Development Rumours

[Antigonish]

What happened in the end? NIMBYs got a hold of it?

[Phalanx]

There was a thread created for it here.

The status on the HRM Site hasn't been updated since February, where it was still in the review process after the public meeting.

[Drybrain]

The density is nice, but I hope it goes through a redesign if it gets approved--after the Vic and the Grainery Lofts, among others (including the renderings for Twisted Sisters), the overall quality of design has really been heading upwards for new building projects. The architecture here is a bit of a step backwards.

[someone123]

Nassim Ghosn is planning an 8 storey, 60 unit apartment building at 5445 Rannie Drive. That lot is near Brunswick and Duke, and adjacent to the Citadel Hotel construction site. Currently it has a small brick building with an H&R location; their lease expires in May.

It will be nice to see a bit more density in that area.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by someone123

Nassim Ghosn is planning an 8 storey, 60 unit apartment building at 5445 Rannie Drive. That lot is near Brunswick and Duke, and adjacent to the Citadel Hotel construction site. Currently it has a small brick building with an H&R location; their lease expires in May.

It will be nice to see a bit more density in that area.

Perfect!!

Is this as tall as they can go? What is the situation with the building beside it, which is closer to the intersection (1882 Brunswick Street...apparently it's a police building)?

[someone123]

I think it is. For some reason, the 5445 Rainnie lot is included in the western height precinct along with the Centennial Pool block, and both pre- and post-bonus heights there are 23 metres (why would they make them the same? are developers not supposed to build public amenities in this area?): http://www.halifax.ca/capitaldistrict/documents/DHSMPS.pdf

Not sure what's up with the blue and grey corner building.

It will be an uphill battle because of all the terrible buildings, but it would be great to see this neighbourhood seamlessly integrated into the downtown and Gottingen areas. I think it will be about halfway there after the current round of new buildings, and some investment in streetscaping could help a lot. So many of the intersections around there are designed for higher-speed traffic and integration with Cogswell; the benefit to traffic is probably minimal and there's a substantial negative impact on pedestrians. It's common to hear about Cogswell and how it severed Barrington from Gottingen, but actually this area is not much better.

[pblaauw]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

What is the situation with the building beside it, which is closer to the intersection (1882 Brunswick Street...apparently it's a police building)?

This Google Map shows a sign saying "HRM Police Criminal Investigations Division".

[Wishblade]

Originally Posted by pblaauw

This Google Map shows a sign saying "HRM Police Criminal Investigations Division".

Barely

[BravoZulu]

Wasn't sure if I should mention this here or in the HRM retail section.

There was a herald article from yesterday mentioning that Strange adventures is moving in order to allow a redevelopment of that building (I think someone had spoken of this previously ) No further details of the redevelopment were revealed.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/355709-strange-adventures-comic-shop-on-the-move


Timeline for the moving out was in the next 8-12 months so I suspect we will hear something shortly.

[Drybrain]

I always kind've thought/fretted about what might happen to 5262 Sackville, since the building is in rough shape and seems to be a likely candidate for demolition.

Ideally, I think the best thing would be for the owner to retain and renovate it—hopefully, if the Nova Centre is the boon we all hope it is, and downtown continues its slow-but-steady improvement, this could soon be a prime spot for some boutique office/retail space, with heritage cachet. (Maybe that's what the developer is thinking).

(The building with Taz Records, on the other hand, is ripe for demolition and full redevelopment. Sorry, Taz. But your building is basically a Quonset hut.)

[someone123]

The article was missing a lot of details but the comments made it sound like this will be more of a renovation than a demolition. I think this should be a heritage building since it's one of a dwindling number of older masonry structures in the area. It would be great to see some kind of mixed development that involves restoring the corner building and maybe demolishing Taz and the nearby bunker.

Strange Adventures is a wonderful shop (I think it was chosen as the top comic shop in North America by DC Comics) but that's how these things go. They will find another location that makes more sense than being right across from a giant new development that has nothing to do with their business.

As the city grows I expect a lot of stores like this to move out to areas like the North End, which could one day be equally as busy and interesting as, say, Barrington is today. We've already seen this to some degree with Barrington south of Morris.

[Phalanx]

Here's another article on the Market/Sackville Reno/Redevelopment:

Businesses scramble for new digs

[Drybrain]

From that CH story: "He said in an email Wednesday he did not want to discuss his plans for the site."

