[citiguy]

Proposed development agreement by WM Fares for a 19 storey mixed development on the Corner of South Park Street and Brenton Place (Clyde Street).

Check out the proposal below:

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/071023ca1013.pdf

[terrynorthend]

Exciting! Nice design...but does anyone know if it fits in with the MPS? I thought there were now strict height limits of 80 feet or something for new developments south of the Citadel. Not sure about this though, and clearly it fits in with the surrounding development.

Also this is close to the Pacey's neighbourhood, and part of the HRM-by-design's Spring Gdn and Queen St zone, so expect a tough fight.

Opponents of development have been trying to use the HRM-by-design exercise as a stalling technique. The "lets not build anything until the design committee finalizes their plans" approach, knowing full well that they won't agree with plans that permit mid/hi-rise development anywhere anyways. Epstein tried that argument against the UG towers when he suggested the city must now buy back the land from the developer.

[skyscraper_1]

Quite interesting!

[worldlyhaligonian]

I don't think that the heritage trust should have any say in this. There needs to be a pro-development group to counter these wackjobs, who haven't managed to actually protect much real heritage.

This project looks great for the area.

[Wishblade]

Exciting! Nice design...but does anyone know if it fits in with the MPS? I thought there were now strict height limits of 80 feet or something for new developments south of the Citadel. Not sure about this though, and clearly it fits in with the surrounding development.


Well, this would be news to me. The Martello and Paramount went up with ease and their far taller than 80 feet.

[Jonovision]

WOW! Very nice. I had no idea anything was in the works for that area. It looks like it has some very nice detailing. I hope this gets through council.

[Wishblade]

1. Halifax MPS and LUB Context
The site is in the ResidentialCommercial
Mix District and the RC2
Zone. This application
would require Council to consider creating policies that would be different from many of the
current Municipal Planning Strategy policies and Land Use Bylaw requirements that apply
to this District and Zone for this area. At this time:
Under the Land Use Bylaw, in the RC2
Zone:
• Commercial uses are only permitted at or below grade.
• Residential uses are limited to houses containing a maximum of four dwelling units
and townhouses.
• The maximum height of buildings is 45 feet.
Further to the Municipal Planning Strategy:
• There are development agreement provisions which allow Council to consider
buildings that are greater than 45 feet in height in the ResidentialCommercial
Mix
District, but only upon the “Clyde Street Parking Lots.”
• There are planning policies that cite a concern with the height of buildings facing
Victoria Park and the Public Gardens, which results in height controls within the C2D
Zone. Such concerns are relevant to this application as the site directly faces Victoria
Park.



Well, that basically answers the MPS question. I'm not sure how its going to turn out. Hopefully it'll end well.

[terrynorthend]

• Commercial uses are only permitted at or below grade.
• Residential uses are limited to houses containing a maximum of four dwelling units
and townhouses.
• The maximum height of buildings is 45 feet.
Further to the Municipal Planning Strategy:
• There are development agreement provisions which allow Council to consider
buildings that are greater than 45 feet in height in the ResidentialCommercial
Mix
District, but only upon the “Clyde Street Parking Lots.”
• There are planning policies that cite a concern with the height of buildings facing
Victoria Park and the Public Gardens, which results in height controls within the C2D
Zone. Such concerns are relevant to this application as the site directly faces Victoria
Park.


Yikes! I was afraid of something like that. Not to be a pessimist, but I suspect this one is dead before it starts. Especially with that bit about Victoria Park and Public Gardens... The Heritage Nazis will be salivating over this. In the very least it will get bogged down in years of appeals, so don't expect anything until 2011 or so.

As for the Martello and Paramount buildings, they fell into the same strange gray area that the so-called "triangle lands" and Trademart near Cogswell. They all received council approval for their respective developments in the 1980's. They've just been sitting on the shelf for those many years, waiting for the developer to submit detailed plans and break ground. This is an oddly run city.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Well, the power of said Heritage Groups is what scares me... we elect individuals to make decisions.

What incentives to developers have to even bother with downtown?

Honestly, if approval is the problem, maybe the focus of growth should be in other areas of the city, where nature can takes its course and buildings can be taller than what a counsellor or a heritage freak dictate. I think Young and Robie area would be a really good area to completely redevelop.

[someone123]

I think this one actually has a good chance of being approved. It is on South Park Street, which already has a row of large buildings such as the Paramount, Lord Nelson, that white/concrete one, and Park Victoria. It does overshadow some adjacent blocks but those are mostly the empty parking lots.

As far as the development itself, it's exactly what that area needs. That end of the block has a couple of houses that are nice but kind of out of place and are encircled by unsightly parking lots.

