[Halifax] 5900 Inglis | ? m | 30 & 24 fl | Cancelled

[Dmajackson]

This was quite a shocker to stumble upon ...

Ashcroft Homes Inc has proposed to build two residential "student" towers (30 & 24 floors) at 6900 Inglis Street currently home of Canadian Martyr's Church. The property mostly falls under the U-2 zoning which is very liberal and vastly different than the nearby low-density residential. Halifax planning staff REJECTED the proposal stating it does not meet the zoning requirements and the matter is now heading to NSUARB next month for a hearing.

http://enviestudent.com/

"Student Towers Pitch Raises Fears" - TheChronicleHerald.ca

Information regarding this project can be found at nsuarb.novascotia.ca via "Matters & Evidence" and searching for Case #M07610. Under "Exhibits" the document titled "Appeal Record" has renderings, floor plans, and rationale.


Halifax Developments Blog. Rendering originally from NSUARB website and created by M. David Blakely Architect Inc

[Dmajackson]

Now for my opinions.

This proposal is a first of its kind in Halifax and considering our large student population it could be successful and add a new level of competition to the rental market. While I applaud Envie Student for coming up with this ambitious proposal the specific location is wrong for something of this scale. This proposal is only feasible due to the liberal U-2 zoning but I think a better location could be found considering other projects in the University area are in the 20-30 storey range.

[Keith P.]

Now we will see if Waye Mason is controlled by the rich south-end residents that he aspires to join or by the young people he so feverishly courts for support. I think this is a hilariously excellent proposal given the existing SMU towers and the demonstrable need for student accommodation in something other than a rat-infested slum.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Raises fears = b/s

Who is afraid?

Aesthetics aside, Fenwick isn't much of a different idea and is a critical point of density in the south end.

Build these towers!!!

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Now we will see if Waye Mason is controlled by the rich south-end residents that he aspires to join or by the young people he so feverishly courts for support. I think this is a hilariously excellent proposal given the existing SMU towers and the demonstrable need for student accommodation in something other than a rat-infested slum.

Much needed. There is nothing wrong with the height.

This needs to be built.

[Nouvellecosse]

Looks perfectly fine. I mean, it's not like it's just in the middle of a bunch of houses on some side street. It's right on the campus ffs. Not that I would be against building a highgrise in a purely SFH area, but I recognize that is traditionally a lot of opposition to that. But in this case, there are already a couple highrise residence buildings on the same campus just a 5 minute walk away.

[counterfactual]

Why is it going to the UARB?

Why didn't it go to Council to consider Staff's recommendations and accept/reject the proposal?

There are wealthy south end residents that sit on the UARB, by the way:

https://nsuarb.novascotia.ca/about/member-biographies

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Now we will see if Waye Mason is controlled by the rich south-end residents that he aspires to join or by the young people he so feverishly courts for support. I think this is a hilariously excellent proposal given the existing SMU towers and the demonstrable need for student accommodation in something other than a rat-infested slum.

It's also interesting how many South End residents rail against rental conversions in older houses (and some of the most frequently-interviewed NIMBYs are extremely privileged older profs at Dal or SMU). Isn't this a better alternative?

As usual there is a preoccupation with height when instead people should be talking mostly about the street-level interaction and design of the buildings, and thinking about the trade-off between having lots of housing on this small site vs. having it spread out into the larger neighbourhood.

Is there a compelling, objective reason why it's bad to "mix" buildings of different densities or heights? I keep hearing this repeated but the principle is rarely if ever supported by a rational argument. It's not self-evident that you shouldn't build a 30 storey building next to a 3 storey building, and actually that kind of arrangement is pretty common in cities around the world.

[q12]

Build these towers!

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Much needed. There is nothing wrong with the height.

This needs to be built.

Something you didn't know was a possibility 24 hours ago now "needs" to be built? Come on.

I'd like to see what the actual demand for rental housing is, whether there's a serious shortage, if prices are prohibitive, what the market actually needs. Having said that, if it turns out there is a market for these, I don't see a problem with them. As Someone123 said, it seems to be taken as self-evident that tall buildings don't belong near houses, but I don't see any reason, you know, why that would be.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I'd like to see what the actual demand for rental housing is, whether there's a serious shortage, if prices are prohibitive, what the market actually needs.

