[berklon]

wish theyd demolish the bank of nova scotia too - the remaining buildings are the epitomy of bland.

I like the Scotiabank building. They could probably replace the glass and make that part look a bit more modern, while still maintaining the concrete around it (although it could probably use a cleaning).

 

[Chronamut]

I like the Scotiabank building. They could probably replace the glass and make that part look a bit more modern, while still maintaining the concrete around it (although it could probably use a cleaning).

I will admit they did do a nice even look for the front - I just fear anything put in the gap left over will be more of the same kinda look, and then there will be nothing for anyone to look at.

 

[Sunnyside]

I will admit they did do a nice even look for the front - I just fear anything put in the gap left over will be more of the same kinda look, and then there will be nothing for anyone to look at.

I wouldn’t dismiss the chance of a rebuild just yet. A large number of planning and architecture firms (among the others) have had a front row seat to this entire debacle, and the vacant lot isn’t going away. You cannot hide this loss from the public eye, like pre-restoration buildings on James and King William.

…but, those been rejuvenated, while say the Tivoli has zero presence to make its case. And these buildings are/were certainly ahead of James Street’s in terms of public visibility.

Attention is ramping up a bit, and the closer the city’s feet are to the fire, the more they’re gonna try to singe the developer’s as a response… so we must wait. But I think we aren’t out of this current episode yet.

 

[Chronamut]

I wouldn’t dismiss the chance of a rebuild just yet. A large number of planning and architecture firms (among the others) have had a front row seat to this entire debacle, and the vacant lot isn’t going away. You cannot hide this loss from the public eye, like pre-restoration buildings on James and King William.

…but, those been rejuvenated, while say the Tivoli has zero presence to make its case. And these buildings are/were certainly ahead of James Street’s in terms of public visibility.

Attention is ramping up a bit, and the closer the city’s feet are to the fire, the more they’re gonna try to singe the developer’s as a response… so we must wait. But I think we aren’t out of this current episode yet.

Call me a pessimist, but these buildings have been in the public eye rotting away for decades, and no-one did anything about it. All the proposals went nowhere. It's the biggest downtown scandal since the cutting down of gore park's trees.. the first time. The city is not known for making the right choices, even at the best of times.

Lert's be honest - blanchard let this happen so that he NEVER had to use the facades, at ALL. This is not a company that makes quality stuff or runs things in a quality way. I don't think they give a SHIT about heritage preservation. They oversee cheap rentals that they BARELY oversee properly. Unless forced I don't see it happening... even the spec article said they had zero confidence that the heritage pieces would see the light of day.

"
Blanchard said “heritage polices and economic conditions have delayed” the consortium’s redevelopment plans.
Carroll, meanwhile, said he has “absolutely zero” confidence in the future of the dismantled heritage features.
“We had made the best of a bad situation,” he said, referring to the plan to at least save some of the facades, if not the buildings themselves.
“And then the builder sits on his thumb and does nothing.”
"

I'd love to be proven wrong, but when it comes to stuff like this, I have a pretty good track record of being right.. buuut we'll see. I don't see those pieces being re-used though - they damaged them in the demolition. Maybe use them as reference images for some type of reconstruction - hopefully not in the style of their "reconstruction" for the tivoli facade. Sick of half-assed designs. Core urban is the only people I feel confident assigned a reconstruction to. MAAAYBE liuna but they half-assed the william thomas facade too, specifically the middle part, where instead of making the middle pieces narrower as was the design they just copy pasted more of the longer pieces from the other parts and then removed elements in the middle with new stone to make it look like it never existed - that was cost-cutting laziness.

I would however love to see a reconstruction with all NEW stone - not only was the original stone damaged, but parts of it also appeared warped by the centuries as gravity took its toll. Love to see it in its prime - and the good news is it appears the facade was only ever a thin veneer so that would make it easier, but still costly, as it would most likely have to once again be outsourced to someone outside the city. Core urban can do simple "stone" designs, but things like the florets in those arches might require more detail.

 

[Sunnyside]

Call me a pessimist, but these buildings have been in the public eye rotting away for decades, and no-one did anything about it. All the proposals went nowhere. It's the biggest downtown scandal since the cutting down of gore park's trees.. the first time. The city is not known for making the right choices, even at the best of times.

Lert's be honest - blanchard let this happen so that he NEVER had to use the facades, at ALL. This is not a company that makes quality stuff or runs things in a quality way. I don't think they give a SHIT about heritage preservation. They oversee cheap rentals that they BARELY oversee properly. Unless forced I don't see it happening... even the spec article said they had zero confidence that the heritage pieces would see the light of day.

"
Blanchard said “heritage polices and economic conditions have delayed” the consortium’s redevelopment plans.
Carroll, meanwhile, said he has “absolutely zero” confidence in the future of the dismantled heritage features.
“We had made the best of a bad situation,” he said, referring to the plan to at least save some of the facades, if not the buildings themselves.
“And then the builder sits on his thumb and does nothing.”
"

I'd love to be proven wrong, but when it comes to stuff like this, I have a pretty good track record of being right.. buuut we'll see. I don't see those pieces being re-used though - they damaged them in the demolition. Maybe use them as reference images for some type of reconstruction - hopefully not in the style of their "reconstruction" for the tivoli facade. Sick of half-assed designs. Core urban is the only people I feel confident assigned a reconstruction to. MAAAYBE liuna but they half-assed the william thomas facade too, specifically the middle part, where instead of making the middle pieces narrower as was the design they just copy pasted more of the longer pieces from the other parts and then removed elements in the middle with new stone to make it look like it never existed - that was cost-cutting laziness.

