[Dartmouth] United Gulf Old YMCA Site | ? m | ? fl | Proposed

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by JET

As I said in another thread, most sensible people accept that this proposal would affect the lake and therefore was rightly defeated.

I must have missed that ..revelation of yours.

[Keith P.]

Anyone who actually watched this interminable debate at council will realize a couple of things. The staff recommendation had nothing to do with the specifics of this particular proposal, but was instead just punting the decision made in 2005 not to allow anything over 35 feet on this site back to council. The other thing one would realize is that there were wind studies done that even Canoe Kayak had no quarrel with that said the buildings would have no appreciable effect on the lake. But certain councillors didn't want to hear that. They were led by Gloria, but others such as Fisher chimed in. Because the person at the canoe club that he talked to didn't know anything about the study, Fisher seemed to decide that was reason to vote against it. Because a former paddler that is a Dartmouth hero was against it, someone else voted against it. And because Gloria is afraid of change, she led the charge and the rest of them meekly followed. Blumenthal even said words to the effect that he didn't know much about it but was against it if Gloria was.

Cripes.

I hope Gloria brings forward a motion to buy this property from UG for what they paid for it plus a reasonable return on their investment. Clearly nothing will ever be permitted to be built here lest it somehow affect the precious paddling course. We're up the creek again.

[Jstaleness]

So we have councillors that vote a certain choice on developments because of a vote already cast by another member? These people are paid to think for themselves are they not? If this true than why do studies in the first place? What a bunch of jokers.

[ibnem2]

Look - United Gulf made a number of strategic mistakes, mostly trying to defeat the height limitation in a sensitized lake community that has the added vice of non-sensical leadership. That leadership is, unfortunately, the state of democracy in our region and most others across Canada. Common sense, detailed design and hard work mean nothing compared to politics and a flawed democratic process (i.e., decision by referendum). You can rag on Gloria and the others but let me ask you this - if your livelihood depended on appeasing a band of nay sayer voters ... what would you do ? It's wrong, it's frustrating, bad decisions get made for all the wrong reasons. But this happens at all levels of government. Real change generally comes about only as part of revolution and Revolution usually happens only when things get real bad. The community was "comfortable", didn't want pain and for a very long time didn't know better ... Well, maybe this was true 50 years ago. But back then, they didn't have the internet and only knew what they were told ... And now things are different. Right ?

Reading comments on this forum I see a number of amateur and professional planners. You all know what building sustainable communities mean and HRM (particularly Dartmouth) is not sustainable in the long term. The inflationary policies of global government to finance past generations of errors is also unsustainable (e.g. USA) and the cost of forthcoming corrections will be even more difficult to burden at the Municipal level (have you been reading about the capital state of the HRWC - no good news about our infrastructure or even quantifying it's state of anything let alone it's state of dis-repair).

There are a lot of intelligent, informed and extremely well spoken individuals on this forum. A pro planning / community group (forget pro-development because not all development is good) will have a significant impact on the inane leadership driving the HRM development process into chaos. Write Gloria and the other councillors and encourage others to do same. Meet and discuss these issues with activist groups (like Fusion). Go to the United Gulf hearings and get heard (for or against). It may sound like b.s. and soap box rhetoric, but groups like Fusion and individuals like the ones on these forums can and have made a difference. PM me if you want examples.

So if you're here for the entertainment and bashing go for it ... If you want change get involved.

http://www.fusionhalifax.ca/en/home/default.aspx

By the way, The developer has a less than stellar reputation in the HRM which didn't help.

nuff said ...

[halifaxboyns]

Well Fussion is doing good work - but there are some good and bad developments.

This one I'd put in the middle - it's good that it had density; but there is a greater goal in the area with the planning regulations and policy to protect the course. The staff report notes that they did a wind tunnel analysis and it wasn't good for the lake. This was based on the original proposal of 2003 but they also modeled two 17 storey towers (although the proposal was 16 - which confused me a bit, may be a typo). Even with the difference of one storey; I doubt the results would've been any better.

Regardless of any of the 'backroom' chatter from the councillors during the discussion, the staff report is pretty clear that the proposal wouldn't really be good for the course and the whole point of the policy in the area is to preserve and protect this world class facility. Frankly, I'm fine with what council did and being a planner, having read the policy - probably would've recommended the same thing.

I'm all for densification, but there are just some projects where the density and scale of the project isn't a good idea - because you are either trying to protect natural features/facilities like the rowing course.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by ibnem2

Look - United Gulf made a number of strategic mistakes, mostly trying to defeat the height limitation in a sensitized lake community that has the added vice of non-sensical leadership. That leadership is, unfortunately, the state of democracy in our region and most others across Canada. Common sense, detailed design and hard work mean nothing compared to politics and a flawed democratic process (i.e., decision by referendum). You can rag on Gloria and the others but let me ask you this - if your livelihood depended on appeasing a band of nay sayer voters ... what would you do ? It's wrong, it's frustrating, bad decisions get made for all the wrong reasons. But this happens at all levels of government. Real change generally comes about only as part of revolution. Revolution happens when things get real bad. So why should the "comfortable" constituents in our communities go thru the pain ... Maybe because 50 years ago they didn't have the internet and didn't know better or only knew what they were told ... and now things are different.