This doesn't seem more than tangentially relevant to the planning question of whether or not the building is appropriate (maybe you could argue a bit more public "sacrifice" is in order for developments with greater social value). To look at this another way, it seems unlikely that city planners and the various commentators who become involved in these proposals will be able to do any better at controlling the housing supply than the housing market itself would. Developers who build housing for which there is no demand don't tend to stay in business very long. And other people generally have a huge conflict of interest; homeowners want the highest housing prices possible, even if newcomers get locked out of the market, and renters want the lowest prices possible, even if prices go so low that they are uneconomical and developers no longer want to build anything new (again this locks new people out of the market but current tenants are happy).

"Targeted" development planning, where specific segments of the market are identified (e.g. low cost) and then promoted doesn't work all that well either since at the end of the day the question is about supply and since the market value of housing is so dynamic. I don't think there are a lot of truly affordable (for all local residents and a reasonable stream of newcomers) housing markets out there with restricted, government-controlled supply coupled with price controls. A lot of those cities are way more expensive than Halifax, and prices started to shoot up soon after market controls (or supposedly compensatory tax breaks, like locked-in assessments) were put in place.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I'd like to see what the actual demand for rental housing is, whether there's a serious shortage, if prices are prohibitive, what the market actually needs.

I can imagine there would be something here that might strike fear into the hearts of some of those south-end homeowners. If the existing student apartments are vacated, they might need to be rented to lower-class working folks who are currently out in the wilds of Spryfield or Highfield Park. The Schmidtville folks would surely not be happy about that.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I can imagine there would be something here that might strike fear into the hearts of some of those south-end homeowners. If the existing student apartments are vacated, they might need to be rented to lower-class working folks who are currently out in the wilds of Spryfield or Highfield Park. The Schmidtville folks would surely not be happy about that.

Requoted for truth.

Students are one thing, but the last thing the deep south enders want would be some of the greater unwashed moving into vacant apartments in the area.........

I used to live on Inglis not too far from the Martyrs church BTW (in the old Phi Rho Sigma frat house). I see nothing wrong with this proposal

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Something you didn't know was a possibility 24 hours ago now "needs" to be built? Come on.

I'd like to see what the actual demand for rental housing is, whether there's a serious shortage, if prices are prohibitive, what the market actually needs. Having said that, if it turns out there is a market for these, I don't see a problem with them. As Someone123 said, it seems to be taken as self-evident that tall buildings don't belong near houses, but I don't see any reason, you know, why that would be.

??? Its student housing... on the campus.

Right, because I haven't envisaged such student housing down there. Its in proximity to the towers... and across the street from houses, not abutting them.

You don't have to agree with me, but I believe that something like this is needed. You "come on". Pfffft.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Requoted for truth.

Students are one thing, but the last thing the deep south enders want would be some of the greater unwashed moving into vacant apartments in the area.........

I used to live on Inglis not too far from the Martyrs church BTW (in the old Phi Rho Sigma frat house). I see nothing wrong with this proposal

Time and time again, in Halifax, those against developments are trying to protect some imaginary reality. I always question fear tactics.

There is nothing to be afraid of residential towers. Period.

[Drybrain]

Jesus guys, I don't have a problem with the towers. All I mean is that I don't know IF there's actually some big pent-up student-housing demand that necessitates a big twin-tower development.

Maybe there is, in which case, sure, build it. That's all.

[Good Baklava]

I have found the rendering for a similar project in Ottawa. The ones we have here look like thinner clones of this tower.
https://www.google.ca/search?q=envie...VFHk12XidcM%3A

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

I have found the rendering for a similar project in Ottawa. The ones we have here look like thinner clones of this tower.

Maybe they have similar dimensions but the elevation drawing above only shows the narrower side?

[planarchy]

This is an interesting appeal.

The developer applied for this as an as-of-right development!! which is why is never went to Council. The application was possible as there are no height limits in the "university zone". Initially, HRM's review determined that it had no choice but to issue a development permit as the zone did not specify that only a university could develop within the zone. But before the development permit was issued, another development officer issued a refusal. They are internal emails in the appeal record where HRM staff say that if they refuse this and it goes to appeal, HRM planning staff cannot defend the decision based on how the bylaw is written. Yet, they refused it anyway. Based on the record, it seems like a permit should be issued, but the NSUARB almost always rules in favor of HRM so I suspect the developer will still lose. But we'll see. Should be an interesting one to follow.

[TheNovaScotian]

Has anyone thought about the children?