I would however love to see a reconstruction with all NEW stone - not only was the original stone damaged, but parts of it also appeared warped by the centuries as gravity took its toll. Love to see it in its prime - and the good news is it appears the facade was only ever a thin veneer so that would make it easier, but still costly, as it would most likely have to once again be outsourced to someone outside the city. Core urban can do simple "stone" designs, but things like the florets in those arches might require more detail.

I can’t quite get to a more fulsome reply right now, but yes, the developer obviously has no interest in restoring…

…But developers have no interest in a lot of things.

From their POV, It is much much cheaper to do a rebuild (original material or otherwise) than to have to restore them in place. They can use old or new brick, doesn’t matter.

So, even if the powers that be compel the developer to do something, as long as the buildings are gone, Blanchard’s won. Thats the pessimistic side. But, they’re still delusional if they didn’t weigh rebuilding into their pro forma, but did cost out full restoration (as a non-starter).

All depends how deep the city is in Blanchards pocket… Any un-compromised city staff or councillors will make sure they never see an application approval or permit. And if it IS that bad, we have a bigger problem. Part of me wonders if it was all set in stone before current council, and these inspections/orders were too little too late.

 

[BCTed]

So a big part of the centre of Hamilton is now a pile of dirt. I guess three general things can happen:
1) It sits as dirt for many years.
2) It does not sit as dirt for too many years and something crappy gets built.
3) Someone influential takes the reins and it does not sit as dirt for too many years and something significant and/or signature and/or valuable and/or transformative gets built.

I fear it will be closest to 1.

 

[innsertnamehere]

It will absolutely be 1. It's what Blanchard has done to his other demolished properties around downtown, including the gravel lot immediately next door on James St. This one will be no different.

 

[BCTed]

It will absolutely be 1. It's what Blanchard has done to his other demolished properties around downtown, including the gravel lot immediately next door on James St. This one will be no different.

If that happens, it will be a horrible symbol of Hamilton's ineptitude.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Unfortunately the City cannot compel Blanchard to build anything beyond maintain the property in a basic state of cleanliness. It's emblematic of an inept landowner, who unfortunately owns a decent chunk of downtown.

 

[Chronamut]

Unfortunately the City cannot compel Blanchard to build anything beyond maintain the property in a basic state of cleanliness. It's emblematic of an inept landowner, who unfortunately owns a decent chunk of downtown.

They CAN however tax them more for the lots being empty, and at least they can't be turned into parking lots.

Honestly, I'd prefer option 1 over option 2. After all, blanchard won't live forever lol..

The robinsons lot is a shame.. but part of me is always hopeful that at least it means something impactful can be built on this eventually.

I hope the city does the right thing and shuts down any generic storefront option design they make. This should NOT be an entirely glassed in storefront - that would be an insult to this stretch. And the proposed design they had before was insulting - that whole stretch was basically just a very tiny shallow useage while the majority behind it was parking - we have giant plots - 75% of all footprints on the ground should NOT be for cars.

 

[BCTed]

Unfortunately the City cannot compel Blanchard to build anything beyond maintain the property in a basic state of cleanliness. It's emblematic of an inept landowner, who unfortunately owns a decent chunk of downtown.

True. I did mean ineptitude of Hamilton as an overall entity as opposed to just the City of Hamilton administration.

 

[KingJames]

I know I have been advocating on this Board a Vacant Land Tax, but this land speculator acts are so egregious, should there not be an uproar at Silly Hall. Absolutely heads must roll in the Inspection / Property Standards area of City Administration.

 

[Sunnyside]

Unfortunately the City cannot compel Blanchard to build anything beyond maintain the property in a basic state of cleanliness. It's emblematic of an inept landowner, who unfortunately owns a decent chunk of downtown.

What’s his angle? We’re talking about him as if he’s a person, but developers/RE manager types typically come as a corporation.

Basically, are we waiting on a ‘bad guy’ (and their practices) to pass away like Gary Bettman? Or are the issues going to remain as long as the corporation does?

Tangentially, curious if they’ve ever built anything. If not, have they ever sold their properties? Or are they just a hog? Cartoonishly villainous if so.

These are questions that sound like they're from the earlier SSP days… just trying to catch up on the ‘established’ information. I try to pretend the days of these things mattering are over, but they clearly aren’t.

 

[Chronamut]

What’s his angle? We’re talking about him as if he’s a person, but developers/RE manager types typically come as a corporation.

Basically, are we waiting on a ‘bad guy’ (and their practices) to pass away like Gary Bettman? Or are the issues going to remain as long as the corporation does?

Tangentially, curious if they’ve ever built anything. If not, have they ever sold their properties? Or are they just a hog? Cartoonishly villainous if so.

These are questions that sound like they're from the earlier SSP days… just trying to catch up on the ‘established’ information. I try to pretend the days of these things mattering are over, but they clearly aren’t.

If we wait long enough the downtown is gonna start to look pre-pre-confederation - with half the spots just unbuilt wilderness lol..