[Dmajackson]

Rendering(s):

http://www.allnovascotia.com/story_img/20120411finalrender5.jpg
Source: Page 8 (allnovascotia.com) (http://www.allnovascotia.com/story_img/20120411finalrender5.jpg)

Name: The Mary-Ann
Height: 28m
Floors: 9 Floors
Status: Approved
Case Number: 18006
Location: Queen Street & Clyde Street
Year Completed:
Developer(s): WM Fares
Architect(s):
Uses: Commercial/Residential
Notes:

100

This is the nickname HRM has given the three devleopment sites in Schmidtville as part of the funding for the central library project.

All of the information can be found below;

http://halifax.ca/sistersites/

[halifaxboyns]

Quite an interesting an approach to the site - I forgot that the parking lot next to the library was going to be incorporated (I was thinking 'three sisters'? I thought it was two!).

Did you also see the link to the materials for the NSCC store they want in the area? Very interesting. I also liked how they provided a lot of material on the design restrictions from HbD - gives people a good idea of the potential of the lot.

[sdm]

Quite an interesting an approach to the site - I forgot that the parking lot next to the library was going to be incorporated (I was thinking 'three sisters'? I thought it was two!).

Did you also see the link to the materials for the NSCC store they want in the area? Very interesting. I also liked how they provided a lot of material on the design restrictions from HbD - gives people a good idea of the potential of the lot.

I would have liked to seen a higher score towards design. It appears with a weighted average of 60% being that of purchase price that they are concerned with attracting the highest bidder.

[planarchy]

I would have liked to seen a higher score towards design. It appears with a weighted average of 60% being that of purchase price that they are concerned with attracting the highest bidder.

Agreed. The weighting for this is way out of wack. Also not so keen on approaching the three sites as so separate. Fine to have different buyers/buildings, but would be nice to have some vision to proceed on besides three names and a basic branding exercise. Maybe I missed something in my quick scan of the documents?

[sdm]

Agreed. The weighting for this is way out of wack. Also not so keen on approaching the three sites as so separate. Fine to have different buyers/buildings, but would be nice to have some vision to proceed on besides three names and a basic branding exercise. Maybe I missed something in my quick scan of the documents?

no, in most part your assumptions are correct. There is however a brief description saying a proponent may consider both lots in their submission.

But again, with price being the importance it means bid prices for the lands may compromise design as economics become pressed. I don't see the highest and best use for the sites as condo's, but if the price goes to high then the options for rental become very hard to justify.

It would have been better to remain with the original height amount, which would allow for 10-12 stories, not the 7-8 that is in place now. If anything that motion de-valued the land.

Anyhow, let the games begin and i look forward to seeing the proposals that result out of this competition.

[alps]

Cool historical info in the environmental assessment PDFs!

[Jonovision]

Spring Garden to change again

City will call for development proposals on three sites


By BILL POWER Business Reporter

Halifax Regional Municipality’s call for development proposals for some prime Spring Garden Road area properties will be heard across the country, devel­oper Danny Chedrawe said Thursday. “The pending avail­ability of these properties was already a hot topic among devel­opers," the president of West­wood Developments Ltd . said in an interview.

“I think these days we’re see­ing Spring Garden at its worst.

Everybody is excited about turn­ing it around," he said.

Chedrawe has two major pro­jects in the works for the Spring Garden Road area, including a 25,000-square-foot glass struc­ture at the corner of Spring Gar­den Road and Birmingham Street (formerly Sock It To Ya), and a hotel-condominium and retail complex at a land assembly fronting on Spring Garden Road, and bordered by Brunswick, Queen and Doyle streets (where Second Cup is located).

“The availability of the city properties will add to the energy of the area. It will be very good for us and what we’re trying to accomplish with our projects," said Chedrawe.

The city announced Thursday the first of three properties — collectively known as the Sister Sites — is on the market.

A parking lot to the south of Mills department store and iden­tified as the Mary Ann site is the first to be offered to developers.

The call for proposals closes March 24.

The city will eventually call for
proposals for a second site identi­fied as the Margaretta, fronting on Clyde Street, and a third, called the Rosina, which is the former Halifax Infirmary site.

Collectively, the three proper­ties provide parking for about 200 vehicles, and parking will be a critical component for any projects that move forward, said Peter Stickings, manager of real estate and facility services for the municipality.

“Parking requirements, design expectations, height and land­use requirements were clearly laid out through the planning process. This streamlines the process for developers, making it easier for them to submit propos­als," he said.

The Mary Ann development site measures 33,869 square feet and contains 70 parking spaces.

It has 172 feet fronting Queen Street to the east, 201 feet front­ing Clyde Street to the south, and 163 feet of frontage on Birming­ham Street to the west.

Stickings said any mixed-use development that occurs at the Mary Ann site will be balanced to accommodate the residential area to the south of Clyde Street.

Bob Mussett, senior vice-presi­dent with commercial Realtor CB Richard Ellis , said he expects to see interest in the Spring Garden Road area properties from many local developers and some from outside the region. “We should see some very interesting responses to the call for proposals for the first proper­ty," he said.

Mussett said he would have preferred an allowance for a greater population density at the Mary Ann site, where the win­ning developer will be limited to a maximum of eight storeys in the residential component.

Additional information is available at www.halifax.ca/ SisterSites.

(bpower@herald.ca)

[DigitalNinja]

Where they say a max of 8 stories in the residental component does that mean that they may be able to add an additional floor retail? Or would that be the whole site?

[JustinMacD]

Just waiting for all of the negative comments to pop up on The Herald's website.

"Too tall"
"Put money towards education"
"The people will not benefit from this"
"How do you expect people to visit downtown when there are no parking lots. Save the parking lots. Won't somebody please think of the parking lots"

Yadda, yadda, yadda

[-Harlington-]

Might as well :

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5396929884_eb0f4e8b15.jpg


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5212/5396332321_ea97d2c58f.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4123/5396930988_2cfc14ebf0.jpg


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5213/5396333735_9b5abea1ca.jpg

The area lots, aha

[sdm]

Just waiting for all of the negative comments to pop up on The Herald's website.

"Too tall"
"Put money towards education"
"The people will not benefit from this"
"How do you expect people to visit downtown when there are no parking lots. Save the parking lots. Won't somebody please think of the parking lots"

Yadda, yadda, yadda

like i mentioned before in a unrelated post, these lots went to RFP back in 1987 and submissions made. It was then that presure was placed on the reviewers by the merchant association to maintain the lots for surface parking because "women don't like parking structures"

I saw this comment in the allnovascotia a few weeks ago and thought, will history repeat itself?


I hope not. Besides, back then you could build 11-12 stories under that RFP, now its been reduced to just 8...........

[halifaxboyns]

like i mentioned before in a unrelated post, these lots went to RFP back in 1987 and submissions made. It was then that presure was placed on the reviewers by the merchant association to maintain the lots for surface parking because "women don't like parking structures"

I saw this comment in the allnovascotia a few weeks ago and thought, will history repeat itself?

I hope not. Besides, back then you could build 11-12 stories under that RFP, now its been reduced to just 8...........

11 to 12? I would've thought that the viewplanes would've had the same effect on these lots as they do with City Centre Atlantic - since it was pretty much stuck at 5 stories of residential above 2 to 3 stories of commercial? They should've allowed it go to the 10 stories - would've gotten more units. I'm willing to bet that there may be a map amendment to HbD coming (perhaps?).

I think that comment is so 80's - I'm hoping that they won't have much pull in terms of parking. It should all go underground.

I'm not fully happy with the RFP but it's okay - it does have some flaws. I agree with planarchy; evaluation ratings are a little odd - but I think the way they are doing the RFP (naming each lot) is very interesting. It's certainly new.

