christiesplits
Senior Member
Yesterday.
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
KingJames
Active Member
Chronamut
Senior Member
It looks so.. stark all there by its lonesome..
berklon
Active Member
Which is why, although I think these developments are great, I always hope they build them closer (or in) the core... and just build out from there.
Chronamut
Senior Member
The plot directly to the left of it has been a known development void for decades - one of the truly rare full block development potentials, but nothing ever gets proposed to be built on it.
Last edited:
Wigs
Active Member
This development will surely beget more development in the immediate area
Hawrylyshyn
Active Member
I mean, there are already quite a few proposed in the immediate area. Looks out of place now but (hopefully) in the near future it won't be.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
The landholding 'culture' of Hamilton would explain that. If people aren't developing other prime lots, then the real golden geese won't be developed either. In short, everyone's got the idea its not time to develop their lots "yet"; the entire boom of the last 10 years has been built by mostly new players locally, and/or mostly on the periphery of the core on 'opportunistic' lots, including the Design District. Which, ironically, proves something is off closer to King and James...
I have more on this thought; I can DM anyone interested. Point is, this practice of nothing is doing the opposite of what the core's landowners theoretically want. They just sit and prevent any sort of domino effect from materializing. It makes you wonder if parking is the point, but I digress. More to my point, this all has the effect of "the better your land is, the less you should do with it" (Jackson Square is a major culprit, too, ofc).
What I will say for the dream parcel, is it isn't shackled by some vision from the city, like others might try to impose. I genuinely think the owner(s) are making hand over fist with parking, and are among those seeing downtown as the ultimate 'passive income generator'. Even if the central city still isn't at 100% health per se, it is now broadly healthier than downtown economically. And that is not solely the fault of the city, or shelters and homeless; some of it is certainly these 'stakeholders'.
legoswmonkey
New Member
Would you say this paralysis is also behind the lack of development around West Harbour GO, Jamesville situation notwithstanding? The building going up at James and Barton is a good addition (Tower crane recently went up) but I really would expect more TOD near there given its future as a hub.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
The number of new units underway in central hamilton has exploded over the last decade - it's not going to go from 0 to 100 over night. There is only so much demand.
Chris R.
Senior Member
This has always been my "meh" behind the height limit. If we had 60 storey towers, we'd likely have even more parking lots remaining, and less spread of the good economic benefits of people roaming the downtown looking to partake in urban activities.
I also think there are much larger issues in the development pipeline for Hamilton to deal with (parking is resolved finally).
Wigs
Active Member
If the third tower is built it's like 90 storeys on one parcel of land! 90 storeys equiv and around 900 units. That's some serious density.
KingJames
Active Member
I would have been happy with 2 at 45! Oh well, maybe they could pivot to rental, regardless this is an area of the downtown that needed some love, and very happy that they were able to move ahead and reap the rewards from 600+- units. Makes the other development posers (land speculators) look stupid with their investment backers.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
I don’t see my point as being strictly limited to residential, and moreso regards the location of any downtown development- namely that this lot wasn’t exactly the lowest hanging fruit. And I discuss a bit below too.
The revitalization of the core is contingent on the key players… playing ball. Nary a foray into new offices for small firms. I guess you could say I want some sensible speculation, perhaps it will find markets.
I don’t like the height limit- and I used to agree on distribution, but there’s a paradox. Sometimes numbers work better with more floors and units. Maybe, bigger players bring GTA demand- like Emblem and others have shown is possible.
Anecdotally, across the 905, more height rarely precludes further development in a given growth centre. The case for the limit is contra to what’s been playing out around us. K-W is also a crystal-clear counterpoint.
Anyhow. What do you see as issues?
Sunnyside
Senior Member
I mean it’s a similar condition, paralysis that is. I don’t think the landowners are really well equipped to develop, at least based on how little has actually come together.
Core Urban is the exact sort of newcomer we need, building quality on the fringes today but should be right in the core. They’re welcome anywhere they can get the land in my books.