Harbour Condos on The Bay | ? | 10 fl | Approved - Page 3

Dr Awesomesauce · #41 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 11:32 PM**

Eleven stories is a problem? I understand a few people furrowing their brows over 45 but 11???

ChildishGavino · #42 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 12:28 AM**

Welcome to Hamilton

lachlanholmes · #43 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 12:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamiltonBoyInToronto

Can't a bunch of us get together and start attending these meetings as a group? We have to start showing up

They're held at 9:30 by design, to keep people from being able to attend. Most people can't attend them. If they can, they have to take time off from their employment or education. They really ought to hold these in the evening.

ChildishGavino · #44 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 1:03 AM**

9:30 am or pm? Either way it’s a pain, but it depends on how much.

lachlanholmes · #45 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 7:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by childishgavino

9:30 am or pm? Either way it’s a pain, but it depends on how much.

am.

Jon Dalton · #46 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

Eleven stories is a problem? I understand a few people furrowing their brows over 45 but 11???

Likewise with the 15(!!) storey building proposed across the street from this. People were losing their shit at the public meeting, acting like it was the Burj Dubai or something. It's just a moderate sized apartment building. Perfect for downtown.

ChildishGavino · #47 Posted **Feb 1, 2019, 9:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamiltonForward

am.

Oh that is absolutely on purpose. What a rip.

lachlanholmes · #48 Posted **Feb 5, 2019, 6:02 PM**

Well, I went and spoke about this an hour ago.

Learned that they've appealed it to the LPAT now, so council couldn't approve or deny the application today.

What they did do is authorize the legal department to oppose this at LPAT. Alas. Here we go again.

ScreamingViking · #49 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 4:55 AM**

Good grief.

I can accept arguing over something like 20 or maybe even 15 storeys of height in this area (though I think that's fine too), but with a small lot the developer needs more than the zoning allows to make money... never mind that transit oriented development seems to be a foreign concept to Hamilton planners. There must be a compromise that will work for all, though 11 floors doesn't seem excessive. It's not likely to throw much shadow on other properties either, not with the rail corridor buffering it from the neighbourhood to the north.

But depending how forcefully they mean this line of critique, if everything "respected existing neighbourhood character" there would be no change, no new variety, nothing interestingly different added to the urban fabric.

[EDIT] By that logic, I have to wonder how Witton Lofts ever got approved on the street behind this. Too tall for its surroundings, too different from the existing neighbourhood character, clashes with the original school building at its base... someone at the city was asleep on the job for that one for sure.

Chronamut · #50 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 7:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

Good grief.

I can accept arguing over something like 20 or maybe even 15 storeys of height in this area (though I think that's fine too), but with a small lot the developer needs more than the zoning allows to make money... never mind that transit oriented development seems to be a foreign concept to Hamilton planners. There must be a compromise that will work for all, though 11 floors doesn't seem excessive. It's not likely to throw much shadow on other properties either, not with the rail corridor buffering it from the neighbourhood to the north.

But depending how forcefully they mean this line of critique, if everything "respected existing neighbourhood character" there would be no change, no new variety, nothing interestingly different added to the urban fabric.

I have to wonder how Witton Lofts ever got approved on the street behind this. Too tall for its surroundings, too different from the existing neighbourhood character, clashes with the original school building at its base... someone at the city was asleep on the job for that one for sure.

Exceptions seem to be made for any design that maintains a heritage facade. Look at the william thomas building.

Hence if you want height, take an existing building and build on top of it.

ScreamingViking · #51 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 3:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chronamut

Exceptions seem to be made for any design that maintains a heritage facade. Look at the william thomas building.

Hence if you want height, take an existing building and build on top of it.

If you're referring to my comment on Witton Lofts, I was being sarcastic -- I love that addition. I was just thinking that the 'respect character' critique would hold true on Murray St. just as much as Stuart and MacNab (yet the result for Witton is fantastic).

For Harbour Condos I guess they'll have to create their own faux-heritage base for the lower floors to get some traction with the DeRP and planning staff, incorporating that 1-storey brick frontage on the west side of the lot. Then maybe they'll get a variance approved for 5 floors... or dare to dream... 6!

Chronamut · #52 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 3:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

If you're referring to my comment on Witton Lofts, I was being sarcastic -- I love that addition. I was just thinking that the 'respect character' critique would hold true on Murray St. just as much as Stuart and MacNab (yet the result for Witton is fantastic).

For Harbour Condos I guess they'll have to create their own faux-heritage base for the lower floors to get some traction with the DeRP and planning staff, incorporating that 1-storey brick frontage on the west side of the lot. Then maybe they'll get a variance approved for 5 floors... or dare to dream... 6!

Maybe

That seems to be the citys vision going forward - a fusion of the old styles with the new. I personally am all for this - I can only take so many all glass and steel buildings, or boxy geometric buildings with no character that look like they were tossed together in autocad revit.

HamiltonBoyInToronto · #53 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 5:05 PM**

Honestly this needs to stop..... we can't let a hand full of people control or destroy progress in Hamilton because they don't understand growth and development (progress)
11 stories is acceptable in suburbia in most cities and thats why cities like Burlington and Oakville have prospered and grown.... this is in our downtown area and literally on top of the GO station.... which people complain isn't being used... we should be promoting 20 stories or residential development in an area like this and the people who cry about it should pack up and move to port dover !

Davis137 · #54 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 5:16 PM**

I really like the new set of renders for this project. Eventually more and more of the North end will get developed, and the area around the West Harbor will be in more and more demand...

King&James · #55 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 9:07 PM**

Agree, stop the lunacy or lets just force all suburban development to respect the height of farmland. If heritage facade is key for density, then buy out Custom house and extend out and upward.

Chronamut · #56 Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 2:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by King&James

Agree, stop the lunacy or lets just force all suburban development to respect the height of farmland. If heritage facade is key for density, then buy out Custom house and extend out and upward.

I'd be all for that.

lachlanholmes · #57 Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 2:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by King&James

Agree, stop the lunacy or lets just force all suburban development to respect the height of farmland. If heritage facade is key for density, then buy out Custom house and extend out and upward.

City staff say they believe 6-8 storeys would be appropriate for the site if the developer buys the house and land immediately south of the property.

LRTfan · #58 Posted **Feb 7, 2019, 2:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamiltonForward

City staff say they believe 6-8 storeys would be appropriate for the site if the developer buys the house and land immediately south of the property.

#unstoppable

TheRitsman · #59 Posted **Mar 31, 2019, 2:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamiltonForward

Well, I went and spoke about this an hour ago.

Learned that they've appealed it to the LPAT now, so council couldn't approve or deny the application today.

What they did do is authorize the legal department to oppose this at LPAT. Alas. Here we go again.

It's crazy to me that this was also denied. How do you find an LPAT case? I couldn't find it, and how long is LPAT taking?

lachlanholmes · #60 Posted **Apr 1, 2019, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRitsman

It's crazy to me that this was also denied. How do you find an LPAT case? I couldn't find it, and how long is LPAT taking?

This link here lists all municipalities, drill down into Hamilton and you'll find a list of all current OMB/LPAT cases.

And this link here is this specific development. No hearings or pre-hearings scheduled yet.