Personally, considering that the Dartmouth viewplanes are being looked at; I'd like to see them do the same for the Halifax ones (although I suspect it would be political suicide). There are two viewplanes which cast over this area but DJ and I seem to agree why not have one large one (still doing the same thing, covering the same area)? Then on top of that, as sdm points out - if the vp allowed 11 stories, why not model the building heights from the start point on the hill and figure out how tall everything could be within the viewplane - then set what the effect would be of increasing building heights slightly? For example - would the view be that drastically affected if this site were able to have a 15 storey building (not counting the HbD restrictions)? I'm guessing probably not - it might peak over City Centre Atlantic, but that might be it. But lets see a model and figure it out - because I suspect the next big area will be Fenwick and that area should be allowed 10 storeys for multi without any problems.

[JustinMacD]

like i mentioned before in a unrelated post, these lots went to RFP back in 1987 and submissions made. It was then that presure was placed on the reviewers by the merchant association to maintain the lots for surface parking because "women don't like parking structures"

I saw this comment in the allnovascotia a few weeks ago and thought, will history repeat itself?


I hope not. Besides, back then you could build 11-12 stories under that RFP, now its been reduced to just 8...........

Rofl @ "women don't like parking structures.

That makes zero sense.

[Keith P.]

Rofl @ "women don't like parking structures.

That makes zero sense.

Maybe not, but I heard the same exact comment from a lady I know the other day. The discussion was about The Bay on Chebucto Rd and the reasons she never went there. The spooky parking garage was cited, saying that she felt she might get attacked in there.

[someone123]

My guess would be that bids for the land will be relatively close together and so 60% will not necessarily put too much emphasis on the price. Because it is a bid I also think that 8 storeys will work out fine -- the city will just see somewhat lower bids than it would have seen had it permitted highrise buildings.

One thing I do dislike about this is the silly names and generic pictures on the website. The carefully-chosen stock woman photos scanned out of a newspaper look ridiculous.

Anyway, the fact that the NSLC wants a new location on Queen Street will make that lot very easy to develop. Guaranteed major retail tenant and apartments or condos in that area fill up extremely easily.

[Keith P.]

My guess would be that bids for the land will be relatively close together and so 60% will not necessarily put too much emphasis on the price. Because it is a bid I also think that 8 storeys will work out fine -- the city will just see somewhat lower bids than it would have seen had it permitted highrise buildings.

One thing I do dislike about this is the silly names and generic pictures on the website. The carefully-chosen stock woman photos scanned out of a newspaper look ridiculous.

Anyway, the fact that the NSLC wants a new location on Queen Street will make that lot very easy to develop. Guaranteed major retail tenant and apartments or condos in that area fill up extremely easily.

Couldn't agree more on the cutesy-pie names and the cost that obviously went into the creative material associated with it, including the signs. Ridiculous, but that's HRM for you these days.

Regarding the development, while I agree that having a tenant makes it easier, I don't quite understand how this will work. They mention the NSLC but nothing more. I seriously doubt if any commitments have been made to them or anyone else about rents. So it is hardly a sure thing that the NSLC will pay any price. I just don't get how being interested is in any way close to making it a reality. If the successful developer goes and says, "great, here's your space, all I need is $100 a square foot", I doubt they or any other tenant would be interested.

I heard a few months ago that NSLC was totally frustrated by the slowness of this process and were ready to walk away from it. They were only here because it was offered up as a consolation prize when they lost out on the spot they really wanted, which HRM awarded to Queen Judith for her monument to herself. It will be interesting to see if they end up being part of this in the end or if they go off and find something on their own.

[someone123]

It looks like they are just pointing out that there is interest in an NSLC location for the Queen Street site. It makes sense to mention that since it makes the site more attractive.

From the perspective of growing that area I think it's positive to have major tenants on "fringe" sites. That stretch of Queen can become like Dresden Row.

I heard a few months ago that NSLC was totally frustrated by the slowness of this process and were ready to walk away from it.

I have never seen a good explanation for this delay. Turner Drake described HRM/provincial (which is mostly WDCL) development as "leisurely". There doesn't seem to be any consequence for bureaucrats when a key parcel of land sits vacant for decades.

[halifaxboyns]

It looks like they are just pointing out that there is interest in an NSLC location for the Queen Street site. It makes sense to mention that since it makes the site more attractive.

From the perspective of growing that area I think it's positive to have major tenants on "fringe" sites. That stretch of Queen can become like Dresden Row.

I have never seen a good explanation for this delay. Turner Drake described HRM/provincial (which is mostly WDCL) development as "leisurely". There doesn't seem to be any consequence for bureaucrats when a key parcel of land sits vacant for decades.

I've gotten the sense (from the people I've talked too 'inside') it really isn't the planning department, so much as the real estate arm, which is in a completely different section. Either way though; it's disturbing that a group (whose purpose is to sell city land for a good return) is so slow - that doesn't say much. I don't recall who all is there still, but I got the sense that many had been around for a while - so I wonder if once the retirements start, if the speed will pick up with new blood? Just a guess on that though. BUt I wouldn't call it bad SDM - I know we're doing something similar with the east village, but I don't think we're naming the lots. I guess it's just something different, but I would hope they didn't hire someone to do it for them and at least did it in house.

As for the packaging of the lots - it's interesting. I'm neither here nor there about it; but it's an interesting idea. I think this is the first time they've done it this way but I'm sure it will get better.

[FuzzyWuz]

So I just read somewhere that those names are of the three Schmidt daughters. There ya go...

[CorbeauNoir]

It looks like they are just pointing out that there is interest in an NSLC location for the Queen Street site. It makes sense to mention that since it makes the site more attractive.

Aren't there already like two NSLCs within a few blocks of that site? Good gravy NS, you guys really pound 'em back :haha:

[Keith P.]

Aren't there already like two NSLCs within a few blocks of that site? Good gravy NS, you guys really pound 'em back :haha:

They want to shut those 2 down and consolidate them in the new development. Which means their existing Clyde St site is up for grabs for redevelopment.

[planarchy]

I guess it's just something different, but I would hope they didn't hire someone to do it for them and at least did it in house.

As for the packaging of the lots - it's interesting. I'm neither here nor there about it; but it's an interesting idea. I think this is the first time they've done it this way but I'm sure it will get better.

I would hope that would do the exact opposite and hire someone who actually knows they are doing. While I think this sort of branding can be useful, it should definitely not be done in-house by municipal staff. We already do too much if this type of stuff in-house at the Provincial Level; meanwhile the local private design firms starve.

[Grav]

The two parking lots would make great condo's which would bring people downtown to live. But I hope for something BIG to go on the old Infirmary site. Maybe a retail/recreation complex? Something with an indoor common area. It could also connect to the new library via tunnel for those cold winter days and for convenience. Also there was another thread about Art gallery of Nova Scotia looking for a new home. I think an Art Gallery and Library complex sounds pretty sophisticated. It would also make the Library's unorthodox design make some sense if it was attached to an art gallery. Then again Dal might build something there.

One thing is for sure, as it is the lots cant stay. I HATE walking down queen because that area feels like a waste land with all that emptiness. And its always windy. People drive around in circles looking for a spot in those even though Park Lane and City Center have Parking Garages! It makes no sense to me. The lots are useless

[-Harlington-]

Developers line up to take a crack at Halifax site

By CHRIS LAMBIE Business Editor
Fri, Mar 25 - 4:54 AM

Mary Ann has plenty of developers looking her way.

WM Fares Group and Banc Developments, Killam Properties and Urban Capital Property, Mythos Developments, Dexel Developments, Universal Properties, Armour Group, Tony Metlege, and Westwood Developments are all interested in acquiring the key downtown property on Clyde Street beside Queen Street from Halifax Regional Municipality. The city dubbed the lot Mary Ann, after one of three Schmidt sisters who lived in the area known as Schmidtville 140 years ago.

"We’re not asking for design proposals; this is just all about financial proposals and qualifications," Andy Fillmore, the municipality’s manager of urban design, said late Thursday.

