[Halifax] The Winslow (2570 Windsor) | 20 m | 7 fl | U/C

[someone123]

This issue also relates to housing affordability for a huge number of people in Halifax. If there can be only single family dwellings on the Peninsula then only the comparatively wealthy will get to live on them. Poor people get to pay more money to live farther away and spend more time on the bus. Lower quality of living for all except the lucky few like Sue Uteck who make up 5-10% of the city's population.

NIMBYism can be extremely selfish. We're talking about a community centre for hundreds of people here with housing for dozens of seniors and the handful of residents nearby want to derail this. Most of them probably won't even be very affected aside from the 2-3 houses directly adjacent and perhaps a couple of others that will see less light (mostly the apartment building where probably nobody is complaining).

I also find it pretty sleazy how the CBC keep trying to turn this into some kind of gay-related issue.

[Northend Guy]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Sloane - Could you possibly elaborate on how a decaying church would decrease home values less then a vibrant new development of similar height... and what the actual impact of shadows will be from the proposed development? I find these kind of statements you make totally bogus.

So true...looks to me that there might an additional 10 feet of height on the building from what is there now. That said, a cursory glance at the site & its neighbors on google earth tells you that shadows are not a significant issue here anyway. At worst, the neighboring homes (not including the apartment building to the north) would only experience shadow early in the morning, up until maybe 10am. The rest of the day, the shadows would be cast to the north and east (the apartment building & along Windsor). The shadows claim is absolutely a waste of time. As worldly mentioned, the similar heights of the existing & proposed buildings makes these claims bogus, especially as they relate to property values.

In my mind, the only legit concern is an increase in traffic. However, given the fact that this is a retirement home, I find it hard to beleive that this will have a significant impact, especially at peak volume, when seniors are on their way to...oh yeah, another cup of coffee...

Red tape makes me sick...

[halifaxboyns]

Both worldly and north end have hit some very good points. No one has a right to light - I essentially argued that at the appeal board the other day. I believe my sarcastic reply was if the sun goes super nova - who are you going to appeal that too? God!? Despite the snickers, it made a point.

Plus, I would agree with north end's calculation - I did some rough math and came out with about 15', so it's still within 10 to 15' I'd say of the original building (and my math is basically scaling from street view).

Who uses the building - I'm getting the feeling that the church may be using the gay issue as a means to get more support. Personally (as an openly gay man); I don't care who uses it. But if they are using the gay community as a means to gain support (by being able to say the anti-project people are some how anti-gay) - I think that's the wrong way to go completely.

[EGS]

The Space Race blog has a post titled Boo!
http://halifax.infomonkey.net/blog.d...?post_id=18367

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

This issue also relates to housing affordability for a huge number of people in Halifax. If there can be only single family dwellings on the Peninsula then only the comparatively wealthy will get to live on them. Poor people get to pay more money to live farther away and spend more time on the bus. Lower quality of living for all except the lucky few like Sue Uteck who make up 5-10% of the city's population.

NIMBYism can be extremely selfish. We're talking about a community centre for hundreds of people here with housing for dozens of seniors and the handful of residents nearby want to derail this. Most of them probably won't even be very affected aside from the 2-3 houses directly adjacent and perhaps a couple of others that will see less light (mostly the apartment building where probably nobody is complaining).

I also find it pretty sleazy how the CBC keep trying to turn this into some kind of gay-related issue.

In fairness, the spokesperson for the project, Louisa Horne, made reference to the gay issue yesterday in a CBC interview by inferring that some of the opposition is coming from anti-gay types who are using the height issue as a blind. Is it true? Wouldn't surprise me in the least in this town.

Really though, Sloane and Uteck should be bloody well ashamed of themselves for suggesting that this is too tall. Cripes, it's on Windsor Street. The existing church is almost as tall. There should be minimal debate on this thing. They are trying to find a way to use their property in a better way. The existing church is underutilized and is falling apart. The minute they try to do something the usual suspects come out of the woodwork and start bitching and complaining. The fact that they found allies in the peninsula councillors who ought to be encouraging density is simply unreal. The residents opposed to this should be equally ashamed. Maybe they want a 3-storey cookie-cutter apartment block like those popping up like dandelions all over HRM. Geezus!!