[Keith P.]

That would be an amazing addition to that neighborhood -- I would love to live there! Only downside I see is that the Cellar and Curry Village would be no more.

Having said that, I expect we will hear cries of outrage from the usual suspects and a desire to saw off several floors because "it's too tall!!!". :(

[worldlyhaligonian]

Well, if Spring Garden is to be the "Fifth Ave" so to speak of Halifax, they really have to do something fast. Adding this building would definitely help businesses along the street.

[skyscraper_1]

Council to mull South Park tower print this article
STÉPHANE MASSINON

A proposed 19-storey, $30-million tower will go before Halifax regional council today.

The building - which is slated to feature 80 condos, two floors of commercial space and two floors of underground parking at South Park Street and Brenton Place - still needs to be approved by council at a later date.

Developer Wadih Fares, president of WM Fares Group, said the project represents the largest single building the company has done in Halifax.

"We're excited about it, and I hope that the remainder of the process will be short and we can get going and under construction by the spring of 2008," Fares said.

WM Fares is currently developing the Mount Royale neighbourhood off Dunbrack Street.

If it goes ahead at council today, there will be opportunity for public input.

Downtown Halifax Coun. Dawn Sloane couldn't say much about the project.

"I want it to go to a public hearing so we can get comments from the public," Sloane said.

"There's two old houses and they're falling to ruin; it's right there," she said of the location.

Fares said the project has been formulated with city staff for a year-and-a-half.

"I don't mind the process to go through what you go through. It takes longer than it really should. However, it's good for us; it's good for the city," Fares said.

In a report to councillors, city staff members say the proposal fits with the city's plans for the area.

"The building relates well to the early principles that have been expressed through the HRM by Design study," the report reads.

http://www.hfxnews.ca/index.cfm?sid=73675&sc=89

[worldlyhaligonian]

I would put money on them not starting construction in "spring 2008".

[Wishblade]

A slightly better article:


19-storey building proposal unveiled

By AMY PUGSLEY FRASER City Hall Reporter
Tue. Oct 23 - 6:16 AM

A new 19-storey building is proposed for the Spring Garden Road area in Halifax but it’s been kept well under wraps.

"Surprise!" Coun. Dawn Sloane (Halifax Downtown) joked Monday when asked about the development at the corner of South Park and Brenton streets.

The councillor has known about the mixed residential/commercial/office building for a while, but only because a previous design was tried out about a year ago. The earlier proposal for the lot didn’t make it past the downtown planning advisory committee, the group that advises council on proposed downtown developments.

"This is their second kick at the can, I guess you’d say," she said in an interview.

An engineer with W.M. Fares Group said Monday that plans for the building have been in the works for some time.

"We’ve been working on it for a while," Cesar Saleh admitted Monday. "But the reason no one has heard about it publicly is because this is the first step of the public process."

That first step will include council being asked tonight to make changes to planning strategies and land-use bylaws to allow the proposal to go ahead.

Height regulations now limit buildings to 13.5 metres and residential uses are restricted to houses, containing a maximum of four dwelling units, and townhouses.

The proposed building goes higher than the permitted 13.5 metres and features a tower measuring 18 by roughly 43 metres. However, the tower is stepped back about 4.6 metres from the commercial level on the first floor.

Doing the design this way provides a maximum "street line" of nearly eight to nearly 11 metres, Mr. Saleh wrote in a recent letter to the city.

Overall, the residential building would range in height from 13 to 19 storeys and accommodate 80 residential suites. It would also include general commercial on the first floor, offices on the second, and two levels of underground parking accessed from Brenton Place.

In order for council to approve the building, says a staff report, it must first consider creating policies that would differ from many of the planning strategies and land-use bylaws in place for the area. But the staff report says that "many of the objectives expressed with the community municipal planning strategy, such as limiting the impact upon Victoria Park, can be achieved through the building’s design."

Mr. Saleh said it’s necessary to go through the amendment process "because sometimes the policy might be outdated or certain circumstances have changed."

"Especially now, with the HRM By Design, there is a need for both office/commercial and residential space downtown and the city is looking to bring people back into the regional centre to live, where the infrastructure is already (in place)."

If council does consider amending its planning strategy, the public will still have a say. The downtown planning advisory committee will host a future public information meeting, Ms. Sloane said.

She is withholding her own views until then. "I want to hear from the public," she said.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/973892.html

[terrynorthend]

I would put money on them not starting construction in "spring 2008".

Ha ha! I'm in for 20 bucks too... only problem is, who's going to take our bets?

