[Dartmouth] Mic Mac Mall Developments | ^115 m | 10 Phases | Proposed

[Dmajackson]

Regional Council will be initiating the planning process for the Mic Mac Future Growth Node at it's meeting next week. There is no specifics of what is proposed made public at this time. The staff report does state Ivanhoe Cambridge owns five of the six properties and is looking to retain the mall building and increase the residential density on the surrounding lands.

Case 22647 Initiation Report

My question before I state what I think should happen on this site is does anyone know which property is not owned by Ivanhoe Cambridge? Was the Kent Building sold to Irving or is it just leased?

[Querce]

The Kent site was sold October 2019 - I assume to Irving

[DigitalNinja]

I wonder if they are planning to tear down the chapters building and integrate chapters into the mall if they are still looking to run the store?

Where it's owned by the Quebec Pension Plan (Ivanhoe Cambridge) I hope we will see a high quality development, they have done some good stuff world wide.

[Jonovision]

I have a lot of hope for this project. There have been some really amazing mall redevelopments across Canada and I hope we can get one of those as well.

I'm surprised to hear they intend to keep the existing mall building. I hope similar to Penhorn that at a later date once the rest of the site is built out that the original mall would be redeveloped as well.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I have a lot of hope for this project. There have been some really amazing mall redevelopments across Canada and I hope we can get one of those as well.

They are a really good style of development that solves a bunch of problems at once. There is less demand for mall-like retail now so adding more customers nearby makes the malls healthier, and sometimes it makes sense to scale back or alter the retail space. Then of course from a planning perspective in the growing cities it makes sense to build up inner suburban areas that have good transit service. Tall towers work well because there are large setbacks from nearby residential.

One area that has been somewhat mixed is how the transit stations are not always well integrated into the malls (as well as pedestrian/bike connections). Ideally transit is integrated into the heart of the complexes when they are redeveloped to cut down on walking distance. Mic Mac Mall right now looks like it's designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought. Most of the bus depots kind of look like they're designed for vehicles too and not so much for pedestrians.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

One area that has been somewhat mixed is how the transit stations are not always well integrated into the malls (as well as pedestrian/bike connections). Ideally transit is integrated into the heart of the complexes when they are redeveloped to cut down on walking distance. Mic Mac Mall right now looks like it's designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought. Most of the bus depots kind of look like they're designed for vehicles too and not so much for pedestrians.

Transit has had a Micmac "Terminal" for decades, but it of course is what they saw as a terminal decades ago, essentially just a long bus pullover on the edge of the parking lot with a wider sidewalk and I believe a few benches and rain shelters. It looks nothing at all like the newer terminals here, although those are no great shakes either, even the very expensive Sportsplex terminal which is confusing and rather challenging to use. Unfortunately Transit does not seem to look very often to what other jurisdictions do and just make up stuff on their own, usually ending up with deficient designs.

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by someone123

They are a really good style of development that solves a bunch of problems at once. There is less demand for mall-like retail now so adding more customers nearby makes the malls healthier, and sometimes it makes sense to scale back or alter the retail space. Then of course from a planning perspective in the growing cities it makes sense to build up inner suburban areas that have good transit service. Tall towers work well because there are large setbacks from nearby residential.

One area that has been somewhat mixed is how the transit stations are not always well integrated into the malls (as well as pedestrian/bike connections). Ideally transit is integrated into the heart of the complexes when they are redeveloped to cut down on walking distance. Mic Mac Mall right now looks like it's designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought. Most of the bus depots kind of look like they're designed for vehicles too and not so much for pedestrians.

This discussion has made think about what could be done for Halifax Shopping Centre parking lot on the corner of Mumford and romans. This has always been the “back entrance” for which ever retail chain had the anchor store,.,.eatons or Sears. It has never been improved.

But with the dexel tower going up a block away and the HSC annex and transit terminal across the road, this parking lot could be the site of a really nice tower. Maybe the old eatons/Sears site could be the location for a second tower. Maybe even a pedestal to the annex which I remember as one option considered in the past.

Make that anchor store site smaller for a Simons or similar store and bring more residents to the location.

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by someone123

One area that has been somewhat mixed is how the transit stations are not always well integrated into the malls (as well as pedestrian/bike connections). Ideally transit is integrated into the heart of the complexes when they are redeveloped to cut down on walking distance. Mic Mac Mall right now looks like it's designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought. Most of the bus depots kind of look like they're designed for vehicles too and not so much for pedestrians.