"If you’ve done a project like this in the past, if you’ve got a good team and if you can show us numbers that make sense, then you’re a contender."

The ground floor on the Mary Ann site will be primarily commercial retail, Fillmore said. Height on the project is restricted to 27.6 metres.

The project, which will hold hundreds of residential units, will be set back 3.6 metres from the sidewalk on Clyde, with a double row of trees on the sidewalk.

"There’s a maximum building envelope that they can do whatever they want to within," Fillmore said. "Then there are some guidelines around quality of materials . . . and active pedestrian streetscapes . . . but you could have very, very different results from different architects."

The municipality’s other Clyde Street parking lot will be up for grabs later, followed by the site of the former Halifax Infirmary on Queen Street, which lies south of the land destined to house the new $55-million library.

There is no schedule for when the other two publicly owned sites will be offered to developers.

The request for proposals closed at 5 p.m. Thursday. The city will not divulge what developers offered to pay for the land until the transaction is complete.

( clambie@herald.ca)

[someone123]

Also really looking forward to this. I think 27.6 metres can work because they are bidding on a site. The developers will effectively set a price that the market can bare given the height restrictions.

I like the fact that they're talking about an extra wide sidewalk with trees. This is something that is actually a community amenity that will be useful. Often the city demands setbacks with no other requirements and the result is awkward private or semi-private wasted land (the land itself has no purpose other than to keep the building away from adjacent properties).

[sdm]

Also really looking forward to this. I think 27.6 metres can work because they are bidding on a site. The developers will effectively set a price that the market can bare given the height restrictions.

I like the fact that they're talking about an extra wide sidewalk with trees. This is something that is actually a community amenity that will be useful. Often the city demands setbacks with no other requirements and the result is awkward private or semi-private wasted land (the land itself has no purpose other than to keep the building away from adjacent properties).

I still would have preferred a bit more design considerations in the evaluation.

Nonetheless, lets get on it with it

[halifaxboyns]

Also really looking forward to this. I think 27.6 metres can work because they are bidding on a site. The developers will effectively set a price that the market can bare given the height restrictions.

I like the fact that they're talking about an extra wide sidewalk with trees. This is something that is actually a community amenity that will be useful. Often the city demands setbacks with no other requirements and the result is awkward private or semi-private wasted land (the land itself has no purpose other than to keep the building away from adjacent properties).

I agree about the sidewalk. Having trees and wider sidewalks is something that the best cities do to create areas that people want to walk in. The trees help shade during the summer, so it's not so god awful hot (as my mother would say). The trees also cut down on wind and help with snow.

I think this site is big enough that despite the fact the height on the isn't very high, you can still get a good level of units and development there. Plus; it's all about cumulative effect. So add this lot, the two other 'sister lots', Trillium and eventually YMCA - that's a good chunk of units added!

[worldlyhaligonian]

If these two lots can be dealt with in a short period then we can focus on the UG, herald, and other major holes downtown.

[sdm]

If these two lots can be dealt with in a short period then we can focus on the UG, herald, and other major holes downtown.

I think there is hope, however if they are both used for condos then i am a bit nervous as it appears the market isn't big enough to support too many. Besides, condo's will require preselling, were as rentals is requires none of this (hence why the vic was built so quickly).

[halifaxboyns]

I think there is hope, however if they are both used for condos then i am a bit nervous as it appears the market isn't big enough to support too many.

I don't know if I agree with that statement. My understanding (in the case of Trillium) was that the average priced to slightly higher end units went quite quickly. It was the higher priced units (I'd assume above $500k) that took a while to sell, which a single person or even a couple with average salaries couldn't really afford. So if they stick to a certain price point, I'm sure the units would sell.

From what I'm seeing, the market isn't doing so well for units above $500k. Because those units in that building by the commons have been for sale for what seems like forever and most of them were 500K and up.

But that's just what I'm seeing and hearing...I could be completely wrong.

The other side of the coin would be that if they flooded the market with condos and had to reduce costs - it might hurt them, but then create an artificial demand on the units because they are going cheaper. But I don't really see that happening, since the developer could end up taking a loss on the product.

[someone123]

Anybody know when they're going to release information about the bids for the first site?

[someone123]

Headed to council in an in camera session in June. Sounds like there was a lot of interest. Not sure when they would actually confirm a winning bid or release more information.

My guess is that we'll get the max 8 storeys of condos with the NSLC and maybe some other retail spaces. I'm also predicting that this will play out smoothly since there is a requirement that the winning bid adhere to HRMbyDesign. There shouldn't be a need for any amendments before development takes place.

This building plus the library and IDEA building will go a very long way in reducing the "sea of parking lots" effect.

Like I've said before, we could conceivably have 5 projects under construction in a very small area: City Centre Atlantic apartments, new TD building, library, IDEA building, and the Mary-Ann site.

[halifaxboyns]

Headed to council in an in camera session in June. Sounds like there was a lot of interest. Not sure when they would actually confirm a winning bid or release more information.

My guess is that we'll get the max 8 storeys of condos with the NSLC and maybe some other retail spaces. I'm also predicting that this will play out smoothly since there is a requirement that the winning bid adhere to HRMbyDesign. There shouldn't be a need for any amendments before development takes place.

This building plus the library and IDEA building will go a very long way in reducing the "sea of parking lots" effect.

Like I've said before, we could conceivably have 5 projects under construction in a very small area: City Centre Atlantic apartments, new TD building, library, IDEA building, and the Mary-Ann site.

This is great news and will go a long way towards creating many good paying construction jobs.

[someone123]

Here's a good view of the sites taken in 2007:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5301/5846844232_654d944cde_b.jpg
source: Ms. Charlie Milne on flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/39335371@N03/5846844232/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

[someone123]

Apparently council will be considering the first development tomorrow. Perhaps we will see some renderings or other material.

It's a rental proposal plus the NSLC is interested in moving in so it's possible that this will proceed very quickly. According to ANS they're looking at 8 floors and about 130 units.

[RyeJay]

Apparently council will be considering the first development tomorrow. Perhaps we will see some renderings or other material.

It's a rental proposal plus the NSLC is interested in moving in so it's possible that this will proceed very quickly. According to ANS they're looking at 8 floors and about 130 units.

Is there a view plane these buildings are ducking under? Why only 8?

[eastcoastal]

Is there a view plane these buildings are ducking under? Why only 8?

No view plane. I'm pretty sure this is part of the area that HRMbyDESIGN set maximum heights in.

[halifaxboyns]

No view plane. I'm pretty sure this is part of the area that HRMbyDESIGN set maximum heights in.

Actually there are both. The parking lots and the other site near the former hospital are covered by viewplanes 9 and 10.

So you actually have the HbD regulations and the viewplanes. My guess would be that the maximum post bonus height comes in just under the maximum viewplane height.

[beyeas]

It appears to be confirmed that the city is going with the Fares bid, and will open negotiations with them. I think this is goos news, and I don't doubt that part of why their bid scored well is that they are one of only a handful of developers that have been building the last couple of years.

Fares has said that they have concept drawings, but nothing detailed... hopefully we will see at least the concept released sometime soon!

[Haliguy]

Fares Group wins Mary Ann bidding war

By BRUCE ERSKINE Business Reporter
Wed, Jun 29 - 4:54 AM

W.M. Fares Group and Banc Developments have wooed and won Mary Ann.

"That’s good," said Wadih Fares, president of the Fares Group, after Halifax regional council decided Tuesday to sell a 33,869-square-foot property bounded by Birmingham, Queen and Clyde streets in downtown Halifax to the local developers.

"I’m very happy."

The property is named for Mary Ann Schmidt, one of three sisters who lived in the area that was known as Schmidtville 140 years ago.

Fares wouldn’t say what the partners paid for the property, the first of three properties in the area the municipality plans to sell for development, or when construction might begin.

