[CorbeauNoir]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/06/06/ns-plan-to-revitalize-halifax.html

A Halifax councillor says box stores in the city's industrial parks should have to build smaller stores downtown to revitalize the centre's economy.

Dawn Sloane, Halifax Regional Municipality councillor for the downtown, wants City Hall to consider forcing each new box store to build a smaller downtown version before getting the go-ahead to do business in places like the Bayers Lake Business Park or Dartmouth Crossing.

"There could be a large store out there and a small one down here — have it as an outlet store in the downtown. Then they're selling things at both places [so] they're not missing out on any of the revenue and they're gaining patrons," she said.

Sloane said the same thing is already happening in New York and said she modelled her proposal after a policy in Winnipeg. She will put it before council Tuesday....

[Keith P.]

What an idiot.

[MonctonRad]

Halifax is not New York City. I don't know if big box retailers are that desperate to enter the Halifax market.

If this were ever legislated, I think big box retailers would just build somewhere near the HRM boundary, or perhaps a little further afield - say Truro or (horrors) Moncton.

[haligonia]

I think the city should offer incentives to retailers looking to open in BL/DC to open in downtown, however a law like this is just unnecessary. Like MonctonRad said, it may end up having the reverse effect in driving new retailers away from HRM.

[someone123]

How is this going to help existing businesses? How do we know that the stores would suit the downtown? Who is going to go to Barrington to visit a mini Wal-Mart? How are they even going to decide which stores must do this?

This seems like a horribly ill-conceived band-aid type solution.

[beyeas]

I agree with something that was said about this in the other thread that what should happen is that the emphasis needs to be on creating incentive for businesses to locate downtown, rather than legislating things. It needs to be a market driven approach rather than top down.

[Nouvellecosse]

Regardless of the best approach, something needs to be done. It was bad enough when most of the major stores got pulled out to the HSC/Mic Mac/Penhorn type areas, but now retail is congregating in places like B Lake and D Crossing (basically clearings in the forest outside any neighbourhood or populated area) and downtown doesn't seem to have significantly improved or expanded since the HRM was some 75-100K people smaller.

If this type of law ever was created, the good thing is that the HRM borders are so huge, it would be tough for stores to locate outside them and still coax people to drive all that way on a regular basis. Some people would go, but those stores would sure lose out a lot to stores in town

[halifaxboyns]

Having talked to her in private on this - I'm not sure a zoning bylaw amendment can achieve what she is looking for on this. I don't see how you could undertake a zoning bylaw amendment that could be enforceable. This may be more appropriate as a tax incentive or a taxation measure that in new development (such as the roy building or discovery centre) there is no property taxes for the first 5 years and then ramp up to full taxation over another 5 years?

I'm not really sure...but I do agree that something needs to be done. What that is; I'm not sure.

[fenwick16]

I believe that big-box stores are intended to be on large lots in the suburbs (they are built to be large, inexpensive, warehouse type buildings). I would like to see tax cuts, tax incentives, encourage residential development downtown and encourage the right-size retail stores downtown. However there will have to be more people living downtown to support it.

Having worked part time at Scotia Square in the mid 70's and seeing the sparse number of shoppers, I don't think that it is possible to legislate retail downtown since it would also be necessary to force people to shop there.

[halifaxboyns]

I believe that big-box stores are intended to be on large lots in the suburbs (they are built to be large, inexpensive, warehouse type buildings). I would like to see tax cuts, tax incentives, encourage residential development downtown and encourage the right-size retail stores downtown. However there will have to be more people living downtown to support it.

Having worked part time at Scotia Square in the mid 70's and seeing the sparse number of shoppers, I don't think that it is possible to legislate retail downtown since it would also be necessary to force people to shop there.

You hit the nail on the head - which is my point as well - how could you really enforce this? I mean; if such a rule were introduced I'm sure it would be easily quashed by the courts as some sort of infringement of a right (what that would be I don't know).

That being said - this is a good start of a broader question, how do we bring life back to downtown? We all seem to agree that residential is the start, so more residential not only in the core but around it (in places like Agricola, Quinpool, South end and along Gottingen). Then add a good efficient transit system by either BRT or my preference a form of LRT/streetcar. Then you will create the conditions to move forward that you don't need worry about the commercial - the commercial will come on it's own.

