General Updates and News

[halifaxboyns]

I joined the facebook group mentioned earlier, I would encourage others do so as well.
I agree with someone123 - the ramparts bylaw really doesn't mean anything considering the stand outs for maritime centre and fenwick. What does it really accomplish?

I agree the flaw with HRM by design is the fact that it didn't take into account existing development and I think if anything were to happen to an existing high rise and then they came back and found out they couldn't rebuild as it was (they would be lower) you would see a few lawsuits happen.

Hopefully someone will pick up on that and see the plan changed in the next few years.

[someone123]

I believe that the view from within the Citadel courtyard is used as a pretext for imposing far-reaching height restrictions on the downtown area. In other words, nobody really cares that much about the courtyard. They just don't want highrise buildings, and the ramparts rules are one way to make height restrictions seem legitimate.

Some anti-development speakers in city hearings (I am probably thinking of the Paceys, but I don't remember clearly) have stated flatly that allowing new highrises results in demolition of heritage buildings, because they think there is more incentive to demolish if something taller can be built. I think this economic argument is wrong (new investment including highrise construction can be channeled into heritage preservation, but if there's no money there's nothing but slow decline), but it demonstrates that really they do not want highrises to be built anywhere downtown. It is not about shadows or ramparts, or coming up with a reasonable solution that minimizes the real impact of new buildings.

The goal is simply to minimize the amount of new construction downtown. This is what has created the "us vs. them", "heritage vs. development" attitude that has been so harmful in Halifax. It's time for the city to leave this attitude in the past.

[alps]

A couple episodes of a homebuying show called "Urban Suburban" that features Halifax are airing tonight on HGTV.

The first episode, at 9:00pm AST, is called "West End vs. Bedford," and the second at 9:30 is "Dartmouth vs. Tantallon."

I think the premise of the show is that the buyers are trying to decide between purchasing in the city or suburbs, and they tour some homes in each area.

[Dmajackson]

The first episode, at 9:00pm AST, is called "West End vs. Bedford," and the second at 9:30 is "Dartmouth vs. Tantallon."

Damn they should of contacted me. I'm a Bedfordian living in the West-End (well politically at least).

[someone123]

There was a bit of news tonight in ANS about $6M renos planned for the Radisson on Hollis Street. The rooms will be overhauled, there will be a new lobby, and there will be new windows. Not sure if the cladding will change, but I'd guess that it will at least be cleaned up. They also plan on adding a multi-level mechanical parking structure in the space between the hotel and the office building next door along Bedford Row -- kind of interesting, and something you see in Manhattan.

One of the top sites downtown I'd like to see developed is the big empty lot across Sackville Street that surrounds the Bank of Canada and Ralston buildings. Right now that site forms a giant belt of underused land stretching along Sackville Street to the waterfront.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drgnmastr/467323457/sizes/l/in/photostream/

[Empire]

I hope that when HRMxD does the plan for the Robie-Young area heights are viewed differently than with the downtown plan. I think generous density bonusing should be part of the plan and that there should be a number of areas designated as "future land use". These areas would have a minimum height allowance of the adjacent properties but no specified maximum height. A developer could propose what they feel the market could sustain and go through a more detailed public hearing type process if they exceed the surrounding height limits.

The lack of single family housing in the Kempt - Young area makes it a natural for density. The area needs a significant hotel and a couple of parks like Victoria Park and Cornwallis park to get the ball rolling.

[-Harlington-]

And maybe the Hydrostone area can become more of an attraction, recent development is already adding more people and shops there so maybe its time the area gets a hotel or something, sort of a ''downtown north end''

If Agricola ever becomes a corridor like many have mentioned here and Gottingen densifys a little more it would be a nice transition into downtown .

[halifaxboyns]

I would have to agree, I see the area (which I like to call the Forum lands because it really gives you a good geographic location) as a huge opportunity and the existing condos on Gladstone set a very good context.

If anything, I wouldn't set a maximum height for this area. I would set a minimum height at about 10 stories and then in order to go higher, you have to undertake a number of bonuses but why cap the height? This spot is ideal as there would be very little in terms of opposition. I'm also found myself moving away from my previous position on Kempt Road staying a commercial corridor - I'd be willing to set the commercial go and become mixed use.

The Hydrostone you will see more opposition, but I think the compromise could be something along this line: development centred more around Agricola could be up to the 15 storey range, while stuff closer to the Hydrostone park would be around 10. This way, you could create a well framed commercial street (with a possible streetcar?) on Agricola and then smaller buildings interior. That or you just go with a minimum height (say 7 stories) and then bonus up to the high teens. Eitherway is fine with me...

[halifaxboyns]

I may have posted this before, but I started watching it again last night and I think the comments that Christopher Hume makes are very important in light of the Regional Centre Plan and just common sense in general.

Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu19UJaPsfU)

It really shows that despite the sprawl development HRM has been focused on, we still have a good backbone for the future. Personally, if HRM had some money as part of the regional centre plan, it would be fantastic to have Mr. Hume come and speak about his thoughts on HRM.

[halifaxboyns]

A very interesting DA initiation report (http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/120110ca1115.pdf) for the corner site at Vernon and Quinpool. Looks like we could be seeing the start of more development interest on Quinpool - about time.

[Dmajackson]

^You missed the Bay's redevelopment report on the Council agenda as well. :P

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/120110ca1114.pdf

Is it just me or are blue glass office buildings slowly taking over the Peninsula?