A confidential May 20 city hall report on the Mary Ann deal won’t be released until the transaction closes.

But Besim Halef of Banc Developments said the partners plan a $30-million, eight-storey commercial-residential development that conforms to the Halifax by Design guidelines. It would include three levels of underground parking.

The ground floor, which may include a Nova Scotia Liquor Corp. outlet to replace the existing Clyde Street store, would be retail space, Halef said Tuesday. The upper floors would contain 120 to 130 apartments.

He also declined to disclose what the property cost the developers.

The municipality received eight bids for the Mary Ann property.

Other bidders included Killam Properties Inc. and Urban Capital Property, Mythos Developments Ltd., Dexel Developments, Universal Properties, Armour Group Ltd., Tony Metlege and Westwood Developments Ltd.

The city will put the nearby Margaretta block at Clyde Street and Dresden Row and the Rosina block, on the Queen Street site of the old Infirmary hospital, up for sale over the next few years.

( berskine@herald.ca)

[Phalanx]

Fares has said that they have concept drawings, but nothing detailed... hopefully we will see at least the concept released sometime soon!

A concept image appeared with the print version of the Chronicle-Herald article. I can't find it online, though, and I don't have a scanner...

It looked pretty good at first glance.

[someone123]

Good to see that this is moving forward after so many years. Looking forward to the rendering.

Hopefully they'll step it up a bit for the next two sites and begin the tendering process for the second while this building is under construction.

[hoser111]

Development duo to build on downtown Halifax lots
Public parking lots behind Spring Garden Road to house retail, commercial structures
By CHRIS LAMBIE Business Editor
Wed, Jun 29 - 4:00 PM
Two prominent Halifax developers are buying two large downtown Halifax lots.

W.M. Fares Group and Banc Developments are now hammering out a deal with the city for two parking lots on Clyde Street, divided by Birmingham Street.

Both developers said the two eight-storey commercial and residential developments they plan to build should be worth a total of about $60 million once constructed.

“We bid on both of them and we got them both,” Wadih Fares, president of the Fares Group, told thechronicleherald.ca today.

“We thought it would make it a lot more appealing to have both lots, from the economic point of view and the control point of view.”

The city had planned to sell three lots individually. The properties are identified as "Mary Ann", "Margaretta" and "Rosina" - the Schmidt sisters who lived in the area, known as Schmidtville, about 140 years ago.

But the request for proposals for Mary Ann, the 33,869-square-foot property bounded by Birmingham, Queen and Clyde streets, gave developers the option to also bid on Margaretta, the neighbouring 42,600-square-foot lot on the west side of Birmingham.

The city plans to sell Rosina, which is the former Halifax Infirmary site, at a later date.

“We’ll do our best to get the third one when it comes up,” Besim Halef of Banc Developments, said with a chuckle.

Halef said he’s had his eye on the Mary Ann and Margaretta lots since he came to Canada in 1975.

“I always thought it would be a great opportunity to build something over there,” Halef said. “Luckily, 36 years later, it came to fruition.”

Peter Stickings, manager of real estate and facility services for the municipality, confirmed negotiations are now going on with the developers for both downtown lots. Three of the eight bidders for the Mary Ann site also wanted Margaretta, he said.

Fares and Banc plan to build an eight-storey, commercial-residential development on the Mary Ann site that will include three levels of underground parking.

The ground floor on Mary Ann, which may include a Nova Scotia Liquor Corp. outlet to replace the existing Clyde Street store, would be retail space. The upper floors would contain 120 to 130 apartments.

Margaretta should contain a similar combination of apartments and ground floor retail, as well as underground parking, he said.

“They’ll be almost the same type of development,” Fares said. “They will be compatible with each other.”

But each building will have its own distinguishing characteristics, Halef said.

The developers are looking at connecting the two projects with either a bridge or a tunnel.

“We can’t say anything right now because it’s all ideas,” Fares said.

The request for proposals from the city gave developers two years to begin construction.

But Fares said today construction on at least one of the two properties could start next spring and take two years to complete.

“We anticipate to close in a short order of time with the city and in the meantime, we will be doing our detailed design,” Halef said.

“We’re going to break ground (on at least one site) next year for sure. We are comfortable either building them one at a time or both of them at the same time.”

Neither Fares nor Halef would say what they offered to pay for the Mary Ann and Margaretta properties. They are estimated to be worth $6 million a piece for tax purposes.

A confidential May 20 city hall report on the deal won’t be released until the transaction closes.

“We’ll wait for the city to make it public, Fares said.

Other bidders on the Mary Ann property included Killam Properties Inc. and Urban Capital Property, Mythos Developments Ltd., Dexel Developments, Universal Properties, Armour Group Ltd., Tony Metlege and Westwood Developments Ltd.

“We have a lot of respect for everyone who put in a bid and I’m sure every one of them would have done a great job,” Fares said.

“That’s what’s so exciting about this. It really drew the top of the development industry in our city.

[someone123]

Very interesting.. I thought they were only looking at the one lot. It sounds like the two year construction deadline applies to both sites..?

A bridge or tunnel seems kind of excessive when the buildings will be separated by a tiny street with very little vehicle traffic. I wonder how much retail they intend to include. Will these have more "mini-malls" like Park Lane or Spring Garden Place?

[worldlyhaligonian]

3 levels of parking! The net result of development on these lots will likely be positive, so shut it NIMBYs and people who don't even live DT.

I can't wait until they develop the lot that fronts onto Queen... those two houses on it need to go!

[Northend Nerd]

I'm glad to see they are finally doing something with these parking lots. I feel so much good real estate is lost to these eye sores. Not only will there be more total parking, but more people living living downtown which will help feed all these new retail shops.

I also like the idea of a tunnel. I feel that bringing more convenient covered passage ways to Halifax is a good thing, especially on those brutal winter days. :cool:

[someone123]

ANS has a rendering posted. To be honest I really don't care for the design, although it is a pretty rough sketch. Hopefully it will be refined into something simpler and more elegant. The overall form looks good.

[alps]

I didn't expect both lots to be sold. On the upside hopefully that means things will move quicker, but I'm also a disappointed that the two buildings seem to have similar/identical designs...I was hoping for a lot more variety in appearance.

[eastcoastal]

I hope the two buildings do maintain distinct identities.

... and a tunnel? Unless there's an extensive tunnel system to connect to, I'm pretty sure a tunnel between two buildings that leads no-where else is not a particularly good use of investment.

[someone123]

ANS ran another story about how the NSLC is interested in opening their new flagship store on Queen Street in this development.

It would be nice to see that move onto Queen Street since it could act as an anchor for other retail nearby. It would also open up a development site at the old NSLC location, which is in an odd spot.

Apparently they're only interested if the rents are low, which makes sense. People are going to go to the downtown NSLC whether it's in a prime spot or not.

[DigitalNinja]

Anyway someone can put the rendering on here?

I'm kinda confused by the article... Are the 2 working together or now bidding against each other for the 2 lots?

[worldlyhaligonian]

The current NSLC site might be a good spot for a restaurant... keeping in theme with the buildings nearby.

[Waye Mason]

Anyway someone can put the rendering on here?

I'm kinda confused by the article... Are the 2 working together or now bidding against each other for the 2 lots?

I don't think they have renderings yet. Fares was interviewed in ANS I think right after winning and he was saying they were going to proceed with drawings, plans, now that they won.

[Nifta]

Excuse the noob question; what's ANS?

[Phalanx]

ANS = All Nova Scotia News. A subscription based news site.

As for renderings... there's nothing detailed yet. A concept image appeared in the Chronicle-Herald and on ANS last week.

[Dmajackson]

Rendering time! :)

http://www.wmfares.com/images/stories/buildings/full_clyde_street.jpg

Credit: WM Fares Group (http://www.wmfares.com/?option=com_content&task=view&id=112&Itemid=122)

[halifaxboyns]

Rendering time! :)

http://www.wmfares.com/images/stories/buildings/full_clyde_street.jpg

Credit: WM Fares Group (http://www.wmfares.com/?option=com_content&task=view&id=112&Itemid=122)

Wow - looks pretty cool.

