HRM by Design

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Wishblade

"A recent opinion piece contained a number of inaccuracies that we would like to address to ensure readers have the correct information about the enhanced heritage protection that is a large part of HRM by Design. This plan will neither encourage nor allow 30 high-rises in the central business district, nor will it encourage the demolition of heritage resources. On the contrary, HRM by Design will provide strengthened heritage protections, and directs any future tall buildings to those areas where tall buildings already exist, thereby preserving the heritage heart of the downtown."


Ok, now let me get this straight. Only putting highrises where highrises already exist. That would include virtually the entire downtown would it not??

You could say that, but what they really mean is Cogswell i believe.

[hfx_chris]

But there's no highrises on the cogswell site!

[Aya_Akai]

Originally Posted by hfx_chris

But there's no highrises on the cogswell site!

And I think its already said *somewhere* that's what going to happen on that site anyway... yes... no?

[sdm]

Originally Posted by HaliStreaks

And I think its already said *somewhere* that's what going to happen on that site anyway... yes... no?

As per future growth yes.

[hfx_chris]

Originally Posted by HaliStreaks

And I think its already said *somewhere* that's what going to happen on that site anyway... yes... no?

Yes, but future doesn't mean present.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by hfx_chris

Yes, but future doesn't mean present.

And that is if they tear that structure down.

Reading the details of HRM by design, most of downtown is 6 stories or less.

[Wishblade]

Originally Posted by sdm

And that is if they tear that structure down.

Reading the details of HRM by design, most of downtown is 6 stories or less.

So, if downtown is 6 stories or less with HRM by design, where will all the towers go? to remain an economic engine, we must have a district for financial services and other offices. It would be stupid not to build them downtown, but if not there, they have to go somewhere...

[hfx_chris]

Downtown Dartmouth

[Dmajackson]

Does anyone know the proposed height limit on SGR? I know i was reading somewhere at street level they have to be three stories but they can be taller as long as they are stepped back...

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

Does anyone know the proposed height limit on SGR? I know i was reading somewhere at street level they have to be three stories but they can be taller as long as they are stepped back...

3 at street level but again limited height. I believe the max is 10, but is limited do to view planes.

For example the CBC building can't be built high just in case they need to fire a cannon.

From SGR south there maybe one site that can go over 7 stories, if i can remember correctly.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Wishblade

So, if downtown is 6 stories or less with HRM by design, where will all the towers go? to remain an economic engine, we must have a district for financial services and other offices. It would be stupid not to build them downtown, but if not there, they have to go somewhere...

Not sure what to say, but thats what the details show.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by sdm

3 at street level but again limited height. I believe the max is 10, but is limited do to view planes.

For example the CBC building can't be built high just in case they need to fire a cannon.

From SGR south there maybe one site that can go over 7 stories, if i can remember correctly.

10!?!? That's shorter than most of the buildings on South Park St!

I've dug through the files and on SGR there are three different height areas;

CBC Building southside - South Park - Morris - Dresdon (minus one block) is 215 feet (65m).

Dresdon to just after Brunswick is 90 feet (27m),

And near Barrington is 35 feet (10m).

The section near South Park has a proposed height about the same as the Trillium's roofline will be.

The CBC building is probably short because of the rampart's bylaw...

It turns out the streetwall height on the main part of SGR is 55 feet (16 metres) so more than 3 stories i guess. Along South Park it is 80 feet (25 feet).

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

10!?!? That's shorter than most of the buildings on South Park St!

I've dug through the files and on SGR there are three different height areas;

CBC Building southside - South Park - Morris - Dresdon (minus one block) is 215 feet (65m).

Dresdon to just after Brunswick is 90 feet (27m),

And near Barrington is 35 feet (10m).

The section near South Park has a proposed height about the same as the Trillium's roofline will be.

The CBC building is probably short because of the rampart's bylaw...

It turns out the streetwall height on the main part of SGR is 55 feet (16 metres) so more than 3 stories i guess. Along South Park it is 80 feet (25 feet).

According to the maps the site where trillum is 215'. There really isn't much more to develop there at isn't already there.

CBC site, 75'

Parking lots, 90' which in residential would be 10 stories approximatley. Commercial would be 7 or maybe 8.

From there to downtown its 35- 70'

A few sites of height are owned by the Government downtown.

Herald site is 90' for some, 75' for most.

Best part is they call highrises 110 feet..........

Also pay attention to the ZM-3 Pre-bonus height maps.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by sdm

According to the maps the site where trillum is 215'. There really isn't much more to develop there at isn't already there.

It does include the block in behind the Trillium (where the NSLC is i think). So other than that white building they can develop that some more. But other than that and the corner of South Park and SGR there isn't any land left in that section.

I wonder why they didn't include the three blocks of Schmidtville and list them as potential heritage district?

Parking lots, 90' which in residential would be 10 stories approximatley. Commercial would be 7 or maybe 8.

90' also applies to the Queen St lands, and on the north side of SGR from behind HMV (Dresdon) to the current library.

Anybody else find it strange that they have a viewplane that goes to PPP but it also goes right through Fenwick Tower (approximately)?

[Wishblade]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

It does include the block in behind the Trillium (where the NSLC is i think). So other than that white building they can develop that some more. But other than that and the corner of South Park and SGR there isn't any land left in that section.

I wonder why they didn't include the three blocks of Schmidtville and list them as potential heritage district?



90' also applies to the Queen St lands, and on the north side of SGR from behind HMV (Dresdon) to the current library.

Anybody else find it strange that they have a viewplane that goes to PPP but it also goes right through Fenwick Tower (approximately)?

Wasn't Fenwick Tower built before the viewplanes were implemented? I believe construction started in 1969 and was completed in 1971.

[Dmajackson]

That might explain the odd viewplane. So we have a viewplane that was purposely looking at Fenwick Tower....strange....

IMO HRM by Design will probably just push development to the other side of South Park (probably see a lot more going up between the Public Gardens and Robie).

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

That might explain the odd viewplane. So we have a viewplane that was purposely looking at Fenwick Tower....strange....

IMO HRM by Design will probably just push development to the other side of South Park (probably see a lot more going up between the Public Gardens and Robie).

Unless zoned R3 that might be hard. I believe the current height limits there are 70'. I doubt that will change.

The view plans came after Fenwick.

The NSLC on cylde is accorss the street. The parking lots, city owned, are 90' restricted.

From HMV to the new libary is not all that high either, there are view plans which will reduce the height.

SGR density is great, i am more concerned about the deep downtown.

[Wishblade]

Downtown Halifax development plan tweaked, much the same

Officials have tweaked the plan that would govern development in downtown Halifax, but the phone-book-sized proposal isn’t a lot different from the draft released in the spring.

“The plan is pretty well cooked right now. It’s just adding some seasonings,” Andy Fillmore, the urban design project manager, said Monday.

The HRMbyDesign committee released the second draft of the plan Monday, launching a six-week period for public comment.

Most of the substantive proposals are still there, and most of the changes were technical, Mr. Fillmore said.

Building heights would range from 10.5 to 64.5 metres, depending on in which of 36 zones they were built. Mr. Fillmore said minor changes in the second draft include rules for the form of high-rise buildings, making them more slender to improve sky and harbour views without reducing floor space.

Another small change was allowing buildings in the Barrington Street conservation area to be about three metres higher, to match the height allowed beside the area.

The second draft notes that the municipality doesn’t have the power to require the private sector to meet the LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) environmental standard for buildings, so mandatory sustainability guidelines are now just recommended guidelines.

There are new requirements for flat-top roofs to be landscaped, and for parking garages to include sheltered bicycle parking.

In writing the second draft, Mr. Fillmore said planners continued trying to balance the often competing interests of growth and heritage advocates.

The city is still waiting on the provincial government to make legislative changes that would allow for some of the provisions in the design plan. Municipal Relations Minister Jamie Muir introduced the changes late in the spring session, but too late for them to get through.

Mr. Fillmore said he’s hopeful the legislation will change this fall.

The new design plan is intended to make things clearer for developers, introduce better design guidelines, and enable quicker decisions on development proposals.

The legislation changes would give the city control over things like building design, enable a design review committee to look at applications instead of regional council doing it, make council - not the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board - an appeal body for development proposals, and delete the review board from the downtown Halifax planning process.

The deadline for public comment is Oct. 24. There’s one public meeting on the new draft – Sept. 24 at the Cunard Centre on Marginal Road. More information is available at hrmbydesign.ca.

Mr. Fillmore said he expects council will get the final report of the draft in January, and will hold a public hearing on it in February.

[Spitfire75]

The 2nd draft is available here.
I haven't checked it out yet.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I have to laugh at alot of the documents. That Cornwallis Park rendering makes no sense, Superstore just put a gas station on the land that the renderings show a big apartment complex on... The land isn't even possible to develop before remediation of the site and it currently is the parking lot for Superstore.