Open letter to council on the proposal to amend the bylaw to allow a 19 story building on South Park and Brenton.
We have several concerns about the bylaw amendment in Case 01046, in particular:
1. The HRMbyDesign Project has already recommended a maximum building height of 116 feet for this area. This proposal was based on maintaining the beauty and integrity of the Halifax peninsula in order to benefit everyone rather than on benefitting the narrow interests of a condominium developer. The WM Fares group has offered no public good that can be obtained from adding an extra 6 to 8 stories to the HRMbyDesign recommendation.
2. We already have two precedents that are relevant to this case: Fenwick Tower and the Aliant building. Those who live and work on the Halifax peninsula view both of these buildings as eyesores which not only mar the natural beauty of the peninsula but also inhibit views of the harbour. There is no reason to repeat these mistakes. These buildings also demonstrate that once this building has been constructed it will be with us for a very long time. Do we really want another Fenwick Tower on the Halifax peninsula?
3. Property prices, particularly condominium prices, are already falling on the Halifax peninsula due to the glut of condominiums that has resulted from the construction over the last several years. An enormous building such as this will only further contribute to this glut, producing extra units that nobody will want or need for years to come. This again brings to mind the disaster that was and is Fenwick Tower.
4. Finally, should this building be constructed at 19 stories as suggested, it could easily become the beginning of a trend that will result in the beauty of the Halifax peninsula becoming transformed into the hideousness of the island of Manhattan. Is this truly a road that we wish to begin to travel down?
In conclusion, to amend this bylaw in favor of such a large building is a decision which does not benefit the people of Halifax; it only benefits WM Fares. This amendment proposes to add 6 extra floors of condominium units that the public neither wants nor needs, as witnessed by the large number of units currently for sale in the recently completed Martello building. Thus, we will be permanently destroying the Maritime beauty of our peninsula for no reason whatsoever. The 116 feet height recommended by the HRMbyDesign Project is clearly quite adequate and if WM Fares claims that such a building is not profitable for them to build, then they should consider building elsewhere.
There is a public meeting regarding this issue December 5th at 7pm at the Prince George Hotel. Please attend if you have concerns.
This article appears in Jan 24-30, 2008.
I don’t know if Manhattan can be considered “hideous” but what I do know is that I have not seen 1 nice condo development in Halifax. Maybe the falling prices can be attributed to poor design and cheap construction- I’m thinking Barrington and Morris- in addition to an over saturation of the condo market. 13 stories of tacky, cheap condo crap or 19- doesn’t really matter when all you see at eye level is tasteless, boring, uninspired wastes of space. And on the topic of Halifax revitalization, why spend tons of money on another condo when Barrington street could really use some property development? Last time I was in Halifax, it really looked depressing! That being said, I’m all for the development of Halifax and personally love tall, beautifully designed buildings.Maybe the focus should be on quality, not quantity!
I find this anti-development attitude very,very tiresome. I don’t know enough about this particular development to comment on it per se, but I’m sure that it has very little similarity to Fenwick Tower–the fact that one tall building built 30 years ago was a mistake doesn’t mean that every other tall building is a mistake. A ‘trend’ that includes greater downtown density, more people walking to work rather than driving in from Bedford or Sackville, more people shopping within walking distance rather than getting back in the SUV and driving to Dartmouth Crossing (which will rejuvenate areas like Barrington St, and the creation of large numbers of construction jobs is a trend I would welcome. As for the comparison to ‘the hideousness of Manhattan:’ Halifax is a city, and a growing one. If you don’t like living in a city, now would be a good time to leave.
Forgot something in my rant: what’s the problem with housing on the peninsula becoming more affordable (although I’m not convinced that it is)? Or are you worried about the value of condos not appreciating as quickly as it could because you want to make some money off your own condos? There are a lot of hideous and badly designed condos in this city, but they’re mostly the three or four story high fake Georgian ones that the promoters of “heritage” in this city want to see more of. Build em’ high, it leaves more area for green space.
As I’ve said in the past. Why do people object so much to development in the city? If it is planned and not out of control, then what is the problem? Why don’t these groups put more effort into fighting the out of control suburbs that are propping up everywhere? Would a large high rise be more environmentally damaging than a 200+ home suburb? How much more congestion is caused by a high rise as opposed to that of the new developments in Hammonds Plains or Fall River? Mixed use high rises would not only increase density and revive the downtown core, but the savings that the city would reap from not building all those new roads to service the suburbs could be put into better transit.The common argument I hear is that these high rises will ruin the sight lines. Well, tell me, who lives downtown that will be affected by these sight lines??? There are already corridors (Duke St, etc..) which one can see the harbour from any location downtown. Don’t tell me that someone living on Robie St can see the harbour and would be affected if high rises were suddenly built in the downtown core. This is the weakest argument one can possibly come up with.Finally, why don’t these groups spend more time and energy on improving the downtown core? Look at all those shoddy buildings on Barrington St. Why not force the owners of those buildings to maintain and upgrade those buildings? The crumbling brick and mortar are eye sores. Try sprucing up the empty lots and boarded up buildings first before opposing development of the downtown core.
this again???? Get with and stop holding the city back. Build em high!!!