I think figuring where to place and how to integrate a new transit terminal on this site should be one of the first things looked at by the consultant team. Figure out a road layout, transit terminal and then work everything else out based on how those will work.

I also think a pedestrian bridge over the highway to link up to Shubie Park trails would create a great asset for this site and its future residents.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I think figuring where to place and how to integrate a new transit terminal on this site should be one of the first things looked at by the consultant team. Figure out a road layout, transit terminal and then work everything else out based on how those will work.

I think this is a big reason to push for electric buses sooner rather than later too. Electrics quieter and they don't produce emissions so they are easier to elegantly integrate into these big developments.

Around here and in Toronto there are a few bus loops that are underneath commercial complexes. The walking distance is a lot shorter and they're protected from wind and rain/snow so the overall experience is much nicer. It's the opposite of the Mic Mac Mall setup where you get dumped at the far end of a windswept parking lot and then have to navigate traffic, poorly cleared snow on pedestrian paths and whatever else.

I wonder about Cogswell too. It seems like it's just going to be a basic bus plaza but I wonder what the possibilities are for underground infrastructure and multimodal connections there. What if the new Granville Square area functioned a bit like a subway station with underground buses, a bit like what Seattle has? And if that connected up with a new and expanded ferry terminal?

[essaysmith]

I heard that Winners is moving form the Annex into at least part of the old Sears in the main mall.

[Dmajackson]

^I believe you are talking about the Halifax Shopping Centre. In Mic Mac they did move Winners from near the bus terminal doors to a smaller spot on the same floor under H&M.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by essaysmith

I heard that Winners is moving form the Annex into at least part of the old Sears in the main mall.

That makes sense!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Regional Council will be initiating the planning process for the Mic Mac Future Growth Node at it's meeting next week. There is no specifics of what is proposed made public at this time. The staff report does state Ivanhoe Cambridge owns five of the six properties and is looking to retain the mall building and increase the residential density on the surrounding lands.

Case 22647 Initiation Report

Austin had this pulled from today's Council agenda. Perhaps there were not enough HCC members and planners on the committee.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Austin had this pulled from today's Council agenda. Perhaps there were not enough HCC members and planners on the committee.

The report is no longer available on the HRM website. I have noticed that the new council and the new clerk have removed certain reports from the HRM website. At the beginning of the meeting Councillor Austin gained unanimous approval to remove the agenda item 'indefinitely'. I quickly went to the HRM website and down loaded the document as a pdf. I have never experienced this new way of dealing with public business. Not sure if this complies with FOIPOP legislation. Regardless of FOIPOP the removal from public access without an explanation is worthy of public condemnation. The agenda is not thrown together a day or two before the meeting, the agenda and supporting documents are given to councillors 7 days before a meeting. If anyone wants the document send me a message.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The report is no longer available on the HRM website. I have noticed that the new council and the new clerk have removed certain reports from the HRM website. At the beginning of the meeting Councillor Austin gained unanimous approval to remove the agenda item 'indefinitely'. I quickly went to the HRM website and down loaded the document as a pdf. I have never experienced this new way of dealing with public business. Not sure if this complies with FOIPOP legislation. Regardless of FOIPOP the removal from public access without an explanation is worthy of public condemnation. The agenda is not thrown together a day or two before the meeting, the agenda and supporting documents are given to councillors 7 days before a meeting. If anyone wants the document send me a message.

Very strange and somewhat concerning. As you state it may have FOI implications.

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Very strange and somewhat concerning. As you state it may have FOI implications.

It is being reported that the withdrawal was at the request of the landlord/developer.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Summerville

It is being reported that the withdrawal was at the request of the landlord/developer.

If that is true I presume the proponent notified HRM in writing and such information should have been presented to the council. Why such secrecy ?

[Keith P.]

Perhaps the applicant realized that involving HRM staff in the planning process would result in a subpar plan which would severely limit the marketability and value of their development.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Perhaps the applicant realized that involving HRM staff in the planning process would result in a subpar plan which would severely limit the marketability and value of their development.

The mall is owned by the Quebec Pension Plan through their property arm Ivanhoe Cambridge - deep pockets and patient money.

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by Summerville

It is being reported that the withdrawal was at the request of the landlord/developer.

This is it. Two sentence email the day before Council from their consultant saying the landowner had changed their mind. No explanation as to why. Makes no sense to proceed with a plan for the area if the landowner that owns everything isn't interested so I removed it from the agenda. I asked prior to the meeting if the report should be tabled (tabled reports basically go into limbo and only come back if Council asks for them), but the procedural advice was that it should be removed from the agenda so that's what happened.