MacDonald Fire Station Redevelopment

• General Information
• LibCorp Proposal and Council Feedback
  
• Legal Opinions - Ownership of Fire Station property 
• Sales Process for the Fire Station Property
  
• Environmental Assessement of the Fire Station Site *NEW*
  
• Additional Planning Documents
  

Hampstead is faced with the most exciting development opportunity since the 1960s when the old Hampstead golf course was sold and the town gradually doubled in size. Today, there is virtually no land left to develop in the town and our tax base only increases when old homes are expanded or demolished and replaced with much larger homes. This growth, while welcome, is not nearly great enough to allow us to do everything that many residents would like.

Now, we have a chance to increase our local tax revenue by about $360,000 annually. That is an 4% increase; the largest increase in the town’s history since the new section of Hampstead was built. That extra revenue is enough to fund an additional $4.5 million of capital projects. Moreover, we will reap about $5 million up front, bringing the total available for projects to $9.5 million.*

The Libcorp Report

Seven months ago, the town hired Libcorp, Robert Libman’s company, to undertake a detailed study of three town properties: the MacDonald Fire Station, the Town Hall, and Hampstead Park. The goal was to identify options for improving the town and optimizing the potential of each site. For every site, several scenarios were examined and expected revenue and cost estimates were done. The qualitative pros and cons were studied. A link to the complete Libcorp report is at the bottom of this page

Council has carefully considered the various options and has concluded that the best one for the old fire station is to rezone the site for a 16 story condo building. The materials used will be of high quality with lots of glass. We will not allow the building to cover more than 40% of the site and will require large setbacks on both sides in order to make the area green and attractive. Council will not accept anything other than a prestigious, high quality residential building.

We believe that many current and former Hampstead residents would like to live in this type of building, once they leave their homes. We also think that a beautiful and well constructed building will attract people from other nearby suburbs, including young couples and families, who will appreciate the park immediately behind the building.

Surprisingly few negatives

This development will not require any new infrastructure. Shadowing will be minimal, as it will fall primarily on the east side of MacDonald. The percentage increase in traffic will be insignificant. Only about a dozen homes in Hampstead will have a somewhat diminished view and, for most of those, it will be a very small change.

Of course, some residents may feel that Hampstead should have no high rise buildings. After careful consideration, six of seven members of council feel that the benefits are so great that we should make this one exception. There are already numerous (although less attractive) high rises to the immediate south, on the Cote Saint Luc part of MacDonald. It should be noted that council is not considering any additional high rise developments on MacDonald or elsewhere. This is a unique situation.

What could we do with the extra revenue?

The money would result in lower tax increases. We could accelerate the speed with which we repair our infrastructure, including roads, sidewalks, water mains and so on. We could consider a hockey arena and improvements to our tennis and pool facilities, as well as, the possibility of building a fully integrated civic centre. Some of these improvements might be eligible for grants and sponsorships which would leverage our investments. The potential is huge.

But the choice is yours.

While virtually the entire council feels that this is what we should do, we also feel that residents should ratify this decision. Therefore, we will open a register so that residents who oppose this project can request a referendum. Even though this change to our urban plan does not legally require this process, we feel that it is an important enough issue to consult all residents. We will consider your decision to be binding.

This amazing opportunity to bring in $5 million, plus $360,000 annually, will only take place with your support. So if you agree with this project, I urge you NOT to sign the register.

Sincerely,
 

Dr. Bill Steinberg