[someone123]

I find it very busy looking and the detailing on the ground floor columns is worrisome -- that kind of stuff is rarely attractive. Somebody could probably benefit from reading up on design, simplicity, and elegance. Adding decoration to a building doesn't necessarily make it more attractive.

Hopefully this will be revised and something clean and modern looking will be built.

[alps]

Yeah...it looks like it has the potential to turn out kinda garish. And again, I'm disappointed the design for the two lots is so similar. Not bad, but I hope this is preliminary and I hope those are mostly storefronts and not largely glass walls (along Queen for example).

[halifaxboyns]

It's a preliminary drawing - a first crack. I'm sure it's going to change at least two or three times before it gets approved.

[HRM]

Even when approved the final product will likely deviate from what HRM will have approved in the final DA. Regardless of what one thinks of the appearance of The Trillium there are numerous deviations as built from what the city agreed could be built in the final DA.

Developers in HRM do not seem to be afraid to go outside DAs and HRM does not seem interested in enforcing the terms of DAs so the renderings even in the final DAs for these sites should probably be taken as general guidelines.

[someone123]

ANS reported on this a bit tonight. Halef and Fares take possession of the lots on September 30. They are partnering with Plazacorp and are in discussions with the NSLC.

The plan is for two rental buildings plus a new flagship NSLC. They mentioned starting the first building in the spring, with the second to follow in 8 months.

It's great news that they're doing rental with retail. It seems pretty likely that they can follow through with an aggressive start date, whereas the highrise condo type proposals have often ended up in limbo. It will be great if in a year's time these are both under construction along with the new library and City Centre Atlantic expansion. Maybe we'll also hear about new plans for the Bank of Montreal/TD block soon.

Looks like there will be huge improvements for this part of the city! It would be great if the level of density/population hit a point where it could sustain some larger urban format stores like the ones that have set up shop in Toronto and Vancouver (Best Buy, Future Shop, Canadian Tire, Home Depot, etc.).

I would also love to see more of a plan to extend the Spring Garden retail area out along Queen Street and past South Park on Spring Garden Road. The idea would be to plan for medium- to high-density residential along those corridors with a strong commercial component. The area around Queen/Fenwick could be consolidated and turned into even more of a high-density node.

[Dmajackson]

Maybe we'll also hear about new plans for the Bank of Montreal/TD block soon.

I doubt it. Chedrawe (Westwood) owns this block and he has a lot of developments underway. He has 5495 SGR and Gladstone North under construction right now, SGR @ Carleton, Drum, Robie Street Funeral Home and possibly another development on SGR in the plans.

I can't see him doing more than two developments at a time.

[someone123]

I doubt it. Chedrawe (Westwood) owns this block and he has a lot of developments underway. He has 5495 SGR and Gladstone North under construction right now, SGR @ Carleton, Drum, Robie Street Funeral Home and possibly another development on SGR in the plans.

I can't see him doing more than two developments at a time.

But typically we hear about proposals long before construction -- in order to keep development going they have to get everything approved ahead of time.

[halifaxboyns]

Chedrawe may be over extended to take on a new project - but getting the discussions going doesn't hurt. If it has to be done through DA, there is lots of time that can be given to negotiate it and when construction would have to start.

The idea of extending commercial down Spring Garden Road is interesting, but the existing development would need to change. Really, the only commercial between South Park and Summer street is the ground level retail with the smitty's restaurant. With the school and other apt building having no commercial and the park - you end up with a divided corridor.

But considering many of the buildings between Summer and Robie have ground floor retail; it wouldn't be too hard to enhance that section (with more density above commercial). The only problem might be the Carlton Heritage Streetscape - but since it may not apply to buildings fronting onto SGR, you might be okay. Would just have to be sensitive in the design towards the heritage element.

[Empire]

Maybe we'll also hear about new plans for the Bank of Montreal/TD block soon.


Hopefully Chedrawe never gets the opportunity to destroy the BMO building..........

BMO Building (Real Sandstone)
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=en&ll=44.643332,-63.57581&spn=0.000002,0.001709&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=28.224119,55.986328&vpsrc=6&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.643289,-63.575977&panoid=KsMU1upDs7AdHT1LLTssJA&cbp=12,24.77,,0,2.55

[Keith P.]

ANS reported on this a bit tonight. Halef and Fares take possession of the lots on September 30. They are partnering with Plazacorp and are in discussions with the NSLC.

The plan is for two rental buildings plus a new flagship NSLC. They mentioned starting the first building in the spring, with the second to follow in 8 months.


That's good, hopefully they will get a deal done. Taking the good with the bad, my sources tell me that the NSLC is going to walk away from their Agricola St store at the end of the year and simply leave without a replacement. I don't know if this is a negotiating ploy or not - my source believes it is real. Apparently they are very unhappy with the proposals submitted by the landlord or the relationship has deteriorated beyond repair. Not sure how they can just walk away from that neighborhood though.

[beyeas]

That's good, hopefully they will get a deal done. Taking the good with the bad, my sources tell me that the NSLC is going to walk away from their Agricola St store at the end of the year and simply leave without a replacement. I don't know if this is a negotiating ploy or not - my source believes it is real. Apparently they are very unhappy with the proposals submitted by the landlord or the relationship has deteriorated beyond repair. Not sure how they can just walk away from that neighborhood though.

Yeah I agree... there is no way they could pull out of the neighbourhood. Maybe they will change locations within it, but no way they leave it.

[halifaxboyns]

Yeah I agree... there is no way they could pull out of the neighbourhood. Maybe they will change locations within it, but no way they leave it.

Didn't the proposal that was submitted have virtually no commercial on it? I'll have to check Dawn Sloane's website, as I believe she still has the rendering again to confirm.

Personally, if that was the plan submitted, I wouldn't be in favour of it. Agricola should be another area commercial corridor area (along the same as someone123's concept of the SGR commercial corridor). This would be an opportunity to have a new building go up to set context and then encourage a pattern.

[beyeas]

yeah I totally agree. Agricola is prime for a north end version of Quinpool etc.

[bluenoser]

Hopefully Chedrawe never gets the opportunity to destroy the BMO building..........

I know it's been discussed before but I have to second that! I love all the new development potential in the area but I see no reason to have to get rid of this gem; one of my favourites in the city.

Anyway, this is all good news.

[halifaxboyns]

yeah I totally agree. Agricola is prime for a north end version of Quinpool etc.

The great thing about Agricola is that when you compare the vehicle traffic there between that of Gottingen and Robie - it's got the least traffic of the three streets. So it opens up a huge amount of possibility in terms of looking at a Streetcar, which could enable a lot of high density in the area. I've talked about the E squared video series on Portland, which I will have with me when I come home in September. One thing that stuck out to me was the comment made by the owner of Powell's Books in the Pearl District (who was a big proponent of redevelopment) - people had faith in investing and building in the pearl district because it was permanent track transportation. It couldn't easily go away, like bus routes can. This enabled over $3 billion in private investment and development in the area.

Put a streetcar down Agricola and through the Hydrostone to downtown - I'm sure you could leverage just as much in Halifax and it wouldn't all have to be high rise towers, although if the game of the heritage trust has been to put the towers there - then lets play the game and do it and crank up the height.

I agree with Bluenoser's comment about the BMO building. It's a gorgeous building, one of only a few sandstone buildings in Halifax and should be retained. I'm sure there are ways that you can build a more modern building on the other lots and connect it to this building. If we could do it in Calgary for the Sandstone school in the Beltline (for the Calgary Board of Education's new HQ), I'm sure it can be done.

[someone123]

The ANS article also mentioned the potential sale of the Sovereign Building -- another sandstone building on Spring Garden Road that should be preserved.