Yes Cyril, it would be horrible if Halifax were held back like those noted backwaters London, Dublin, and Amsterdam, all of which have far more stringent height and zoning restrictions than Halifax.
Sadly, the only part of Halifax that can be remotely comparable to the beauty of London, Amsterdam or Dublin is Barrington street and look at how the city is allowing that street to crumble to bits!
Thanks so much for your comments. I’m perplexed why anyone thinks we’re anti-development. Please build the 13 story building that’s currently permitted. Do it tomorrow and do it for all of the extremely good reasons that rj mentions. Planned development is a great thing and that was the point of our original note: the planning has already been done by the urban planners of the Halifax By Design group and this group came up with a very sensible plan. Why should we overturn this plan to generate six extra floors of empty condominiums? A quick search on MLS returns over 200 apartments and condos for sale on the peninsula, many of which have been on sale for over a year. Building more is only going to contribute to the backlog of unsold homes. We also agree with rj that affordable housing is fantastic, but there are some weird things that can happen as an oversupply of something builds. As prices fall and there is more supply, people develop expectations for further price falls. This has two effects. One, the marginal seller is motivated to sell today while they can still get a good price. Two, the marginal buyer will tend to wait in expectations of a lower price tomorrow. This can set up a vicious cycle of deflation which, when applied to downtown housing, can create a corrosive environment that perversely leads to a hollowing out of the downtown core. Furthermore, housing deflation can actually drive rents higher as the marginal buyer still needs a roof over their head while awaiting lower prices and therefore must rent. This situation would actually create a lack of affordability in the downtown area as most people rent rather than own. Anyone who doesn’t think that this somewhat paradoxical effect can occur need only look to the south where rapidly falling housing prices are driving up rents in many U.S. cities. Finally, it’s unclear what “groups” Mike is talking about – the only group behind Concerned resident is a couple in downtown Halifax. Again, we agree with Mike that development that is “planned and not out of control” is a great thing. We’re simply arguing that the planning has already been done and to change that planning in the proposed direction risks taking it out of control. Regarding sightlines, if you look at notes from the meeting or read the article about the meeting in the Chronicle-Herald, you’ll find that most people weren’t concerned about sight lines to the harbour but by sightlines to the sun as their homes would be put in darkness by the building’s shadow. If Mike feels this to be unimportant then I’m sure he’ll find many who disagree. A sightline to the harbour is our particular pet peeve and if Mike doesn’t find it important then we’ll just have to disagree. We heartily agree with Mike’s statement about the buildings on Barrington but fail to see how that has any relevance to the issue at hand. Thanks again for taking the time to post your thoughtful comments.Concerned resident
tj, I can’t see how changing buildings to be taller would be considered “out of control”. Moving upwards does not have the same effects as moving outwards. Would you define the New York, Chicago, Tokyo, or Hong Kong skyline as out of control as the urban sprawl that exists in any large American metropolis such as Houston or LA?Downtown Halifax is sloped, towards the harbour. If you build a building greater than 20 stories high, how does that block the sunlight from anyone’s house? Any building (or imaginary house downtown) on Brunswick St or higher will not be affected by a 20 story building built on Lower Water Street. How many single dwelling homes are there in the downtown core? Again, how many sight lines are affected by the buildings in the downtown core? There are NO single family dwellings in the downtown core. You fail to see the relevance to my statement because you’re so blinded in your mission to prevent the development of any large scale buildings in the downtown core. Perhaps you should put more time & effort into restoration and cleaning up of downtown instead.
I was under the impression the height restrictions were for the benefit of sight lines on Citadel Hill, which is a national park as well as a huge tourist attraction.I honestly don’t care as the only people who profit from these developments are foreign developers anyway. They own half the city now as it is.
Mike….sounds like you have a vested interest in this project…..??As a young Haligonian currently living in the vertical city of Manhattan, I’m concerned about this issue. One of the problems with developing a vertical city is that the services on the ground can’t support the number of people living in the air. The convenience of living in a city center becomes more about waiting in line ups and being sure to have dinner reservations weeks in advance for that “spontaneous” dinner, than about a quality of urban life. Do you really want to wait upwards of 30 minutes to get a coffee to go (as I write this, I’m drinking a coffee that took 30 minutes to get- not because of slow service but because of overcrowding), or 20 minutes for a tube of toothpaste? As a result of this overcrowding and long wait times people get frustrated and that frustration spills over into their daily lives. It turns into an angry, aggressive, self centered environment. I would hate to see that happen in Halifax. I sat in the Halifax airport one day and two Texans got off the plane. The one man turned to his mate and said, “Get ready son, you’re about to meet one happy city.” Halifax is a lovely harbor city. We can keep it modern and well developed but turning it upwards will create problems some perhaps haven’t even thought of. You can build an infinite amount of places to live and work into the sky, but there is only a finite amount of space on the ground for the services to support them. …..and building high does not allow more green – it only creates more parking lots and squeezing in as many services as you can to cater to the people living in those towers in the sky…then consider the amount of garbage it results in. The argument that moving upwards is greener thinking doesn’t hold. But whatever….we’re all doomed anyway….build on….
