Hamilton Hamilton Line B LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[DC83]

Downtown Hamilton is in serious need of renewal, and permanent transit is known to be one of the best drivers of improvement. Heritage protection doesn't mean saving everything. You have to be willing to lose a few buildings in order to save the city.

A few buildings?! There are literally dozens planned for demolition!!

This on top of the hundreds that have been demolished since the 'urban renewal' craze of the 60-70s (which didn't actually stop in Hamilton, see Gore Park buildings).

For an outsider to say "It's just a few buildings!" is completely ignorant to what has happened to Hamilton, our history and our built form.
Hamilton cleared masses of lots with historic structures in the King-James area (now referred to as Jackson Square), York Blvd (nothing replaced the torn down bldgs to this day). There's also the huge sprawling lots around King William/John as well as Jackson/Catherine.

 

[DC83]

Non-architect here: what's so special about the Scotia/Hakim at King-Sherman that I'm missing?

Toronto May have a bunch of these bldgs left, we in Hamilton do not. That's what makes them special.

Again, Hamilton tore down a majority of historic or unique structures during urban renewal (not just downtown, but throughout the entire lower city). To lose even one more with unique characteristics (to Hamilton) would be really sad.

And yes, the loss of affordable housing in a city full of ppl on social services is a HUGE issue. When TO started to gentrify in the 90s-00s, a lot of those who couldn't afford your city anymore moved to Hamilton. Where do they go now? Brantford? Ppl have the right to live where they want without fear that their housing be torn down with zero plans to replace any of it.

 

[TOareaFan]

And yes, the loss of affordable housing in a city full of ppl on social services is a HUGE issue. When TO started to gentrify in the 90s-00s, a lot of those who couldn't afford your city anymore moved to Hamilton. Where do they go now? Brantford? Ppl have the right to live where they want without fear that their housing be torn down with zero plans to replace any of it.

Putting those two bolded parts together....you get an illegal act! If you remove any rental units from the rental stock in Ontario you are legally obliged to replace them.

I feel your passion for Hamilton, but on that score I don't think you have anything to fear.

 

[DC83]

There is a choice.

Do we complain and bitch (or join the NOLRT team)?
Or do we ACTUALLY do something?

We should be banding together for solutions. For example, when a corner is cut, only the ground floor needs to be slightly expropriated if there only needs the second floor to cantilever over the sidewalk by one-half meter (e.g. If it does not enroach intro road allowance, just slightly over sidewalk). Delta can easily structurally do that, for example. But this is good for upIt has been done elsewhere. Also, the most historic building facades can be disassebled and re-built a few meters set back. One of you put together a heritage preservation group and I'm in -- I'd let my spouse know because he has a very big interest in heritage stuff. One of our presentations brought up the subject of heritage preservation. And reach out to existing groups (if they are organized enough to band together on this).

LLMMFFAAOO!! You've got a lot of faith in developers if you think they're going to spend extra money to dissemble a whole structure carefully, store said materials during construction, then pay a restoration specialist to put it all back together.
The Province won't be funding everyone's projects like they did with LIUNA's Lister properties. Nice to dream tho eh

Here's a better solution to The Delta stop. Cut it! Replace it with a stop that makes sense at Gage & King so ppl who actually use transit can use it to connect to a bus, not for old ladies to stroll through a damn park!

 

[stanko]

LLMMFFAAOO!! You've got a lot of faith in developers if you think they're going to spend extra money to dissemble a whole structure carefully, store said materials during construction, then pay a restoration specialist to put it all back together.

Of course they won't unless someone tells them they need to. This is how things get done in a city where people care

 

[jje1000]

Now, if all of those areas will be immediately replaced by new buildings, its less of a concern, though still a bit of a shame since old buildings add flavor to a city. If those lots just end up empty though, well thats another matter entirely.

Let's not kid ourselves- those lots will probably be empty for a while after the LRT is built until some developer assembles the entire block and puts up a tower.

 

[animatronic]

A few buildings?! There are literally dozens planned for demolition!!

This on top of the hundreds that have been demolished since the 'urban renewal' craze of the 60-70s (which didn't actually stop in Hamilton, see Gore Park buildings).

For an outsider to say "It's just a few buildings!" is completely ignorant to what has happened to Hamilton, our history and our built form.
Hamilton cleared masses of lots with historic structures in the King-James area (now referred to as Jackson Square), York Blvd (nothing replaced the torn down bldgs to this day). There's also the huge sprawling lots around King William/John as well as Jackson/Catherine.

It would be a mistake to equate the LRT with Jackson Square. Hamilton has shot itself in the foot plenty over the last 40 years but this is a different issue. Imagine if Toronto said no to the Bloor Danforth subway because of the hundreds of houses getting torn down

If you don't fix transit in Hamilton it's just a matter of time before Main and King look like Barton and Cannon. You need Mac students spread through the city. You need Toronto commuters to live more than a block from the GO stations. The people who live in affordable units need to get to their jobs.

One hopes they are minimising impact but if that's what it takes to make it work it's a good investment.