Leave it to the lovely Ms. Sloane to wait to make a comment until she hears which direction the wind is blowing.

I'm also unsure of what they mean in that last article about the tower measuring 18 by 43 metres. Are they talking about height?

[Jonovision]

Just wondering if anyone happened to see council tonight? This proposal was suppose to have been presented for preliminary debate, and policy amendments.

[someone123]

Height regulations now limit buildings to 13.5 metres and residential uses are restricted to houses, containing a maximum of four dwelling units, and townhouses.

It kind of annoys me when they put this in Herald articles. That limit is not a real height limit, it's simply a threshold beyond which new developments are deemed significant enough to warrant public consultation.

I think the 18x43 m thing means 18 "deep" (along Brenton Pl) and 43 m along South Park Street. A 19 storey residential building would be in the 50-60 m range for height.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Any news from council on this?

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Interesting development. I like the height, the location, and lots of interest at street level. The overall design is ok, but man that top is AWFUL. That really brings things down a notch or two or my opinion.

There are lots of proposed projects coming up lately. Are we just seeing the tip of the iceberg in terms of peninsula development?

[worldlyhaligonian]

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/a_gallant/IMG_0281.jpg

This project sure would add alot to this little cluster of buildings.

[someone123]

In that shot I think it would actually be covered by Park Lane. You'd see a little bit of the top maybe.

That photo does show how far the area has come in the past 3-4 years though. If this tower goes up along with some developments on the Clyde Street lots it will be more of a "district". Dresden Row and South Park will have a lot more retail, along with possibly Queen Street if the Infirmary lands are redeveloped.

Something else that would be interesting is a development in front of that square ~20 storey apartment building on SGR that's at an angle to the street. There's just parking in front, so presumably that could be replaced with a lowrise type structure with ground floor retail.

Something similar could be built on the grounds of the old condo building at SGR/Summer but I doubt that residents would want to give them up.

Sacred Heart is nice but it would be nice if the retail part of SGR could be continued right up to Robie. Right now it's cut in two.

[someone123]

Here's a little rendering of how I think it will look based on the plans in the HRM report (original aerial photo from http://www.pbase.com/mucker):

http://www.pbase.com/image/88174776/original.jpg

[worldlyhaligonian]

nice job.

it would certainly be a great addition.

[phrenic]

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z152/phrenical/Untitled-1-1.jpg

An image of what the proposed tower is to look like from South Park Street.

(image from HRM Council's report)

[skyscraper_1]

I like the design and it will help expand the Spring Garden retail area. A rendering would be useful to figure out what kind of materials may be used.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I'm confused, I thought there was supposed to be news on the amendment to the MPS that would effectively approve/reject this proposal.

I don't know what's up with the roof of this building, is that a flag being held by wires or part of the roof itself. I hope its just a flat roof. Weird.

[someone123]

It would simply require a development agreement, not general amendments to the MPS as some like to imply. The MPS includes provisions for buildings like this, and similar development agreements have been granted in this area in the past.

[terrynorthend]

That rendering is South Park St. elevation? Does anyone know what is proposed for the ground level here? It looks like a bunch of individual condo entrances; I'd prefer to see retail/dining along here.

[someone123]

Those are storefronts, not condo entrances.

[Canadian Mind]

south park is a pretty good series... didn't know it was in the maratimes though. :P

[worldlyhaligonian]

Lol, great show, manbearpig.

South Park is like our upscale retail, its like a Park Ave/5th Ave, Bloor St. for Halifax.

I wonder if we will be getting any Gucci, Prada, LV, etc stores once great retail like UG and this South Park and Brenton go through. I certainly think that we would be the first city in the maritimes, and I think it would definitely attract shopping dollars from around the region. I'm unsure of whether the wealth and population can sustain it.

[someone123]

There's a meeting coming up for this project:

Dec. 5, 2007 District 12 Planning Advisory Committee

Windsor Room 2, Prince George Hotel

1725 Market Street, Halifax - 7:00 p.m.

Public Meeting

Case 01046 - Application from WM Fares to amend the Halifax Municipal Planning Strategy and the Halifax Peninsula Land Use By-law to permit a 19 storey residential building, with first and second storey commercial uses, on the north-east corner of South Park Street and Brenton Place in Halifax (1441-1467 South Park Street and 5679-5683 Brenton Place), by development agreement.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Whats going on with this!!!!

[Wishblade]

Whats going on with this!!!!

Well that meeting that Someone123 is speaking about is tonight, so I assume we'll know a little more after that.

