THE recent completion of Sir John Swan's Atlantis Building in Hamilton prompted consideration of the likelihood of further developments of this type: quality high-rise apartments in the city which may help reduce the pressure for single-family and condominium development of Bermuda's rapidly diminishing open land.

Prospective developers must consider whether the cost and difficulty of finding available land outside the city will lead to any significant demand for city living.

At the opening of the Atlantis Building, Sir John made his views on the matter crystal clear. Depending on the success of this enterprise, he said, "I think there is room in the City of Hamilton and we should see more of these kinds of developments. (Atlantis) proves that if you think hard enough and work hard enough, you can find a solution."

Concentration and industry will help any venture to completion, but for any prospective developer of city property there are special challenges to overcome. According to Premier Alex Scott, no obstacles will be placed in the way by Government.

Responding to Sir John's comments at the opening, he said that housing was a priority for the Government, and stressed the importance of revitalising life in the city. He said: "A city that does not have cranes in the air is dying", while assuring his audience that several cranes were currently visible in Hamilton.

According to a number of experts from the worlds of real estate, planning, construction and architecture, the normal challenges which obtain in realising any successful venture are exacerbated in the special case of urban development.

Ian Waddington, director of realtor Coldwell Banker, pointed out some of the difficulties inherent in urban development.

"The city plan mandates different height restrictions according to street or area. Much depends on the size of the plot. It can be very difficult to do residential development in the city with small sites and limited height. The planning regulations come from Government although are directly governed by the City of Hamilton."

"The city plan is a separate document and it is supposed to be designed to accommodate the future needs of the city. It is my personal opinion that in certain areas of Hamilton they did not allow enough height."

"For example, in the northwest corner, down toward BAA field, they could have allowed ten storeys without doing any harm aesthetically or environmentally. The reasons that development is difficult are complex: height restrictions, cost of plots, small size of plots. There is also the problem of the restricted 'corridor' north of the Cathedral. Now is that necessary from a planning point of view? I don't believe it is."

The City of Hamilton Plan 2001, approved by the legislature in July 2002, was clear about planning objectives. In the "Living in the City" section, one of the plan's major objectives was "to encourage residential development in the city and enhance existing residential areas".

It went on to state that, "One of the best ways to revitalise Hamilton is to encourage more people to live in the city. Increased activity would help to boost the city's economy, as more people are available to take advantage of city services such as shops and restaurants."

The extent of the depopulation problem was described in a discussion paper which preceded the last city plan. It reported a drop in the population of Hamilton from nearly 3,000 in 1950 to just over 1,000 according to the 1991 census.

The plan directly addressed the advantages of urban development: "Exploiting the potential that exists in the city for higher-density living would make a valuable contribution to meeting housing demand for the island as a whole."

"It would help to alleviate the pressure for residential development on green field sites around the island thereby conserving valuable land resources. Apartment house development in the city would be a much more efficient use of land . . . and would provide an opportunity for people to live closer to their places of employment and reduce the need to commute."

Paradoxically, the extraordinary growth of employment in the city has helped accelerate the decline in city living. The proliferation of new office buildings resulting from the demands of the international sector of the economy means that any plot viable for office development is unlikely to be targeted for any form of residential development.

Rowlinson, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of the Environment and former Director of Planning, highlighted that difficulty: "In the last city plan, we gave encouragement to some extent to development throughout the city because there was a realisation that the resident population of the city was continuing to decline."

"The reasons are common enough internationally, the difficulty of having people living, working and recreating in a city. That has not been the cultural norm here. Another problem is that the basic office building with open floors, an elevator, and a couple of toilets on each floor is a much cheaper building per square foot and the return is much higher and faster than with a residential building. The previous city plan led to some residential and multi-use plans being proposed, taking advantage of a bonus floor that was allowed if you had residential development."

"They were approved at the 'in-principle' stage but they never reached the drawing board or construction. They were changed to being 100 per cent office development. When the new city plan came into effect in 2002, it expanded the scope for residential development."

"It is allowed throughout the city, and for sites north of Church Street, along Victoria Street, Dundonald Street, Park Street, the new plan increased building heights to seven floors to promote development in these areas. It remains to be seen if the new building heights make these developments work."

"There appears to be a reduced demand for office buildings, which may encourage more residential development. It is very difficult for a Planning Department. Our job is to provide the right environment to make these developments work."

"It is quite complex, but the Ministry and the Department are very, very supportive of any form of residential development in the city, and we certainly hope this new plan encourages it."

Alan Burland of contractors BCM McAlpine was fairly upbeat about the prospect of further residential developments in the city. He said that there are some reasonably-sized plots available.

"It is a matter of assessing each site and looking at the various restrictions as to heights and setbacks. There will be more residential developments. There are traffic issues, and prime land is too expensive. If you can provide quality amenities, some people will like the idea of living in town."

Architect Sjur Linberg was optimistic, but he said: "It depends how well this first one (Atlantis) is received. The market response will obviously have a huge bearing on the attitude of other developers. I am aware that there are other smaller-scale developments out there."

"There is a problem with residential development in the city and that is the very high cost of land. Land values are derived from the value that these parcels have for commercial development. If the Government and the Department of Planning really want to be serious about encouraging more of these developments, then there has to be more flexibility in terms of density and height."

"Having said that, when you develop residential projects, you don't need the floor-to-floor heights that you do for an office building, where you frequently need to go to 12 to 12? feet floor-to-floor. Whereas in an apartment complex, you can go to 9? feet. There is scope in the interpretation of the development plan to look at it that way."

"I think there is enough discretion in the plan the way it is written to interpret it in a way that makes sense for Bermuda. If the planners, and the planning board, and Government have the will to make it happen, to encourage it to happen, then I think they can do so without rewriting the development plan."

"There has to be more flexibility in terms of allowing more storeys, and in certain areas where you can do so, allowing greater overall heights. We have to balance that, we don't want to end up looking like Hong Kong I am sure, but we do need to look seriously at encouraging the residential development of the City of Hamilton."

"It has multiple beneficial impacts, apart from not developing virgin land, easing the pressure on that. It also eases traffic congestion on our roads. It will also help the retail and restaurant environment in town.It just has a lot of knock-on effects."

For a variety of social, cultural and economic reasons, the resident population of Hamilton has declined over the last four decades. A question posed in a 1997 planning discussion paper asked: "Is the declining residential population in Hamilton a problem and, if it is, what measures can be included in the plan to encourage residential development throughout the city?"

It seems inevitable that diminishing open land in the parishes will encourage some people to rediscover the advantages of urban living. Some measures have been taken to ease planning restrictions, but it remains to be seen whether new developments in the city will succeed, and reverse the historic trend out of town.