RECAP: Council votes to raise maximum development height at Quinpool and Robie

HALIFAX – Halifax Regional Council voted to change the maximum height of the proposed development site at Robie Street and Quinpool Road on Tuesday from 20 to 25 storeys.

 

Council already voted to limit the height to 20-storeys but had asked for a supplemental staff report to look at a possible increase in height if the developer included more incentives for HRM, things like affordable housing units and installing underground wires.

 

That report came to Council on Tuesday with four options, but Council voted to push those aside and go with a seemingly on the fly calculation from the Councillor for the area, Shawn Cleary.

 

Using a hybrid of the staff options and his own calculations, Cleary put forward a motion to have the height raised to 25-storeys but include incentives for the municipality from APL properties based on density and ground area bonuses. It would see roughly 10 affordable housing units, the potential installation of the building’s wires underground and sidewalk work on both sides of the building.

 

That motion passed 14-2 after over an hour of debate.

 

Dartmouth Councillor Sam Austin called Cleary’s proposal the “epitome of ad-hocery,” and said he would vote against the plan to wait and see what the 'Centre Plan' said about the site.

 

Bedford Councillor Tim Outhit also disagreed, as he said the staff report had noted 20-storeys provides more affordable housing, fits better with the centre plan and would also have area residents feel they’ve been at least partially listened to over height concerns.

 

Speaking with reporters, Cleary said the hybrid allowed for a happy medium between the applicant’s proposal of 29 storeys, which prompted backlash from local residents, and the 20-storey proposal that might not have been viable for development.

 

“Obviously seven units of affordable housing isn’t enough and going to 36 may not be doable,” Cleary said, noting he hadn't had discussions with the developer over its feasibility.

 

He added given the fact many Councillors and residents at a public meeting earlier this year wanted additional amenities around the building, he felt there was room for a solution.

 

When it comes to height itself, Cleary said he knows some in the neighbourhood won’t be happy with the additional five storeys on the site, but called it a “compromise.”

 

“We have to protect the way that streetscape looks but if we approve 20, the difference between 20 and 25 is there, is it huge? I don’t know. But to approve 20 and get nothing for it, that’s unconscionable.”

 

Cleary said some density is needed in the area, as he said he’s witnessed three local business close in the last year and the census has shown the loss of about 500 residents in the last few years.

 

A new hearing will now be scheduled for public feedback on the new site guidelines and still will present new bylaw amendments to council for first reading.

 

Municipality to study how CeaseFire program can be adapted

 

A confusing discussion surrounding the funding of the local anti-violence group CeaseFire ended on Tuesday with Council voting to explore rolling parts of the program into existing youth programs.

 

The group, which works to mediate conflict among ‘high risk’ African-Nova Scotians, had its federal funding run out at the end of 2017, with initial emergency provincial funding scheduled to wrap up this month.

 

Staff recommended not funding the program, with a report from HRM’s public safety advisor Amy Siciliano noting empirical evidence the group actually works in reducing the crime rate is hard to come by. She didn’t deny the value in the program, though, and said that led to the recommendation of seeing if parts could be integrated elsewhere.

 

Councillor David Hendsbee then put forward a motion to try and have HRM provide stop-gap funding for the group until July, but CeaseFire program manager Mel Lucas then provided a letter to council from the province confirming further funding.

 

The letter, received by Lucas on Thursday, provides skeleton funding for the group from the Department of Justice to operate until July 15.

 

Hendsbee withdrew his motion and the original motion, where HRM kicked in no funding, was approved.

 

Lucas told reporters he and the group were blindsided by the staff recommendation to provide no funding, as the staff report dated March 6 was never passed along.

 

He said he first saw it on Friday when a reporter called him to ask him about it.

 

“I was a little outraged when I saw the report was dated March 6,” Lucas said.

 

“There were some hopes we would have been able to come here today and there would have been some opportunity to talk,” he added. “It’s frustrating.”

 

Lucas said he’s still cautiously optimistic about the program’s future but said there are some major concerns.

 

“I’m optimistic they believe we’re doing a little bit more than the report actually indicates. I’m not optimistic that if we move in the direction the government wants to go if CeaseFire would be the same.”

 

Lucas explained the program might lose its effectiveness if rolled into HRM, as many of the clients the group works with tend to distrust the government and may feel its too close to the police force.

 

He also said the parent group of CeaseFire, the Chicago-based CureViolence, might not appreciate pieces of the program being “pulled apart.”

 

Lucas said the group has become aware of potential new federal funding opportunities that they’ll also be exploring in the coming weeks.

 

Other bits from Tuesday’s meeting

 

A single complaint from the public against a sitting Councillor was dealt with in-camera on Tuesday but the outcome is unknown.

 

Timberlea – Beechville – Clayton Park – Wedgewood Councillor Richard Zurawski appeared to suggest the complaint was against him after Hammonds Plains Councillor Matt Whitman proposed making the complaint discussion public.

 

Zurawski said ‘while he’d like to deal with the complaint in public, personal circumstances dictated otherwise.’

 

A proposal for Councillors to review the code of conduct governing their behaviour on an annual basis, being brought forward by Councillor Tony Mancini, was deferred to next week's meeting.

 

Another proposal from Councillor Hendsbee to have staff study allowing chickens for egg-laying purposes in residential areas was deferred until its meeting scheduled for next week.