[Jonovision]

I just got back from the meeting and it was very lively and interesting. The design has been greatly refined and is now something that looks really good. They've added a plaza on the corner with a curved glass element that runs up the entire height of the building and becomes the crown of the building.
The reviews were very mixed, there were a good deal of people in the schmidtville neighbourhood that thought it was too tall and didn't like it. There were people from other neighbourhoods who thought it was a great development with great attention to detail. But the best was the few who lived within a block of the proposal and got up and said they were all for it. They would be proud to have this building in their backyard.
I wish I had some pics to show the new design, but it is really nice! A building that is designed for the site, and they made provisions for future developments in the area as well.

[Keith P.]

The reviews were very mixed, there were a good deal of people in the schmidtville neighbourhood that thought it was too tall and didn't like it.

There are a relatively few activist people who advocate for "Schmidtville" (I lived right there for 7 years and had never heard that term until a few years ago) who oppose anything new whatsoever in that area. It seems they are as bad or worse than the Heritage Trust in wanting a historical theme park.

It is hard to see how this development is a problem for them. It is taking up parking lot space and a couple of rooming houses. I suppose they would argue the rooming houses could be restored, and that similar-looking structures could be built on the empty lots. But I cannot imagine that would be viable economically. With Park Vic across one street and the Charterhouse across the other I cannot see how this is somehow troublesome.

[Jonovision]

Their biggest issues were that they were loosing their sky views, the shadow and wind effects, and the fact that surrounding their neighbourhood with highrises would make it a theme park. They all talked about their inability to use their back yards because of the lack of sunlight, but to me, if you choose to live in the inner city, than you are choosing to live the urban lifestyle and one facet of the urban lifestyle is giving up personal green space and using the large nearby public green spaces.

An article from the todays Chronicle:

Building plan called both beautiful and a blight
Proposed downtown development draws mixed reaction at meeting
By AMY PUGSLEY FRASER City Hall Reporter
Thu. Dec 6 - 5:26 AM

Halifax needs to shrug off its cloak of heritage and embrace the future through innovative building design, a public meeting on a new downtown development heard Wednesday night.

But the 60 or so people gathered at a downtown hotel also heard that three historic homes on South Park Street should not be sacrificed for a new development and that 19-storey buildings aren’t always welcome by their neighbours.

A brand new development proposed for the corner of Brenton and South Park streets incited such varied remarks from the crowd that it was at times hard to reconcile them to the same development.

What was "beautiful" to one was someone else’s "blight."

"Would I be opposed to this being in my backyard? No I would not!" proclaimed Rick Layton, whose home on Brenton Place puts him right next door to the proposed development.

Conversely, Larry Haven said he wouldn’t want to continue living in his home on neighbouring Morris Street if the structure went up.

The building, a commercial and residential design by Duffus Romans architecture and proposed by W.M. Fares group, is not permitted under current zoning and planning rules.

However, the group was last night asking for a nod from the downtown planning advisory committee which advises regional council. The public information meeting was the beginning of a long process, which includes at least three stages for rejection before the first shovel would hit the dirt.

Ruth Goldbloom, who lives on Dresden Row, said the Fares team should be thanked for bringing forward such a beautiful design.

"While we have a history in Halifax of not putting up the right structure, we also enjoy a reputation across Canada of being anti-development," she said.

"But there are compromises."

She’s hopeful the building will entice people to repopulate the heart of the city, especially at a time when "we hear in our city about everyone leaving the downtown."

"My kids have gone," agreed Ted Worthington of nearby Birmingham Street.

"We need more density downtown for 25,000 more souls," he said, referring to the city’s plan to direct residential development into the core business area.

After viewing 3-D video presentations along with the requisite side elevations, a few people were bothered by the progression of slides illustrating the shadows the building will cast onto Victoria Park and the Public Gardens across the street.

A man who lives on Brenton Street said the effect on his side of the building will be worse. "Noon on Brenton Street is going to be black," said David Barlow.

Judy and Larry Haven are trying to raise a family on Morris Street and they’re feeling pushed out by the highrises in their neighbourhood.

"We’ll be a theme park in the middle of very tall buildings," Mrs. Haven said of the historic district known as Schmidtville where they live.

"Why does the building have to be 19 storeys? If you built nine storeys would you go broke?" said Mr. Haven. "Why do we have to have another building the same height as Park Victoria?"

That 22-storey building, erected in 1962, ruined the neighbourhood with its wind and shadows, said another downtown homeowner.

"We’ve been suffering the effects of that building ever since," said Lyndon Watkins, who owns houses on Birmingham Street and Dresden Row.

"This will blight the neighbourhood even more."

After a number of people suggested the building would be better at the permitted five-storey height, a local developer who attended the meeting warned the group that good things do not always come in small packages.