I get that developers don't necessarily want to lay all their cards on the table, but I wish there would be more understanding that the built environment is something that in many ways belongs to all Haligonians. A lot of us care very intensely about what happens in the city, so the fact that Giannoulis can't seem even to confirm if he plans to tear down or retain the building is frustrating.

[someone123]

The "6-8 months" period sounds suspiciously like the HRM by Design approval period. Unless there is some existing approved development for that site, the developer will have to hold a public information session, so people will eventually learn what is going on.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

The "6-8 months" period sounds suspiciously like the HRM by Design approval period. Unless there is some existing approved development for that site, the developer will have to hold a public information session, so people will eventually learn what is going on.

Although a public information session would be a good idea, is it a requirement of HRM_by_Design? I don't remember one being held for the Citadel redevelopment, which didn't require amendments to the HRM_by_Design rules.

PS: is 5262 Sackville Street a heritage building?

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

PS: is 5262 Sackville Street a heritage building?

No, I just think it's worth keeping. As Someone123 said, it's one of only a few Victorian masonry structures up around there. And it could make a great counterpoint to the contemporary style of the Nova Centre. Plus, I think Halifax developers haven't quite realized that companies and residents who can afford it will pay a premium for well-restored heritage, especially as downtown starts to take off a bit more. Using this building as the cornerstone of a larger redevelopment could be a great way to bridge past and future. (But like I said before, by all means, I hope he tears down the Taz building. If Taz has to go, their bunker should too.)

[someone123]

The heritage designation process is optional and initiated by the owner in Halifax, so the lack of designation doesn't really say anything about a building's heritage value. There is a scoring system and if the owner were to ask for heritage designation for this building I bet it would be granted.

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by someone123

The heritage designation process is optional and initiated by the owner in Halifax, so the lack of designation doesn't really say anything about a building's heritage value. There is a scoring system and if the owner were to ask for heritage designation for this building I bet it would be granted.

And that's one of the biggest problems with our heritage system. There is almost no incentive to register your property and plenty of drawbacks. HRM's approach is to hope property owners cooperate out of a sense of civic responsibility, which has obvious limitations. Barrington Street is the only spot where the city offers some real incentives that start to tip the balance in favour of heritage. It's no wonder there are a lot of significant buildings in HRM that have never been registered. I think there should be some kind of ongoing economic incentive to encourage registration of heritage buildings. A tax deduction would probably be the easiest and simplest approach. The size of the deduction could be based on a property's heritage score and on it being kept in good repair. If the city didn't want to create an uncertain liability, a set dollar amount could be allocated that could be then divided up proportionately amongst eligible properties. Our current approach to heritage is all stick and no carrot and is really not that effective.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by spaustin

And that's one of the biggest problems with our heritage system. There is almost no incentive to register your property and plenty of drawbacks. HRM's approach is to hope property owners cooperate out of a sense of civic responsibility, which has obvious limitations. Barrington Street is the only spot where the city offers some real incentives that start to tip the balance in favour of heritage. It's no wonder there are a lot of significant buildings in HRM that have never been registered. I think there should be some kind of ongoing economic incentive to encourage registration of heritage buildings. A tax deduction would probably be the easiest and simplest approach. The size of the deduction could be based on a property's heritage score and on it being kept in good repair. If the city didn't want to create an uncertain liability, a set dollar amount could be allocated that could be then divided up proportionately amongst eligible properties. Our current approach to heritage is all stick and no carrot and is really not that effective.

The registered heritage property program has not been that successful in saving our built heritage. (Waterside is a prime example) Given the small number of heritage buildings in HRM a massive tax deduction for heritage status would not have a big impact on tax revenue. I would suggest at least 50% reduction in property tax. Incentives for restoration and improvements would be in addition to the tax cut. A registered heritage building should not qualify for demolition. In addition, I think there should be a new heritage committee and they would have authority to assign heritage status to buildings of significance and the automatic 50% tax deduction would be in effect. Buildings such as the Penor Trust building and the Merrill Lynch Securities building would get automatic status from the committee if they weren't already registered. There should also be a larger fund created for heritage preservation. The Dexter government has spent millions purchasing woodland / swampland so investing in our built heritage shouldn't be too painful for them.

Merrill Lynch Securities
http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=44.6...sjAK_xWzolkm8B_TA&cbp=12,26.28,,0,-18.69

Penor Trust
http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=44.6...ZJX8JGvPgw4LDmfA&cbp=12,116.28,,0,-18.69

[someone123]

I agree about the property tax break. That would not be too difficult to implement and it would add an incentive for owners everywhere to try for heritage status, leaving it to the heritage committee to decide what's worth preserving.