recent as-of-right multiplex conversions bylaw really exemplifies this and shows that it isn’t just legacy zoning that is being tapped into, but new policies as well.

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by onetimetoomany

Are there not ways that a city could incentivize or attract development to an area that is in need of it where both parties benefit. Waiting around for it to maybe hopefully someday creep it’s way seems passive and unproductive.

It’s kindof difficult to attract investment to our worst areas when most of the city hasn’t seen any investment for decades. Looking at Toronto, development will come to every corner of the city, it just takes time. Incentivizing development means creating plans, policies or economic stimuli that would make developers want to build there. First, those things take a long time notwithstanding existing conditions. Second, for an area like the east/north end, it is a tall ask to bring It up to a standard of desirability where new builds are common when most of Barton hasn’t seen any construction or tangible growth in decades. Third, the city hasn’t had the money to invest in stimuli for the city, and the province hasn’t really taken up the mantle either.

Thankfully, I am confident that with the redevelopment of the Stelco lands, Barton will once again rise to prominence in rapid fashion. 23,000 jobs is akin to what was actually there 50-70 years ago, so we will definitely see uptake there in the coming years and decades. Luckily that project can probably move faster and deliver results more quickly than infrastructure investments, which often spend decades in planning and construction before benefits can be seen on the ground.

[craftbeerdad]

Not to drive the Barton bus too far off into the ditch, but a simple proxy for interest level would be the CBRE sale of the A&W huge plaza across from the kids hospital (with commercial and residential baked in). That's closer to the core of downtown and would bring the Barton Village, that development and James to John at least a bit more filled in as a starting point to illustrate Barton's viability as an opportunity set.

I also assume when the LRT is done, we will see cluster stretch up to Barton over time as astute developers see attractive land value and attractive risk/reward characteristics.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by mikevbar1

I didn’t know any of this, thank you for the thorough response! This does seem to fall in line with what I’ve seen when zoning is brought up in other cities, and definitely explains why cities ask for so much elsewhere. There’s a precedent for every development that it is inherently “not allowed”, putting the given city on a pedestal and in a position of power before a design review can take place, or application processed. It’s little tidbits and differences like this that make Hamilton such a unique and interesting place; it explains why we get projects that the city adamantly dislikes (310 Frances comes to mind) but are nonetheless permitted due to zoning (or the lack thereof in that case).

I think this approach is better, as it allows for a more natural and market-based approach, but might also introduce challenges to newcomers who aren’t familiar with our development process. It’s certainly ironic that in a city with such a greedy and incompetent council we have managed to keep one of the more easily abused powers out of their hands. Overall, this approach is especially valuable in a city where its common knowledge that new investment isn’t guaranteed, nevermind seen as a right (looking at all these other Ontario cities). Despite section 37 changes I think our approach will continue to make it easy enough for developers to build as it seems to be a mindset of the city that has manifested into policy. The recent as-of-right multiplex conversions bylaw really exemplifies this and shows that it isn’t just legacy zoning that is being tapped into, but new policies as well.

To be clear, 310 Frances is a unique situation where for some reason Stoney Creek enacted a zoning by-law with unlimited height permissions.

Hamilton has pre-zoned most of the downtown, but not at unlimited height permissions. The central core is mostly zoned for 27-30 storey buildings, with the outlying areas of the core zoned for 14-15 storey buildings, like at 1 Jarvis.

We are seeing many developers take advantage of this to avoid a rezoning exercise, while many are pushing for more density still, particularly if they are outside of the 30 storey area.

In this case, Emblem stuck to the existing zoning, filed for an as-of-right 14-storey building, and got building quickly.

Most of King / Queenston is also pre-zoned for midrise development, which is what 1106 Main St E used to get going, as well as a few specific spots with higher densities permitted such as around Eastgate, which allows up to 20 storeys.

Most of the rest of Hamilton still uses the more standard "old zoning bylaws" with minimal as of right density, requiring most projects to rezone.

[mikevbar1]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

To be clear, 310 Frances is a unique situation where for some reason Stoney Creek enacted a zoning by-law with unlimited height permissions.

Hamilton has pre-zoned most of the downtown, but not at unlimited height permissions. The central core is mostly zoned for 27-30 storey buildings, with the outlying areas of the core zoned for 14-15 storey buildings, like at 1 Jarvis.

We are seeing many developers take advantage of this to avoid a rezoning exercise, while many are pushing for more density still, particularly if they are outside of the 30 storey area.

In this case, Emblem stuck to the existing zoning, filed for an as-of-right 14-storey building, and got building quickly.

Most of King / Queenston is also pre-zoned for midrise development, which is what 1106 Main St E used to get going, as well as a few specific spots with higher densities permitted such as around Eastgate, which allows up to 20 storeys.

Most of the rest of Hamilton still uses the more standard "old zoning bylaws" with minimal as of right density, requiring most projects to rezone.

I’m well aware of the height limit downtown, I didn’t realize that such taller midrises were also allowed in an area around downtown however. I suppose it makes sense the suburbs still zone for minimum density right now, but I get the impression this could actually change, between certain corridors being upzoned for mid-high rides, and neighbourhoods permitting more as-of-right multiplex permissions. I am curious as to how we dictate midrises here, however. I know in Toronto they can be somewhat difficult to make work economically when there are parking requirements, setbacks, etc.

Originally Posted by craftbeerdad

Not to drive the Barton bus too far off into the ditch, but a simple proxy for interest level would be the CBRE sale of the A&W huge plaza across from the kids hospital (with commercial and residential baked in). That's closer to the core of downtown and would bring the Barton Village, that development and James to John at least a bit more filled in as a starting point to illustrate Barton's viability as an opportunity set.

I also assume when the LRT is done, we will see cluster stretch up to Barton over time as astute developers see attractive land value and attractive risk/reward characteristics.

To be clear, I have no doubt that Barton will eventually be a very well developed and popular corridor again. It has all the good bones of the best retail streets in Toronto or Hamilton. We will likely see a steady crawl of development push down Barton towards the east, and maybe new interest by Barton & Centennial due to Confederation GO. The ultimate goal would be to redevelop centre mall.

[TheRitsman]

Looks to be at floor 4:

[lachlanholmes]

Friday, September 2nd.

[johnnyhamont]

October 5


Joe

[TheHonestMaple]

Wild how fast this one went up! Hopefully we can expect the same once the Design District breaks ground.

[johnnyhamont]

Oct 12


Joe

[Innsertnamehere]

I'm interested to see how cladding turns out here given Emblem's branding of "excellent design".

[TheHonestMaple]

Taken October 23, 2022.

[Canuck905]

They have started putting up black windows on the east facade.

[spaghettisam]

1 jarvis and kiwi

https://imgur.com/a/oxvBZ8v

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by TheHonestMaple

Taken October 23, 2022.

I'm really curious about the seemingly "quiet" re-clad of Landmark. She's gotten a lot darker, glass balcony panels several years ago, and that ribbing looks unfinished (I had thought it was getting higher and higher, but streetview shows it's been at the same level since 2015) so what's the plan?