"When you build buildings that are five stories, what you end up with is a squat building that covers lots of land … shoebox-type buildings," said Tony Metlej, who is not affiliated with the project.

Cesar Saleh, an engineer with the Fares group, said the building is custom-designed for the site and includes stepped-up effects at the 5th, 13th and 19th storeys so the building gets narrower as it grows.

That differentiates the design from its neighbour Park Vic, he said.

( apugsley@herald.ca)

[Wishblade]

Yeah, the people who are complaining about Shadows, loss of green space, and lack of sunlight should not be living anywhere near there. they should be living out in the suburbs or outskirts. I cant understand why some of these people choose to live where they live with their views. But honesty, I don't understand what the problem is, as there are buildings just as tall or taller than this in the immediate area.

Good to see that there was a lot of praise for the development as well. I hope it goes through with few tie ups.

[someone123]

Conversely, Larry Haven said he wouldn’t want to continue living in his home on neighbouring Morris Street if the structure went up.

:rolleyes:

It's really hard to imagine this structure having a significant impact on the area given the fact that Park Vic is nearby and is several times larger. As for Victoria Park, it's already surrounded by large buildings. I would imagine that the impact on the Public Gardens would be very minimal (couple minutes of shadows on about 2% of the area during part of the year) and other buildings that supposedly were going to ruin the area haven't.

This sounds like a great development. I hope it gets approved and build as soon as possible and is followed by more infill on the Clyde Street lots.

[worldlyhaligonian]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2179/2102475878_fc4affb1a1_o.jpg

[phrenic]

Haha it seems like almost every picture taken of the Halifax skyline always has Fenwick looming in the background.

But this development would look good there.

[Keith P.]

I don't see Fenwick in that pic.

[Wishblade]

I don't see Fenwick in that pic.

It's peaking out behind Park Vic. See it now? :P

[skyscraper_1]

Great picture btw.

[Keith P.]

It's peaking out behind Park Vic. See it now? :P

Nope. I guess with it being so demonized everyone proposes a building over 5 storeys that I expected to look like Godzilla, terrorizing everything else in sight. ;)

[hfx_chris]

I don't see Fenwick in that pic.

Neither do I...

[phrenic]

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z152/phrenical/2102475878_fc4affb1a1_o.jpg

Anyway, nevermind. Sorry to threadjack.

[someone123]

Last week I took photos of the site. The development itself would go up to the yellow house in this picture:

http://www.pbase.com/halifaxphoto/image/91157384/original.jpg

Looking Southeast, with Park Vic in the background:

http://www.pbase.com/halifaxphoto/image/91157469/original.jpg

It's too bad that these houses will be torn down since they're not in particularly bad shape but I think this is an example of a trade-off that is justified. Some holes will be filled and a new 19 storey building would be more along the lines of other buildings in the area like the Lord Nelson, Paramount, etc.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Couldn't the houses be somewhat dismantled and rebuilt in an area of the city to fill in some holes with real heritage? Lets think outside the box here, I know that they do things like that in the Netherlands.

[someone123]

It is an interesting idea. I don't know how that would work with old wooden structures. Normally when I hear stories about buildings being moved it is only a brick or stone facade that is disassembled and reassembled elsewhere, often at great expense.

I have always liked the little black house on the corner.

[Keith P.]

Both those houses have been used as student apartments for decades. They are in poor condition inside. All you would be saving is essentially the front facade since much of the inside has had whatever detail it once had stripped away.

[someone123]

There are new, detailed renderings available at: http://www.halifax.ca/planning/Case01046Details.html

Here's the South Park aerial view and elevation...

http://www.pbase.com/image/93932723/original.jpg

I really like this design. Great proposal.

[terrynorthend]

Beautiful design. Now I REALLY want to see this go ahead. That aerial perspective shows just how well it DOES fit the neighbourhood.

[Jonovision]

Very very nice! This building is perfect for that location in my opinion.

[Dmajackson]

That's a real beauty! I hope it gets built as soon as possible it'll look a lot better then the houses i currently look at every morning.

[Keith P.]

There are new, detailed renderings available at: http://www.halifax.ca/planning/Case01046Details.html

Here's the South Park aerial view and elevation...

http://www.pbase.com/image/93932723/original.jpg

I really like this design. Great proposal.


It has changed a bit from the original version:

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z152/phrenical/Untitled-1-1.jpg

An image of what the proposed tower is to look like from South Park Street.

(image from HRM Council's report)


I like the revised version better. Let's hope it goes ahead. :cheers:

[skyscraper_1]

This will definitely be a great addition to the area! I hope it can be approved asap. Hopefully this proposal will help to expand the Spring garden shopping district beyond just SGR.

