So I went to the public meeting for this project - it was very interesting. I probably shouldn't have worn my City of Calgary vest lol; since it says I work with 'Development and Building Approvals'...but oh well, that's the first thing I grabbed when I left!

It got (from what I say) a pretty typical response. All the usual suspects were there, although I left early to see my mom in the hospital. Phil Pacey was there, as was Peggy Cameron and Alan Ruffman (from the Save the view group). He made some of the worst comments; accusing the group of basically being bad corporate citizens for suggesting this development and 'selling out'.

A lot of the owners of the condos in the adjacent towers came out and were upset they were loosing their view; which almost sent me over the edge. Oh and then when the Citadell Hill person from Parks Canada came up and said she wanted the height kept the same - I wanted to scream. Like the citadell would stop being a tourist destination because of a tall building? Please...

But there were some good statements by people in favour of the development. The one guy from one of the adjacent towers sent me up the wall though because he asked if Councillor Sloane would accept political donations from these people...wow...totally not appropriate!

This will have a pretty negligible impact on views of neighbours. I guess it would block a small portion of some views from the Martello. So what? Nobody is promised protected panoramic views across everybody else's private property.

Alan Ruffman should move to Canso or something. He would be able to relax there without even the remote threat of new development or economic activity.

He always does that. Ruffman seems to think of himself as the one honest man and always slings mud and false accusations against any proposed development. Of course, he is a convicted income tax felon - something he seems to forget. I really do think he is psychopathic.

With Sloane its hard to say - she accused someone of offering her a bribe years ago, got a lot of press, then backed off when pressed to back up her accusations. She is a terrible councillor and nothing she does would surprise me.

Height shmight. What makes me concerned about this is that it is the first test of HRMbD. We have a cohesive plan that is supposed to stop this fighting and that everyone is supposed to adhere to and out of the gate we have a proposal to shoot past the max bonus height. I find that frustrating, though I do like the proposed building on paper. I mean, HRMbD is far from perfect, but it is the mediated solution, if you will.

If I lived next door, had bought a condo in the last two years, and "knew" the by-law said that the buildings to the north and east of me could only be whatever the bonus height is, 70 feet I think, and then the very first new development was over double that, I too would be upset. I think that is fair comment on those people's part.

Parks can go to hell, there is no view plane constraint on that site, until the mid 90s they didn't even own Garrison Grounds, DND did.

Both sides weigh in on YMCA project
Plan would require city to amend height restrictions
By EVA HOARE Staff Reporter
Fri, Apr 22 - 4:55 AM
A proposal for a major expansion of the Halifax YMCA was met with both accolades and criticism during a public information session at city hall Thursday evening.

Some feared the proposed $22-million structure, which would require the city to amend its height restrictions, would be another Fenwick Place tower, an eyesore that would be out of character with the neighbourhood.

"I’m firmly opposed to putting another Fenwick on the corner," said Joseph Skerry, who lives nearby in Martello Tower.

Skerry said he realizes some sort of development will go ahead at the YMCA/CBC site at the corner of South Park and Sackville streets, but he is "violently opposed" to the proposed 46-metre-tall structure because of its height. (Current rules restrict buildings to 23 metres in that area around Citadel Hill.)

"It would be asinine for anyone to think that site would not be developed," Skerry told the crowd of about 70, adding that he thinks the nearby Trillium complex is "an abomination."

"I think we commit a crime allowing (the YMCA expansion) to take place on that corner."

Others said the proposed complex would be a "friend" to the nearby Public Gardens and Citadel Hill. It would include a vast atrium allowing people inside to have views of Citadel Hill. Visitors could also see the Public Gardens and adjoining local streetscapes, supporters said.

The glass, art deco-inspired front, with two towers stepped back and a covered glass laneway along Annandale Street in between, would include 330,000 square feet of residential units and possibly even a boutique hotel.

Representatives from Michael Napier Architecture, the Halifax firm in charge of the complex’s design, said they had come up with a respectful proposal that would be a "comfortable" fit in the neighbourhood.

The higher parts of the structure, which would be residential areas, would be stepped back from Sackville and South Park streets so as not to interrupt the view from Citadel Hill, they said.

Kenzie MacDonald, who lives with his family in the area, called the proposed expansion "a tremendous asset" to the area.

"There are very few options for the public for recreation south of Citadel (Hill)," he said.

Jim MacFadzean, who lives in the city’s south end and said he is a member of Friends of the Public Gardens, addressed concerns about viewplanes from Citadel Hill toward Spring Garden Road and southward.

"I don’t believe that many people go up Citadel Hill to gaze on South Park and Sackville streets," he said.

MacFadzean said the development would not be "perfect for everybody" but would greatly enhance life in the area.

Throughout the session, several proponents called the proposal "critical" to downtown Halifax.

Jennifer Powely of the Ecology Action Centre wondered why the city is considering changing its height restriction after just completing the HRM by Design initiative.

"Why are we looking at changing that?" she asked.

Michael Napier said his firm’s design complies with city bylaws except for the height restriction, and even then only a portion would be in violation.

Napier’s company has been involved in a downtown YMCA project in Vancouver and in several mixed urban complexes in Europe.

A Halifax YMCA representative said the expansion is badly needed as the existing infrastructure can’t handle the community’s needs.

