Comment 122720

By JasonL (registered) | Posted March 26, 2018 at 15:14:20 in reply to Comment 122717

This project isn't held to the proposed escarpment height limit. This has been in the works for a few years, while the new limit hasn't even been passed into law yet. I can't keep up with all the reasonings given for the height limit. One day it's views of the water, next day it's views of the escarpment from downtown, next day it's the 'defining characteristic' point. The public meetings for that study were crowded with neighbourhood association folks looking to keep heights low in direct response to this project. The same civic administration that happily approved 3 new buildings taller than the escarpment in the last couple years is still in place. Whether all future downtown planning in a major city should be dictated by a handful of people focused on their own hood is a discussion for another day, but regardless, I don't agree with the conclusion that we should cap building heights.

If allowing any building taller than the escarpment will result in it NOT being the defining characteristic of the lower city, than that ship sailed 45 years ago. IF the escarpment still is the defining characteristic even after having buildings taller than it for 45 years, it will remain the defining characteristic 45 years from now with a few more buildings taller than it.

Regarding retail, my personal preference would probably be to have some street entrances, but I've also come to really enjoy the new modern mini-retail complexes at the base of new developments in cities such as Toronto, Vancouver, Singapore and others. Hamilton's experience with such spaces generally involves older spots like Terminal Towers, Right House etc. Even without street entrances, these large, bright units will animate the street and be far more interesting than what we see at the base of virtually every other tower in Durand.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds