[Halifax] Imagine Bloomfield | ? | ? | Vision

someone123 · #1 Posted **Jun 3, 2008, 2:27 AM**

This thread is for the "Imagine Bloomfield" project and associated redevelopment of the site on Agricola Street.

Details can be found here: http://www.imaginebloomfield.ca/

Google maps: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...05879&t=k&z=18

someone123 · #2 Posted **Jun 3, 2008, 2:33 AM**

One related development mentioned in the planning material is 1 Kingsway in Vancouver. It is a combined library and community centre with attached rental housing:

Source

I would like to see a similar residential component for the Bloomfield site. The neighbourhood needs more residents and some of the profits could go into funding nonprofit components of the redevelopment.

This is actually a case where I'd prefer to see some kind of residential tower. That would allow for a significant portion of the site to be turned into outdoor public space, something that is lacking along Agricola. Some of the older buildings should also be preserved (at least the dark brick and stone school structure from the 1910s).

someone123 · #3 Posted **Dec 7, 2008, 10:35 PM**

New article from the Coast that I was complaining about elsewhere - http://www.thecoast.ca/Articles-i-20...tre_plans.html

One of the plans is basically to tear down the ugly 70s school building, preserve the others, and then construct two residential towers and some smaller buildings that would be for cultural uses.

I love the idea of this development, but I wish it would proceed much faster (really, this should have happened 5-10 years ago). This is the kind of showcase project that the North End needs. The potential of this part of the city is huge.

Keith P. · #4 Posted **Dec 8, 2008, 12:32 AM**

I wonder why HRM needs to be in the real estate business. If you have a high concentration of housing in that development I'm unsure why HRM is even involved.

I suspect this will run aground on the rocks of financial realities. While spaces for artists, community groups (*cough* HCAP *cough*) and the like are nice in theory, unless you are willing to basically supply free space they are not viable. To put that in new construction that isn't an art school or something similar really will be a financial drag on the feasibility.

someone123 · #5 Posted **Dec 21, 2008, 9:34 PM**

Preliminary report (157 pages) available here: http://www.halifax.ca/RealPropertyPl...n-Dec.2008.pdf

I haven't read it all yet.

I agree that the idea of having the private sector build free space for nonprofits isn't going to happen, but the point is that this is a large lot that is underused. The project could be the equivalent of the city selling off part of the lot in exchange for money to be used for public outdoor space and improvements to the buildings that they will retain. This seems viable now that the area is becoming much more desirable.

Too bad they just let a suburban style Shoppers go in across the street though. They really need to fix the zoning regulations in that part of the city.

Dmajackson · #6 Posted **Aug 8, 2009, 12:22 AM**

There's something about this plan on Council's agenda on Tuesday but until the links become available I can't say for sure.

Dmajackson · #7 Posted **Aug 10, 2009, 4:33 PM**

4. BLOOMFIELD MASTER PLAN (2.0 Mb)

Spitfire75 · #8 Posted **Aug 10, 2009, 4:49 PM**

Ripped these from the PDF

Keith P. · #9 Posted **Aug 10, 2009, 11:15 PM**

Why would they choose to locate townhouses on the Robie and Agricola steetfronts, the two busiest and noisiest parts of the entire site, and put non-residential buildings on the inside of the site? That makes no sense. I'm also not sure of the value of extending two roadways to make new intersections with Robie. Almon and Agricola.

loriginal · #10 Posted **Aug 10, 2009, 11:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Why would they choose to locate townhouses on the Robie and Agricola steetfronts, the two busiest and noisiest parts of the entire site, and put non-residential buildings on the inside of the site? That makes no sense. I'm also not sure of the value of extending two roadways to make new intersections with Robie. Almon and Agricola.

I was thinking the same thing about the non-residential/mixed use buildings, especially since Agricola St. seems to be turning into a bit of a niche shopping district. You'd think they'd try to carry that farther north.

Dmajackson · #11 Posted **Aug 11, 2009, 1:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by loriginal

I was thinking the same thing about the non-residential/mixed use buildings, especially since Agricola St. seems to be turning into a bit of a niche shopping district. You'd think they'd try to carry that farther north.

Actually the townhouses will have ground-floor retail along with the mixed-use buildings.

eastcoastal · #12 Posted **Aug 11, 2009, 10:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Why would they choose to locate townhouses on the Robie and Agricola steetfronts, the two busiest and noisiest parts of the entire site, and put non-residential buildings on the inside of the site? That makes no sense. I'm also not sure of the value of extending two roadways to make new intersections with Robie. Almon and Agricola.

They're townhouse "forms" with retail possible at grade.

The extensions of Fern Lane and Bloomfield are pedestrian

terrynorthend · #13 Posted **Aug 11, 2009, 1:22 PM**

On a positive note they accommodate two 10-story towers on the site, although I do agree they would form a better elevation along Robie than Almon. And kudos to the planners for labeling them as "mid-rise". This city has to get away from the knee-jerk reaction that anything over 4 stories is a "high-rise"

someone123 · #14 Posted **Aug 11, 2009, 6:21 PM**

Actually I think the location of the 10 storey buildings makes sense, since it is effectively a setback.

As mentioned, the new streets would be for pedestrians and service vehicles. They make sense because it is an unusually large block, and there will be public space in the middle.

Hopefully they will stick to the one year timeline. This could be a great project.

phrenic · #15 Posted **Aug 11, 2009, 6:27 PM**

I think the towers would work well on Almon provided there is a setback. If there is ground level retail on all sides anyway, there is no specific reason why the towers would have to face Robie or Agricola.

This is could fantastic for the north end provided it gets done in our lifetime.

Takeo · #16 Posted **Aug 12, 2009, 10:30 AM**

Placed on Robie, the towers would block all sunlight from the public spaces for all but the early morning for much of the year.

Jonovision · #17 Posted **Aug 12, 2009, 12:16 PM**

That is after all the narrowest part of Robie. I'm glad the towers aren't facing that direction. Takeo is right, there would be no sunlight on Robie if they were built that way.

Keith P. · #18 Posted **Aug 12, 2009, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision

That is after all the narrowest part of Robie.

Which of course begs the question of why, since this is HRM property, they are not reserving a piece of it for future widening of Robie?

Dmajackson · #19 Posted **Aug 12, 2009, 5:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Which of course begs the question of why, since this is HRM property, they are not reserving a piece of it for future widening of Robie?

If you look closely at the alignment of Robie Street in the area you'll notice that the Bloomfield side is perfectly in line with the wider part near Young St. Its the other side of the street that needs to be bought out in order to widen it correctly.

Ideally the whole length should be six lanes with a boulevard but its very unlikely to be that anytime soon.

planarchy · #20 Posted **Aug 12, 2009, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

Ideally the whole length should be six lanes with a boulevard.

Maybe in your ideal Halifax, but sure not in mine.