[Halifax] Pavilion (YMCA) and Curve | 2X49 m | 17 & 15 fl | Completed

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by resetcbu1

Ha , what B.S ....."Profesionals", why do we need profesionals ? Why not average , blue collar people? Seems to me that a city like Halifax is comprised of mostly blue collar, average , hard working people. these comitees should be chosen at random and no volunteers , comprised of normal people and not those who have been involved in any type of special intrest group, IMO.

I think they include "normal" people too. This panel in particular is charged with reviewing a design-based planning regimen, and because it has the power to approve (rather than just advise), I think that the makeup of the panel is meant to have representation of professionals in the design field.

I know several people disagree with me, but I do think that having people with specialized training and knowledge is important on a panel like this. I also have to say that I think it's important to have the normal people there too. Being a "professional" shouldn't mean a blank acceptance of expertise... I mean, professionals are just as capable of making crappy decisions as anybody else.

I reserve judgement for a few years to see how the new process works for downtown.

[halifaxboyns]

Typically for committees like this; there is a desire to have 'professionals' employed in the general trade of urban planning, development, architecture, etc. because they know the terminology and understand the fundamentals.

If I was to bring someone off the street and ask them if they knew what floor area ratio was or density bonusing, they would look at me like I had two heads. They wouldn't understand it and it's not easy stuff to understand...there is a certain curve of learning to it and considering the expectation of this committee with the regional core project, I would think the curve is quite high.

If I look at Calgary Planning Commission as an example - most of the people on it are architects, alderman (who deal with land use on a regular basis) and practicing consultants in planning. It wasn't uncommon for some of the planning staff to be dealing with CPC members on an application and then have to go in front of them on different application. But I give them total kudos for having the best interests in mind (most of the time). Sometimes the whole professional ego thing comes out once in a while, but it's a competitive industry so I don't see that as a bad thing.

[Chadillaccc]

This would be a wicked project! Hope it goes ahead!

[fenwick16]

I just read the updated case 16655 details for this YMCA/CBC proposal - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/Case16655Details.html. Based on the Status section of the case details page, it appears as though this proposal can't reach the HRM_by_Design 49 meter height limit since it includes a setback requirement - "the Downtown Halifax Land Use By-law stipulates that above a height of 17m at the South Park streetline, buildings shall be setback 0.9m for every 0.6m in height. The impact of this requirement on the YMCA proposal is shown here."

The case details page also gives a link to an additional shadow study by Michael Napier Architecture submitted on December 6, 2011 here.

The information page indicates that Regional Council will consider a supplementary report in January (2012). Then to make amendments to HRM_by_Design a public meeting would have to be held.

It is starting to appear doubtful that this proposal will proceed in its current form (just my opinion).

[Keith P.]

The shadow impacts appear trivial and the setback requirements seem arbitrary at best as a result.

There is nor eason why this should not be allowed to proceed except for the structural intransigence of HRM Council and its assorted interest groups/committees towards any new development in this town. We need councilors who will find ways to support development, not to torpedo it.

[RyeJay]

Is HRM arranging some kind of bris for The Martello, too? This building breaches that setback line.

Has the construction of The Martello destroyed parts of the public gardens?

It's as though the city sometimes enjoys picking on developers.
This development has already changed several times, adhering to the rampart height restrictions.

This YMCA proposal, as is, is NOT harming the public gardens in any way. In fact, a circumferential view from within will become more interesting.

[someone123]

Some people simply do not want any new construction so they play a political game of trying to find reasons to reduce heights.

The HbD height restrictions are absurd and should never have been this low. In many cases they are lower than the buildings that already exist.

[FuzzyWuz]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Is HRM arranging some kind of bris for The Martello, too?

[resetcbu1]

I really hope this development goes through, I think it would fill in that area quite nicely and I really really liked the design that they had proposed. Let's hope that the wants of a few don't outweigh the need of the many, I think most people would be in favor of this and it would do wonders to revitalize that corner... But this is the HRM we're talking about here, so we'll see what kind of blunders come of this... The more these developments are shot down, the more I feel we need a wholesale change in the city, from council to city planners and bring in some people capable of thinking for themselves and doing what is best for the city instead of catering to a bunch of wing nuts like the Pacey's or the Miller's.

Anyway I really hope to see this go through, I bet you if they did a poll on all of these major developments proposed downtown, the majority of people would be in favor, but as the stadium talks have gone we know they will listen.

I'm beginning to start to feel negatively about the prospects of this city ever changing, when just a few years ago I had such high hopes but I still have my fingers crossed that things will change.