The streetcar and permanence of transit infrastructure is an interesting point. That whole aspect of transit and development tends to be ignored by the municipal government and Metro Transit (often it seems like new ideas are intentionally torpedoed). Typically a new project is evaluated in terms of current trips, not in terms of how it can shape and encourage future development. A North End streetcar would never look attractive if you just considered current residents, but it would make a lot of sense as part of a larger strategy for intensification.

If the city fails to move forward to doing this type of planning it will continue to waste money on poor quality services for car-oriented sprawl.

[Keith P.]

A streetcar that did a loop - start at what is now the Cogswell interchange and run south on Hollis to South, go west to either South Park or Robie, north to SGR, north or east to Agricola, north on Agricola to Young, south on Novalea/Gottingen to Cogswell - would really be a great service.

[beyeas]

A streetcar that did a loop - start at what is now the Cogswell interchange and run south on Hollis to South, go west to either South Park or Robie, north to SGR, north or east to Agricola, north on Agricola to Young, south on Novalea/Gottingen to Cogswell - would really be a great service.

Interesting idea... my vote would be SGR over Robie I think. Would keep it more of a "downtown" route (although Robie has its own advantages like maybe catching more Dal students), and Robie has become a pretty major traffic artery for getting to/from Quinpool etc.

The elevation change coming up South from Hollis is a bit steep on that first hill, although to be honest I am a bad judge of what the grade would be relative to what a streetcar can do.

I am trying to picture how best to get from Gottingen to Hollis without a steep climb down. Going down North onto Barrington I think might be a bit steep, but going down Cogswell street itself might work.

Overall I really like that idea though, in particular if there was a reasonable way to enact ROW for it. :tup:

[halifaxboyns]

My thought on the idea of a streetcar was somewhat similar to Keithp's - but I kept the lines I thought of away from Spring Garden Road. Mainly because the street is congested enough as is with deliveries, cars, buses...it would be a different story if it became a transit only street, but for now I kept my ideas off of it.

I looked at using streets that were close by that had far less traffic, so that locating a streetcar as embeded rails wouldn't be a big disruption. So when I thought of the SGR area - I thought of Morris Street/University Avenue. It's only a block or two away, so it's a quick walk.

I came up with 4 different lines, which can be seen on this (http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?msid=202282502905246741857.00049bbc4a08ab6beda47&msa=0&ll=44.68086,-63.595734&spn=0.150618,0.264015) map.

The two lines that are Halifax Peninsula specific are: (a) the Agricola loop - starting at the NSCC campus on leeds, following Agricola and Cogswell into downtown along Hollis to the train station and down Barrington, under the railway tracks and then back into downtown from the Pier 21/Seaport area along Lower Water and back up Cogswell/Agricola to the Hydrostone and then along Devonshire to the NSCC.

(b) Starting at Mumford Terminal, under the parking lots of HSC, along Connaught to Windsor. Along Windsor to Cunard where it would then share the same line as route (a) through the downtown core until reaching Morris Street. Then line (b) would branch off at Morris and head along right up University and turning left onto Robie, would end at St. Mary's. The line would then reverse and back track along Morris until reaching the common outbound line along Lower Water Street and reverse the inbound route ending at Mumford.

I won't describe the other two lines, you can look at them from the map. My idea had been to have a shared segment in the downtown so that you could have a higher frequency of service in the downtown core (to service the office people during the lunch time rush) but also minimize car traffic impact as much as possible (I don't think that can be avoided with Lower Water and Hollis Street, but with the other streets it could). The other main goal was to use the Streetcar as a catalyst to encourage redevelopment in areas where it could be done (such as along Windsor Street, Agricola, the Hydrostone, etc). Finally, the other main rationale was to put major destinations along the routes that would generate useage. It's one thing to build a streetcar, but if it doesn't serve anything important - whose going to use it? If you take it places people want/need to go too, you create the greater possibility of success.

[halifaxboyns]

I'd also repeat the comment I got from that e squared about Portland's streetcar. There is a perception with developers, that if you build projects on the expectation of transit oriented development - you get better buy in when it's permanent track transportation because you can move bus and BRT routes with ease. Train, LRT and subway - not so much.

If you put a streetcar in, I suspect you would get the same reception in HRM. The question would be whether or not you'd get the $3 billion in private investment that Portland did, around their streetcar. I suspect overtime, HRM could definately get that or more...

We are kinda getting off topic of the thread - since this is about the sisters sites, but related (and not). So I'm also going to post this map and more details in the rail discuss thread.

[someone123]

I would run transit right along Spring Garden Road. It would be a big mistake to build streetcars somewhere else and make the street inconvenient for transit users and pedestrians.

Spring Garden Road is congested but its role as a traffic corridor isn't important. I would guess that it doesn't carry a lot of vehicles and isn't popular for people commuting into the downtown. The parking issue is also overblown and just doesn't make much sense. How many car spots could you even fit along those blocks given the corners and hydrants and crosswalks and everything else? 100? It seems like such a stretch to believe that having those few spots on SGR instead of on a sidestreet or in a garage is somehow critical to the businesses. It's even harder to believe that it is more important than having foot and vehicle traffic move better.

And of course the SGR design of lowest-common-denominator patching is not what you see in busy and successful cities (e.g. West Coast). It's what you see in faded cities stuck in the 1950s (worst parts of the Midwest).

The street would be dramatically improved if it had wider sidewalks, places to sit, maybe some more trees, a few sensible spots for delivery vehicles, and electric streetcars instead of loud diesel buses spewing out exhaust. Too bad the city can't get it together enough to make those things a reality.

[halifaxboyns]

I would run transit right along Spring Garden Road. It would be a big mistake to build streetcars somewhere else and make the street inconvenient for transit users and pedestrians.

Spring Garden Road is congested but its role as a traffic corridor isn't important. I would guess that it doesn't carry a lot of vehicles and isn't popular for people commuting into the downtown. The parking issue is also overblown and just doesn't make much sense. How many car spots could you even fit along those blocks given the corners and hydrants and crosswalks and everything else? 100? It seems like such a stretch to believe that having those few spots on SGR instead of on a sidestreet or in a garage is somehow critical to the businesses. It's even harder to believe that it is more important than having foot and vehicle traffic move better.

And of course the SGR design of lowest-common-denominator patching is not what you see in busy and successful cities (e.g. West Coast). It's what you see in faded cities stuck in the 1950s (worst parts of the Midwest).

The street would be dramatically improved if it had wider sidewalks, places to sit, maybe some more trees, a few sensible spots for delivery vehicles, and electric streetcars instead of loud diesel buses spewing out exhaust. Too bad the city can't get it together enough to make those things a reality.

Going from memory; there is no main on street parking for people on SGR. The parking is either for delivery vehicles, bus stops or taxis. So parking isn't really an issue in a way (beyond deliveries). The main reason I kept it off SGR was with the number of bus routes during peak times, my concern was the conflicts between SC and buses. With some many routes trying to get through a narrow area (in both directions), I felt adding a SC to the mix would likely cause the efficency of any SC in terms of speed and ontime performance to decrease (even if you included transit priority). Added to this, the concept was to have the inbound routes come through Hollis and outbound through Lower Water (using the one way flow) it would be tough to get a SC up from Hollis to SGR. I had thought about Barrington, but the same problem exists on Barrington as SGR with deliveries. That could be solved by exluding delivery trucks from both streets during peak periods, but then how do you deal with it off peak?

I think a SC could work in either sense, but one of the key issues with public transit is ontime performance. If you put the route on Morris St then the conflict with buses decreases. I'm just not sure you could have a conflict free experience through DT (be it on Hollis/Lower Water or on Barrington).

[someone123]

Much of my complaining is directed at the grumbling that seems responsible for the death of proposed streetscape improvements in 2009. There are certain business owners who only seem to care about surface and on-street parking. I'm sure it's something their customers complain about but it's clearly not a requirement for successful urban shopping districts.