[someone123]

A very interesting DA initiation report (http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/120110ca1115.pdf) for the corner site at Vernon and Quinpool. Looks like we could be seeing the start of more development interest on Quinpool - about time.

I read about this and it is a great proposal. A few buildings have gone up on Quinpool over the past few years but they've been around 3-4 floors, which is a waste of prime land and doesn't look very good on such a wide street.

This is not a landmark proposal but it's the sort of thing you could imagine being repeated a dozen times over on Quinpool. If that were to happen the street would be much more successful but there would be a minimal impact on nearby residential areas.

[ewjonsson]

I was reading that report, and I was wondering about one thing they mention in the workshop outcomes section. It says, "Explore the possibility of extending the Chebucto lane south of Quinpool Rd.". Does anybody know what this means? I thought it was kind of randomly inserted into the guidelines. This seems odd to me, because for Chebucto lane to even get to Quinpool would require the demolition of at least one house, one apartment building and then through Quinpool shopping centre.

[Keith P.]

^You missed the Bay's redevelopment report on the Council agenda as well. :P

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/120110ca1114.pdf

Is it just me or are blue glass office buildings slowly taking over the Peninsula?

It is unfortunate that the existing mold- or moss- or fungus-covered precast on the existing building is to remain. That structure was ugly the day it opened and only got worse - it is a classic example of a building that never should have been built in its current form.

[RyeJay]

Is it just me or are blue glass office buildings slowly taking over the Peninsula?

I rather blue glass over turquois.

[RyeJay]

I look forward to this redevelopment's impact on the lil' armdale skyline.

[alps]

That Quinpool project looks great! I'm surprised nothing similar has ever been proposed for the former Esso site (Quinpool & Harvard).

[someone123]

That Quinpool project looks great! I'm surprised nothing similar has ever been proposed for the former Esso site (Quinpool & Harvard).

I've wondered about that site for a long time. My supposition was always that it was contaminated.

[Waye Mason]

I've wondered about that site for a long time. My supposition was always that it was contaminated.

Everything's contaminated on the peninsula. You just have to work around it. I know from when I was up on Gottingen that all the buildings there had buried oil tanks (that would leak), or small scale industrial (like the drycleaners, or photolabs, or printers, that would have spills ). Or just the fact that for 150 years coal ash was scattered out the back door as "fertilizer" or whatever and now most gardens have 700 to 1000 times the heavy metals in the soil that is allowable.

I know when they were doing the Brickyard on the old Alexandria school property that they found diesel in the soil, but it had come from up the hill somewhere, and it could have been from any one of a dozen old properties, including the then abandoned MET building.

On top of that you have to deal with run off from slate... pretty much I think developers need to plan as if every site on a major, older street has contamination of some significant kind... heh.

[kph06]

I think the problem with a lot of the old service station sites, the Quinpool one included, is that they are contaminated and owned by the oil company. The company would have to clean up the site before it is sold, and in many cases the cleanup costs would be more than the selling price, so it doesn't make economical sense for the company. Although with the recent sale of three Ultramar sites to Banc, hopefully this thinking has changed, or those were just cleaner sites.

[haligonia]

The drawings near the bottom of the Quinpool DA are really interesting. I hope to see some sort of redevelopment of the Quinpool Centre in the near future.

[halifaxboyns]

The quinpool proposal is a good first start. If we get a few more of these along Quinpool it will build up a good context to start going higher. Hopefully this project will provide some context for the Regional Centre Plan as well.

I think if the a similar building context were to be done along Agricola (around the 12 to 15 storey range), it would create an attractive corridor there as well, bring a lot of people to around the core and make the commons way busier. A building like the Quinpool Proposal is what I was hoping would start showing up along Gottingen too, but around 10 storeys.

[Keith P.]

Everything's contaminated on the peninsula. You just have to work around it. I know from when I was up on Gottingen that all the buildings there had buried oil tanks (that would leak), or small scale industrial (like the drycleaners, or photolabs, or printers, that would have spills ). Or just the fact that for 150 years coal ash was scattered out the back door as "fertilizer" or whatever and now most gardens have 700 to 1000 times the heavy metals in the soil that is allowable.

I know when they were doing the Brickyard on the old Alexandria school property that they found diesel in the soil, but it had come from up the hill somewhere, and it could have been from any one of a dozen old properties, including the then abandoned MET building.

On top of that you have to deal with run off from slate... pretty much I think developers need to plan as if every site on a major, older street has contamination of some significant kind... heh.

All of which is true, but the required response is ridiculous. Nobody is pulling drinking water from wells on the peninsula. There is no further risk associated with these sites than what has already been there for decades. The sites will be excavated in large part anyway, removing most of whatever the particular problem material allegedly is. The entire soil cleanup business is based upon an absurd premise and should just be abandoned for urbanized areas.

[Empire]

Hopefully the stadium is one of the permits.

City Riding Development Wave

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/49229-city-riding-development-wave

[q12]

Admiral's growth in step with Halifax's bright employment picture
January 6, 2012 - 7:13pm BY JOHN DEMONT BUSINESS REPORTER
http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/49460-admirals-growth-step-halifaxs-bright-employment-picture

Here is an excerpt from this article with some good news even before the shipbuilding contract benefits have really even started:

His isn’t the only company in HRM that’s hiring these days. Figures released Friday by Statistics Canada show that Halifax’s unemployment rate dropped to 5.5 per cent in December, compared to 6.8 per cent a year ago.

