Comment 44088

By Shawn Selway (anonymous) | Posted July 26, 2010 at 22:48:34

Not sure where Jason or H+H gets the idea that northenders want to gate the area. Personally I have no problem with crowds or cars: enjoying as I do the privilege - broadly subsidized, as Jason and H+H point out -- of living in the neighbourhood, I just walk to the fireworks. Also umpteen other events through the year. Eat your hearts out. However, I think that on this question we're discussing, which is rather large, where you live should not disqualify you from commenting. All motives are mixed anyway. Otherwise we would all be angelic robots, not a condition I see much of. It is a land use question. What is the highest and best use for that site? On that question, H+H's remarks are interesting, because they actually contain a thought about that point. I agree that Setting Sail guidelines for Barton-Tiffany do resemble Meadowlands density. I think that some of Meadowlands gets a bad rap. It is not all that sprawly. But what negates the density is the vast parking lot plateau with the individual retail boxes. In any case, more "urban and urbane" would indeed be preferable, and that particular site does offer that potential. I think the consultants may have set the bar low there out of uncertainty about how much investment could realistically be expected. Towers I just can't see much use for in central Hamilton, because we have so much empty footage, brown, beige and otherwise, that building up would just thin the fabric. One or two glamour spires maybe... But I'm not sure and that's maybe another discussion. Barton Tiffany seem to me to have more potential than the other two residential sites in Setting Sail, but really, there is nothing in principal that would keep one from building well on either of them either. Nor is there some cosmic law that says a stadium must be bad. But at least with regard to the mediocre proposals for Barton Tiffany we have some notion of what is envisaged. For the stadium we have none that I know of, except that meaningless pair of CAD renderings prepped for the Commonwealth Games bid book. Am I wrong in thinking that? Also, H+H, you have offered a concrete example of what you think is decent residential. Can you offer an example of a good "multi use sports complex"? Setting aside for the moment the unique character of the hillside site. No two sites of that size are going to match, unless they are on the flat with no surrounding constraints at all, in which case they would be irrelevant. Worse, exurban.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds