[Halifax] The Jade & Green Lantern (1595 Barrington) | Completed

[fenwick16]

I agree with sdm, instead of seeing only commercial buildings in downtown Halifax it could become more residential. PS: Having more residential will naturally lead to more retail in the downtown core.

I might add that hotels should continue to be developed in downtown Halifax close to most of the historic sites.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

He means that more and more businesses in the commercial buildings are moving out to places that have cheaper rent like Burnside.

Rent actually plays very little into reasons these days, if anything the difference is marginal.

Parking, ease of access to the core, lack of public transit, and older buildings are the common reasons to leave, not so much rent.

[someone123]

Increased residential would also make the downtown more attractive to businesses. Lots of people like being able to walk to work but there have to be good local services and housing options. It could be worse but right now the downtown area is pretty sparse.

I've always thought the Roy proposal was kind of marginal. Not a great design and it's been needlessly sitting empty for years.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by sdm

Rent actually plays very little into reasons these days, if anything the difference is marginal.

Parking, ease of access to the core, lack of public transit, and older buildings are the common reasons to leave, not so much rent.

That's what I assumed you meant, but I didn't want to assume and then be wrong.

The parking issue can be easily changed through the zoning rules for suburban development - many cities are now capping the parking to a maximum amount (usually somewhere between 50 to 75% of what normally would've been required). It seems to be working from what I've read and pushing investment back, when combined with taxation programs that reduce or defer municipal taxes to encourage redevelopment.

The access issue is more difficult for HRM. But I think if there is a combination of direct high speed routes (bus lanes where possible) and perhaps a high speed ferry or rail system (it could be regional rail or even an LRT) the access issue (combined with more people in downtown) could really turn things around. But that will require firm financial committment and a firm committment to planning goals of making downtown better. That's something which i doubt the current council has.

[halifaxboyns]

I just updated my facebook - Councillor Sloane's status:
"Discovery centre project rejected by pac"

[fenwick16]

According to allnovascotia.com, a council committee, which advises regional council, liked the Roy building design and unanimously rejected the Discovery Centre design. My own explanation for that viewpoint is that they think that square, unremarkable buildings fit in with downtown Halifax architecture; curved, ultramodern buildings don't fit in.

It is interesting that many people on this skyscraperpage forum seem to have the opposite opinion. Beverly Miller referred to the Discovery Centre design as looking like the Queen Mary "kind of washed up and crooked". Councillor Sloane stated that the "ultra modern" building design was distracting. Interesting how Councilor Sloane feels that buildings should attract people to downtown Halifax but keeps rejecting one residential tower after another.

All I can say is "this is frightening and makes me feel sick to my stomach". Downtown Halifax is doomed to be an area of squat, rectangular, uninspired buildings that fit in with the rest of the squat, rectangular, uninspired buildings. Add to that vision all the vacant lots and you have a recipe for a very dull, decaying downtown core.

This council advisory committee is too lopsided and out of touch with the viewpoint of the majority of the people in the HRM. It is time for a change. Hopefully the rest of the Regional Council will be more progressively minded and have a better sense of what is good for downtown Halifax.

PS: Unfortunately allnovascotia.com didn't give the name of the advisory committee - is it a heritage committee? Are they recommending against any modern building in downtown Halifax - the feeling in my stomach is . - I really feel like vomiting.

PS: Question, are ultra-modern buildings bad anywhere in downtown Halifax or just along Barrington Street? If ultra-modern buildings are bad anywhere in downtown Halifax then why is the new Central Library considered to be an inspired building along Spring Garden Road? Interestingly, Spring Garden Road is a popular vibrant area whereas downtown Halifax is going in the opposite direction.

[CorbeauNoir]

The design is 'ultra-modern'?

Christ. Make sure these people don't catch wind of Mies van der Rohe or Le Corbusier, they'll go ballistic :

[halifaxboyns]

On her facebook - she called it a toothbrush when we were arguing about it. I laughed.
Not everyone likes modern designs...although Bev Miller should NEVER EVER be on a council committee related to downtown. That's not a no vote waiting to happen or anything.

[Dmajackson]

It was the D12PAC (District 12 Planning Advisory Committee) that discussed the case and to be honest I wasn't surprised. Put Bev Miller and Dawn in the same room and everything will be shot down for not being perfect.

What should be interesting to watch is the Heritage Adivsory Committee discussing this on Wednesday (not for the result but rather the descriptions of the building).

I just looked it up and the PAC only has four members so if Bev and Dawn have a similar opinion the other two votes don't matter. I imagine the other two only voted against it to send a strong message. The good news is this has to go before Regional Council for final approval so the sensible suburban councillors will vote it thorugh just like they did for the Trillium, Alexander and United Gulf proposals (all of which Dawn voted against). My prediction is this will happen;

- PAC will recommend Council not approve the proposal
- HAC will recommend Council not approve the proposal
- Regional Council will approve the proposal in a vote of 20 - 3 (Sloane, Blumenthal, and Uteck/McCluskey against)
- Heritage Trust will appeal the approval to NSUARB
- NSUARB will uphold Council's decision

And hopefully the developer will then sue the Heritage Trust for purposely holding back a development with no just cause.

[fenwick16]

Question - since Councillor Sloane is the Councillor for district 12, is it a fair assumption that she selected Beverly Miller to the D12PAC committee?

[someone123]

Is Bev Miller qualified in any way to make an architectural assessment of that building? My guess is that she isn't since she always gives the same vague, subjective comments.

Why do we even have these committees when they are just a platform for a small number of people with personal agendas?

[beyeas]

To say I am disgusted with this would be an understatement.

The developer had dropped the height to appease people already, and had dropped the parking garage to save the facade, and yet STILL these apparent arbitrator's of design couldn't see fit to approve something that actually stand a chance of increasing residential density along a street that desperately needs it. @#$%!!!!!!

[someone123]

The PAC is just advisory, 4 members, and a tie probably means official rejection (it did with the PCC). In other words, Sloane + Bev means nothing recommended ever. It is a joke -- emblematic of serious problems in Halifax that are going to kill the city if they aren't dealt with.

My hope is that somebody else will run in the downtown district in 2012. My guess is that she's more popular with the shrinking old North End demographic than new condo residents, though I'm not sure.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Info about Beverly Miller from The Coast:
http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/bever...ent?oid=995632

I'm suprised to see she has an MBA and also has some of these anti-development viewpoints. Also, I don't think any "open spaces" on the waterfront are a positive idea given the wind/weather. My point of view on that has more to do with the reality of walking on the waterfront than it does with my views on development. Taking control of these spaces??? What is this, expropriation? That's "evil" in the business world. Plus, these lands are mostly controlled by the WDCL??? So who does she mean take them back from?

This whole thing about affordable housing for young people is constantly talked about by boomers. I'm a young person and I don't think that housing is the issue, its j-o-bs... otherwise, rents aren't rediculous and there are still tons of places for around 100k in Dartmouth and parts of Halifax. When you aren't working any housing is not afforable.

Heritage is definitely a great resource of sorts, but it doesn't mean we can't build new things downtown. I am also a fan of infill, but not shady low quality stuff that gets through council.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by someone123

The PAC is just advisory, 4 members, and a tie probably means official rejection (it did with the PCC). In other words, Sloane + Bev means nothing recommended ever. It is a joke -- emblematic of serious problems in Halifax that are going to kill the city if they aren't dealt with.

My hope is that somebody else will run in the downtown district in 2012. My guess is that she's more popular with the shrinking old North End demographic than new condo residents, though I'm not sure.

Has the councilor ever supported a project in her riding ? I can't think of one where they voted yes.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by beyeas

To say I am disgusted with this would be an understatement.

The developer had dropped the height to appease people already, and had dropped the parking garage to save the facade, and yet STILL these apparent arbitrator's of design couldn't see fit to approve something that actually stand a chance of increasing residential density along a street that desperately needs it. @#$%!!!!!!

The PAC cannot approve anything. They recommend to Council. In this case, they would be not recommending the staff report. It is Council's job to decide whether or not the PAC recommendation, or lack thereof, impacts their votes. The PAC is supposed to provide advice to council based on planning issues, not on resemblance to a toothbrush.

Council should also be considering the Heritage Advisory Committee's recommendation (or not), any public comments at the hearing, and any comments submitted by constituents to their respective councilors.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

The PAC cannot approve anything. They recommend to Council. In this case, they would be not recommending the staff report. It is Council's job to decide whether or not the PAC recommendation, or lack thereof, impacts their votes. The PAC is supposed to provide advice to council based on planning issues, not on resemblance to a toothbrush.

Council should also be considering the Heritage Advisory Committee's recommendation (or not), any public comments at the hearing, and any comments submitted by constituents to their respective councilors.

Exactly - these committees are advisory; council doesn't need to take their comments into account at all. Fortunately, the structure of the council presentation is to present the administration recommendation and then advise of the recommendations of the committees.

Here in Calgary - we'd have to present the Calgary Planning Commission's recommendation (whether we agree with it or not). I can't tell you how many times I or other staff members have had to bite our tongues presenting because we didn't agree with the recommendation - but such is life!

I'm sure the more level headed people on council will prevail. I wouldn't be surprised to see this vote go much the same was as UG towers.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

Exactly - these committees are advisory; council doesn't need to take their comments into account at all. Fortunately, the structure of the council presentation is to present the administration recommendation and then advise of the recommendations of the committees.

However, they still add significantly to the overhead of getting new projects approved by delaying the approval process. If they are just a platform for a select group of unelected random people they should be eliminated. Sloane's membership is also questionable since she gets a say at council anyway -- why is she voting on her own recommendation? Could there be anything more absurd?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

However, they still add significantly to the overhead of getting new projects approved by delaying the approval process. If they are just a platform for a select group of unelected random people they should be eliminated. Sloane's membership is also questionable since she gets a say at council anyway -- why is she voting on her own recommendation? Could there be anything more absurd?

Indeed. HRM is held prisoner by it's absurd public participation process and these useless committees. Blow them all up and make a goddam decision.

[resetcbu1]

This whole thing about affordable housing for young people is constantly talked about by boomers. I'm a young person and I don't think that housing is the issue, its j-o-bs... otherwise, rents aren't rediculous and there are still tons of places for around 100k in Dartmouth and parts of Halifax. When you aren't working any housing is not afforable.

Heritage is definitely a great resource of sorts, but it doesn't mean we can't build new things downtown. I am also a fan of infill, but not shady low quality stuff that gets through council.

As a young person I couldn't agree more with you,this is why I live in calgary now, but I would love the oppertunity to come home to a vibrant city. I work for enmax power out here on the powerlines so I would imagine now I could return home with my experiance and work for NSP, but my girlfriend would have a hell of a time getting the type of P/T job there she has here while going to university she makes 23$ hr here P/T most people would kill for that wage back home, so maybe if the tide turned it would be feasible to do so...