On The Waterfront II

I've scanned in a copy of the new plans for the Hamilton waterfront, for the benefit of anyone who may not have been at last night's presentation. Click on the images for the full-size versions.

I strongly support redevelopment of the waterfront. I'm in favour of relocating the docks and the Front Street car parks and finding new berths for the cruise ships so they don't block the water view. So I'm glad that the issue is receiving this kind of attention.

But do we really need a development this big? This project involves reclaiming a lot of land (if you look closely at the plan, you can see a dashed red line which marks the existing shoreline) and would cost a staggering $639 million. Much of it is earmarked for offices, apartments and a new hotel. Is that really what we want?

Perhaps the office space is a necessary quid pro quo for the Corporation agreeing to relocate the docks, something they have long resisted because of the loss of revenue. However, I would prefer a less ambitious project that reclaims less land and eschews offices and apartments in favour of more waterfront parkland. After all, the aim of the project is to open up the harbour. There seems little sense in merely replacing one obstruction with another.

Initial reader comment on the new plan can be found here.

Comments

[Monique on 23.03.06 at 00:31]

I was excited to read about the proposal when I checked out the online Gazette. The proposal does seem massive and extensive. I guess it is planning for the long term. I lived in Bermuda in the 60's as a child and still hang on to the very small island mentality. Underground parking in Bermuda -- no way!!!!! But you are dealing with someone who is still coming to terms with losing many of the guest houses, cottage colonies, that once were the mainstay of Bermuda tourism. Always the fiscally consevative one, where is the money going to come from and at what expense? I gather from reading the Gazette online on a daily basis that there are major issues such as housing that need to be addressed.

[Slowhand on 23.03.06 at 06:49]

Um..... where is White's Island?!!

[newbi on 23.03.06 at 06:52]

It all looks cool, though I think overly ambitious. However the location of the cruise ship dock is crazy. The amount of windage created by those things is huge, the wind often comes from the west and a small problem will leave it parked on whites Island!

[Tiger Bay on 23.03.06 at 08:14]

I'd point out that the Corporation of Hamilton has an election in a few weeks, including the mayoral position. If you are Bermudian (company or individual) and own or rent space in Hamilton, you are elegible to vote.

We need improvements to the waterfront - but this one is totally insensitive to the history and needs of the City. It does not enhance Hamilton so much as drop a new one in front of it. One that happens to be totally owned by the Corporation!

[Zoom on 23.03.06 at 08:24]

Nice big "park" areas on the west and east of that map that don't exist.

[Yummy on 23.03.06 at 08:38]

10 years to complete? But immigration will have to send back all the people that they will need to bring in for the job six years in.....

or would this be an exception?

[Adjustah on 23.03.06 at 09:04]

The good news is that the seven storey monstrosity isn't on the map either.

[Tiger Bay on 23.03.06 at 09:09]

Should the proposed large modern buildings be built, there would be massive pressure on the owners of Front Street properties to tear down and rebuild in order to compete. I think you'd see an array of proposals for 7 story buildings!

[Bda_Rock on 23.03.06 at 10:39]

We usually have 3 and sometime 3 cruise ships in at once... I only see a spot for one. Where will the others go? Bahamas?
Also, is the $639 million a Government number? If so, in real money isn't that $1.3 billion?

[silencedogood on 23.03.06 at 10:49]

I thought there was adequate parkspace.

My one concern was why they would want to build another hotel to compete with an already ailing hotel industry. The only reason I could think of to justify it would be that business travellers want to be in Hamilton, not in the west end.

The extra office space could lower commercial rental prices in hamilton which are outrageous in the short term and encourage improvements in the longer term. The wiring in some buildings is atrocious.

They should also plan to make "old" hamilton more green like upper reid st. so it does not become a neglected area. I'm partial to the large planter boxes at DeCouto Realty and the large trees along the sidewalk.

All in all, I thought a good long-term plan. Unless we plan to go back to fishing and tourism this the right way to go about things in my not-so-humble opinion.

[Michael Taylor on 23.03.06 at 10:55]

I like it. Sure it will change the face of the city but from the artist's renditions, the development seems to meet with the style of Hamilton while increasing its beauty and excitement.

[Greta on 23.03.06 at 11:00]

I agree on that more open and public spaces are needed. I am amazed that such small country so "rich on paper"? has _such_ a lack of municipalities. We need more parks, tennis courts , even bocci, and picnic benches.