[The_Bow]

Great new redesign!

Whats the next hurdle for the development?

[sdm]

Agreed, the redesign is more acceptable in my mind.

Will be interesting to see what the wind study says as we are all aware that brenton to south park is brutal area during south east wind conditions.

[phrenic]

I like the new design much better. The more modern look will help distinguish it from Park Vic (assuming it goes ahead).

[Dmajackson]

I was having a browse through the new HRM by Design information released today and they support tall buildings going up on the west end of the SGR district. If council follows these recommendations this building should be approved easily.

[someone456]

I atended the PAC meeting last night - Bev Miller, acting Chairperson of the committee did her very best to scuttle this one, however the remaining committee members accepted the staff recommendation to put it forward to the next step. The PAC and HAC meetings are observation only, but if you want an inside look at why things are so disfunctional you try to attend. This Bev Miller person has been anti-development for 25 years, and yet she is in a position of "impartial mediator"?

[Haliguy]

I atended the PAC meeting last night - Bev Miller, acting Chairperson of the committee did her very best to scuttle this one, however the remaining committee members accepted the staff recommendation to put it forward to the next step. The PAC and HAC meetings are observation only, but if you want an inside look at why things are so disfunctional you try to attend. This Bev Miller person has been anti-development for 25 years, and yet she is in a position of "impartial mediator"?

Are these meetings open to the public?

[someone456]

yes - the public may attend however NO input, just observe.

[someone123]

The PAC is meant as a "first pass" to weed out totally inappropriate developments I guess. There still has to be a public consultation and then council decision. As mentioned in the other thread, I find the PAC step pointless and flawed. The HAC is similar. Both have become mechanisms for obstructionism, and in reality I don't think anybody on those committees is any kind of "expert" (if such a thing is even possible). Why is Bev Miller's opinion worth more than that of some random person who gets up to talk at a council debate or sends in a letter?

[Dmajackson]

I think something happened in council tonight about this proposal. Does anyone know if it got approved? Or is the verdict still out?

[Jonovision]

This went to council a few weeks ago and will continue now to the public hearing stage. Tonights meeting was about The Alexander, the 21 story tower for the brewery. It was also put through to the public hearing stage.

[someone123]

I'm not sure why they do this vote to determine whether or not the development goes to a public hearing. It's not as if there are huge numbers of these developments being proposed and the idea that project details should be withheld from the public based on the whims of the HAC, council, etc. is questionable to say the least. These preliminary votes come off either as pointless rubber stamping or paternalist (which itself is a huge joke given who is on some of these committees).

[Jonovision]

An article from today Herald. (I'm posting it in both towers respective threads.)

Downtown projects move ahead
21-storey condo development and 19-storey residential building sent to public hearings
By AMY PUGSLEY FRASER City Hall Reporter
Wed. May 14 - 5:37 AM

It was a big night Tuesday at city hall for two proposed downtown developments after council agreed to send both to public hearings.

The projects are a 21-storey condo Halkirk wants to build on the south side of its Brewery Market property and a 19-storey residential building the W.M. Fares group is eyeing for the corner of Brenton and South Park streets.

While the Fares proposal elicited no debate among councillors, there were a few comments about Halkirk’s $30-million development.

That’s because the building, which had a thumbs-up from city planning staffers, drew some negative response from council’s heritage advisory committee.

That committee and the downtown planning advisory committee assist council by reviewing projects to ensure they fit within the city’s heritage and planning strategies.

Coun. Sue Uteck (Northwest Arm-South End) wondered whether the volunteers who sit on city boards have their responsibilities well outlined to them, especially when the projects are already recommended by city planning staffers.

"When you turn down a positive recommendation from staff, you are supposed to quote the applicable sections of the heritage act or the land-use bylaw or the (municipal planning strategy) that apply to that."

Neither of the advisory board reports on the project did that, she said.

"To me, it’s not the fault of the committees. . . . But if you are going to have a developer, in this particular instance, that has to go the 27 rounds we’d say in golf, then (the committees had) better have some concrete understanding of where they’re coming from before they get to . . . council."

But Coun. Dawn Sloane (Halifax Downtown) said the developer altered his plan within the last week, adding window and balcony bays to what had been a blank, sheer wall on the Bishop Street side.

"He went back and changed it . . . because I wasn’t willing to even take this to the public."

Coun. Patrick Murphy (Halifax North End) wondered whether accompanying multimillion-dollar renovations to Keith Hall, the 1863 mansion built for beer baron and former Halifax mayor Alexander Keith, would include interior as well as exterior building restoration.