Richard Harvey, a senior planner with Halifax Regional Municipality, said people need to consider two key points: the kind of impact a higher structure would have on Citadel Hill and its surroundings, and whether the public benefit from the proposed complex would support amending the height restrictions.

Harvey said his department welcomes all input and historical data so it can provide a well-rounded report to regional council. Once that report, with its recommendations, is before councillors, they will decide whether to send it on to public hearings, he said.

( ehoare@herald.ca)

I feel rather frustrated and dismayed. I'd been thinking that over the long term every development giving some height to the downtown would add to those who are on the side of good densification. But then comes along a knob like this Skerry who got his hi rise condo home (Martello) and now wantos to stop all ther rest of them. Very irritating to read quotes like those.

Almost like the the old proverb says - People who live in glass towers shouldn't throw stones. I think the Martello Tower is just as tall as the YMCA/CBC tower. His statements certainly seem to be hypocritical. Now even highrise dwellers are opposing highrises.

On the contrary, the southern view is my favorite view from the Citadel. I think this proposal will make it even better. I hope that this proposal will go ahead.

I guess opinions are like a certain rearward-facing body part, but with attitudes like this guy's it is a miracle we aren't all living in thatch-roof cottages. It's a shame that his asinine remarks are the lead in the story but the Herald seems desperate to sell papers these days.

I guess the Martello is the only tower that should have been allowed in the entire neighborhood. :rolleyes:

I think this is a bad mindset to be in. It is basically impossible to have a few people sit down and create a reasonable "mediated solution" (i.e. "grand plan") for development of a large area for many years. There needs to be a way to amend plans and indeed one exists for HbD.

Note that HbD has also already had a number of unintended consequences and has required a substantial review. Again, there is no reasonable way to avoid this.

This is such nonsense. I hope somebody called him on it.

Wow, just wow.

"I’m firmly opposed to putting another Fenwick on the corner," said Joseph Skerry, who lives nearby in Martello Tower.

Soo... the guy in a taller tower than the proposal is calling this development another Fenwick... Hahahahahahaha.

Its clear the agenda is simply anti-height from these folks. The merit of any development isn't even looked at. Its shameful.

No, I get that, but I like a substantial planned approach, rather than creating rules and ignoring them piecemeal. And HRMbD was created with input from thousands, and then approved by council, it has to have some weight.

It does have some weight -- they are taking many principles of the plan into account. Height of the tallest part of the development is but one small aspect of the design, contrary to what you'd think from reading these articles.

The massing, setbacks, mix of uses, street-level interest, public amenities, and so forth are all much more important than the fact that part of the building (set well back from the edge of the block) is 8 storeys or so above an arbitrary height limit.

My understanding was that HRM_by_Design was meant to be a dynamic, living document that could be changed if it was found not to be working. If the HRM by Design hampers growth in the downtown core instead of encourages it then why wouldn't it be amended?

It seems as though the majority of people feel that the YWCA/CBC proposal is a good one that will allow the YMCA to continue at that location. HRM by Design should allow a process of individual development agreements so that worthy developments aren't automatically ruled out. It seems as though such individual development agreements are allowed under HRM_by_Design which is the way that I believe it should be.

I'm not against the development. Having concerns and wanting more information is not the same as being against it. Of course HRMbD is a living document, all law is that way, however...

Look I want a discussion not a flame war, so I am throwing this out there hoping you will all discuss rather than just dismiss.

The point of having a development plan is to say "this is what you can build." Fenwick, you say it shouldn't "hamper development downtown" and I agree, but just because a developer does not want to follow the plan does not mean that it is hampering development, right?

Otherwise, why have any plans at all, if everything is going to ultimately be considered on the project's merits?

You have made an assumption that I believe is incorrect. Your assumption is that some developer doesn't want to follow the plan by proposing a project that exceeds the HRM_by_Design height limit. I don't believe that there currently is a developer for this project.

Based on my understanding, the YMCA would like to expand and in order to raise enough capital they came up with the plan of allowing development on their YMCA site. The YMCA is hoping to raise $8 - 9 million dollars from this endeavor and they hired an architect to come up with a proposal that could meet this target. It is my understanding that if the YMCA gets the development agreement to go ahead, then they will look for an interested developer that will pay them this amount for their current land and the right to build above the new YMCA which would be moved to the CBC location. (alternately, the payment could be that some currently unchosen developer will build a new YMCA at a greatly reduced price).

PS: I think this is a brilliant financing scheme that the YMCA thought of.

Here is a pic of the site from the pubic gardens, I think it would fit in nicely.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...0/DSC02726.jpg

what a hypocritical knob this skerry character is , to think that he and the rest of these high-rise dwelling condo owners are the only ones entitled to live in luxury in the heart of downtown with these amenities and as soon as someone else wants what they already have they start whinning like spoiled little children who don't want to share with the other kids. People like that truely make me sick ,god I wish I could tell that self righteous jackass too his face how much of an idiot he really is...... DUMB ASS

it would give a cool central park(NY) kinda feel, in my opinion that would be really cool

I like how most of the taller buildings you can see from the gardens, you can just see through the trees

but you dont notice it if you dont want to when looking around and still gives it a cool look if you wanna look at the buildings.