[Murmur on 23.03.06 at 11:04]

It is ambitious and ridiculous at the same time. The objective of any revitalization of the waterfront should be to create an amazing, interesting and accessible space for residents of Bermuda. This would imply moving cruise ships out of the close harbour completely -- who needs that ugly vertical wall of portholes facing you? The earlier breakwater design which stretched out toward Whites and had room for two cruise ships seemed much more of an improvement. In this design, the ship will still be right in your face. Yuck.

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 12:06]

Thanks for posting the drawings Limey.

When I look at the over-all plan I like 2/3rds of it. Bringing the dock forward to what they plan makes a lot of sense. The amount of space that will give us is more than enough. The current Front Street could then have it's sidewalks widened and they could intall a one-way traffic program. The new front street could have the same wide sidewalks with a combination of buildings and small parks for greenery. Parking can be put below all the docks as well as service operations for the ships.

Forget about all the extended jetty stuff, our harbour is too small to accomodate all that. By making the docks in a zig-zag shape they could accomodate up to three normal size cruise ships and still not fully block the views. This would also create a theme of Triangles, which in my most humble opinion seems appropriate.

Then the kicker is instead of spending all that money on the waterfront take some of it and develop the back of town with office space and residential.

Oh yes, one more thing. Seeing as they don't want them, maybe HSBC would be kind enough to donate all the parish plaques to the city and we can name all the small cross streets heading to the water after the parishes. And keep them in order so our guests can figure out the lay of the land.

[Bdacurler on 23.03.06 at 12:15]

Although we are afraid to lose the look of a 1950's Front Street, is it not fair to say that 1950's Front Street looked differently than a 1920's Front Street that look differently than an 1880's Front Street?

Is it so bad if we do end up with 7 storey buildings? I understand the argument that locals and visitors enjoy the look of Bermuda and we don't want to become a miniature Manhatten, but if there is no space to expand out, we will have to either stop growing or start going up.

Can we not have 7 storey buildings that still encompass Bermuda architecture? The ACE building is a great example. Although not a 7 storey structure, it is much, much larger than an average building in Hamilton, but you cannot disagree that it has a strong Bermuda character to it.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 23.03.06 at 13:24]

What I would like to know is:

Didn't Mr. Swan do a proposal, with a local Architect?

What ever happened to those plans?

And why is an overseas firm handling this? Surely there are locals that have the expertise.
I know of at least one (granted, he lives in Nebraska, but he's still Bermudian).

So why are we going overseas for this?

[Tiger Bay on 23.03.06 at 13:34]

"is it not fair to say that 1950's Front Street looked differently than a 1920's Front Street..."

Actually, Front Street has remained remarkably consistent over the past 150 years.

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 14:18]

Your Excellency you bring up an excellent point. But I have a sneaking feeling people are just a little too jaded in having John Swan putting his stamp on everything. I'm surprised (actually I'm not really) that the people who decide to come up with the plans do not go to our schools first and get ideas and concepts from our young people. We've got all the time and money in the world to get our own people involved and yet we totally snub them and settle on a plan that could pretty much be anywhere in Florida. I say let's get our young people more involved in building their future.

[Alastair Macdonald on 23.03.06 at 14:34]

Hamilton is currently an ugly and non-functional city. Because of the cost of land developers are building on every sq in available to them. Few new buildings have setbacks to create a sense of perspective. Most buildings are office buildings and streetscape stores and restaurants (people places) are rapidly disappearing. Even much of the existing retail space is being taken over for institutional use such as banks and utilities. What is really sad is that most of the old buildings from when Hamilton was residential have now been replaced. Traffic patterns are getting worse and worse and parking is difficult to find if you come to town after 9:30 am. There really is little of interest to draw you to Hamilton unless you happen to work there. If this continues Hamilton will become like the business downtown of many large North American cities, a concrete office complex that closes down in the evenings and weekends.

This plan offers an opportunity to change that trend. In my view it cannot come too soon. Yes it is big, yes it is ambitious but it shows tremendous promise. It is not perfect and it will need some tweaking and adjustment. The alternative is to water down this proposal and do it incrementally. That I believe would be a big mistake. We would end up with all of the negatives of what Hamilton has become without all of the potential positives of opening up Hamilton with more space and making it a more people oriented place. In general we in Bermuda tend to back away from radical change (as many of these posts reflect) but sometimes we have to be brave and bold and take some risks. Incremental change will not work in this situation. We need a bold and radically diferent vision. That's what this plan appears to offer.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 23.03.06 at 14:36]

Exactly, Lord Smokes! (As the first to use my correct title, you are hereby given a Lordship. This is my decree)

When John Swan did it, there was a big contest (Not the best organized or executed, but...) and prizes. A whole bunch of people... Bermudians... submitted really good ideas.