While planner Paul Sampson said interior designs were not part of the development agreement, Ms. Sloane explained that original stained glass windows and other architectural features would remain intact.

Another councillor wondered how the new developments would be handled with the city’s downtown planning project, called HRM By Design, in the works.

Although the city has drafted new rules for downtown development through the project, the area is still governed by the old guidelines until council approves and implements the new plan.

That had Coun. Bob Harvey (Lower Sackville) wondering if any decision on the Halkirk proposal would be superseded by the new guidelines.

"It’s going to be a race between public hearings for these amendments and for the Halifax By Design amendments. I mean, which are we going to get first?"

Austin French, manager of planning, said the HRM By Design proposals probably wouldn’t be before council until mid-summer.

The public hearings on both downtown developments will likely be held within the next month.

( apugsley@herald.ca)

[hfx_chris]

I love that classic Sloane comment:

"He went back and changed it . . . because I wasn’t willing to even take this to the public."

[someone123]

Public hearing scheduled for June 10:

June 10, 2008 Halifax Regional Council - 6:00 p.m.

Public Hearing:

Case 01046 - MPS/LUB Amendments and Development Agreement, South Park Street and Brenton Place, Halifax.

--

Not sure when it will go before council for the final decision. Based on what I've heard I don't foresee problems. I hope the project can get underway in a few months.

[Jonovision]

Some nice new renderings out on the cities website.

http://www.halifax.ca/planning/Case01046Details.html

[someone123]

Here's the night one:

http://www.pbase.com/image/98111290/original.jpg

[hfx_chris]

Pretty.

[sdm]

That looks very good, lets make it happen.

[Empire]

That is a great looking building. This is the type of development that would work very well in the Young St./Kempt Rd. area as well.

[phrenic]

That's hot.

[Haliguy]

Thats a great looking building!

[Spitfire75]

Awesome.

[Dmajackson]

Of all buildings in Hali that would be the hottest. Last would be Fenwick. But WOW thats really going to liven up South Park Street

[hfx_chris]

Some people like Fenwick.

[Dmajackson]

I forgot about that....how about the Grain Elevators?

[worldlyhaligonian]

omg.

[hfx_chris]

I forgot about that....how about the Grain Elevators?
Not so much.

[terrynorthend]

Would love to see a giant mural painted on those elevator silos. Its one of the first things confronting visitors entering the harbour by sea (that and the worst possible angle of Maritime Centre; the southeast corner). A mural depicting the harbour historically would be cool..

[Empire]

I fail to see why people dislike Fenwick so much. It has a tiered design, both in the vertical and horizontal planes. The top is distinguished from the the main building and it's the tallest in the city. There are dozens of buildings that are much worse than Fenwick...... Scotia Sq., Trade Mart, Pince George, Holiday Inn, Cogswell Tower, new apt. building near Mic Mac, King Edward tower in Fairview, Cowie Hill apts. (top of the Mountain) 5170? Spring Garden Rd. etc..........even the Paramount is a cheap looking building.

Is there anyone else who likes Fenwick?

[phrenic]

Is there anyone else who likes Fenwick?

I don't want to jack this thread, so I started a Fenwick discussion thread.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=3596739#post3596739

[NorthYorker]

Some people like Fenwick.

New to this forum, but I've always loved Fenwick. Now of course everytime I look at it I have to picture it cleaned up, but its definatley my fav. tall building in Halifax.

[someone123]

The public hearing for this is tomorrow:

June 10, 2008 Halifax Regional Council - 6:00 p.m.

Public Hearing:

Case 01046 - MPS/LUB Amendments and Development Agreement, South Park Street and Brenton Place, Halifax. Detailed information and staff report...

---

I'm hoping people realize that this would have minimal impact on the nearby houses. It's definitely a good development for the area.

[Dmajackson]

I was in the neighbourhood a few days ago driving towards South Park from Queen and i realized it would look better with a building there just to fill in that gap in the skyline. The area seems like somewheres that would be nice if it were surronded by highrises. All the houses are crammed together and its a very dense area its very urban. Putting highrises on the edge of this neighbourhood will allow it to still be peaceful and tightknit community while being close to everything, affordable and desirable to live in.

In my opinion its win-win situation for everyone. The residents get more shops, people and a better community without destroying the neighbourhood. And Halifax and SGR win by having more high-class shops, a "landmark" building, more people in the immediate area without losing the beauty of the district.

[HaliStreaks]

Three or four disgruntled people should not be setting the tone for the evolution of the downtown core of a metropolitan area with hundreds of thousands of inhabitants.