The last time the city’s unemployment rate was lower was December, 2008 — before the recession really took hold.

While unemployment deepens across much of Canada, the jobless rate is back to pre-recession levels in the whole of Nova Scotia.

In December, the provincial unemployment rate hit 7.8 per cent — still marginally above the national average of 7.5 per cent— but sharply below 10.4 per cent a year ago.

I would say an unemployment rate in Halifax of 3-4% in a couple years is highly likely especially if the global economy has recovered some by then.

[RyeJay]

I would say an unemployment rate in Halifax of 3-4% in a couple years is highly likely especially if the global economy has recovered some by then.

Halifax is set to perform quite well. Unfortunately the city cannot rely on the markets around the world to do the same.

The global economy will not recover, at least in a way of returning to 'business as usual'. We are living in a reality of climate change. Basic resources (clean freshwater, food--especially meat) will continue to dwindle around the world, constantly compromising the economies of countries most severely affected by extreme weather. This shall continue straining international finances as more countries take on more debt to survive(on top of debt from political mismanagement and what seems to be endless consumption from not just western nations, but emerging developing countries).

Canada needs other economies to drive its own. Canada's business partners will more often not be able to afford transacting with us; as well, our partners will drop in number as countries dissolve in their political unionship -- and physically on land that has been reduced in its habitation capacity.

[fenwick16]

The US economy is starting to recover. Many trillions of dollars of its debt were incurred to fight in Iraq. It also got into trouble because of its real estate bubble - the same thing happened in the Toronto area in the early 1990's; it took several years but the GTA real estate market has recovered. I think the US is well on its way to recovery and that should help drag Europe out of its mess; much of Europe's mess is associated with unsustainable social programs and too much leisure time instead of a strong work ethic (e.g. Greece, on the other hand Germany seems to be doing well).

I don't think that world population is a big strain on the economy - China's population will peak in another 10-15 years and is then forecast to decline - http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/china-and-the-one-planet-equation/. India is still growing but once starvation becomes a problem then they will be forced to do more about their population growth. In any case, I think population growth will take care of itself - once there are unsustainable resource levels and food then governments take action to reduce population growth. Japan's population has already started to decline. Canada's population will continue to grow because Canada wants population growth and encourages population growth through immigration.

One interesting point - according to the law of conservation of mass, which is a well established principle that is commonly used in chemical engineering and chemistry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass, we will never run out of resources. For example, steel isn't being used up and isn't being depleted; iron ore, which is iron oxide, is mined and processed to form steel, which if not maintained will oxide and convert back to iron oxide (iron ore). Similarly, when fossil fuel is burned it is not destroyed but is converted to carbon dioxide and water; as the carbon dioxide levels rise then plants grow more rapidly and the carbon dioxide is converted to the carbon in the plants plus oxygen - this is the carbon dioxide cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle). The carbon in plants can be burned directly or even converted back to oil (http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/13218/). However, as cheap oil is depleted then we will switch more predominantly to cheap natural gas for fuel (as is happening now and it is hurting NS gas royalties). As cheap gas, oil and coal are depleted then the world will switch predominantly to more expensive alternatives (but this won't be during our lifetime, there is too much natural gas available).

This is just my 2 cents worth on the economy, for what it is worth. I can't buy into the doom and gloom scenarios - I have been hearing it for as long as I have been watching the news, since the 1970's.

[someone123]

Here is seasonally unadjusted labour force characteristics data from Dec 2010-2011:
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/lfss04a-eng.htm

According to the table, Halifax had an unemployment rate of 4.7% in December 2011. To put things into perspective, Calgary has an unemployment rate of 5.1% and Toronto has an unemployment rate of 7.9%. 6,500 jobs were created in Halifax in 2011, which is a 3% increase to 225,300 employed.

The economy is already doing very well and the shipbuilding contract has yet to go into full swing. As I've said before I will not be surprised if over the next 5-10 years Halifax develops a reputation as a high growth city and becomes a common destination for people across Canada.

[fenwick16]

The economy is already doing very well and the shipbuilding contract has yet to go into full swing. As I've said before I will not be surprised if over the next 5-10 years Halifax develops a reputation as a high growth city and becomes a common destination for people across Canada.

This will help the entire province and even the rest of the Maritimes. Even if the prosperity doesn't spread far out from the HRM, Nova Scotians and Maritimers will be able to grow up and live in the Maritimes instead of having to move to other parts of the country. But to continue to attract more Maritimers, Canadian and international immigrants, it will also have to add to its attractions - performing arts centres, museums and a stadium are all part of the mix of amenities. It will have to become a major city with some big dreams.

[RyeJay]

The US economy is starting to recover. Many trillions of dollars of its debt were incurred to fight in Iraq. It also got into trouble because of its real estate bubble - the same thing happened in the Toronto area in the early 1990's; it took several years but the GTA real estate market has recovered. I think the US is well on its way to recovery and that should help drag Europe out of its mess; much of Europe's mess is associated with unsustainable social programs and too much leisure time instead of a strong work ethic (e.g. Greece, on the other hand Germany seems to be doing well).