Halifax mentality is like that of a hoarder -- clinging mindlessly to things that are no longer needed or even useful just because they're there. We need an intervention.

[planarchy]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Really though, Sloane and Uteck should be bloody well ashamed of themselves for suggesting that this is too tall. Cripes, it's on Windsor Street. The existing church is almost as tall. There should be minimal debate on this thing. They are trying to find a way to use their property in a better way. The existing church is underutilized and is falling apart.

According to the InfoMonkey.net blog post, this is only 12 feet taller that the church. As well the top level is stepped back, mitigating any effects of the extra 12 feet.

I completely agree - the Councillors voting against this project need to be called out and challenged for their ridiculous and irrational behaviour. Given the existing height of the church, and the fact that this is being developed by the church, this should be as-of-right. It is a great project for this site, for this neighbourhood and exactly the type of project someone like Sloane, given that her district has the same qualities and challenges, should be supporting. I am completely shocked, even for Halifax, that this is even being discussed.

[DigitalNinja]

Nothing can shock me anymore in halifax politics...

[halifaxboyns]

Wow Sue voted against this going forward too? Wow - that doesn't impress me at all. Will this end up at Peninsula Council or Regional? I hope to god (pardon the pun) it's regional.

Personally, I would've given it the go ahead because the design can be tweaked if it goes forward. It's funny how councillors seem to forget they have approved policy that says to densify the regional core (which the peninsula is) and location is great. Besides, considering the money crunch...I would think they would be happy about assessments rising, thus more tax dollars!

As to your comment about the spirit place spokesperson KeithP - I honest don't know if they are masking it behind the gay issue or not. Personally, I think it's just both....

[someone123]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Nothing can shock me anymore in halifax politics...

A big part of the issue is that the councillors are slaves to public opinion and represent very small districts. Uteck gets voted in by people who would hate to see this move in next door to them.

It's a mistake to begin with to have councillors voting on individual projects. The process is far too political and people try to manipulate it to achieve results that they know are not even reasonable. It's much better to come up with general rules informed by public opinion that are then applied consistently. Many people I think can see the logic of balanced development rules but that all goes out the window when you start talking about a specific development next door. Nobody wants to deal with it but it has to happen somewhere or Halifax will be a very sad looking place -- it's already 60% of the way there.

[halifaxboyns]

Someone pretty much hit the nail on the head.
In most places out here in the west; you simply make the application. There is no report to initiate anything - you pay the fees and submit a complete application - you get a file number and off you go.

For Calgary, you do the internal circulation first (engineering, water, transportation and all of them) and do you policy review and if it has any specific plans, a review of the bylaw rules. That all usually takes about a month to a month and a half and can be quite detailed. The next step is letting the public know; so a sign gets posted on the site with the file number and the proposal details, file # and applicant name and contact info and the planner assigned to the file. People can then submit comments and this is where the local community association is circulated the file as is the alderman. By about 3 months, all of the circulations are done, comments compiled and sent back to the applicant to respond (more info, change the plans, whatever). If the plans required minor tweaks, another brief circulation until everything is ironed out and then a report goes to Planning commission for review and then council. If there are no hickups, we've done simple rezonings in 4 to 6 months. The more complex files can usually run a minimum of 8 months and the ones with a lot of community involvement can go longer, but the only time council gets involved is at public hearing. Planning Commission is a technical review and even if planning commission gives thumbs down, the applicant can still (at their decision) take it forward to council. Of course, we would present the negative recommendation and they'd be fighting to get the recommendation filed and proposal approved.

[Jonovision]

Project foes say they’re fighting spin

Gay-friendly seniors residence will simply be far too high, neighbour says


By DAVENE JEFFREY

Staff Reporter

Some residents of a Halifax neighbourhood fear city council will greenlight a very large apart­ment complex out of fear of being labelled anti-gay.

St. John’s United Church on the corner of Willow and Windsor streets wants to build a seven­storey multi-use complex which includes 65 apartments for se­niors on its present site. If ap­proved, proponents say they believe it will be the first devel­opment of its type in Canada to openly welcome gay residents.

“It’s all about spin," says Liz Cunningham, whose home backs on the church property.