[halifaxboyns]

Much of my complaining is directed at the grumbling that seems responsible for the death of proposed streetscape improvements in 2009. There are certain business owners who only seem to care about surface and on-street parking. I'm sure it's something their customers complain about but it's clearly not a requirement for successful urban shopping districts.

I completely forgot about that - but that helps my suggested route. Most of the businesses along SGR would probably hate having a streetcar out front (because of their obsession with parking). Since there aren't that many businesses along Morris, it wouldn't be such a problem. Plus it's only a 2 block walk.

With Hollis and Lower Water - most businesses along there expect people to park on the street or in parking lots because those streets are limited in on street parking. I think you could keep the on street parking in some parts and then build the stop platform on the same side so that the SC would run in one of the lanes of traffic - thus eliminating the need for removing on street parking.

[someone123]

Plus it's only a 2 block walk.

This is huge; consider how much less valuable Morris Street commercial spaces is than Spring Garden Road space!

[halifaxboyns]

This is huge; consider how much less valuable Morris Street commercial spaces is than Spring Garden Road space!

Maybe so - but how likely wood it be to get a streetcar on SGR (considering the parking issue)?

[someone123]

Maybe so - but how likely wood it be to get a streetcar on SGR (considering the parking issue)?

About as likely as it would be to get any streetcar at all. If there's leadership it can happen. If there isn't, well, I hope people like taking the bus.

There's too much hand-wringing in Halifax about how people might be offended, and that extends to the forum. Every good project has its detractors.

[eastcoastal]

I completely forgot about that - but that helps my suggested route. Most of the businesses along SGR would probably hate having a streetcar out front (because of their obsession with parking). Since there aren't that many businesses along Morris, it wouldn't be such a problem. Plus it's only a 2 block walk.

With Hollis and Lower Water - most businesses along there expect people to park on the street or in parking lots because those streets are limited in on street parking. I think you could keep the on street parking in some parts and then build the stop platform on the same side so that the SC would run in one of the lanes of traffic - thus eliminating the need for removing on street parking.

The two-block walk is not a huge deal if you think of it in pure terms. Unfortunately, that two blocks could put a serious dent in SGR. Much of the success with streetcars, as they relate to businesses and urban development, is that the commuter/travelling public is pretty much guaranteed to be hanging around on the street waiting for the next train. My fear would be that a streetcar elsewhere would suck life away from SGR. Maybe in the long term that would be OK, because a new shopping strip would probably develop along the new line, but the growing pains would be difficult, and there would be much gnashing of teeth about the death of SGR.

I say stuff the parking two blocks away.

[halifaxboyns]

The two-block walk is not a huge deal if you think of it in pure terms. Unfortunately, that two blocks could put a serious dent in SGR. Much of the success with streetcars, as they relate to businesses and urban development, is that the commuter/travelling public is pretty much guaranteed to be hanging around on the street waiting for the next train. My fear would be that a streetcar elsewhere would suck life away from SGR. Maybe in the long term that would be OK, because a new shopping strip would probably develop along the new line, but the growing pains would be difficult, and there would be much gnashing of teeth about the death of SGR.

I say stuff the parking two blocks away.

I was thinking about the same thing last night. Part of the reason I chose Morris Street in my streetcar concept was two reasons: The first was that it had a very gentle slope up from the shared Hollis Street concept. I think the shared concept on Hollis for the office workers during the work week is very important because it can help attract more people onto a streetcar. Also by using Morris you don't have to worry about the grade change because it's hardly noticable.

The second reason was that it was close to SGR, but I was concerned with putting too much on that street. So it was a close walk, but not right on the street.

It's the second point I've been thinking about more and I think someone123 is right, as it your comment. I'd be worried you'd end up moving the commercial down to Morris, which isn't my intention. But I didn't want to give up the University Avenue segment to service the IWK, VG and Dalhousie before going down Robie to SMU as the terminus.

So I've come up with a solution - which I put into the map. I've changed the '503 - Morris' streetcar route (I just picked a random number) so that it still goes up Morris, but turns right at Queen, then left at SGR and follows SGR until Summer. Then hangs a left @ Summer, Right at University and resumes the original route concept I had. Another change could be SGR all the way from Queen to Robie and then down Robie to SMU.

I've updated the map concept, which is posted in the Rail Discussion Thread. This way the shared concept along Hollis/Lower Water is maintained, the route goes to the main area of SGR, it still services the IWK/Dal/VG site (small walk) and can stay on Morris to take advantage of the little amount of grade change from Hollis and Lower Water.

[RyeJay]

A streetcar on Spring Garden Road will never happen. Ever.

Not unless some kind of over-land bridge was constructed. Oppss, I mean subway; sorry HT.

Morris Street is the perfect place for a streetcar: seeing as how the 2012 renovations of Fenwick--with additional new surrounding towers (and other south end projects)--are going to increase the population, this further supports the logic of developing this kind of transit on Morris.

The universities should would love it! That's a definite.

And I also completely agree with the avoidance of Barrington.

[halifaxboyns]

A streetcar on Spring Garden Road will never happen. Ever.

Not unless some kind of over-land bridge was constructed. Oppss, I mean subway; sorry HT.

Morris Street is the perfect place for a streetcar: seeing as how the 2012 renovations of Fenwick--with additional new surrounding towers (and other south end projects)--are going to increase the population, this further supports the logic of developing this kind of transit on Morris.

The universities should would love it! That's a definite.

And I also completely agree with the avoidance of Barrington.


I can see either street being okay; my main focus was to avoid the steep grade and try not to create huge traffic problems. That's why I am so infavour of a streetcar on Agricola because Robie and Gottigen get the most traffic compared to Agricola, so you have options to avoid it if you don't want to deal with a streetcar stopping and starting.

The adjustment I made moves the route I had thought of off Morris for the SGR commercial component and only as far as Summer Street. Personally, I could see either Morris or SGR working well. SGR would be better for the businesses, where as Morris would be what I call the nimby compromise.

[someone123]

A streetcar on Spring Garden Road will never happen. Ever. ... And I also completely agree with the avoidance of Barrington.

You're not providing much explanation here. My reasons for thinking it could work are:

1) More and more cities have streetcar and LRT systems and the costs are falling. The advantages of streetcars in these cities are the same as they would be in Halifax; more comfortable and permanent service than buses, quieter vehicles that are better for the environment and last longer, and less reliance on fossil fuels. I predict that we will see more and more electrification in the future as the cost of oil goes up. Realistically I think Halifax will be backed into a corner where it has an expensive and inefficient bus system and will be at a disadvantage when it finally converts. The "it can't be done!" crowd will probably be among the first ones to say "WHY ARE WE PAYING SO MUCH FOR BUSES?" and "WHY AM I STUCK IN TRAFFIC EVERY DAY?!". But that's life in a backwards city I guess.

2) Most of these cities run the lines right along major streets. Go to San Francisco and you will see streetcars right on Market Street. Toronto has streetcars on King and Dundas. Those streets are all busier than Spring Garden Road.

3) Halifax used to have streetcars. They ran on Spring Garden Road and Barrington, and back then Barrington was probably busier than it is today. It even had plenty of car traffic by the time the trolleybuses were running.

[JET]

You're not providing much explanation here. My reasons for thinking it could work are:


3) Halifax used to have streetcars. They ran on Spring Garden Road and Barrington, and back then Barrington was probably busier than it is today. It even had plenty of car traffic by the time the trolleybuses were running.

a lot of the rails are still buried under the asphalt.

[halifaxboyns]

I like your point number 1 someone123.
But I think the time to move on this is now, when the cost to install a system is cheapest.

I know I go back to that PBS documentary, but the Portland example is the greatest reason to install a streetcar, regardless of whether it ends up on Morris or SGR or whatever.

