Developers who proposed a 22-storey tower in Lower Sackville last fall have revised their plans and are instead proposing two six-storey buildings for the First Lake Drive site.

As reported here in October, Upland Studio applied on behalf of First Mutual Properties to amend an existing development agreement to allow the company to build three towers — six, 15, and 22 storeys tall. The proposal included ground floor commercial and office space.

That led to backlash, with some concerned residents creating a petition saying the proposed development was too tall for the area. 

Upland Studio has now revised its proposal for the 70-80 First Lake Drive site.

As published Thursday on HRM’s website, the revised application includes two six-storey multiple unit dwellings on a shared podium. They’d comprise 77 residential units each, for a total of 154. 

The proposed development also includes the following:

  • Sobeys grocery, Staples building, and Tim Hortons remain on-site unchanged
  • Demolition of the warehouse/commercial space at the rear of Sobeys
  • A network of pedestrian walkways through the site

Upland Studio’s development summary also mentions the creation of a new drive-through restaurant building within the Sobeys parking lot.

HRM notes the application is currently at the review stage of the process, where the request is reviewed by internal municipal staff and external review agencies. 

Yvette d’Entremont is a bilingual (English/French) journalist and editor who enjoys covering health, science, research, and education.

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

Only subscribers to the Halifax Examiner may comment on articles. We moderate all comments. Be respectful; whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims. Please read our Commenting Policy.

  1. *sigh* This is a major reason we can’t fix the housing crisis. There should just be clear rules (sort of like the centre plan… but better done) and within certain boundaries we don’t get to yay/nay every single development as “too tall” etc. But also… we just need to accept greater density.

    I bet that that drive through restaurant is going to end up creating more traffic problems than the 22 story tower would have.

    1. I agree completely, Daniel. It is hard to read anything regarding climate and environment without encountering the “up not out” rule of thumb for doing better in these two areas. It is understood that few of us are early adopters of change, but we do not have the luxury of waiting until we achieve consensus on changing approaches. “Up not out” has many benefits, not the least of which are the minimum increases in residential infrastructure, such as water, sewer, and electricity; and a smaller thermal footprint and impact, especially with underground parking. Spin-off benefits are the contributions to improving public transportation, something that urban sprawl only exacerbates.