Ironstone Condos | HT ?? | 16 FLRS | U/C - Page 2

Millstone · #21 Posted **Jul 3, 2008, 6:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC83

^^ downtown Stoney Creek (although most are from the 90's).

Maybe King St... but Hwy 8 is all boxy 70s apartment buildings that look like ass. I really don't like that stretch. I take Hwy 8 from St. Catharines and always shudder coming into Stoney Creek.

Jon Dalton · #22 Posted **Jul 4, 2008, 7:33 PM**

I ride by this every week. It's much more impressive in that drawing than it is in real life. They did a good job of ensuring that none of the surroundings appear in the drawing.

omro · #23 Posted **Jul 9, 2008, 2:27 PM**

How much are the Hamilton units?

raisethehammer · #24 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 1:31 PM**

yea, it looks like they took out the surroundings and added that 20-storey guy standing there with a glass of wine.
Considering where this place is, he should have been holding a Hortons or a Slurpee.

DC83 · #25 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 1:52 PM**

^^ It's Burlington, try Starbucks & a Booster Juice HAHAHA crazy yuppies!

Developers use rediculously fake surroundings to sell their 'quiet, unique communities' to gullible buyers.

Look at sites like Summit Park, they protray a forest-like setting when in reality, this site was built on a former farm with little-to-no trees and the trees they do plant will likely reach about 1/4 to 1/2 their potential size due to the way they develop land now.

http://www.multi-area.com/single_fam...floorplans.asp

raisethehammer · #26 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 2:04 PM**

haha...yea, people are so gulible it's unreal. "country living in the city".
It'll take 70 years before the trees look like that, if they even plant any and don't kill them with all their pesticides and driveway salt.

highwater · #27 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 2:48 PM**

They won't even look like that in 70 years. DC's right. Modern developers use 'scorched earth' techniques, removing the best soil before building. There's a reason the trees are so big in Westdale and the Southwest, and it isn't just their age, it's the quality of the soils, quality that is lacking in new subdivisions (likely built on soils that were farmed unsustainabley even before the developers got their backhoes on them).

ryan_mcgreal · #28 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 3:11 PM**

Not only that, but the industrial machines used to build houses now compact the earth until it's like concrete. Even with a full 18 inches of high quality topsoil, trees wouldn't have a chance.

BrianE · #29 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 3:43 PM**

And the number of trees in the rendering is unrealistic as well. Getting developers to plant more than the absolute minimum number of trees per hectare is like banging your face against a wall.

raisethehammer · #30 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 4:22 PM**

why waste money on trees when you can buy some more cheesy 'pillars' from home depot to give the house a sense of prestige.

Jon Dalton · #31 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by omro

How much are the Hamilton units?

Not sure if you're referring to this building but it's starting at 160,000.
It's now 50% sold.

Jon Dalton · #32 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 4:54 PM**

Try looking at this from the opposite side as that shown on the rendering (from Appleby Line, that is). Much less appetizing.

omro · #33 Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Dalton

Not sure if you're referring to this building but it's starting at 160,000.
It's now 50% sold.

That's not a bad price, though depends on the size of the units. Good to know.

SteelTown · #34 Posted **Jul 22, 2008, 7:14 PM**

They are now advertising Ironstone on SSP Local: Hamilton now haha

raisethehammer · #35 Posted **Jul 29, 2008, 1:05 PM**

I love the ad they are using on SSP too - "reduce your carbon footprint".
Yea, cause we all know how environmentally friendly it is to live in north Burlington and drive to all the big box stores.

Jon Dalton · #36 Posted **Aug 13, 2008, 12:21 AM**

Reduce your carbon footprint, eh? That's just typical of the greenwashing hype that's taking the marketing world by storm, from Ford cars to plastic water bottles: "Sleek design uses 30% less plastic!"

A tour of your new neighbourhood:

Welcome home.

highwater · #37 Posted **Aug 13, 2008, 1:27 AM**

fastcarsfreedom · #38 Posted **Aug 13, 2008, 3:08 AM**

While it may amaze some of you that people go for the "country living in the city" concept--it is equally amazing how much all of you buy into your own hype too. Driveway salt? Compacted soil? Unsustainable farming? Architectural drawings are what they are--they've never represented "reality"--and no one buys a house at Summit Park thinking that it's going to look like it does in the sketch--they all visit the model home while it's sitting out in a field by itself.

As for the trees--I can't speculate. I live in a 70s subdivision--early scorched earth if you will--built off of farmland--I've seen the photos it was bulldozed flat and started from scratch--earth movers and all. Now, let me tell you, our neighborhood is full of mature trees--all of which have grown naturally and not been killed off by driveway salt and lawn spray--(which of course, no one in the city would dare use). I'm cool with your preference for an urban lifestyle--I think it's great--but please idle back your hype a little--people in the city drink Hortons coffee too...and lo and behold, people from the city drive out to box stores too--in our case, they drive a lot further than I do.

raisethehammer · #39 Posted **Aug 13, 2008, 3:11 AM**

sorry fastcars, but you've gotta admit the advertising for this place is a joke.
I don't know why you always bring up your town near Windsor. Nobody on here has ever made a negative comment about where you live. None of us even know where it is (I do now, but only cause I drove to Detroit).
The above pictures represent such a massive waste of your tax dollars and of the worlds energy supplies that you should care about it.
It's a joke.

fastcarsfreedom · #40 Posted **Aug 13, 2008, 3:31 AM**

I mention where I live as an example--because it's suburban--that's all. I'm certainly not thumping my chest and trying to defend it--since this is a Forum about lifestyle choices--I use my own as a point of reference. I don't live in an urban environment--I live in a suburban one--that's relevant to the discussion when arguments against that particular lifestyle choice drift from reasoned debate to foolishness about lawn spray and Tim Hortons.

I also take exception to the insinuation that I "don't care" merely because I disagree--it's downright shocking to me to be frank and smacks of myopia. It is possible, as shocking as it may be to your sensibilities, to look at the world with reasoned and intelligent eyes, and draw different conclusions than you have.

So, in a perfect world, where should I move? It would seem increased density in the suburbs is every bit as offensive as sprawl--reading the above comments about this building in Burlington.