Legally, the church is prohib­ited from asking potential resi­dents about their sexual orien­tation, said Cunningham who belongs to a large group of area residents opposed to the complex. “It shouldn’t matter to council, who may or may not live there," Cunningham said.

The neighbourhood is zoned R2 which allows for no more than four units per lot.

Before the project could begin, land-use rules for the lot would have to be changed and that would be a decision of city coun­cil, said city planner Luc Ouellet.

Church board member Louisa Horne maintains that her group has heard some gay seniors have been forced back into the closet as they age because of their living arrangements.

But such social justice issues are not a concern of council, Horne s ays.

“Who lives there isn’t one of the aspects of what they look at," she said.

The complex would be run as a non-profit and offer enough as­sistance to allow aging residents to remain independent in their own apartments as long as pos­sible.

The proposed structure will have a similar footprint on the property as the church does now, Horne said.

The peak of the church’s roof is five storeys and the planned complex would be two storeys higher.

But the reality of the space a steep peaked roof requires and the space seven-storeyy building will fill is a “massive difference," Cunningham argues.

And, while the size of the pro­ject matters to her greatly, Cun­ningham says, the population density change that the complex would bring would also negativ­ely affect the neighbourhood.

“The church is beautiful. It’s been a great neighbour," she said. Going from a building only used a few times a week to a 65-unit apartment building open 24-7 would bring increased traffic and congestion to the neigh­bourhood, Cunningham said.

But that density change could also spur some positive changes for the neighbourhood like in­creased services and improved busing, Horne said.

Gay herself, Cunningham admits that Spirit Place is exactly the type of living situation she would like to eventually live in.

Personally, she’d like to see it built smaller, like the three-storey apartment building with under­ground parking already in the neighbourhood.

Because of economies of scale, Horne fears that drastically cut­ting the number of units would increase the costs per apartment to the point that the project would not be feasible.

The public will be able to speak out about the project at a meeting which will likely be scheduled in March, Ouellet said.

City staff will attend the public meeting and will report back to council by summer, Ouellet said.

(djeffrey@herald.ca)

[DigitalNinja]

LOL 22m far to high! This is crazy, I think we should build a random 1000m building on georges island to piss off these silly people

Seriously though, there should be no debate over this, the hight is not high at all!

[sdm]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

LOL 22m far to high! This is crazy, I think we should build a random 1000m building on georges island to piss off these silly people

Seriously though, there should be no debate over this, the hight is not high at all!

I believe community council changed "as of right" heights after St James Place development agreement was finalized.

This changed the "as of right" height to just 35 feet, down from 70 feet, which is basically the height of the proposal herein. Shame, density is very much needed in the core and this is just causing more of it to leave.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by sdm

I believe community council changed "as of right" heights after St James Place development agreement was finalized.

This changed the "as of right" height to just 35 feet, down from 70 feet, which is basically the height of the proposal herein. Shame, density is very much needed in the core and this is just causing more of it to leave.

I don't think the as of right height height was changed. This may have been a case of something built way before the Peninsula Bylaw and then it was made non-conforming.

The R-2 zone height has always been 35', mainly because it's residential - but churches have always been allowed to occur in both R-1 and R-2 zones. I suspect (given the church's age) that the church came before the Bylaw and a decision was made by the City of Halifax to simply make it non-conforming in height. I'd guess that back then they didn't think inner city churches were going to disappear like they have been, which would've been a reasonable position at the time (which would've been late 70's?).

[halifaxboyns]

My title should read from the Chronicle Herlald online! Whoops! =-)

Spirit House concept, height, stack up just fine

By ANGELA MOMBOURQUETTE Don't Get Me Started
Mon, Feb 7 - 4:55 AM
IS IT ABOUT the building, or is it about the proposed "clientele"? Well, let’s assume for the moment that it’s just about the building.

The board of St. John’s United Church in Halifax has proposed a mixed-use development called Spirit Place at the corner of Windsor and Willow streets, where the congregation’s church has stood, unused, for a couple of years. The goal of the proposed development is, according to the group’s website, "to create an affirming, welcoming space to live, gather, and worship for everyone, including seniors of moderate means, and seniors of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered (GLBT) community."

