Comment 122638

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted March 20, 2018 at 13:47:29 in reply to Comment 122630

I agree that we need to look at both costs and benefits: my post was intended to be the "costs" complement to your original article which highlighted the benefits (mostly just the benefits of high density), and didn't fully explore the possible costs. The general tone of the article was to dismiss all concerns as NIMBY arguments and claim that it is self-evident that the increased density outweighs any possible costs and is better than the alternatives.

30 storeys is arbitrary, but surely height is a relevant factor. Every city I know considers building height as a relevant criterion and increased height is often traded for improvements and amenities.

What evidence is there that the retail will actually open onto the street? I haven't seen any renderings showing business entrances onto the sidewalk or shops visible from the street.

I'm not saying this building should not be built, but there are legitimate questions and room for improvement. And there is also a legitimate debate to be had on whether very tall buildings are the main way Hamilton should try to increase density downtown. One of the early articles on RTH was entitled "High Quality Densification Without Towers":

https://raisethehammer.org/blog/362/high...

Have we now decided that densification must be achieved with towers?

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds