[Halifax] Skye Halifax (1565 Granville) | 66 m | 2 x 21 fl | U/C - Page 40

someone123 · #**781** Posted **May 9, 2013, 2:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Is our downtown an appropriate home for 'standard'? I'm not expecting lavish, but I would appreciate something with handsome materials bearing a classy scheme of colours.

By "standard" I just meant something that could be immediately approved. I wasn't talking about aesthetics and materials.

The Bank of Canada proposal is a good example of something that would look fine on this site, and it conforms to HbD. If two buildings like that were built along Sackville Street the area would be dramatically improved.

RyeJay · #**782** Posted **May 9, 2013, 3:05 AM**

This site does need to get developed, and obviously a proposal that follows HRMbyDesign is the fastest way to achieve that. I'm just holding out hope that maybe United Gulf will re-submit for a simpler and more affordable mixed-use project, to the ramparts maximum.

I want that additional height for this location -- something on par with the Nova Centre. These grander buildings make Barrington Street more exciting, and the higher densities translate into more customers for businesses.

I realise the trouble of asking for the Twisted Sisters' height may not be worth the potential delay... and UG doesn't seem ready for a fight.

someone123 · #**783** Posted **May 9, 2013, 3:10 AM**

One thing that would be nice about having a taller building on the UG site is that it would rise above the Bank of Canada building and create a layered effect.

Right now though we have an empty lot that doesn't do anything other than look ugly.

halifaxboyns · #**784** Posted **May 9, 2013, 3:01 PM**

I have to agree with Tim's article on this one (which is making my mouth taste quite bitter, I never thought I'd say that). The clause would be on the title like a restrictive covenant requiring discharge if anything ever got built. Well, nothing was built - so let's spend the $5 million and leverage the property even more.

What I would suggest to be the way to go, is something along the line of what Someone123 said in his previous post:

Step 1 - Send a staff report to City Council requesting approval to leverage and activate the buy back clause and seek budget approval for the money.
Step 2 - In the same staff report, request council direct administration to initiate a new application case to amend the HRM by design height on the parcel to slightly higher (not the full UG application height though) to get that layered effect.
Step 3 - Council approves the amendment to the height (subject to all the usually bickering of the anti-development crowd).
Step 4 - Do a request for proposal (RFP) for the site, but require that they include in their proposal: The architect (or team), initial proposed designs, proforma, timelines for construction.
Step 5 - Sell the site, applicant has 1 year to undertake a permit application.

teddifax · #**785** Posted **May 9, 2013, 3:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I have to agree with Tim's article on this one (which is making my mouth taste quite bitter, I never thought I'd say that). The clause would be on the title like a restrictive covenant requiring discharge if anything ever got built. Well, nothing was built - so let's spend the $5 million and leverage the property even more.

What I would suggest to be the way to go, is something along the line of what Someone123 said in his previous post:

Step 1 - Send a staff report to City Council requesting approval to leverage and activate the buy back clause and seek budget approval for the money.
Step 2 - In the same staff report, request council direct administration to initiate a new application case to amend the HRM by design height on the parcel to slightly higher (not the full UG application height though) to get that layered effect.
Step 3 - Council approves the amendment to the height (subject to all the usually bickering of the anti-development crowd).
Step 4 - Do a request for proposal (RFP) for the site, but require that they include in their proposal: The architect (or team), initial proposed designs, proforma, timelines for construction.
Step 5 - Sell the site, applicant has 1 year to undertake a permit application.

This sounds great to me. I am tired of all the empty lots and empty offers of development in Halifax. I am also tired of all the bureaucratic run-around in this city. It must be frustrating for those developers who are really trying to make changes that have to deal with so much red tape and naysayers. Everything I read says Halifax must grow from within (the city core/mainland) where the infrastructure already exists. How can this happen the way things currently are. There has to be some kind of shake-up. Come on Mayor Savage, get up on that white horse and save Halifax from stagnating!!!

halifaxboyns · #**786** Posted **May 9, 2013, 6:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by teddifax

This sounds great to me. I am tired of all the empty lots and empty offers of development in Halifax. I am also tired of all the bureaucratic run-around in this city. It must be frustrating for those developers who are really trying to make changes that have to deal with so much red tape and naysayers. Everything I read says Halifax must grow from within (the city core/mainland) where the infrastructure already exists. How can this happen the way things currently are. There has to be some kind of shake-up. Come on Mayor Savage, get up on that white horse and save Halifax from stagnating!!!