I use Portland as a great example. I just re-watched the E squared episode on Portland and the Pearl District is a wonderful case study (I've already been in touch with planners there, so I'm hoping to do a road trip this summer). When they launched the Pearl Urban Renewal project with the streetcar, Powell's books was the only business there. After they put the zoning and policy in place and the streetcar, the development came very quickly. This added residents and then the businesses came shortly after and not one building in the area had provision for parking for the commercial business. It was all either on street (which wasn't removed for the streetcar) or people walked/biked or took transit.

If you were to do a streetcar loop similar to what I suggested in the transportation thread (from the Hydrostone, through a redeveloped Agricola with high density and then through downtown and back) I'm sure you'd create an efficient loop that you could densify all along the route and then business would flock to the area. The same could be done on the Dartmouth side too.

[Nouvellecosse]

I don't think it's an issue so much of wanting downtown Walmarts, Costcos, and Best Buys in Halifax. We don't even have a full size downtown department store like the Bay or Sears, which every other large or mid-sized Canadian city has.

But the thing is, many of the stores in the outer retail parks are NOT stores that specifically need to be in a big-box format. There are all kinds of things like Town Shoes, Sportchek, Aldo, etc. that can also fit comfortably in storefronts and shopping malls.

Besides, even the stores that today are typically large and found in suburbs generally originated in more sensible sized locations. I remember growing up in Amherst, 3/5 out of the 5 grocery stores were downtown and NOT huge supermarkets. Now 2/3 of the grocery stores are supermarkets and not downtown. And the local Canadian Tire was downtown and about 1/4 the size of the current location which is on the very edge of town. And no, I'm not an old man, I'm only 28 lol.

And currently there are examples of smaller "big box" stores like Canadian Tire, Future Shop, and Chapters fitting into urban settings in places like TO and MTL, although I don't think that's really essential for Halifax. I'm happy for instance with the Quinpool CT being as central as it is. I don't need everything to be downtown, as long as I don't need to venture into the forest to access it. I was extremely annoyed when Canadian Tire left Tacoma and Future Shop left Mic Mac for the sake of going to the Crossing. Now a Dartmouth resident has to go to either the Crossing, Cole Harbour, or Quinpool to get to CT. I usually choose Quinpool.

I think the issue here is that it is from a new build standpoint, it's simply cheaper to build stores on virgin land, and from a managerial/administrative standpoint, it's cheaper to have fewer, larger locations. The only problem is, herding everyone to the edge of town to shop at these few huge locations may be good for the stores but it isn't good for communities (lack of vibrancy, poor land usage, auto-dependence/pollution, etc.)

As far increasing the downtown population, that's always wonderful, but I don't see it as the main issue. The Dartmouth Crossing area isn't very densely populated, but it manages to support retail by attracting people from a distance. I don't think it's unreasonable for a downtown - the supposed heart of a community - to do the same. Especially since much of the transportation infrastructure - transit in particular - is already focused there for the sake of employment.

[downtowndawn]

Glad this idea has generated dicussion. This is exactly the reason why I am requesting more information. I want people to think of ways to think outside of the box on how to fix this problem between the commercial retail parks and the downtwon area. Commercial tax reform would be ideal, but the other members of Council and staff need to jump on board.

Sure, it sounds outlandish but it has worked in Amsterdam. New York, Toronto and Vancouver.

[fenwick16]

Glad this idea has generated dicussion. This is exactly the reason why I am requesting more information. I want people to think of ways to think outside of the box on how to fix this problem between the commercial retail parks and the downtwon area. Commercial tax reform would be ideal, but the other members of Council and staff need to jump on board.

Sure, it sounds outlandish but it has worked in Amsterdam. New York, Toronto and Vancouver.

Hello Councillor Sloane, the idiot comment wasn't mine by the way.

I think that downtown Halifax is making headway by approving the Roy Building and Discovery Centre downtown. Hopefully both will be primarily residential. The NFB development will also add more people downtown. More residential development downtown is required in order to support more retail. Office workers usually don't do a lot of shopping while at work and most don't stay downtown during the evening.

I think that Spring Garden Road is a successful retail area because there are numerous residential areas along that business district. There are also two universities that add to the Spring Garden Road pedestrian traffic. Hopefully downtown Halifax will soon be able to support more retail also. I hope that you will overcome your fear of heights and promote more high density development in the downtown core :) . Also the downtown tax rate has to be decreased and some of the burden shifted to commercial areas in the suburbs.

Councillor Sloane, could you please do something to get the Waterside development moving along? It is a real eyesore and I am sure that developers need support from Councillors to move projects forward.

[beyeas]

Glad this idea has generated dicussion. This is exactly the reason why I am requesting more information. I want people to think of ways to think outside of the box on how to fix this problem between the commercial retail parks and the downtwon area. Commercial tax reform would be ideal, but the other members of Council and staff need to jump on board.

Sure, it sounds outlandish but it has worked in Amsterdam. New York, Toronto and Vancouver.

I think that shaking up the current status quo is a great thing, because it is clear that the status quo isn't working, and I congratulate you for stirring debate.

Having said that, as I said earlier in the thread, I don't agree that your specific proposal is the right approach for Halifax. Legislating change and forcing the market to do things often backfires, especially relative to providing positive financial incentives for setting up show downtown (reduce property taxes for 1st X years, etc).

I also think that this would be difficult in practice... what do you do if a big box store opens in DC, they open a downtown version as per the by-law, and then a year later the downtown store for whatever reason goes out of business? Do they now have to close the big box version in DC?

Regardless, I certainly encourage you to get council to think outside the box, stimulate debate, and to not accept the status quo when it comes to downtown business.

[ScovaNotian]

I don't know whether it's a good idea or not, but I think it's one that deserves a serious look. If this has been done elsewhere, has it been long enough to judge whether it's been a success?

[MonctonRad]

Councillor Sloane, I think most everyone who contributes to this forum is in favour of vibrant development in the core. How to accomplish it is the principle issue.

I don't think you can force big boxes to build mini-clones of themselves in the downtown. It certainly wouldn't work for the Costco's of the world. Draconian legislation in this regard would end up being counterproductive.

As Fenwick and others have pointed out, in order to have a vibrant (and retail friendly) downtown, you actually have to have people living downtown. This requires allowing high density residential (which will mean building up, not out). High-rise condo dwellers (without a car) will require commercial services in order to live downtown. If you allow downtown residential towers to be built, then retail, commercial services and restaurants will naturally follow. Vibrancy will then occur, just like in Vancouver's west-end.

This will all require some planning. Appropriate zoning will have to occur. Municipal services will have to be in place. For example, at least some of these condo dwellers will have children. Where is the nearest public k-8 school? Downtown transit will have to be enhanced. I am a strong proponent of an LRT(tram) system just like halifaxboyns.

All that we want can be accomplished, but it won't happen through ill-advised legislation. It will require thoughtful municipal planning, appropriate zoning and perhaps some tax incentives, but it can happen. :tup:

[beyeas]

What an idiot.

Now now... "you can argue one side of a position or another until you are blue in the face on the merits of the position"... but... "a PERSONAL INSULT and does not belong on the site." Right?

[joeyedm]

What an idiot.

Thats certainly a mature comment.

[-Harlington-]

I dont know about box, but there are certainly some stores in BL and DC and the malls that should be downtown.

[alps]

As usual the quality of the comments on that CBC page are pretty depressing. Pretty sure 9/10 moan about parking in some way...never mind that I have never seen MetroPark close to capacity, and that more free parking would mean taking away space from the things that make downtown worth visiting in the first place.

Anyway, it obviously has problems but the general idea is interesting and I would like to see how it has been done elsewhere.

When I was in Boulder, CO I heard they'd banned new big box stores. Not sure now true that is because I can't find anything on Google, but I don't think they had Wal-Mart or Costco there.

I would above all like to see an urban growth boundary for the city. It'd help not only by physically making it difficult to build new business parks, but by densifying existing communities to the point where a retailer might look at building the sort of urban format stores you would find in Toronto or Vancouver.

[beyeas]

As Fenwick and others have pointed out, in order to have a vibrant (and retail friendly) downtown, you actually have to have people living downtown. This requires allowing high density residential (which will mean building up, not out).