But, as you say, people are averse to having his name stamped on anything, so that all goes to the wayside and a foreign company gets it.

*sigh* Same ol' same.

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 15:06]

Alastair Macdonald - I for one have no problem with building something that will give us something to grow with but I think the plans as they are would accomodate 200 years and still not alleviate areas which need major help but just happen to be in the back of town. Not the most glamorous areas for sure, but still very important. A rising tide should raise all boats.

Our waterfront is limited by what must be considered "practicality". Do we expect to really have panamax ships coming into port? As we've just seen, it's very easy for a relatively small vessel to get into trouble in the space we have now.

The size of the extended wharfs are the size of city blocks and then some. My sense is this is over-kill. It's normal in development to put up huge plans and then scale them back as resistence builds so I'm not surprised to see this. But it definitely needs some serious tweaking.

[Michael Taylor on 23.03.06 at 15:10]

Well said Alastair Macdonald. My feelings exactly, for the most part. I don't know if I'd call Hamilton ugly in its current state but it sure seems like its beauty very often overestimated by us Bermudians.

[Prospero on 23.03.06 at 15:13]

" ... alleviate areas which need major help but just happen to be in the back of town ..."

I would have thought with the success of the Atlantis complex, it would now be topmost on developers' minds to start revamping the back of town/Middletown area into a mixed-use commercial/residential area. The land prices for commercial sites are certainly far cheaper than they are on Front Street; and the money and new business pumped into the area would both "gentrify" the neighbourhood and raise residents' property values without forcing them out ... Would have struck me as a no-brainer.

[His Excellency, Uncle Elvis II on 23.03.06 at 15:19]

"I would have thought with the success of the Atlantis complex..."

The Atlantis complex is a success?

Really?

[Michael Taylor on 23.03.06 at 15:26]

Smoking Gun,

Doesn't the Corporation own the Waterfront? There's only so much they can do with land they have limited control over like the back of town.

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 15:28]

From today's RG:

“Let’s get it on” – that was the verdict from the head of the Chamber of Commerce’s Restaurant and Nightclub Division Phil Barnett on the latest plans to transform Hamilton’s waterfront.
He welcomed the Corporation of Hamilton’s $839 million scheme to shift the docks, create new land for a hotel and housing and put in underground parks and marinas."

See- it's gone up $200 million in just one day. ;)

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 15:39]

Michael - you raise a good point. I really don't know the answer to just how far back they control. But in the grand scheme of things I feel we need to create a balance of scale that fits Hamilton appropriately from all sides of the city. For instance it has been decided to try to make the court street area more inclusive with the city and more appropriate for tourists. If the waterfront sucks up all the needs of our tourists and locals then we are back to square one with regard to helping the back of town get out from under it's current problems. Problems that affect all of us.

[Prospero on 23.03.06 at 15:47]

"The Atlantis complex is a success? Really?"

More than 90 percent of the rooms have been sold -- including the really top-end penthouse apartments. I believe that most (if not all) of the apartments that haven't sold yet are being rented on short-term leases. I'd consider that a success.

[Tiger Bay on 23.03.06 at 15:50]

The Corporation owns very limited land in town - it is set up to provide essential services to the businesses and residents of the city.

This project would transform the corporation into being the largest landowner in town, creating potential conflicts of interest with the taxpayer base.

[Michael Taylor on 23.03.06 at 16:01]

Smoking Gun,

Ewart seems to be trying to work with the owners in that area to try and encourage positive redevelopment which I think all will agree is a welcome initiative. Unfortunately, I think its safe to assume that change in that area will be more gradual for the reason I brought up previously. I'm not sure that having a beautiful and entertaining waterfront is going to draw tourists away from the back of town, or even if that would be a good reason not to do something positive in the front. I would expect that if the redevelopment was successful it would attract more visitors to the city and that they are likely to want to sample all the flavors the city has to offer in particular the new Court Street Ewart has envisioned (let's hope it is realised). That's my guess as a true anti-expert though, and I'm assuming everything works as planned.

[green on 23.03.06 at 16:07]

Prospero,

It's only a success if you sold them at a profit. Not saying they didn't, but they certainly had to sweeten the deals they were offering to move the units.

[thisgrassman on 23.03.06 at 16:17]

This project would transform the corporation into being the largest landowner in town, creating potential conflicts of interest with the taxpayer base.

