Lovelace takes another swing at saving HRM property from non-profits

HALIFAX, N.S. — Arguments on respecting environmental goals and saving costs for non-profits didn’t work at Halifax Regional Council on Tuesday.

Again Coun. Pam Lovelace (Hammonds Plains – St. Margarets) argued that a 40,144-square-foot property at 21 Fox Hollow Dr. in Upper Tantallon should not be added to the list of surplus properties to be offered up for sale to non-profits looking to build affordable housing.

It’s in a rural subdivision, with houses on all sides and abuts a well-used trail.

Last month, council discussed a list of seven surplus HRM-owned properties that could be offered up for sale to non-profits to build affordable housing. This property was one of them but Lovelace argued that there weren’t enough services — including transit, sewer and water — necessary to build affordable housing on that spot.

The vote to remove this property from the list ended in a tie, meaning it failed.

But Lovelace came back swinging again.

New information

On Tuesday, she requested a motion of rescission because of “new information” on the suitability of the land for housing. She said the information was from an engineer who specializes in septic systems who says this lot is not suitable.

“This lot happens to have a much longer history than this subdivision process that was dating back to the 1960s/’70s. In fact, this lot was used for wetland storage since the beginning of the rail line that was built during the early 1900s,” Lovelace said.

The fact that council rejected her request to not sell off the property is surprising given that Halifax declared a climate emergency five years ago, she said.

Too costly for non-profits

HRM staff didn’t assess the property before it was added to the surplus list and it would burden non-profits with tremendous costs and time to make the site work.

“Council is knowingly placing the burden of additional costs and added time to the construction of affordable housing on this lot. Rather than conducting due diligence to ensure the land is suitable for housing, the municipality is placing the burden to assess the land’s suitability for septic and groundwater (on non-profits),” she said. “The cost of the permits to infill the wetlands, the cost of the provincial permits to alter the watercourses — those are all being placed on non-profit organizations.”

Cathie O’Toole, chief administrative officer, clarified that staff get permission from council first to make a property surplus and then do their due diligence before placing it on the market. 

Lovelace said it’s not worth the money to pay a consultant to do that when it’s neighbourhood knowledge that the property won’t be suitable.

Coun. Shawn Cleary (Halifax West Armdale) said they don’t know the quality of this new information and should discount it. He added that at minimum there could be a single-family home put on the site, similar to a Habitat for Humanity project.

“If any potential purchaser wants to look at this property, they could easily determine if it suits their needs or not and just not buy it from us.”

Lovelace needed a two-thirds vote to rescind the previous vote but she didn’t come close to getting it. Her motion failed 4-11.

Surplus process needs to change

But Lovelace wasn’t done. She also argued that HRM’s process for determining surplus land is faulty as it doesn’t involve any assessment of the property’s suitability for development, including provincial regulatory requirements for septic systems.

She asked for a staff report exploring changing the process.

Council voted in her favour this time, 12-3 in support of a staff report.