The former St. Pat’s-Alexandra School is deteriorating and needs major upgrades, a report HRM released earlier this month states. But after touring the school last Friday, community members who plan to submit a proposal for the property are questioning the report’s validity.
The report, authored by Eagle Project Management, says it would cost $15 million to bring the older building up to code. The roofs and outside walls of both buildings are leaking. Photos show mould and potential asbestos. Boilers in the new building have passed their life expectancy.
Graffiti coats the the newer building, a musty smell lingers inside and ceiling tiles and a light fixture had fallen down, The Coast observed in April. The older building shouldn’t be used, the report says.
But after the tour, Reverend Rhonda Britton of the Richard Preston Centre for Excellence wasn’t convinced the problems were urgent. “It made it sound like all these upgrades needed to be done before you could even occupy the space. The space is very occupy-able right now.”
City officials handed out gloves and masks on the tour, she said. “Our children were just in there two years ago,” Britton says. A daycare moved out of the older building last year.
The school board voted to close the school in 2009 and HRM took possession in 2011. In April, HRM rented the newer building to the Trailer Park Boys for six weeks.
Peter Smith of Eagle Project Management authored the report, says HRM spokesperson Janet Bryson. HRM paid EPM $11,891 for the report. Smith does contract work for WM Fares Group, a local development firm, but is not an employee of the group, according to Bryson Smith declined to comment for this story.
“It’s potentially a conflict of interest, unless you bar that developer now from potentially putting in any bid for the school,” says Britton.
The walk-through jogged her excitement about the community’s proposal despite her concerns. The groups have 90 days to respond to the RFP, due Nov. 12.
Related Stories
Jono not interested in St. Pat’s mediation
This article appears in Aug 29 – Sep 4, 2013.
I was thinking the same thing as Britton: The buildings were occupied only two years ago, and now suddenly they’re basically condemn-able? No way.
First, virtually every building constructed prior to 1980 either has asbestos or used to. You remove it. Asbestos is not a reason to tear a building down.
Second, leaks can also be fixed, and in the case of the original St. Pat’s school (the Victorian building, which I wish was used by the media to depict the site, instead of the ugly 70s addition) should be to salvage the building.
Look at the Greenvale School in Dartmouth. Built in the late 1800s, it was abandoned and deteriorating for 21 years before a developer converted it into loft condos a couple of years back. It was re-used and preserved, and it was in much worse shape than St. Pat’s, I’m sure.
Ask Darrell Dexter to provide funds for another contractor to review the building. Some contractors write a report to suit the wishes of the client.
Can they raise the money to fix it and run it? Only real question here.
@dentrh says: “Can they raise the money to fix it and run it? Only real question here.”
That’s true. I would very much like to see it go to a community group like the Preston Centre, and I would even support a bit of government help to remediate the structures for them.
But if they really can’t hack it, financially, there’s no point letting the site sit in limbo for years. I know it might be an unpopular opinion, but IF no community groups can actually afford it, I’d prefer to see the site sold to a private developer who could (hopefully) refurbish the 19th-century building for residential purposes, and knock down the 1970s building for something new.
If the signature block of the guy doing a report on the building doesn’t say “P.Eng”, its fucking worthless. And the city is insane for so much as putting out a tender that doesn’t make that a requirement.
Ah, yes. Asbestos. Skipped that. See, if you have a building that contains asbestos, and the asbestos itself isn’t falling apart, its not an issue. Don’t poke at it, and its fine. But if you want to do some renovations, or tear the building down entirely, then you need to deal with it. And the process is:
RENOVATING A BUILDING WITH ASBESTOS
1) remove asbestos
2) renovate
DEMOLISHING A BUILDING WITH ASBESTOS
1) remove asbestos
2) demolish
Great reporting, Hilary! You have identified the origin of the problem – school board policies permitting schools to run down, then downloading the deferred maintenance on HRM and civic taxpayers.
How did it happen? The HRSB closed St. Pats-Alexandra School in 2009, giving up on the neighbourhood. Then, the board passed on the site as the potential location for its administrative headquarters. Instead, the HRSB moved from Alderney Gate?Dartmouth to a Burnside Corporate Park. It cost $1 million more a year in lease payments to rent in Burnside. The board revealed in September 2010 that it had $4.5 million in reserves to finance the relocation to the suburbs.
Where might we look for a solution? It’s not too late to look at turning St. Pats-Alexandra into a Community Hub School in a mixed use community complex. Imagine Bloomfield showed the way. That would mean re-engaging the school board officials now inhabiting the Burnside bunker.
The fact remains that if it’s going to need renovations or repairs to become occupy-able according HRM building codes, it doesn’t matter how occupy-able you think it is for your purposes.
They haven’t become condemnable since 2009, but buildings require upkeep. If it largely hasn’t been maintained since then, it’s entirely plausible that it needs to be revamped to meet codes.
I’m not willing to have any of my tax dollars put into this sinkhole.