Posted by Tiger Bay on 23.03.06 at 15:50

We also need to concern ourselves with the reform of this municipal entity that will not allow public attendance at any of their meetings

It is my understanding the Corporation of Hamilton is unique in the modern western world with this archaic restriction.

[Prospero on 23.03.06 at 16:22]

"It's only a success if you sold them at a profit. Not saying they didn't, but they certainly had to sweeten the deals they were offering to move the units."

Yeah, they probably did ... but such deal-sweeteners aren't uncommon where such large-scale projects are concerned. I agree the complex was not the instant success/cash cow its backers had hoped for. But the influx of new re/insurance types post-Katrina has filled the place up (from what I am told) and made the apartments into pretty good (if not spectacular) investments for Bermudians with the right amount of spare change in their piggy banks ...

[James on 23.03.06 at 17:34]

Smoking Gun,

Wasn't there something in the budget that was offering 10's of millions (not sure of the actual number) to redo the back of town area, especially Court Street?

Well I am all for the redevelopment of the waterfront (it did a great job in Halifax) as well as Dockyard and St. Georges. Everything needs a refresh... is about time. Now size and actually development, well lets wait and see what the final plans are, but I think that a good compromise can be found for the people of Bermuda.

[Phil on 23.03.06 at 17:34]

SmokingGun

I'm surprised (actually I'm not really) that the people who decide to come up with the plans do not go to our schools first and get ideas and concepts from our young people.

Many of the entries in the On The Waterfront competition were from young people. I'm sure the CoH will have looked at those before coming up with this plan.

[SmokingGun on 23.03.06 at 17:55]

James - I hope it's tens of mills. They certainly need it.

Limey - I guess you are right so that is a good thing. I was thinking in a more expansive way similar to how the recent idea of school teams sponsored by the insurance company. But thanks for reminding me.

[americanbermudian on 23.03.06 at 18:27]

I completely agree with SmokingGun - this plan reminds me of Naples or St Petersburg in Florida, with a dab of Chicago. It's not Bermuda.

What I really don't like about it is the fact that you won't be able to see the water from the Front St. buildings anymore. For this reason I almost get the feeling that these plans take the waterfront away from Hamilton.

I think it would be enough to build the new cruise ship pier, take away the waterfront bike parking, demolish #1 shed, close Front St. to traffic outside of rush hour (for al fresco dining, craft market etc) and if you get really crazy build the underground car park at City Hall and turn that into a park.

If funding for this is an issue then maybe tack on the docks relocation as well. That way the CofH gets its office revenue.

Anything more than this in my opinion would completely detract from everything Hamilton has ever stood for - a city on the water's edge. Add in all that park filler and you're left with just a city with the water somewhere nearby - maybe where all those boats are parked off in the distance through those trees - is that a mast or a flagpole honey? Oh lets go take a picture of that. These are just old office buildings back here...

[Tiggy on 24.03.06 at 16:01]

I bet all those "current" harbourside buildings will be screaming bloody murder!

[SmokingGun on 25.03.06 at 16:55]

In today's Mid-Ocean there is an article stating that the National Trust was not consulted regarding the City of Hamilton's Corporation's plans for the Waterfront. Even after they had two experts flown in to discuss the impact that Mega-Ships would have on the island it was kept a secret from them.

Last time I looked the area that the Corporation was planning on building on was called the harbour. Call me naive but surely the National Trust should have somehow been involved in the planning?

[dude wheres my stadium? on 28.03.06 at 13:09]

will this project end up unfinished just like the national stadium i wonder?

[Hamiltonian on 28.03.06 at 13:20]

I doubt the project - in this form - will even get started.

[Tiger Bay on 28.03.06 at 13:30]

It would be unsuitable for the Corporation of Hamilton to undertake the massive waterfront project without first increasing its transparency. I do not know of any comparable "town council" that meets in secrecy like the Corporation of Hamilton.

[googlybda on 29.08.06 at 07:49]

Front Street is a great Asset overlooking the Sound. It is now a higgledy piggledy Mess. Someone comes up with an idea to improve it and they get smacked down! Well come up with an alternative!

There should be outside cafes on the waterside not carparks. More places like Albouys Point to sit and relax. Send docks to Norf Shore or somewhere. Apat from one or two high class shops mostly it should be entertaining establishments in those high rent hovels on Front Street. Not all bars either. Where is the Tea Cosy? Timbucks Coffee House? Fish Market - retail Fish's Plaice shop and restaurant?

Instead of a broken down excuse for a coffee shop, Irish Linen! and a bike shop. A BIKE SHOP ON FRONT STREET!