Neighbours have suggested that the building’s design does not fit with the area. Specifically, and inevitably, because we are talking about Halifax here: too high. This, despite the fact that the proposed seven-storey design is actually only 15 feet taller than the roofline of the church.

So how does a church come to be in the business of building a housing complex? Louisa Horne is a member of the congregation and a volunteer on the board that’s behind the proposal. "We are a community church. The majority of people who come to our church live within walking distance. So we began to ask, ‘What are we being called to do in the future? Where should we be in three to five years?’ And we started a process where people told us that one of the needs that they saw was for seniors housing in that neighbourhood."

Horne says that if you look at a map of the peninsula and draw crisscrossed lines, the proposed development falls smack in the middle. "That area has a lot to offer for seniors," she says. "Many of those in our congregation who are able to walk to church know that they are not going to be able to stay in their big houses forever, and they don’t want to move to the ’burbs. They want to stay where they can walk to the doctor and the grocery store and the pharmacy. And there are just very few options for housing.

"So what came out loud and clear from our planning was that if we look to the future of a community church located in the centre of Halifax, being an integral and engaged part of that community would mean addressing that particular need."


So, let’s talk about the height. You can see an artist’s rendering of the proposed design at spiritplace.ca/redevelopment-plan. I’d call it a perfectly appropriate size and scale for a neighbourhood that spans residential and commercial uses. Will the building create shadow problems for the neighbours?

"Very few," says Horne. "The architects have this amazing software that can look at every hour of every day of the year as the sun changes, and the information that they have is that the impact is extremely minimal in terms of light and shadow. It’s almost negligible."

So what’s the real problem here? "I suppose that every project is going to have people who are opposed," admits Horne. "Change itself is sometimes a challenge. We’ve been there for 100 years and hope to be there for 100 more, continuing with the social justice work that we do. So we just take it step by step."

And, not to put too fine a point on it, if a medium-density housing complex were being built in my neighbourhood, I would ask this simple question: who has the most potential to be seriously awesome neighbours? Gay seniors, of course. Imagine the incredible dinner party circuit.

The next step will be public consultations, schedule to be determined by Halifax regional council.

Angela Mombourquette is a Halifax freelance writer and associate editor of Saltscapes Magazine.

[Dmajackson]

Case 16417 Details

Public Information Meeting is scheduled for this project for next Wednesday (July 6th) starting at 7pm at the Forum.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Case 16417 Details

Public Information Meeting is scheduled for this project for next Wednesday (July 6th) starting at 7pm at the Forum.

Thanks for the link. The renderings look good.

[-Harlington-]

Spirit Place proposal draws mixed reviews

Spirit Place would have 65 apartment units. Supporters and critics spoke out Wednesday night about a proposed housing development for seniors in Halifax.

About 150 people attended a public meeting to discuss Spirit Place, an inclusive apartment complex planned for the corner of Willow and Windsor streets.

The seven-storey complex would be built on the site of the St. John's United Church. It would 65 apartment units.

Some people say the building would be too large and imposing, and that it would cause traffic problems.

"I can't imagine what it would be like sitting in my backyard with a seven-storey building towering over and people looking into my backyard and my home," said Liz Cunningham, who lives nearby.

There is also strong support for the project.

Alyson Holland said the Halifax Regional Municipality must consider innovative ways to reduce urban sprawl.

"I just think that seniors residences like this are so important to the community. Also, I'm a young professional looking for a city that encourages growth and dynamic change," she said.

The architects said the building would have tiers so it wouldn't reach its maximum height of 22 metres on all sides.

They also said Spirit Place would cast a shadow on adjacent buildings about an hour earlier only at certain times of the year.

There were still people waiting to speak when the meeting wrapped up at 9 p.m. Some asked for a second public session so more people could share their thoughts on the proposal.

Municipal staff will prepare a report for council. It will then be up to Halifax regional council to decide whether to amend land-use rules so Spirit Place can proceed.

[sdm]

Total B.S.

Seven stories? are you kidding me. How did we ever build before.....

This city is so backwards.

[halifaxboyns]

The vast majority of people support the project, based upon the messages posted on both cbc and the CH. My comment made it in just before the CH closed off comments.

I think there is one NIMBY resident posting on CBC, which I'm having fun with...but still, this project should go ahead.