The challenge in any city is that development in the "inner city" (urban core/regional centre - whatever you want to call it) is way more challenging than out in the suburban areas. From the simple perspective that infrastructure and road layout are quite simple in the burbs and you just need to tie in, get your driveway connections and then site your building. Inner City - you face way more challenges: Sewer/Water/storm capacities, old infrastructure needing to be removed, contamination issues, etc. That adds layers of issues to applications, making them more complex and adding to the cost. My feeling has always been - how do you make that time and cost balance out? What can a city do to make that process easier? I think that's about a fundamental shift in attitude that development and inner city growth is beneficial (we are seeing that with HRM staff and many other cities) but also finding people who can help get applications through the bureaucracy without giving away the farm.

It's that last point that the regional centre plan will really help with - because it will move approvals to the 90 day timeline much like the current DT HbD area. That will open up a huge area of land to redevelopment AND cut the time dramatically. I suspect after the plan is approved (in whatever form) it will take a few years, but cranes will start popping up more and more...

Wigglez · #**787** Posted **Nov 28, 2013, 9:43 PM**

I'm terribly sorry to dig up an old thread but I was just wondering, has there been any updates on this site lately? Or is it being left as an empty lot for now?

Thanks

fenwick16 · #**788** Posted **Nov 28, 2013, 10:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wigglez

I'm terribly sorry to dig up an old thread but I was just wondering, has there been any updates on this site lately? Or is it being left as an empty lot for now?

Thanks

Skye was rejected by city council (not very surprising).

Even under current rules United Gulf could build two 20 - 22 storey towers on that site. With construction occurring almost all around that site, it is puzzling that they prefer to sit on such a prime piece of real estate (and they had to win a competition to buy the site from the city several years ago).

It seems like the best option would be for them to sell it to a serious developer.

teddifax · #**789** Posted **Nov 29, 2013, 4:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Skye was rejected by city council (not very surprising).

Even under current rules United Gulf could build two 20 - 22 storey towers on that site. With construction occurring almost all around that site, it is puzzling that they prefer to sit on such a prime piece of real estate (and they had to win a competition to buy the site from the city several years ago).

It seems like the best option would be for them to sell it to a serious developer.

Just what is the financial situation of this company?It doesn't seem that they are doing anything these days!

counterfactual · #**790** Posted **Nov 29, 2013, 4:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by teddifax

Just what is the financial situation of this company?It doesn't seem that they are doing anything these days!

Heard they're involved with some litigation on other properties...

RyeJay · #**791** Posted **Nov 29, 2013, 5:39 PM**

Would anyone care to wager when a new proposal will come forward for this site?
Will it come before or after every bloody site around this United Gulf mess redevelops?

counterfactual · #**792** Posted **Nov 30, 2013, 4:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Would anyone care to wager when a new proposal will come forward for this site?
Will it come before or after every bloody site around this United Gulf mess redevelops?

Probably. I never believed they had an interest in actually building. I think they wanted the approval to flip the property.

I don't think they're serious.

ns_kid · #**793** Posted **Dec 2, 2013, 12:49 PM**

I think you're quite right, counterfactual. The Skye proposal was such an outlier it was doomed to fail. United Gulf's legacy to the people of Halifax is a muddy, weed-grown eyesore. My recollection is that the city has the right to take back the property and it's past time they acted.

lmccabe55 · #**794** Posted **Dec 4, 2013, 11:22 PM**

http://metronews.ca/news/halifax/874...-sisters-plan/

Hard to believe any news that comes out relating to this story, but I'll take it with a grain of salt.

someone123 · #**795** Posted **Dec 5, 2013, 2:48 AM**

I think that's actually a pretty good story. Proposing something under HbD is the most sensible option at this point and it is the most realistic path to actually getting something built.

teddifax · #**796** Posted **Dec 5, 2013, 4:02 AM**

I will believe anything from this company when a building is started... and finished!

gm_scott · #**797** Posted **Dec 5, 2013, 1:48 PM**

Yeah, a year to 18 months. Doesn't sound very promising.

RyeJay · #**798** Posted **Dec 5, 2013, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gm_scott

Yeah, a year to 18 months. Doesn't sound very promising.

Hello, Halifax. You might hear from us in 2015.

pblaauw · #**799** Posted **Dec 6, 2013, 4:14 AM**

Didn't they same the exact same thing prior to revealing the Skye development?

counterfactual · #**800** Posted **Dec 6, 2013, 5:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Hello, Halifax. You might hear from us in 2015.

Yeah, really.

After re-reading, it sounds more like a few lines from UNITED GULF DEVELOPMENTS INTERNATIONAL PLATINUM GOLD SUPER ELITE (TM) to placate the Mayor and those of us out here in the peanut gallery.

"WE ARE THINKING REALLY REALLY HARD, GUYS. WE'LL HAVE AN IDEA IN 24-36 MONTHS. DEVELOPMENT IS A TOUGH BIZ, OKAY GUYS? YOU DON'T KNOW."