 

[TOareaFan]

LLMMFFAAOO!! You've got a lot of faith in developers if you think they're going to spend extra money to dissemble a whole structure carefully, store said materials during construction, then pay a restoration specialist to put it all back together.
The Province won't be funding everyone's projects like they did with LIUNA's Lister properties. Nice to dream tho eh

LLMMFFAAOO!! if you think that is what I said! The law does not require that the building is rebuilt from the original bricks...it just says that if you remove 30 rental units you have to replace them with 30 (or more) new units.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

My only thought: is the LRT threatening/demolishing all these buildings, or is it maintaining all those car lanes to keep serving Hamilton's car addiction?

 

[dowlingm]

LLMMFFAAOO!! if you think that is what I said! The law does not require that the building is rebuilt from the original bricks...it just says that if you remove 30 rental units you have to replace them with 30 (or more) new units.

The law regarding conversion or demolition of rental in Hamilton would flow from s. 99.1 Municipal Act, which governs properties where there are 6 or more units. I've looked at the City of Toronto bylaw (which flows from City of Toronto Act s.111) and what I don't see is an infrastructure expropriation scenario. I find it hard to believe that there isn't a get-out for cities such that they do not have to replace in that scenario. That said, the takings above probably leave room for some midrise rental to be constructed on some of the remainder plots of land, especially if consolidated.

 

[dowlingm]

Toronto May have a bunch of these bldgs left, we in Hamilton do not. That's what makes them special.

Again, Hamilton tore down a majority of historic or unique structures during urban renewal (not just downtown, but throughout the entire lower city). To lose even one more with unique characteristics (to Hamilton) would be really sad.

And yes, the loss of affordable housing in a city full of ppl on social services is a HUGE issue. When TO started to gentrify in the 90s-00s, a lot of those who couldn't afford your city anymore moved to Hamilton. Where do they go now? Brantford? Ppl have the right to live where they want without fear that their housing be torn down with zero plans to replace any of it.

You are conflating two issues here. A Hakim Optical is obviously not providing social housing. It's a one storey box which to me has no distinguishing characteristics. I'm not an architect so I might miss some things but I have a suspicion you aren't either or you would have come up with a better reason. In any event, a browse of streetview shows several vacant or low density lots along King in the vicinity to which a building of actual merit could be relocated either by being jacked up or reconstruction. The problem of course is that some Hamilton councillors seem bent on vetoing things which improve the project (Bay stop, for example) so it's not unlikely that Hamilton council might be unable to actually do such swaps because of the wreckers ability to prevent the funds required from being allocated.

I'm curious as to what you (DC83) think is the correct course here? Should Hamilton abandon rapid/reserved lane transit on King entirely? Only build what can be afforded underground? Something else?

 

[mdrejhon]

My only thought: is the LRT threatening/demolishing all these buildings, or is it maintaining all those car lanes to keep serving Hamilton's car addiction?

This, this, thissity-this.

Let's just make Main 2-way, and deal with huge lane reductions around the LRT stops instead. The heritage group can also work to do. I'd love to help amplify this, but we need more groups to help out and working together. It will require a lot of fighting to even just reduce several LRT stop by a single lane, etc -- but that can be enough to save lots more heritage buildings.

One of the first things that can be done to publicize this in a way to rally the groups together, before demolitions occur. The traditional design-to-30% before RFQ doesn't necessarily mean it's too late to remove a lane (or even two) at LRT stops. King thru delta really needs to simply be a local street, rather than a throughfare.

And of course, Main 2-way advocacy can also make a big difference (spinoff to heritage preservation by reducing pressure for lane requirements at stops), though that can be a political hot potato that needs to be carefully timed with 2018 electioneering & doing it as a detour trial during construction to help soften opposition to eventually making it permanent.

For those who do not realize this, stop laughing from the sidelines, look at the forest and not the trees. Target the bigger heritage preservation opportunities, buddies! If you aren't, I bet you score low in chess, not thinking ahead.

 

[dowlingm]

What are the chances of a 2-way Main alternative getting through council? Is the problem that any savings from not having to expropriate on King would accrue to the province/project and not the City?

 

[mdrejhon]

Environment Project Report (EPR) Addendum is now out.

Those paying attention, over 3,000 pages of documents.
http://hamilton.siretechnologies.com/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1147&doctype=AGENDA

Then click Section 7.1 to show the list of most of the documents.
The biggest document cluster (not the only one) is Section 7.1 where there is a long list of supporting materials:


Some interesting sub-documents (not too big) that I was able to read quickly enough, are:
- EPR Addendum (2nd link)
- Geotechnical Report ("Appendix C_8" link)

For those paying attention to expropriations, look at the Volume 3 CHERS (Cultural Heritage Evaulation Report) which can provide a jump point for local heritage-preservation advocacies.

The March 28th (meeting agenda) City Council meeting is accepting public delegations, any member of the public can request to speak for 5 minutes in front of Mayor Fred and city councillors.

 

[innsertnamehere]

looking at the design plates, the grade seperation at the CP crossing will be interesting. Looks like a pretty unique piece of infrastructure being placed mid road like that while the regular lanes remain at grade.