This point is indeed the absolute key. There could be free parking and ultra-low property taxes, but if no one lives downtown there will still not be businesses who can make a go of it.

The biggest single thing we could do is densify downtown living. If there were thousands more people living downtown, then businesses would be able to look past the taxes anyway because they could still be profitable. People who would choose downtown condo living are the exact people who want to be able to walk to restaurants, walk to a grocery market, walk to a book store etc.

Doing things that add residential density is THE key thing here... everything else done to encourage downtown businesses only flows from this.

[Nouvellecosse]

Sorry, but a city's downtown should be a major draw and a focus for people across its metro area. When a city's downtown can only support the stores and businesses that serve its own local residents I don't consider the downtown to be a successful one. A successful neighbourhood maybe, but not a successful CBD.

[halifaxboyns]

This point is indeed the absolute key. There could be free parking and ultra-low property taxes, but if no one lives downtown there will still not be businesses who can make a go of it.

The biggest single thing we could do is densify downtown living. If there were thousands more people living downtown, then businesses would be able to look past the taxes anyway because they could still be profitable. People who would choose downtown condo living are the exact people who want to be able to walk to restaurants, walk to a grocery market, walk to a book store etc.

Doing things that add residential density is THE key thing here... everything else done to encourage downtown businesses only flows from this.

Taking a '35,000 foot' approach, it seems to me the way to make this work is a multi-approach:


Taxation change
Encourage more density and intensification not just in the downtown core but around it
Better transit
LESS parking


If you increase suburban commercial tax rates and then provide a proportioned tax decrease in the core or some system of taxation that any new development is either exempt or pays less (but you increase taxes if they keep lots vacant or as parking lot - thus being an encouragement to GET ON WITH a development) - something along those lines, that could help counter balance or tip the balance back into downtown's favour. I'd want to see what Vancouver and Toronto have done - if anything to promote redevelopment along Yonge and Eglington or along Cambie (where there is big box retail and then residential above).

Even if you factor out viewplanes, there is going to come a point where most of the opportunity sites will be actually developed. So it's not just a matter of infilling in the DT core, but around it too. As much as people think (and I"m sure know there would be opposition); push it through anyway. Encourage the South end around Fenwick, Agricola, Gottingen Street and Quinpool to intensify. Support more infill in dt Dartmouth and around it.

I posted a video about the streetcar demo in Vancouver and one of the things that the transportation staff found was that if you made people on transit feel important and gave them a comfortable ride - you could attract more people out of their cars. It wasn't about the cheap seats or feeling cramped on a smelly bus. If you use a good comfortable LRT or a streetcar - you can get more people.

Less parking - not more. If you get good transit access; you don't need more parking. I'll point out the Pearl District in Portland - 3 billion dollars in redevelopment and not a single parking space required for any of the commercial ground floor developments. I don't believe any of it would be 'big box retail' - but the point still stands.

[beyeas]

Sorry, but a city's downtown should be a major draw and a focus for people across its metro area. When a city's downtown can only support the stores and businesses that serve its own local residents I don't consider the downtown to be a successful one. A successful neighbourhood maybe, but not a successful CBD.

Regionalism is a HUGE problem in the (:yuck:) HRM. You just have to read the CBC comments page to see people saying that they hate "Halifax", would never go there anyway, etc.

I don't disagree with you, but I think that growth will have to start with new high density residential, and it is only then that you will have the vibrancy and all that comes with it (more people, more cafes, more stuff going on, better mass transit links to downtown etc) that will draw people in from other parts.

[someone123]

Part of the issue here is that the downtown is multi-purpose. Sometimes we talk about it as an office district, sometimes we talk about retail. Improving different functions requires different solutions.

Personally I'd suggest mostly giving up on the 1970s-style highrise office downtown core. I dislike suburban office parks for a whole bunch of reasons but there's lots of room all around the core for offices. High-end businesses will naturally locate near attractive neighbourhoods that permit development.

The retail issue mostly comes down to a combination of local population and transit (so that people can get downtown and so that downtown residents without cars can get around the city). Put in 15,000 new residents and a good high-frequency transit system and the problem is fixed. This is basically all that Vancouver has done -- there's been very little downtown office growth here.