When they designed the streetcar, they had planned on 3,000 riders a day. They typically see 10,000 riders a day (average). That's huge and totally beyond their expectations and I'm sure today it's probably closer to 15,000.

That also lead to the logic behind the corridor along Hollis and Lower Water - they pointed out that the streetcar was for distances that we (this is how they put it) 'just beyond the comfortable walking distance'. So walking to Scotia Square from SGR for some may be beyond that. But it would be nice and comfortable to sit in an air conditioned streetcar and enjoy the sites.

That's the point I also took from the youtube video I posted about the Vancouver streetcar in the rail thread some time ago. The vehicles were comfortable, leather seats and were about putting the rider first - this was done to show that the typical 'bus' atmosphere isn't the way streetcars function. They can be way more comfortable and encourage people to get out of their cars.

I suspect that the rails under the street would probably not be able to handle the modern streetcar weights, but certainly the rail beds would be a good start in installing a new line.

[planarchy]

a lot of the rails are still buried under the asphalt.

The are visible along much of Barrington and quite the hazard when on a bike!

As far as a line on SGR, you'd need a really good excuse not to use it - and removal of a handful of on-street parking spots isn't one.

[halifaxboyns]

The are visible along much of Barrington and quite the hazard when on a bike!

As far as a line on SGR, you'd need a really good excuse not to use it - and removal of a handful of on-street parking spots isn't one.

The elimination of on street parking would depending on how the stations are built and the size of the car. If you look at the Vancouver 2010 streetcar for example, the platform for the station would have to be much longer than the Portland Streetcar. The bombardier streetcar used in Vancouver would require a station length of about 90% of the total car length (to ensure all doors would reach the platform, 10% of the car is typically the cab for the driver). This is due in part to the placement of the doors, more and wider doors.

The Portland streetcar is a little different because the placement of the doors is centred in the cab, unlike Bombardier which is all over the length of the car. So you could get away with building a shorter platform if the Portland style car was used (I'm guessing roughly 75% of the car length) and then the back end past to last set of doors would just stick out past the platform and block a car using the on street parking from pulling out.

In the suggest route update I gave (Morris to Queen, to SGR and then back to University via Summer street), you could take advantage of a Portland Style car and remove only a few on street spots along Queen, SGR and Summer Streets for the platforms, so the impact would be minimal. Add to that the fact that SGR access would become far easier for so many all over the peninsula because of the streetcar, you'd generate more foot traffic from the service itself. People wouldn't have to worry about finding a parking spot, they could just jump on the streetcar instead.

[someone123]

According to ANS this Clyde Street development plans will be submitted to HbD in November.

They're planning to add 330 rental units and 520 parking spots, so in other words there will actually be more parking in this area once the lots are developed. Just as some new highrises have dispelled concerns over height a little, the new infill that replaces these lots will be a great precedent. Spring Garden Road will be a great counterexample to the claim that you need surface parking to have a successful retail area.

The first lot to be developed will be on Queen Street. It will look great with the new library.

[RyeJay]

According to ANS this Clyde Street development plans will be submitted to HbD in November.

They're planning to add 330 rental units and 520 parking spots, so in other words there will actually be more parking in this area once the lots are developed. Just as some new highrises have dispelled concerns over height a little, the new infill that replaces these lots will be a great precedent. Spring Garden Road will be a great counterexample to the claim that you need surface parking to have a successful retail area.

The first lot to be developed will be on Queen Street. It will look great with the new library.

With a submission in November, how long do you think an answer will require? It would be nice to have the Queen Street lot developed in time for the new library. The grand opening would be more grand.

[halifaxboyns]

With a submission in November, how long do you think an answer will require? It would be nice to have the Queen Street lot developed in time for the new library. The grand opening would be more grand.

Wasn't the HbD process that if it met all the rules; you'd get an approval (development permit) within 90 days? If my memory is right, the permit process shouldn't be more than 3 months, including review by the design review committee.

[halifaxboyns]

A final design for a commercial and residential development on two large downtown Halifax lots will be ready sometime in November.

W.M. Fares Group and Banc Developments purchased two parking lots on Clyde Street, divided by Birmingham Street, in June for $14.7 million.

They plan to build two nine-storey buildings — one floor of commercial retail space and the rest residential — with each having three levels of underground parking.

The design is being finalized and is expected to be presented to Halifax Regional Municipality in November.

"We’re moving ahead. We’re hoping to have construction started in the spring of next year," said Wahid Fares, president of the Fares Group.

The lots are located in an area once known as Schmidtville, named after sisters Mary Ann, Margaretta and Rosina Schmidt, who lived there.

The developments will be built on the Mary Ann lot, a 33,869-square-foot property bounded by Birmingham, Queen and Clyde streets, and the Margaretta lot, the neighbouring 42,600-square-foot lot on the other side of Birmingham.

Plazacorp Retail Properties Ltd. will be a partner in the project and the Fredericton company will own the combined 70,000 square feet of retail space in the ground floors of the two buildings

Besim Halef of Banc Developments said while the design is not yet finalized, the idea is to make the buildings "similar, but different."

"We want to try to distinguish the two buildings from each other," Halef said. "So we are going to probably use different materials for each building, like the exterior facade and things like that."

Neither developer would divulge any defining characteristics the buildings will have, but they promised the buildings will be "unique" and enhance the look of downtown Halifax.

"We’re looking to complement the old and the new of our city. So it will probably have a contemporary look, a modern look," Fares said. "Architecture is very important when it comes to that part of town. And I know people are waiting to see something different."

Story link (http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Business/1266921.html)

[RyeJay]

I can't wait to see some renderings!

[halifaxboyns]

Report: Developers paid more than market value for city lots

By REMO ZACCAGNA Business reporter
Developers of a proposed commercial and residential project on two large downtown lots paid millions more than market value, a declassified city report shows.

The report, released Thursday , showed that W.M. Fares Group and Banc Developments Ltd. bid and ultimately won the competition for two parking lots on Clyde Street, divided by Birmingham Street, for $14.78 million.

That is more than the listed market value of $11.564 million of the two properties, colloquially known as Mary Ann and Margaretta, named after the Schmidt sisters who once lived in the area.

The next highest bidder was a joint submission of $14 million from Urban Capital Property and Killiam Properties Inc.

There were eight bids in all, but only the top two put in proposals for the two lots. The remaining bids were solely made on the 33,869-square-foot Mary Ann lot.

The high bids did not come as a surprise to the city, said Peter Stickings, HRM manager of real estate, who noted the strength of the retail sector on Spring Garden Road, as well as other residential projects in the works as a big draw.

"I think with the announcement of the Central Library and sort of the transformation of that area, all of these things I think have elevated the interest in these properties. And then, of course, eight qualified proponents were bidding, so with competition brings stronger value to the process," he said. "I think if you note some of the lower bids were more indicative of the market appraisal, which would have been performed by a third-party appraiser."

Requests for proposals on projects of this nature often have bids that exceed their market value. It’s the nature of doing business, said Robert Musset, senior vice-president at CB Richard Ellis Limited in Atlantic Canada.

"The value of those sites is tied directly to the density that was allowed within the offering memorandum that was set out by the city. And you can see that range of pricing that came in," he said. "Some people priced it more aggressively than others and reviewing their spreadsheet it looks like they did a pretty good job in evaluating the various components of the bid and allocating a certain amount of importance to each area."

Another lot, the former Halifax Infirmary site on Queen Street, nicknamed Rosina, is expected to be put on the market by the city next year. That site is appraised at $4.851 million, according to the city report.

But that, too, is expected to go for more.

The rest of the story can be found here (http://thechronicleherald.ca/Business/1268664.html).

[RyeJay]

Spring Garden Road is quite the hot spot.
Once the library is completed it will give this street a big jolt of walking traffic.
I love making the downtown busier! :)

This street was my home for five years, living in Park Victoria. And in a decade I will not recognise her. And that is so exciting!