[Halifax] 6955 Bayers Rd | ? m | 16 fl | Cancelled - Page 4

Dmajackson · #61 Posted **Aug 30, 2008, 9:12 PM**

Just to confirm her point on trees. This site has absolutely no trees on it.

Dmajackson · #62 Posted **Oct 12, 2008, 12:39 AM**

There was a notice of approval today for the MPS ammendments for this site.

It still has to go to a public hearing for a development agreement though.

someone123 · #63 Posted **Oct 12, 2008, 2:24 AM**

This has always been a pretty obvious one. This is a derelict site that's about as perfect for high density infill as it gets.

It's true that visually a 16 storey tower would add a lot to the area. I am often a little surprised at how visible new towers are around the city (e.g. Gladstone) and they make it seem a lot bigger.

worldlyhaligonian · #64 Posted **Oct 12, 2008, 6:59 PM**

This project would really help tie the west in with alot of the structures farther north such as the eastlink building on young or gladstone ridge. I really want the 16 story tower...

The lot at the corner of Windsor and Young is dying for a nice tower.

Empire · #65 Posted **Oct 13, 2008, 4:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

The lot at the corner of Windsor and Young is dying for a nice tower.

It sure is. If fact the whole area from Young St to the Bedford Basin is prime for high density development. This is an area that HRM should be actively promoting for development. There are greenfields, brownfields, derelict ugly buildings, not to mention the largest tract of land unincumbered by heritage issues, viewplanes, traffic issues, shadows and wind in the city. This area couldn't be more central with excellent transportation links etc. Developing this area piecemeal with drugstores and video stores is missing the big picture. This area is still regarded as the outskirts which is amazing because it is practically downtown.

hfx_chris · #66 Posted **Oct 17, 2008, 11:00 PM**

Who owns that land?

sdm · #67 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 6:25 PM**

Didn't realize they were appealing.

http://www.nsuarb.ca/images/stories/...20ns%20ltd.pdf

Keith P. · #68 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 7:23 PM**

If you look at the minutes for the Nov 10th meeting of Peninsula Community Council you can see that they considered the application for a 16 storey tower and deadlocked 2-2. Uteck and Blumenthal voted in favor of the tower while Sloane (no surprise) and newcomer Jennifer Watts, whom I have suspected as being anti-development given her NDP ties, voted against. Her rationale was that the tower was incompatible with the existing neighborhood, which I guess means that she only wants 2 storey wood frame construction there. Another ridiculous example of our dysfunctional council processes.

Not an auspicious start for the newcomer.

sdm · #69 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 7:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If you look at the minutes for the Nov 10th meeting of Peninsula Community Council you can see that they considered the application for a 16 storey tower and deadlocked 2-2. Uteck and Blumenthal voted in favor of the tower while Sloane (no surprise) and newcomer Jennifer Watts, whom I have suspected as being anti-development given her NDP ties, voted against. Her rationale was that the tower was incompatible with the existing neighborhood, which I guess means that she only wants 2 storey wood frame construction there. Another ridiculous example of our dysfunctional council processes.

Not an auspicious start for the newcomer.

Incompatible with the existing neighbourhood? You mean the two 10 storey appartment buildings on the other side of the tracks? Man, thats great for economic development.

Dmajackson · #70 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 7:57 PM**

I didn't even know this one got rejected. Oh well its nice to know they appealed it though. This should be built.

The Bayers Park Apartments aren't even on the other side of the tracks. I think they are right behind this lot.

someone123 · #71 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 8:09 PM**

I'd say it's disappointing but it's not like I expect the PCC to make good decisions at this point.

I hope at least there were lots of sob stories having little or nothing to do with the development, followed by a few impassioned yet confused and ultimately pointless speeches on the part of certain councillors.

Sloane should just count as an automatic "no" vote for anything that would bring in more than $100,000 in annual tax revenue to the municipality.

worldlyhaligonian · #72 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 9:06 PM**

I plan to speak at the appeal, I am very passionate about this particular development.

Preparation must be made in advance, so lets come up with some benfits of this project. Please drop a detailed follow up.

Benefits:
Tax revenue
Supports local retailers that have been hit hard
Is close to office space
Fixing up the memorial on the site
Exisiting height in the area already
Closes off awkward open space next to Bayers road, which will reduce traffic noise in the interior of the neighborhood
Provides high quality housing in an area with typically low-quality
Adds high density to an area that desperately needs it
Possibly increases the value of homes in the area, as it becomes more attractive
Serves as a focal point when entering peninuslar halifax in that area
Supports the future Bayers Rd. widening
Adds landscaping to area

Dmajackson · #73 Posted **Dec 22, 2008, 9:38 PM**

Increases tranist use in the area (since buses on Bayers Road connect to every point served in town and the amount of vehicles on the road will deter residents from using personal vehicles.)

Dmajackson · #74 Posted **Jan 2, 2009, 10:49 PM**

I just had a look at the HRM planning website and apparently theres a public meeting info on a new plan to build a nine storey building on this lot.

Case Number: 01228

January 14th @ 7:00pm @ 6955 Bayers Road (Community Centre).

Dmajackson · #75 Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 8:23 PM**

The Fact Sheet for the newly proposed building on this lot is out.

Nothing real special. A nine storey 124 unit signel building that will step down to six storeys (I'm assuming to Bayers since all the NIMBY's are from the other side of Bayers).

Spitfire75 · #76 Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 10:56 PM**

This will get shot down too no doubt.

spaustin · #77 Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 1:48 AM**

So did they abandon the appeal then?

sdm · #78 Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 1:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaustin

So did they abandon the appeal then?

Don;t think so.

Dmajackson · #79 Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 2:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitfire75

This will get shot down too no doubt.

Probably the neighbourhood won't accept anything bigger than their own houses.

It will be harder though to reject. The Bayers Park Apartments next door at about nine storeys I believe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaustin

So did they abandon the appeal then?

Nope the appeal is still on for February 19th.

I think this is more of a back-up plan in case the appeal is turned down.

worldlyhaligonian · #80 Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 2:45 AM**

I don't think I'm going to the meeting, but I hope the 16 gets approved.