I think the biggest question is how to induce more residential development in the core. The best answer is probably tax breaks. Explicit tax increases for suburban areas are not going to fly.

Focusing on retail directly is pointless because without a decent market new stores will fail. Efforts to draw in suburban shoppers have been the focus of the last 50 years of downtown planning and have failed utterly.

I agree that the petty regionalism is messed up.

[Nouvellecosse]

Tax breaks are good, but what would also help is to not make it so darn difficult to actually build in central areas. I'm sure developers know that if they want a new 10 story highrise condo or apartment building, it will require a battle if they build almost anywhere other than virgin land on the periphery. If they build downtown, there are people hollering about density, shadows, historical "feel", view planes, launching court challenges, etc...

Who the heck is going to want to bother with that when they don't need to?

Now I'm definitely not suggesting developers get free reign and be allowed to raze historic buildings and neighbourhoods for the sake of increased density, but the peninsula could easily support another 30-40K people by simply allowing things like laneway housing, and allowing empty and under-utilized lots to be built with midrise and highrise residential.

If we aim for a peninsular density of about 5,000 ppskm, the city would be infinitely more vibrant and enjoyable in all aspects.

[Architype]

I just noticed this thread, and I think it's a concept that will eventually be successful in medium size and smaller cities as well as larger ones.

Vancouver has some good examples, at least close to downtown:


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=49.264479,-123.114692&spn=0,0.010525&z=17&layer=c&cbll=49.264351,-123.114688&panoid=KBFAFIKNYDmYhd6YeLbsPQ&cbp=12,54.54,,0,-8.26

[spaustin]

What about a tax on parking spaces? That would be infinitely simpler and might tilt some of the economic calculation back in favour of the Downtown. The funds raised could be dedicated to improving transit, which would further help the core compete. Obviously it's not a complete solution, as the Peninsula really needs more people, but it might form part of a broader policy setup.

[downtowndawn]

This is known as a stall tax and is used all over north america. I have tried several time to have this adopted by Council, but they do not see the value in it. I do. I think this would be the best way to fund transit and even the playing field for the commercial businesses (along with commercial tax reform)

[downtowndawn]

I just noticed this thread, and I think it's a concept that will eventually be successful in medium size and smaller cities as well as larger ones.

Vancouver has some good examples, at least close to downtown:


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=49.264479,-123.114692&spn=0,0.010525&z=17&layer=c&cbll=49.264351,-123.114688&panoid=KBFAFIKNYDmYhd6YeLbsPQ&cbp=12,54.54,,0,-8.26

This was an example I used today. They allowed the businesses in before the residential and it is successful. with that being said, our downtown doesn't need full blown warehouses, but smaller satellite stores like in NYC (home depot) Toronto (Ikea).

[fenwick16]

One thing that pops into my mind is - cities such as NYC, Toronto and Vancouver have rapid transit and dense downtown residential numbers. I am not being negative, I just wonder if it is a good comparison to use such cities as an example. Maybe Halifax needs the dense residential development first.

[halifaxboyns]

I just noticed this thread, and I think it's a concept that will eventually be successful in medium size and smaller cities as well as larger ones.

Vancouver has some good examples, at least close to downtown:


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=49.264479,-123.114692&spn=0,0.010525&z=17&layer=c&cbll=49.264351,-123.114688&panoid=KBFAFIKNYDmYhd6YeLbsPQ&cbp=12,54.54,,0,-8.26

This is exactly the area I was thinking of in my previous comments.
My only concern Councillor Sloane about getting these stores into 'downtown' is that there is very limited retail at grade spaces (I'm thinking along Barrington) that this could fit into for a workable 'urban style' size.

You might have better luck doing it on a brand new building because it would have a bigger and more open floor plate, but this begs the question of whether you want this right in the CBD (Central Business District) or in areas on the edge like Quinpool, Spring Garden Road or Agricola areas? This way you could then do a similar idea with putting residential above?

Like the 'stall' tax. There seems to be support for a stall tax on here; so perhaps if there is an official case created for this research, once the information is posted we can provide comments to the planning staff?

