Chronamut
Senior Member
The hub is one time-ravaged building - I don't imagine it will escape the wrecking ball.
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
The hub is one time-ravaged building - I don't imagine it will escape the wrecking ball.
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
There's a proposal right next door. Perhaps they will acquire this property as well. I bet Lamb has his eye on it.
Chris R.
Senior Member
Lamb is apparently buying up a bunch of properties in this area so I wouldn't be surprised.
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
Wonder what this area will look like in 5 years.
Stec
Active Member
A lot better than it does now lol
Chronamut
Senior Member
Well, a lot DIFFERENT than it does now is probably the overall more accurate claim - different isn't always better lol..
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
All depends on if the Good Shepherd leaves or not.
KingJames
Active Member
Residential tower project on Philpott Church site hits snag
Plans for a twin tower condo development on the site of Philpott Memorial Church appear to have hit a snag. The congregation of Philpott have asked the city for more time to conclude a deal with the builder, Empire homes to secure the property. The matter came to light on the agenda of the...
bayobserver.ca
More delays.... Chalk it up to soft condo market
Chronamut
Senior Member
aka people aren't willing to pay the insanely overinflated prices right now..Residential tower project on Philpott Church site hits snag
Plans for a twin tower condo development on the site of Philpott Memorial Church appear to have hit a snag. The congregation of Philpott have asked the city for more time to conclude a deal with the builder, Empire homes to secure the property. The matter came to light on the agenda of the...
More delays.... Chalk it up to soft condo market
PaperSun
Active Member
No heritage protection for downtown Hamilton church eyed for residential towers
Philpott Memorial Church leadership says deal with developers in jeopardy.
www.thespec.com
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Quite a bit of drama here.
Philpott wants to turn the parking lot into a commercial lot - literally just put up parking meters and charge for it instead of leaving it gated off until the development market improves.
This was approved at the CoA. City of Hamilton Staff instead want this decision appealed and fought at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
The applicant has filed a rather scathing letter on the matter identifying that it should be approved according to the City's own policy framework and that the alternative is to simply leave the lot abandoned.
I have to say that I really don't get why City Staff are so upset about this that they want to spend money to appeal the decision to force a charity organization to leave their property abandoned. It really doesn't make a lot of sense.
City Staff as a whole seem to be giving the church consistent problem after problem and roadblock after roadblock on this file. I'm sure it's incredibly frustrating.
Philpott wants to turn the parking lot into a commercial lot - literally just put up parking meters and charge for it instead of leaving it gated off until the development market improves.
This was approved at the CoA. City of Hamilton Staff instead want this decision appealed and fought at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
The applicant has filed a rather scathing letter on the matter identifying that it should be approved according to the City's own policy framework and that the alternative is to simply leave the lot abandoned.
I have to say that I really don't get why City Staff are so upset about this that they want to spend money to appeal the decision to force a charity organization to leave their property abandoned. It really doesn't make a lot of sense.
City Staff as a whole seem to be giving the church consistent problem after problem and roadblock after roadblock on this file. I'm sure it's incredibly frustrating.
Chris R.
Senior Member
I think the issue is potentially similar to defending trademark and copyright. If they don't the policy around allowing no new surface parking lots could be kaput using this as precedent.
I intended to provide a comment on this, but I'm of the opinion it should have been time limited to five years. The main issue I have with the paid lot is it could be incredibly lucrative with TD Coliseum and a development could just never happen.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
As the letter helpfully points out, it's not a new lot though. I get it for new lots (and even then have some issues with it.. parking like it or not is a major issue in business attraction and retention in the downtown), but this is literally an existing surface lot that the City wants to spend thousands fighting them putting up some parking meters for. It's absurd.