I don't think that world population is a big strain on the economy - China's population will peak in another 10-15 years and is then forecast to decline - http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/china-and-the-one-planet-equation/. India is still growing but once starvation becomes a problem then they will be forced to do more about their population growth. In any case, I think population growth will take care of itself - once there are unsustainable resource levels and food then governments take action to reduce population growth. Japan's population has already started to decline. Canada's population will continue to grow because Canada wants population growth and encourages population growth through immigration.

One interesting point - according to the law of conservation of mass, which is a well established principle that is commonly used in chemical engineering and chemistry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass, we will never run out of resources. For example, steel isn't being used up and isn't being depleted; iron ore, which is iron oxide, is mined and processed to form steel, which if not maintained will oxide and convert back to iron oxide (iron ore). Similarly, when fossil fuel is burned it is not destroyed but is converted to carbon dioxide and water; as the carbon dioxide levels rise then plants grow more rapidly and the carbon dioxide is converted to the carbon in the plants plus oxygen - this is the carbon dioxide cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle). The carbon in plants can be burned directly or even converted back to oil (http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/13218/). However, as cheap oil is depleted then we will switch more predominantly to cheap natural gas for fuel (as is happening now and it is hurting NS gas royalties). As cheap gas, oil and coal are depleted then the world will switch predominantly to more expensive alternatives (but this won't be during our lifetime, there is too much natural gas available).

This is just my 2 cents worth on the economy, for what it is worth. I can't buy into the doom and gloom scenarios - I have been hearing it for as long as I have been watching the news, since the 1970's.

Your generation doesn't have to.

You can describe it as gloom and doom as you please: I've decided to pay attention and accept the numbers of what is happening to our biosphere as fact.

If the high levels of CO2 in our atmosphere are to, as you've mentioned, compliment the growth of plants -- then for what are they waiting? The speed of growth and CO2 conversion rate in our surviving species of trees has not change. There is also the problem of where these plants shall grow. We're sure not going to let any forest crop up on farmlands, which are producing less because of desertification and flooding.

And what shall we do about the massive quantities of methane (20X more severe than CO2 in terms of heat-trapping) that are being released from the arctic as more ice recedes? Seeing ice-free arctic summers is something even your generation will get to experience with the rest of us.

Toronto experienced the same thing as the U.S.? I've never known Canada to have such lax banking regulations as to allow gambling of mortgages.

[fenwick16]

Your generation doesn't have to.

You can describe it as gloom and doom as you please: I've decided to pay attention and accept the numbers of what is happening to our biosphere as fact.

If the high levels of CO2 in our atmosphere are to, as you've mentioned, compliment the growth of plants -- then for what are they waiting? The speed of growth and CO2 conversion rate in our surviving species of trees has not change. There is also the problem of where these plants shall grow. We're sure not going to let any forest crop up on farmlands, which are producing less because of desertification and flooding.

And what shall we do about the massive quantities of methane (20X more severe than CO2 in terms of heat-trapping) that are being released from the arctic as more ice recedes? Seeing ice-free arctic summers is something even your generation will get to experience with the rest of us.

Toronto experienced the same thing as the U.S.? I've never known Canada to have such lax banking regulations as to allow gambling of mortgages.

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.

How do you explain the ice-age and natural warming that occurred over thousands of years afterwards? Would you be more comfortable if there was another impending ice-age. I will take global-warming over global-cooling, especially since we live in Canada.

Rising carbon dioxide levels do increase vegetation growth - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm. Do you also not believe in photosynthesis?

[haligonia]

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.


It is possible that global warming is not entirely man-made, however there is scientific evidence to prove that we are a massive contributor to the situation. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have spiked so sharply over the past century (The same time during which the world experienced immense industrialization) that I am fairly certain that our destructive ways are the root of the problem.

[RyeJay]

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.

How do you explain the ice-age and natural warming that occurred over thousands of years afterwards? Would you be more comfortable if there was another impending ice-age. I will take global-warming over global-cooling, especially since we live in Canada.

Rising carbon dioxide levels do increase vegetation growth - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm. Do you also not believe in photosynthesis?

So...for the sake of argument, if climate change is not vastly due to human activity -- we should ignore it? Or at least not feel responsible as the news gets more depressing.

The Earth goes through cycles of cooling and warming, like a pulse. It's fascinating to look over the graphs and see the numerical repetition. The numbers of CO2 in our atmosphere have never been higher, hence why scientists are very troubled. There is so much carbon, such an extreme change in chemical composition throughout the atmosphere, that we have no point of reference to which a comparison can be made.

To clarify my grade school knowledge of plants and photosynthesis: you've taken my questions as a rejection of CO2's fertilising properties on plants. I realise carbon is used by plants, but my point was that carbon is just one and only one element to a plant's growth.

All parts of the planet that receive enough sunlight to allow plant growth are taken up by human colonisation, farmlands, and industry. The small forests that are remaining are all burning at record rates, or are being washed away from flooding.

It would appear that all this CO2 is changing the medium in which all plants grow, presenting such extremes that I doubt even the notion of miracle forests suddenly springing out of the ground.

Too much fertiliser, it would appear.

As more of the planet's filtration system dies, I'm concerned our slow response is futile when this is an in-process long-term problem, requiring attention now.

[fenwick16]

So...for the sake of argument, if climate change is not vastly due to human activity -- we should ignore it? Or at least not feel responsible as the news gets more depressing.