There are a lot of intelligent, informed and extremely well spoken individuals on this forum. A pro planning / community group (forget pro-development because not all development is good) will have a significant impact on the inane leadership driving the HRM development process into chaos. Write Gloria and the other councillors and encourage others to do same. Meet and discuss these issues with activist groups (like Fusion). Go to the United Gulf hearings and get heard (for or against). It may sound like B.S and soap box but groups like these and individuals like the ones on these forums can and have made a difference. PM me if you want examples.

Reading comments on this forum I see a number of amateur and professional planners. You all know what building sustainable communities means and HRM (particularly Dartmouth) is not sustainable in the long term. The inflationary policies of global government to finance past generations is also unsustainable (e.g. USA) and the cost of forthcoming corrections will be even more difficult to burden at the Municipal level (have you been reading about the capital state of the HRWC - no good news about our infrastructure or even quantifying it's state of anything let alone it's state of dis-repair).

So if you're here for the entertainment and bashing go for it. If you want change something get involved.

http://www.fusionhalifax.ca/en/home/default.aspx

By the way, The developer has a less than popular reputation in the HRM which didn't help.

nuff said ...

Many on this forum have spoken numerous times at City Council public hearings, open houses etc. We have also written to councillors, written editorials and appeared on TV. In addition, some of us have been on committees and been involved in workshops and built model stadiums. Everyone here is passionate about how the Halifax area is to be developed. The danger in the near future is that we lose what makes Halifax unique and forge ahead with mediocre midrise structures like Armoury Sq. and Drum. We need to retain the unique flavour of Halifax which is rooted deep in history and quality architecture. HRM is a very complex microcosm where the issues of sustainable living are endless. Consideration must be given to the existing architecture, the waterfront, open green space, a growing vibrant business district, a burgeoning entertainment district, a growing shopping segment, a funky arts presence, a new frontier in the north end, industrial uses, transportation, affordable housing, shipbuilding/shipping, tourism, educational/medical institutions and very well established tree lined residential neighborhoods. All of this in a very small constricted sensitive area with cumbersome municipal governance and numerous diametrically opposed interest groups. What is the solution?

[ibnem2]

Originally Posted by Empire

Many on this forum have spoken numerous times at City Council public hearings, open houses etc. We have also written to councillors editorials and appeared on TV. In addition some of us have been on committees and been involved in workshops and built model stadiums. Everyone here is passionate about how the Halifax area is to be developed. The danger in the near future is that we lose what makes Halifax unique and forge ahead with mediocre midrise structures like Armoury Sq. and Drum. We need to retain the unique flavour of Halifax which is rooted deep in history and quality architecture. HRM is a very complex microcosm where the issues of sustainable living are endless. Consideration must be given to the existing architecture, the waterfront, open green space, a growing vibrant business district, a burgeoning entertainment district, a growing shopping segment, a funky arts presence, a new frontier in the north end, industrial uses, shipbuilding/shipping, tourism, educational and medical institutions and very well established tree lined residential neighborhoods. All of this in a very small constricted sensitive area with cumbersome municipal governance and numerous diametrically opposed interest groups. What is the solution?

Firstly, I am not in defence of the U.G. proposal.

On a solution ... We'll solve that one right after world hunger and about 2 billion more years of evolution. But seriously, there is a significant bias towards non-development in Dartmouth (good or bad) and Council has no motivation to balance the odds or listen to their staff (they need to get re-elected right !). Oh and let's not forget about negative population growth on many parts of the Dartmouth Peninsula including ... well, how about Gloria's district ! Not sustainable equals forget the architecture, forget the vibrant business district and forget about your mom having a place to retire within the community she grew up. The buck stops w sustainability and all our choices go out the window when that fails. We really won't have to worry about what looks prettiest and what's worth saving because HRM won't be able to provide a gymnasium for us to discuss it (have you been to Alderney school recently). Sorry for bantering but I couldn't resist.

In order for the pendulum to swing back to some sensible centre, rational voices need be heard and planning reports need to be a de-facto standard for Council's decision - not the amateur, mis-informed, nay-sayer's with the largest voice. We hire these professionals and we need to listen to them. Give councillors the right signals with lots of noise so they have the confidence to listen to those reports. I am sick of hearing "well I don't know much about the application so I'll just defer to Councillor so and so's position because it's her district". Or "the people have spoken ....". So yes, keep writing, keep speaking and get everyone else to do the same. One rational voice will defeat an army of many that aren't, but if you're good ... you might just win them over too .

Soap box again ... Go figure.

Cheers ...

[JET]

Good discussions. Just one question, is there a Dartmouth penninsula?

[ibnem2]

Originally Posted by JET

Good discussions. Just one question, is there a Dartmouth penninsula?

Sorry - been hangin in Halifax too much recently - try "mainland".

cheers ...

[Dmajackson]

I completely forgot this site was another of United Gulf's never ending requests.

Housing Accelerator Fund requested zoning changes;

• This property is not adjacent to the M-District FGN which has already been initiated by Council.
• This property is also subject to Lake Banook height precinct controls.
• Staff are not recommending this rezoning as part of the HAF process.

Regional Centre Development Requests