Raise the Hammer

Naturally, I'm going to be seen as a partial contrarian here, but seeing as my monthly dues were just paid, I've no problem with that...

I want Hamilton to move forward. But at the same time...and I might be lacerated for making this comparison, but hey; my dues for the Laceration Club were just paid, too...

The true definition of 'success' is finding your best place. You know, what you're meant to be. The Festival of Friends began as a gathering in Gage Park and somewhere along the way, someone decided that in order for it to fulfill its destiny (subjectivity in full-force here), it had to move. I'm not saying it shouldn't have, but maybe I'm saying 'We need to be able to recognize what 'success' is.'

I'm wary of Hamilton trying to play 'catch-up' with a place like Taranna. Which, not tapping into the longstanding insecurity this city's always had with That Place Around The End of The Lake, we don't need to. I don't want Hamilton to be a 'little Toronto'. And maybe this is part of how I react when it comes to the notion of 450' behemoths in Hamilton: that in our near-desperation to get out of this funk and be taken seriously, we're going to try to overcompensate.

I get that we need more density. I don't need to be convinced of this reality. But seeing as so much of the lower city is never going to contain the kind of density that large projects provide, why is it necessary to go the behemoth route? I'm no urban planner, so I'll ask those better qualified and equipped: is it not possible to develop all that's currently available to develop in the downtown core and not go this 'super-high' route? Can't we still have the needed density in our core without completely going to a form that I just can't see as being appropriate for a city our size? (Which begs the question 'How do you envision Downtown Hamilton in 25 and 50 years?')

Yours in rabid mystoneycreeking...