I really hope this project goes through, it is an absolutely stunning building and it would allow for more people to be in that area (I'd love to be down there lol)

I unfortunately wont be able to make it to the hearing tomorrow night as I am seeing a good friend off to Texas for good [another HRM resident lost because of the "this is a backwards city" line :( ]

If I were to make it though, I sure as hell would get up in front of council and tell them that quote from Someone (maybe a litter nicer...er..maybe not lol) Council needs to understand that they cant keep listening to the HAC because frankly they are ruining this city.

At some point we all need to go to city hall, band together for a little visit, and pass along that message from all of us, and of course, the rest of Haligonians For Development who are in favor of seeing this city grow and prosper and not stagnate and rot.

[Haliguy]

In the paper this morning:

Proposed South Park development obstructs view, critics say
JENNIFER TAPLIN, METRO HALIFAX
June 10, 2008 05:00

Friends of the Halifax Common are ready to fight for the view tonight.


At the city council meeting tonight they’ll be speaking out against a proposed 19-storey development on South Park they say goes against the Halifax Common Plan.


“They say from South Street all the way to the Citadel is a very important view because it’s like a grande allee in Paris. It’s the nature of the city that gives it definition,” said Peggy Cameron.


They say the building will cast shadows and direct winds towards Victoria Park and the Public Garden.


A vote from council tonight could make or break the development.


“Council ought not to (approve it) based on what the current regulations are, but they continue to make exceptions to their own regulations,” Cameron said.


“There’s not any vision on the part of council. It would be exciting though if they did turn it down.”


Cameron has no idea which way city council is leaning and neither does Downtown Coun. Dawn Sloane.


“Basically I’m waiting to hear from the public.”


She said she hasn’t yet made up her mind, but is aware there are strong opinions both for and against the development in her constituency.

[hfx_chris]

So not only do we have the idiotic viewplanes from the Citadel to work around, we then learn there's viewplanes from Brightwood in Dartmouth, and now there's viewplane issues with the Halifax Common as well!? What the hell.

Do these people have anything to stand on? Are there actually protected views from the Common that are supposed to be protected? If not, then there is no reason why this development should be tossed.

[hfx_chris]

Actually, upon further reflection on the location of the building, can anybody tell me just what views this development would be blocking? It's nowhere near the Common, and it isn't blocking any views from Victoria Park either...

[phrenic]

Article in the Herald - today.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1061157.html

Someone please go to the hearing and shout down these idiots who seem to come up with the most ridiculous excuses to oppose these things.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Where is the Haligonians for Development Facebook group on this one??

If the admin of that group could send out the word, get people out to the meeting, it could change the decision.


The funniest thing is that there is currently no view from this site... well, properties that aren't overly well taken care of. The fact that Fares has made the concession to move the houses is great, what more could u want here. Those houses could fill in gaps around the city.

And comparing Halifax to Paris, thats a laugh. Have they ever been to Paris for an extended period of time? I've lived in europe, not sure about any of these chumps commenting, and european cities have a great mix of pro development and pro heritage because flexibility exists.

But hey, if all this continues, why not build "la defense" in Burnside, lol.

[someone123]

Well, whatever. They are grasping at straws and either want to mislead readers or don't know what they are talking about.

There is no four storey "height limit", nor are there viewplanes relating to this development. If South Park is a kind of "Grande-Allée", why wouldn't you want more major buildings on it, of the kind that already exist?

Wind and shadow are always vaguely mentioned but the fact is that the exact results of the wind and shadow studies are up on the HRM website. Usually new buildings are designed in consultation with engineers to ensure that they don't generate wind effects, which seem to be pretty easy to avoid at street level. It looks like that is what happened in this case since the model created was of the old design of the building. Of course, many people have totally misunderstood all of this at council (e.g. Gloria McCluskey).

[Keith P.]

I'm watching the public hearing right now and Mr. Leroy is currently speaking and totally debunking the usual arguments from the naysayers. If you're a member here, thank you!

The negativity from these people is astounding. The previous guy argued that low-rise sprawl is better for the environment than a high rise. Ridiculous.

Bev Miller up next... :yuck:

ETA: Miller made the usual "shocked and appalled" argument. She claims it is "out of scale" -- maybe she is arguing that it is too short compared to Park Vic? ;-)

She also rolled out the srgument of the John Heseltine report regarding Appeals in NS versus elsewhere. Someone should please get their hands on this and interpet it correctly.

[phrenic]

Someone just got up to argue that the development would block sunlight and one of their points was "for every one young person who leaves nova scotia for better opportunities, there are 10 who leave for better sunlight."

She looks confused and disheveled.