No, we should continue to do all that we can to reduce pollution. However, the human percentage of total carbon dioxide produced is a small proportion of the total - most is naturally produced. It should also be noted that water vapor is the predominant greenhouse gas - a factor that we have little control over.

To clarify my grade school knowledge of plants and photosynthesis: you've taken my questions as a rejection of CO2's fertilising properties on plants. I realise carbon is used by plants, but my point was that carbon is just one and only one element to a plant's growth.

The primary elements are carbon, hydrogen and oxygen - the carbon comes almost entirely from the atmosphere and is a large percentage of the composition of plants. That is why planting trees and other plants is a method or removing atmospheric carbon dioxide.

All parts of the planet that receive enough sunlight to allow plant growth are taken up by human colonisation, farmlands, and industry. The small forests that are remaining are all burning at record rates, or are being washed away from flooding.

Crop yields have increased dramatically over the past 100 years; this is a result of fertilizers, crop rotation, better crop varieties, better knowledge of growth patterns, irrigation of desert land, etc (and quite possibly because of increased CO2 levels which is a nutrient for plants). Growing crops removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, so how is it bad for the environment? Forests are constantly being replenished.

In any case, humans only occupy a minuscule percentage of the earth's total land mass.

It would appear that all this CO2 is changing the medium in which all plants grow, presenting such extremes that I doubt even the notion of miracle forests suddenly springing out of the ground.

Too much fertiliser, it would appear.

As more of the planet's filtration system dies, I'm concerned our slow response is futile when this is an in-process long-term problem, requiring attention now.

I feel quite confident that an equilibrium will be reached based on the laws of nature (or scientific principles, if you prefer) and mankind will live on for many more millennia. I think a far greater threat is nuclear arms than global warming.

[hoser111]

Personal Peeve -

Signing up to a forum for updates and discussion on construction and development related activities, yet having to listen to debates about marijuana, Climate change, "Occupy" this and that.......

ad nauseum.

[fenwick16]

Personal Peeve -

Signing up to a forum for updates and discussion on construction and development related activities, yet having to listen to debates about marijuana, Climate change, "Occupy" this and that.......

ad nauseum.

I agree. I prefer development news and pictures; primarily positive development news.

In any case, if someone wants to start a thread on how climate change will affect development in Halifax then it could be put under a separate thread and then people can skip the ones that aren't of interest.

[bluenoser]

Construction boom: Cranes busy in Halifax (http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials/50055-construction-boom-cranes-busy-halifax)
January 9, 2012 - 4:35am THE CHRONICLE HERALD | EDITORIAL

http://thechronicleherald.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/ch_article_main_image/articles/towers2.jpg
Construction workers are seen near the top of a tower at the King's Wharf construction site on the Dartmouth waterfront on Dec. 13, 2011. (TIM KROCHAK / Staff) .HALIFAX


Mayor Peter Kelly, like any politician seeking re-election, knows the value of getting out in front of a good-looking parade.

So Mr. Kelly, who faces municipal elections this fall, certainly wasn’t shy about issuing a news release last week predicting Halifax will likely issue $1 billion in development permits in 2012, which would be more than 20 per cent above last year.

The Halifax mayor based his prediction not on staff reports but on his own optimism, he said in an interview.

Mr. Kelly is correct that the city is currently buzzing with construction activity — and could see a lot more, particularly if Rank Inc.’s $500-million Nova Centre development, which includes the convention centre, gets off the ground this year. However, the credit belongs with macro factors like the pent-up demand for commercial and residential space in Halifax, continuing low interest rates and the afterglow from Irving’s winning bid on the $25-billion shipbuilding contract last fall.

......

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials/50055-construction-boom-cranes-busy-halifax


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Halifax area shows biggest jump in building permits (http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/50223-halifax-area-shows-biggest-jump-building-permits)
January 9, 2012 - 6:39pm By JOHN DeMONT Business Reporter


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


6112 Quinpool Rd.

Quinpool businesses face displacement (http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/49471-quinpool-businesses-face-displacement)
January 6, 2012 - 8:43pm By REMO ZACCAGNA Business Reporter
Council to mull 8-storey structure on retail stretch

http://thechronicleherald.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/ch_article_main_image/articles/pp010612Quinpool2.jpg
Pedestrians cross the street in front of 6112 Quinpool Rd. in Halifax on Friday. (PETER PARSONS / Staff) .

Several businesses will need to find a new location if a proposed Quinpool Road development goes ahead.

On Tuesday, Halifax regional council will look at starting the process to amend its municipal planning strategy and land-use bylaw to permit an eight-storey, mixed-use building at 6112 Quinpool Rd., where businesses like Cyclesmith, Noble Grape Urban Winery, Atlantic Cat Hospital and Etc. Press Ltd. are currently located.

.....

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/49471-quinpool-businesses-face-displacement

[Northend Nerd]

I don't know if this has been shared yet, but Bobby Mac from Q104 has launched a Facebook group called "SCREW THE VIEW!! We want to join the 21st century in Halifax."

It was created Jan 4th and has 270+ members already. Here is the link.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/205066832916557/

[halifaxboyns]

I don't know if this has been shared yet, but Bobby Mac from Q104 has launched a Facebook group called "SCREW THE VIEW!! We want to join the 21st century in Halifax."

It was created Jan 4th and has 270+ members already. Here is the link.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/205066832916557/

There appears to be two different groups...because I joined one (which has 34 members) and then there is this one with 270+.