TJ, you make some excellent points and some points worthy of consideration. However, I disagree with the sky is falling approach (no pun intended). There is a fine line between asking valid questions and instilling fear of failure. Has there been a city the size of HRM or larger that has seen a “hollowing out” of their downtown core because of over development? I guess what I question the most is your correlation between potential supply/demand issues in Halifax and the housing crisis in the US. The US housing issue was caused by sub-prime mortgages and questionable lending procedures. There were people just realeased from prison, unemployed and even deceased who were granted 6 figure mortages. The defaulting on these loans and subsequent forclosure is what fueled the fire. I don’t see this being an issue in Canada.I can’t deny that moving Halifax into the 21st Century in terms of development has been a contentious issue. I understand the importance of getting it right and everyone seems to have an opinion on the subject (most of which is positive, including yourself). It would be possible to argue that doing nothing is as futile as making a “mistake”. For what it’s worth I’d rather have an extra 6 floors than nothing at all. The last major project downtown was the Purdy’s Wharf towers in the mid 80’s. We are almost 8 years into the 21st Century ….. it’s time to stop arguing and start building.
The sheer number of peoplein Halifax who go spastic at the discussion of a mid-rise building never ceases to amaze me. Halifax has only one building that could be considered hi-rise (Fenwick) yet people talk about a 19-storey proposal as the end of the world. Incredible. A few points: HRM By Design is not policy, yet. It is an exercise by a group of planners, for better or worse. It seems to me that it panders too much toward heritage obstyructionists and pays short shrift to developing downtown in a modern manner, and that is what will hopefully get discussed before it does become policy. Until that time, it is an idea, nothing more, and has no standing in terms of project approvals.As for the financial arguments, if you are the one putting up the investment capital for these projects, it is your job to worry about whether or not you will make a return. If you are not an investor, then you have no standing to presume that these investments are good, bad or indifferent. That’s the nice thing about the market: you invest your money and you take your chances. The peanut gallery has no voice.The Brenton proposal is exactly the type of thing Halifax needs. If anything, I only wish it was bigger and taller. Halifax is in no danger of becoming another Manhattan in our lifetimes, but we need to take the baby steps to try and move it at elast into the latter part of the 20th century. Building a bunch of 6-storey red-brick faux-victorian shoebixes isn’t the way to do that.
Keith,I actually found this to be one of the more intelligent conversations on this site. I didn’t think anyone was going “spastic”. You seem to have a problem with an open discussion about things.
Terry,Waiting upwards to 30 minutes for a coffee does not have to do with the height of a building. Did you take into consideration that in such a large market as Manhattan, there are over 2 million people in that area? Maybe the shop you were at just has bad service or not enough employees? There are hundreds of places you can get a tube of toothpaste. I cannot see a correlation between wait time for coffee or toothpaste & height of buildings.As for the Texans, they find the people “quite happy” here maybe because we don’t have the gun violence or level of crime as they are use to? Have you been to Texas? If you have, visit the sprawling cities of Dallas & Houston. There you will see that in the surrounding neighourhoods, it’s just sprawl. They build out instead of up. I’d rather wait 20 minutes for a coffee (which I could have brewed myself or gone to a competing shop instead) than spend over an hour everyday stuck in traffic (which I have no alternative to). Building higher does not necessarily mean more parking spots. If people lived downtown, they would not need the cars like they would if they lived in the outer areas such as Clayton Park. The services are all within walking distance, so there is no need for a car. However, unplanned developments such as Bayers Lake only lead to more cars, more parking spaces, and more congestion. Prime example is any weekend or now, during the Christmas rush. No, I do not have a vested interest in this. I would just like for people to allow more development of the downtown core instead of continually fighting everything, yet allowing all the crazy and out of control suburbs to pop up everywhere. Prime example again is the south of the border, where American cities such as Detroit slowly die because of the population migration from the downtown core to the suburbs. The downtowns are only alive during 9-5, and when the work day ends, they’re nothing but hollow cores. Anyone who’s been to Detroit or Buffalo will know what I’m talking about.
Terry, seeing you’re in Manhattan, perhaps yu aren’t as plugged into things here in Halifax whenever a building over 6 storeys is proposed. The usual; group of anti-development/heritage suspects does indeed go spastic over it. In this case we had a resident of Morris St — one block away and separated from the proposal by the 22-storey Park Victoria — claiming that he would have to move if it was approved. That’s simply ridiculous. In th elocal paper today we had a letter from Phil Pacey of the Heritage Trust claiming that 50% of Haligonians visit Citadel Hill for the view. Equally ridiculous. Trust me, people do go spastic around here.
Why has no one mentioned that 5 or more Victorian houses will be demolished to build this thing. Create affordable housing, more like kick people out of the flats they can afford to build ones they cannot. When will Halifax start to appreciate the history here, perhaps once its too late. ghost of Halifax past