[Nouvellecosse]

What about Gottingen? At one time it was a major retail strip and now is largely under-performing. There are several places where a larger store could be accommodated, and it's served well by transit.

[someone123]

This was an example I used today. They allowed the businesses in before the residential and it is successful. with that being said, our downtown doesn't need full blown warehouses, but smaller satellite stores like in NYC (home depot) Toronto (Ikea).

Most of those larger stores along Cambie are in mixed-use developments with residential on the upper floors. That street is also adjacent to what would be high-density residential areas in Halifax. These areas have been undergoing intensification for decades. They're probably more densely populated than anywhere in Halifax and are not considered a part of downtown Vancouver (which is enormously successful yet packed with the sort of highrises that are strongly opposed in Halifax).

These stores were built because they're profitable. They're not the result of a metro-wide policy requiring big box retailers to open big box stores.

Also these areas have subway service (Canada Line) and articulated buses equivalent to the MetroLink in Halifax running every 2 minutes or so at peak periods (good enough that you don't worry about waiting -- just show up at the stop and a bus will be there). Halifax transit is kind of a joke in comparison. Not many people rely on it exclusively unless they have no choice, so more people need parking downtown.

[halifaxboyns]

There are photo examples of a variety or urban format big box retail not only from Toronto and Vancouver but from all over in this (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=191390) thread.

[PoscStudent]

This sounds like a dumb idea, Halifax doesn't have the population to support such an idea. Why not look at lowering taxes for businesses who set up in the downtown core instead?

What is Halifax's downtown like now, is there many vacant buildings around?

[wackypacky]

What about Gottingen? At one time it was a major retail strip and now is largely under-performing. There are several places where a larger store could be accommodated, and it's served well by transit.

I think gottingen still has a ways to go yet before many business's will want to locate there.

[CorbeauNoir]

I think gottingen still has a ways to go yet before many business's will want to locate there.

I remember reading in The Coast (take that as you will) a while back that there are some plans to reintroduce some retail onto Gottingen, but it would be more residential-scale kinda stuff (grocery store, bank, stuff like that)


There are photo examples of a variety or urban format big box retail not only from Toronto and Vancouver but from all over in this (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=191390) thread.

In fact I'd say downtown Halifax already has an example of this kind of scaled-down retail in the Mountain Equipment Co-Op (or the BabyMEC, as I always call it). I'd love to see similar kinds of scaled-down versions of large retail stores (I'm still amazed that downtown doesn't even have an HBC), but I think doing so lies more with offering incentives rather than issuing demands.

[halifaxboyns]

This sounds like a dumb idea, Halifax doesn't have the population to support such an idea.

That isn't really true.
If you look at the examples in the skyscraper thread, population (total) would be irrelevant. What I mean is; if you look at the Vancouver examples - in most cases, residential was provided above. So there would be some people already living in the area and the more people moving in above the stores.

In the case of Cambie, there was existing residential and then a number of the buildings were built in close succession (pretty much one after the other) so the cumulative population in the area kept going up, as each new building was completed and occupied. So population wouldn't be a limiting factor in that sort of concept.

It would be slightly different if it was in an area where there was little to no residential population. If Gottingen Street was turned into a new urban 'big box' area - there is some population near by, given the combination of residential types. But if the only thing they built was the store itself and didn't add residential (like what happened with staples) - you may find that the stores would probably stuggle until residential development caught up.

Personally, I don't really see the value of these types of stores in the CBD of Halifax or Dartmouth. The potential floor plates of most approved or proposed buildings wouldn't even be big enough for an urban format big box store. The areas that might be good for it on the Halifax side would probably be along Gottingen, the Agricola area, Young Street near the Superstore or along Quinpool. But my caveat to that would be - don't just build the store. Do what Vancouver did and require residential above it.

With Dartmouth, I see the Dartmouth Shopping Centre Area being a great potential location for this style.

[someone123]

In fact I'd say downtown Halifax already has an example of this kind of scaled-down retail in the Mountain Equipment Co-Op (or the BabyMEC, as I always call it).

The downtown area also has a Staples (on Gottingen!) and Superstore. The Staples has underground parking. Either one could have been built with residential on top and a better overall design.