[-Harlington-]

Free parking in peninsular Halifax may end


Permits could be needed on eight streets in February
CBC News
Posted: Jan 9, 2012 8:50 PM AT
Last Updated: Jan 9, 2012 8:57 PM AT

The city charges commuters $60 per month to park on William Street, near the Halifax Common. The city charges commuters $60 per month to park on William Street, near the Halifax Common. (CBC)


It may soon be more difficult to find a free parking spot on the Halifax peninsula.

Right now, many downtown commuters leave their vehicles on residential streets that allow all-day parking at no charge.

But if Halifax regional council agrees to go ahead with changes, permits will be required on a total of eight streets. The permits would go on sale in February.

They would cost from $20 to $40 a month, except for residents who can park on their own street for $30 per year, Dave McCusker, HRM's manager for strategic transportation planning, said Monday.

"The rationale for doing this is really to have control on the parking on the street so that there is parking availability for the people who live on them," he said.

"A number of streets in high demand areas get saturated with parking and residents just simply can't find a space when they need it."

Right now, William Street, off of Robie Street, is the only street on the peninsula where permit parking is allowed. It costs $60 per month.

Todd Yeadon can't park near his home on Maynard Street because so many commuters take advantage of the free parking.Todd Yeadon can't park near his home on Maynard Street because so many commuters take advantage of the free parking. (CBC)Very few commuters find that to be much of a deal, so William Street is practically empty on a weekday.

Todd Yeadon lives a few blocks away on Maynard Street, where anyone can park free all day.

"We have a lot of commuters coming in here and not wanting to pay a dime," he said. "So, it ends up as a taxpayer and a homeowner on the street and community, I can't even park near my house, let alone sometimes even on my street."

So to accommodate homeowners like Yeadon and to make some money, the city is going to charge commuters to park on Maynard Street and six other streets on the peninsula including Woodill, Wright and Falkland.

Residents on those selected streets will pay $30 per year.

McCusker said the city thinks this will reduce congestion.

"The other message that this project is trying to put forward is that we would prefer people not to drive and to park downtown, and to use transit and park and ride or car pooling to get to work," he said.

The city is also dropping the price of the permit for non-residents from $60 to between $20 and $40 depending on how close the street is to downtown.

Bill Josef, who parks his car on Trollope Street, said he'd be happy to pay for this kind of permit, but it doesn't mean there would be a spot waiting for him.

"The thing I mind is there is no guarantee of a spot. So you could end up paying $40 and still not parking here. That would be a concern," he said.

Council wanted to have permit parking on 12 streets, but residents on those other streets voted against it.

[kph06]

Watts is currently speaking against the Quinpool Rd. project and basically said nothing over 6 stories should be allowed.

[Keith P.]

Watts is currently speaking against the Quinpool Rd. project and basically said nothing over 6 stories should be allowed.

Just shows that a person can have lots of book learnin' and still be an idiot. :koko:

[cormiermax]

I hope someone there put her in her place.

[someone123]

Did she explain why 8 floors are different from 6 or is she just adopting a symbolic "tough on development" stance to please her constituents?

[kph06]

Did she explain why 8 floors are different from 6 or is she just adopting a symbolic "tough on development" stance to please her constituents?

I think she was looking back to HRM by Design notes and said the consensus though 3 or 4 floors was good for Quinpool, she thought that 6 would be the max for the area. She "feared" this would be another St. Joseph's development - so I guess that's a development that is proposed at a resonable height but then people like her sling mud at it till it is shrunk? I had to go out after she spoke, but quickly saw that Sloane thought it should go to public consultation, which is reasonable. Consultation however will for sure bring out the Pacey's, they live on Yukon St., so actually somewhat in their neighborhood compared to their other vendetta's. Either way, it made it beyond this round.

According to Tim Bousquet's live-tweeting of council (which is skewed to his biases, but still a useful way to follow it if I can't watch it live) - Hensbee thought it should be taller.

[someone123]

Quinpool shall be a playground for Jennifer Watts types, with 3 storey buildings, bike lanes, maybe some traffic calming, half-empty walkable schools for the kids. They can buy up the empty lots and turn them into parks. Everybody else can pay their taxes and then go f*ck themselves.

What a crew!

[RyeJay]

This modest proposal of 8 floors is actually grounds for Watts to be grateful. She needs to be reminded of the many who'd love to see Quinpool with towers. She needs to also be reminded of the economical and environmental demand for Quinpool to host much, much more density.

Though Quinpool's businesses are mainly supported by the two large residential areas they exist between, I hope it is seen more that this clientele is not opposed to modest height: certainly not a mere 8 floors. Even I am frustrated that the height allowances for Quinpool Road are shorter than those of the downtown.

Question:
Why are people concerned about temporary shadows a mid-rise building would cast upon a low-rise building across the street? Adjacent residential homes behind the low-rise buildings have nothing to worry about, because the brave low-rise buildings are bearing the brunt of the evil shadows.

8 floors is too short.

[cormiermax]

I agree 8 floors is far too short. They should be looking at something it the 20 range, specially for a prominent site on Quinpool.

[halifaxboyns]

Did they at least go ahead with initiating the proposal?

[Phalanx]

I, unfortunately, actually live in her district. I sent a (polite) email asking for an explanation of her position on this one just for fun. We'll see if I get a reply.

