An architectural firm has put forward plans for a massive redevelopment of Sessions House — but Government has no plans to actually build anything.

An application by S.H.Y. Architecture was received by the Planning Department on June 25.

It proposes a multiphase project which would introduce underground parking and public gardens to the area, while removing Supreme Court.

The idea was to drum up public interest, said architect Simon Hodgson.

In a letter to Dame Jennifer Smith, chairman of the House and Grounds Committee for Sessions House, he wrote: "We understand you are the appropriate Minister of Parliament to contact to initiate discussions on the merits of this proposal.

"By making this approval-in-principle application, this proposal will become public knowledge and hopefully will encourage a broad input from many in the community who would benefit from the revitalisation of this public realm project.

"Our sincere hope is to promote a better appreciation for the design of our built environment, particularly in the urban context of the City of Hamilton. Therefore, any support your offices are able to give at this stage is greatly appreciated."

The plans put forward would create a new building with a landscaped roof. It would sit to the east of Magistrates' Court for Government offices at the corner of Reid and Court streets.

Two memorial gardens and a public plaza would replace the existing parking lot, which circles Sessions House.

In the plan, Mr. Hodgson said the design is intended to "connect these significant public buildings in the urban context, thus creating space with meaning and a sense of place".

A new multi-storey parking lot capable of accommodating 120 cars would be constructed between Magistrates' Court and the Sessions House.

The House of Parliament chamber is also redesigned in the plan. Seats would be placed in a semicircle instead of on either side of the chamber as they are now.

Supreme Court One and Two, which currently sit in the Sessions House, are not found in the plan. They are replaced by a public lobby and a public committee room.

Mr. Hodgson said in the application: "We note that this phased planning will have to incorporate the relocation of the Supreme Court facility, which is an aspect of the proposal that needs further deliberation."

Mr. Hodgson was contacted in regards to this story, but declined to comment.

Dame Jennifer said she didn't know about the plans until after they were submitted.

"It's something they did on their own," she said. "They informed us after the fact."

She declined to comment any further.