[someone123]

Change comes slowly in Halifax but I do think there have been some positive developments. Even if this is scaled back, it might still turn out nicely and many other decent projects have been built in the Spring Garden area. Projects like King's Wharf, the Trillium, or the library would have seemed like a pipe dream in 2000 or so.

The Paceys et al. are just very out of touch with the modern evolution of the city, and always behave as if they're fighting the next harbourfront expressway or Scotia Square. In the future their perspective will carry less weight (it has already lost a lot) and the connotations most people attach to tall buildings will change. They won't think of the old Fenwick, they'll think of the new Fenwick or King's Wharf and they will want more progress.

[Antigonish]

We need a Robert Moses type character in office, or majorily involved somehow. That will show those naysayers whats up!

(or is that a bit too far? lol )

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by someone123

Change comes slowly in Halifax but I do think there have been some positive developments. Even if this is scaled back, it might still turn out nicely and many other decent projects have been built in the Spring Garden area. Projects like King's Wharf, the Trillium, or the library would have seemed like a pipe dream in 2000 or so.

Yes. I'm thankful now that HRM is finally seeing a normal amount of downtown development. I'm thrilled we're no longer throwing everything to the suburbs, but scaling back the already scaled-back YMCA proposal is demented.

I wish more Haligonians could see this graphic and its bloody red line just to see how petty this is.

If I was the developer I would make a total stink about this in the media. Here we have a developer interested in making a huge investment in our stagnant downtown and we have people worried about enough sunlight getting to the fuckin dandelions around the sidewalk.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

I wish more Haligonians could see this graphic and its bloody red line just to see how petty this is.

What irks me is that in the media this is often presented as developers breaking the rules. They make it sound as if everybody sat down, had a good faith discussion, and came up with a compromise but now the developers are going back on their word (actually frequently it will be even worse because somebody will misinterpret a policy and present it as fact without being challenged in a news article).

In reality the property rights of developers like the YMCA pretty much seem to be ignored. Rules are imposed by councillors, who basically are representatives of homeowners' groups. Another important group is the small cabal of people who have enough time on their hands to attend lots of public sessions and, ideally, get on something like the Heritage Advisory Committee. Commercial property owners and businesses, students, commuters or suburbanites in general seem pretty much disenfranchised. They can send their money down to fix up Point Pleasant Park or something, but it's the upper middle class homeowners who call the shots.

[cormiermax]

It's times like these that make me think Halifax needs some sort of organized pro-development group to combat NIMBYism and the Heritage Trust.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by cormiermax

It's times like these that make me think Halifax needs some sort of organized pro-development group to combat NIMBYism and the Heritage Trust.

There is - there are two groups on facebook called "Screw the view". One is up almost 400 members. I highly encourage people to join to get this perspective out.

[cormiermax]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

There is - there are two groups on facebook called "Screw the view". One is up almost 400 members. I highly encourage people to join to get this perspective out.

I'm apart of that group, but you can hardly say that a facebook group is comparable to the heritage trust. I was talking about something more substantial that could actually get something done.

[halifaxboyns]

I wouldn't under estimate those groups.
They may be just organizing but there seems to be some real drive to make things different...who knows.

In terms of the setback requirement that has now caught this development - it's actually a pretty standard concept. However the shadow studies provided off set the issues, so a relaxation on the rule should not be an issue.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by cormiermax

I'm apart of that group, but you can hardly say that a facebook group is comparable to the heritage trust. I was talking about something more substantial that could actually get something done.

What about the Fusion group? They have an urban development action team - http://www.fusionhalifax.ca/en/home/...t/default.aspx

It seems to be a well organized group. They are looking for young people in the 20 - 40 age group.

Urban Development
There’s no question that a city is more than its buildings, parks, and streetscapes – Paris would still be Paris without the Eiffel Tower. But the world’s best cities know that careful planning and smart growth is necessary to fuel culture, opportunity, and competitive edge.

Our Urban Development Team brings together individuals with a passion for the progression of Halifax with a mandate to engage and encourage young people around the decisions that truly shape our city. With a keen eye, our team looks at city-wide progress as more than just buildings, streets and parking lots, but as an opportunity to unlock new potential for the future of our communities.

Have your voice heard and get involved. Email us at urbandevelopment@fusionhalifax.ca

[Keith P.]

The problem with Fusion is that they discriminate against people over 40. More than that, they shun them. And from what I have seen, there is a dangerous number of clueless types involved in Fusion.

[fenwick16]

Regarding the step-back requirements that are affecting the YMCA/CBC proposal - Central Park in Manhattan seems to have survived a wall of highrises that surround the park - Bing Bird's Eye View

It peeves me that so many methods were used to limit height in the HRM_By_Design By-Laws.