[Aya_Akai]

I noticed this this evening while I was walking home from a friends house in Colby Village, at the corner of Caldwell and Hampton Green

http://halifax.ca/planning/Case17343Details.html

4 story seniors apartment complex attatched to a church, nothing too out of the ordinary, I have a funny feeling it's going to look just awful when it's finished.. we can hope for a good finish, right?.. lol.. it'll certainly bring about change to that area, with it being hovering right over the current colby plaza Zellers- soon to be walmart.

[kph06]

Did they at least go ahead with initiating the proposal?

Yes, this got the green light. I was shocked she would try to stop it this early.

[halifaxboyns]

Yes, this got the green light. I was shocked she would try to stop it this early.

I'm not, this isn't the first time she's tried to stop something. I believe she tried to stop the YMCA application too. This whole process to initiate an application doesn't make a lot of sense to me. In many other cities, once someone submits a complete application for rezoning or special development provisions (with fees) that process starts. Council only gets involved at the end when a decision is needed.

[someone123]

Years ago the PCC could do this to ALL peninsula developments, including large downtown developments of regional importance. Dawn Sloane blocked the original brewery tower, for example, and then the system was changed so that all of regional council could vote on higher-valued projects.

I think the whole system is flawed since a big part of the development process is higher-level regional planning objectives. TYou cannot accomplish goals like mitigating suburban sprawl if development practices are determined by NIMBYs. You can set targets and guidelines but if the individual developments are all killed of one reason or another then the whole process fails.

Local feedback should be included but the residents in one area shouldn't have veto power over everything built there because of their councillor. That is very close to being the situation in some areas where community councils require only 2 "no" votes from councillors (Sloane + Watts -- anybody want to check their voting record?) to stop a proposal dead in its tracks.

[someone123]

Apparently council also rescinded the St. Pat's sale. Bonus points if HRM bureaucrats somehow eventually find a way to sue the developer.

The city has now managed to create three fiascos in one small neighbourhood:

-Jazz condos
-Gottingen subsidized housing hold ups
-St. Pat's

My belief is that whatever success has been experienced on the peninsula over the last few years has happened more in spite of the city's municipal government rather than because of it. It is hard to over-emphasize how petty, disorganized, and incompetent the city appears.

[resetcbu1]

Especially like an area like the city's north end, this part of town can really benefit from some quality developments and all the city seems to do is systematically reduce the chances of any of these quality developments taking place, although there was a lot of outcry from residents of that area over the saint Pat's thing , I'm not sure why, misinformation is the only thing I could imagine?:koko:

[haligonia]

I think there was some sort of law that requires the city to offer surplus municipal buildings (schools) to community groups/non profits before selling it. I could be wrong, but this is what I've come to believe after hearing a bit of information.

[someone123]

The whole thing is a little vague. Apparently the city doesn't have to go with an offer from a community group but they are supposed to entertain proposals from them first..? Sounds like a feel-good rule rubber stamped by council.

In either case somebody has dropped the ball -- they may or may not have followed their own procedures and in either case they are flaking out on the developer. Yet another sign for developers to be wary of HRM deals.

[Keith P.]

I think there was some sort of law that requires the city to offer surplus municipal buildings (schools) to community groups/non profits before selling it. I could be wrong, but this is what I've come to believe after hearing a bit of information.

It's not a law. However, HRM has a policy that states that interested community groups must have an opportunity to decide if they wanted to make a proposal on the property. This is where it gets murky. Our esteemed mayor states that staff did indeed meet with said groups as per the policy. Said groups also submitted multiple proposals, which were subpar compared to that of the Metleges. On the basis of staff evaluation, the Metlege proposal was recommended, approved by council, and then an attempted motion of reconsideration was dealt with and voted down A SECOND TIME. The way HRM works, that is supposed to be it, game over.

That is when Rev. Britton, a.k.a. the mouth that roared, played the Africville card and our inept council folded like a house of cards. Outside of any known process or rule under the HRM Charter, they passed a motion last night to rescind the original decision, which is procedurally impossible. Good luck with that lawsuit, HRM. Shameful.

Seemingly unquestioned in all of this is the role of the area councillor, Dawn Sloane, who from all appearances sat on the sidelines watching Coronation Street and sipping tea while receiving progress reports on all of this and doing nothing to ensure the community groups were heard. Naturally, she is now leading the charge to throw staff under the bus.

Once again HRM Council manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

[haligonia]

Thanks for the clarification!

[FuzzyWuz]

....That is when Rev. Britton, a.k.a. the mouth that roared, played the Africville card and our inept council folded like a house of cards. Outside of any known process or rule under the HRM Charter, they passed a motion last night to rescind the original decision, which is procedurally impossible. Good luck with that lawsuit, HRM. Shameful.


I think it was quite inappropriate of her to bring up Africville in that context. People living in Africville were kicked out of a community and their former homes were bulldozed. This school is empty. Nobody lives there! And the community groups coveting the site do have homes at the moment. Maybe they're too small. Everyone wants a bigger space than the one they have. But to compare this to what happened back in the sixties is to belittle what happened back then. Shame!

[Waye Mason]

Flawed analysis.

If the development proposal solicitation had been weighted to bonus support for those community groups, then maybe Mic Mac Friendship, Childcare, North End Clinic, even Direction 180 could have been moved off of Gottingen, freeing up 3-5 major store fronts/properties for re-development.