There are already a bunch of other retail developments in Halifax with underground or structured parking and residential on top. Examples are Park Lane, CCA (with Pete's), Spring Garden Place... Around Barrington office towers on top were more popular (Maritime Centre, Scotia Square -- these older designs had more problems unfortunately).

Soon there's a good chance we'll see a major NSLC location with residential (Clyde Street lot on Queen). And we'll still have people arguing over whether or not it's possible.

[halifaxboyns]

The downtown area also has a Staples (on Gottingen!) and Superstore. The Staples has underground parking. Either one could have been built with residential on top and a better overall design.

There are already a bunch of other retail developments in Halifax with underground or structured parking and residential on top. Examples are Park Lane, CCA (with Pete's), Spring Garden Place... Around Barrington office towers on top were more popular (Maritime Centre, Scotia Square -- these older designs had more problems unfortunately).

Soon there's a good chance we'll see a major NSLC location with residential (Clyde Street lot on Queen). And we'll still have people arguing over whether or not it's possible.

That is a very good point. But the point that I was trying to show with the Portland example in picking up from a point you made earlier was that if you combine good residential density, efficient high speed transit (LRT/streetcar) and then not focusing on cars (not requiring parking for commercial, but providing it on the first couple of floors near grade); you can really get some interesting mix of development.

What I found interesting about the drawings in the thread I posted earlier is the walmart design. Walmart has been really going at focusing on an urban format because of the negative play the big box format gets in major urban areas. Many big cities won't allow them - but they want into the market, so they are learning to 'play the game'. I suspect it won't be long until you see urban format walmarts popping up all over the US and Canada.

[beyeas]

The downtown area also has a Staples (on Gottingen!) and Superstore. The Staples has underground parking. Either one could have been built with residential on top and a better overall design.

There are already a bunch of other retail developments in Halifax with underground or structured parking and residential on top. Examples are Park Lane, CCA (with Pete's), Spring Garden Place... Around Barrington office towers on top were more popular (Maritime Centre, Scotia Square -- these older designs had more problems unfortunately).

Soon there's a good chance we'll see a major NSLC location with residential (Clyde Street lot on Queen). And we'll still have people arguing over whether or not it's possible.

I agree... I don't see the CBD being a good place for this style of store.

The Clyde Street lots are a great place though. Any redevelopment of the other end of Queen Street as well. Quinpool is in my mind is the PRIME place for these sorts of developments (residential over-top of retail). I would absolutely love to see Quinpool become a mix of mid to high-rise residential development with retail at grade, and dedicated high frequency transit. Gottingen/Agricola also clearly fall into that. The upside to doing this on Gottingen is that in the short term there empty lots available, the upside to doing this on Quinpool is that I think people are at present more comfortable (rightly or wrongly) with Quinpool as a shopping/restaurant district (especially at night).

[robotropolis]

I was just dreaming yesterday about how amazing it would be to have a SuperTarget downtown(ish) *sigh*. A gal can dream, can't she?

[someone123]

The Clyde Street lots are a great place though. Any redevelopment of the other end of Queen Street as well. Quinpool is in my mind is the PRIME place for these sorts of developments (residential over-top of retail). I would absolutely love to see Quinpool become a mix of mid to high-rise residential development with retail at grade, and dedicated high frequency transit. Gottingen/Agricola also clearly fall into that. The upside to doing this on Gottingen is that in the short term there empty lots available, the upside to doing this on Quinpool is that I think people are at present more comfortable (rightly or wrongly) with Quinpool as a shopping/restaurant district (especially at night).

I think part of the issue here is that the 1950s definition of the downtown centred around Barrington/Hollis is still the predominant one. Halifax has some great growing areas like the south end of Barrington and Spring Garden Road. They don't seem to figure into the discussion much even though today they are more built up than the downtown used to be! People who claim that the core is stagnant need to see side-by-side 2011 and 1981 views of Spring Garden Road from the Citadel.

Barrington today is very well-suited to residential conversions (like NFB), small businesses, and boutique-style shops that can work in heritage buildings. It's not going to be "Main Street" for a city on its way to 500,000 like it was for the old city of 150,000.

