A general discussion of Fenwick - Page 3

someone123 · #41 Posted **May 7, 2009, 7:12 PM**

I don't think you should read too much into what's not included in Herald articles.

Dmajackson · #42 Posted **May 7, 2009, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't think you should read too much into what's not included in Herald articles.

The article looked remarkably similar to another one made a couple of months back.

I just put it up to stimilate conversation ... not for news.

someone123 · #43 Posted **May 7, 2009, 7:24 PM**

At least they've gone a little further toward dispelling the swimming pool myth.

kph06 · #44 Posted **May 7, 2009, 7:29 PM**

The fact that it will be rented leads me to believe it won't be under renovation this year. I believe in an earlier article they said the planned renovations would take about 2 years. One possibility is they will run at half capacity, renting one half for a year and renovating the other half, then switch over for the second year. Having a large building like that sitting idle for two years is a pricey investment.

Takeo · #45 Posted **May 7, 2009, 9:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06

The fact that it will be rented leads me to believe it won't be under renovation this year. I believe in an earlier article they said the planned renovations would take about 2 years. One possibility is they will run at half capacity, renting one half for a year and renovating the other half, then switch over for the second year. Having a large building like that sitting idle for two years is a pricey investment.

Wouldn't that be tricky however when it comes time to renovate the second half? They've have to get everybody out. Anyway... whatever they do... I hope they do something major with the grounds. It's such a horrible space surrounding the building now.

Jonovision · #46 Posted **May 7, 2009, 10:54 PM**

And with this being Templeton Properties I doubt we will hear anything until it is about to happen.

kph06 · #47 Posted **May 7, 2009, 11:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeo

Wouldn't that be tricky however when it comes time to renovate the second half? They've have to get everybody out. Anyway... whatever they do... I hope they do something major with the grounds. It's such a horrible space surrounding the building now.

Yeah, it wouldn't be ideal for the tenants, I was kinda thinking out loud there. I just figured if they did it that way they could only offer a year lease then everyone would be out for the second half.

Jonovision · #48 Posted **Jul 14, 2009, 3:08 PM**

I was curious so I went into the rental office yesterday. They have already started their renovations with an full reno of the entrance floor. I was told that the facade renovation will be taking place over the next year while people are living in the building. Still not sure what they are doing to it, but I'm gonna go back in later this week and see if I can dig anything up.

DigitalNinja · #49 Posted **Jul 14, 2009, 6:29 PM**

Awesome, thanks for the info Jono.

miesh111 · #50 Posted **Sep 1, 2009, 5:05 PM**

The building is nearly full now from what I've been hearing. I also know that the developer has been meeting with architects and engineers nearly daily, and that the plans for what they want to do with it (unit configuration, type of clading, etc etc) change as often as the weather around here. We'll just have to wait and see whats going to go down.

In other news, another Templeton Property, King Andrew Tower, is converting to condo's...

Jonovision · #51 Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 3:21 AM**

I was speaking with the developer today and he is hosting an invite only community workshop regarding the redevelopment of the site. He wants to put as much density as he can on the surrounding lots so he has the income to totally remake Fenwick Tower itself.

worldlyhaligonian · #52 Posted **Sep 9, 2009, 3:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I was speaking with the developer today and he is hosting an invite only community workshop regarding the redevelopment of the site. He wants to put as much density as he can on the surrounding lots so he has the income to totally remake Fenwick Tower itself.

Nice, so is this implying new towers in the area?

My ideal scenario would see the crummy 2 or 3 story building next door and the Workers Compensation building both replaced with a tower that is taller than the St. James and shorter than Fenwick. There would be a real wall up South Street which would meet up quite well with South Park and its towers!

Jonovision · #53 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 1:01 PM**

He has some concepts himself, involving a small office building around the size of the St James and another large condo/apartment tower in the range of 23-30 storeys with at grade retail passing through the site. But he also wants to get an idea of what the community wants on the site. The more density he can build the more options he has in refurbishing Fenwick Tower.

And for all those wondering, this was the "big secret" that I had a while ago.

sdm · #54 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 1:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision

He has some concepts himself, involving a small office building around the size of the St James and another large condo/apartment tower in the range of 23-30 storeys with at grade retail passing through the site. But he also wants to get an idea of what the community wants on the site. The more density he can build the more options he has in refurbishing Fenwick Tower.

And for all those wondering, this was the "big secret" that I had a while ago.

He will never get a approval for that many stories, not in a millon years. The residents in that area after St James Place was approved got a moition passed to not allow anything higher then 70 feet.

terrynorthend · #55 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 1:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision

He has some concepts himself, involving a small office building around the size of the St James and another large condo/apartment tower in the range of 23-30 storeys with at grade retail passing through the site. But he also wants to get an idea of what the community wants on the site. The more density he can build the more options he has in refurbishing Fenwick Tower.

And for all those wondering, this was the "big secret" that I had a while ago.

Ah HA! Sounds ambitious...

...but I fear great opposition here. St. James ran into many hurdles before eventually being whittled down to the 10 story lump it is now. I believe HRM by design excludes a new 23-30 story building in this area (south-end has pretty low height caps if I remember). Add to this the developers' promise to get community input, normally a good thing, but there are a lot of tired and angry people around Fenwick right now, after a year of open pit mining on their street. Three to five more years of noisy, dirty, large scale construction is gonna fly like a lead balloon, IMO.

Takeo · #56 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 6:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdm

He will never get a approval for that many stories, not in a millon years.

Yup. That area probably has the highest concentration of NIMBY's in the entire city and as has already been mentioned... St. James dragged on for years before it got approved.

worldlyhaligonian · #57 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 6:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeo

Yup. That area probably has the highest concentration of NIMBY's in the entire city and as has already been mentioned... St. James dragged on for years before it got approved.

Yeah, given the average age of the NIMBY's, lets hope that some of them aren't around to kick up a stink.

Barrington south · #58 Posted **Sep 10, 2009, 10:40 PM**

so he needs to build up wards of a 30 story tower to pay for the upgrades for Fenwick?

yeah that tall tower doesn't stand an ice cube's chance in hell, even if the 70 foot limit did not exist

didn't The James take over 10 years to get approval?

but I'm all for developing the site to the max

I would love for him to make the site the biggest success as possible.....

Jonovision · #59 Posted **Sep 11, 2009, 3:43 AM**

I definitely think he has a lot of work ahead of him. We shall see how it all turns out. Either way, I'm very excited about the possibilities!

someone123 · #60 Posted **Sep 11, 2009, 4:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdm

The residents in that area after St James Place was approved got a moition passed to not allow anything higher then 70 feet.

This is one of the more obvious problems with the way the municipal government works.. that is a totally one-sided motion passed before the current owner of the property was even around.

I similarly disliked the motion to limit development of the lot behind that building on Barrington to townhouses. Midrise is perfectly reasonable there and there was no input from developers in terms of what is preferred or what is economically feasible.