Other cities have experienced the same transition. The old "main street" in Toronto for example were areas like Front Street, Queen, and King. Those streets are far less expensive today than Bloor Street, which 100 years ago was in the boonies. Vancouver's equivalent of Barrington was Hastings, which is now a total dump. St. James St. in Montreal used to be the epicentre of Canadian business and now it's just a street in Old Montreal with particularly nice looking buildings that house restaurants and boutique hotels.

It's important to bear all this in mind and make sure that growth is allowed in new areas on the peninsula.

[halifaxboyns]

I would not focus so much on Halifax for an urban style big box retail. I'd use the 'regional core' definition in the regional plan - which is basically all of the peninsula and then all of Dartmouth inside the circ highway.

Then you'd have a pretty broad view.

[halifaxboyns]

I mentioned to Councillor Sloane in a private email; that I sent around the article about this (from the Herald) in our offices out here. Apparently it got some chatter with the Centre City Planners and our law department. Law was hardline; couldn't happen. But apparently there has been work going on with the new downtown land use framework to develop use area rules for such types of uses at grade (seeing as we already have a Holt, the Bay and Winners stores in DT very close to each other).

I had a couple cracks at re-writing her motion over dinner and I would expand the motion to include the regional core (as I said before), but also look into other issues like:

Incorporation of an urban format 'big box retail store' into a mixed use development;
Use area restrictions for the maximum size of an urban format retail store;
Parking requirements;
Location requirements (on a major road, close to transit stations or major transit lines like BRT/LRT);
Policy and land use bylaw best practices;
Mixed use regulations (greater the sized store, greater density required);
Street level interface (window and facade treatments);
Location opportunities with in HRM (what are the best areas within the regional core)...


... but I would not focus on forcing a satellite store. I think if you had proper policy; you could do just fine. With the list above, you could easily pound out a two page terms of reference for the study with a list of cities to look at (Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, New York, Chicago and perhaps Atlanta) and then a brief public engagement on the idea, if at all, beyond the required public hearing for any policy changes. Personally, I'd suggest a couple open houses through the regional core - just so that you wouldn't have people upset they weren't asked their thoughts. This would be my suggested reworked motion and if you got a few of the regional core Councillors on board, it would look even better. :)

[someone123]

Law was hardline; couldn't happen.

I've seen vague claims that this has been implemented somewhere in New York (state? maybe?) but I've never seen an actual example of a town with this on the books. Is there a municipality roughly equivalent to the HRM with this regulation? Did the regulation result in new stores that would not otherwise have opened?

Many cities do have urban format big box stores that were in some cases facilitated by city planing but that is quite different.

Vancouver has a fairly substantial parking tax (on the order of 10-15% if I remember correctly) which I believe is handed over to TransLink for transit services.

A parking tax could work. Part of the issue here is that the big box stores don't have to fully pay their way (for road infrastructure, services, and a bunch of externalities they create). If they were taxed fairly I believe we'd still have big box stores but the balance would shift somewhat in favour of urban storefront type retail.

[halifaxboyns]

I've seen vague claims that this has been implemented somewhere in New York (state? maybe?) but I've never seen an actual example of a town with this on the books. Is there a municipality roughly equivalent to the HRM with this regulation? Did the regulation result in new stores that would not otherwise have opened?

Many cities do have urban format big box stores that were in some cases facilitated by city planing but that is quite different.

Vancouver has a fairly substantial parking tax (on the order of 10-15% if I remember correctly) which I believe is handed over to TransLink for transit services.

A parking tax could work. Part of the issue here is that the big box stores don't have to fully pay their way (for road infrastructure, services, and a bunch of externalities they create). If they were taxed fairly I believe we'd still have big box stores but the balance would shift somewhat in favour of urban storefront type retail.

This is where I would agree with Councillor Sloane's frustration in shooting down her motion. Without administration being able to do any investigative work; we won't really know if such policy or legislation exists?

I'd like to see the motion brought back but re-worked so that it could be more palitable and maybe even get some of the other regional core councillors on board. The other thing to remember when it comes to planning law is that Canada and the US are really different. So the US planning laws may have more ability than we do here or vise versa.

[Waye Mason]

My gut feeling is more regulation of this type is not going to help. What will help is reinvesting more of downtown's taxes back into downtown, but also lowering commercial taxes to be closer to the national average.