They didn't follow their own policy.

This process was done wrong from start to finish. HRM staff need to be fired over this.

I am glad to see council overriding staff on this.

[spaustin]

The whole St. Pat's sale is a massive failure to be innovative and make the most of public resources. Putting aside the rhetoric, the charities really can't take on the school property. It's too big and has too many problems. It would likely bankrupt them or at least take away from the good work they're doing (the $200,000 heating bill alone would mean a lot less help for the community). That said, why does it have to be all or nothing? There is surely an option to redevelop the site and meet the charities needs. Below-market space could be reserved in the redevelopment as a condition of the sale or HRM could have split the site so that a portion was reserved for the charities. As Waye points out, if we had been a little creative, we could have sparked redevelopment of multiple other properties on Gottingen producing an even bigger long-term benefit for the city. HRM needs to stop making this stuff up as they go along and start following a clear set of rules so that everyone knows what to expect. The Provincial and Federal governments have very clear rules and processes for surplus properties. Why is it still amateur hour over at City Hall?

The thing that I keep coming back to on this story is the stark contrast to the sale of the Sister Lots off Spring Garden. Wasn't preserving parking capacity part of the condition of that sale? It's pretty sad when our municipal bureaucracy can take the time to protect surface parking spaces, but can't be bothered to look out for the needs of the less fortunate.

[someone123]

That said, why does it have to be all or nothing?

The sale was not all or nothing. The Jono proposal that was selected included 5-10% affordable housing and 5-10% community space. That is a substantial investment for a developer to take on when acquiring a site like this and may be higher in value than the buildings themselves, which as you say don't quite fit the needs of these nonprofits.

[JET]

Flawed analysis.

If the development proposal solicitation had been weighted to bonus support for those community groups, then maybe Mic Mac Friendship, Childcare, North End Clinic, even Direction 180 could have been moved off of Gottingen, freeing up 3-5 major store fronts/properties for re-development.

They didn't follow their own policy.

This process was done wrong from start to finish. HRM staff need to be fired over this.

I am glad to see council overriding staff on this.

Waye, from reading all the news on this, your summary is spot on. HRM did not follow their own policy.
Re Affricville, the comparison is legit. If you don't think so read Don Clairmont's book.
It is a large site with not just one building. It doesn't have to be all or nothing; it could be a win-win for community groups, the developer and the city

[Waye Mason]

Ultimately, St Pats/Alex school, the 1970s part, probably needs to be torn down. It is the same era of crappy construction that Bloomfield was built in, an d that building is largely beyond practical renovation and repair. Maybe the 100 year old original building could be renovated, it has some nice features.

But that isn't really the point, the point is staff has to follow policy. Butts blew it on this one.

A better approach to this development could have avoided all these issues and solves several problems in the neighbourhood at once.

I wrote about it here (http://halifax.openfile.ca/blog/curator-blog/exclusive/2012/hrm-misses-point-st-patsalexandra-decision), and here. (http://halifax.openfile.ca/blog/curator-blog/exclusive/2012/waye-mason-windows-are-closed-again)

[someone123]

Has anybody actually found this policy? What is the exact wording? The details are sketchy partly because much of the information surrounding this is not public, but the policy wording is something factual that could be added to the debate.

Many of the arguments against the sale that I have seen conflate what the arguer thinks ought to have been done with what they think the required procedure was. Those are two separate things. Procedural error does not follow from establishing that Gottingen's inhabitants were wronged in the past or that the street could benefit from moving nonprofits to the new site.

Waye, your articles are interesting and I find the history of this area fascinating but as far as the procedural part goes your claims come off as hearsay. If you're going to assert that somebody did something wrong and then later post on an internet forum that staff should be fired you should probably be carefully backing up your claims, at the very least by providing a passage from HRM policy and preferably by getting an expert to interpret it.

[Keith P.]

Has anybody actually found this policy? What is the exact wording? The details are sketchy partly because much of the information surrounding this is not public, but the policy wording is something factual that could be added to the debate.

Many of the arguments against the sale that I have seen conflate what the arguer thinks ought to have been done with what they think the required procedure was. Those are two separate things. Procedural error does not follow from establishing that Gottingen's inhabitants were wronged in the past or that the street could benefit from moving nonprofits to the new site.

Waye, your articles are interesting and I find the history of this area fascinating but as far as the procedural part goes your claims come off as hearsay. If you're going to assert that somebody did something wrong and then later post on an internet forum that staff should be fired you should probably be carefully backing up your claims, at the very least by providing a passage from HRM policy and preferably by getting an expert to interpret it.

First, you need to review the staff report that led to the original (and in my view, proper) decision to sell the site to Jono:

http://halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/111213ca1019.pdf

Next, one needs to understand the policy. I have not been able to find a complete copy, but have pulled these extracts from another site:

The Municipality shall make every effort to dispose of surplus schools in a timely manner, preferably by sale. Sale of a surplus building on the open market at full value must always be considered a desirable option, and not seen as a last resort, only to be pursued if the property cannot be used by the Municipality for its own purposes, or made available for community use.


The section in bold type is poorly written and can be interpreted in many ways. I read the section after the second comma as being an example of what should NOT be done.

Third, it is Sloane and Watts and reporters like Bousquet who are contending that staff did not follow the above-noted policy. Consider the sources and take that for what it is worth.

Finally, keep in mind that there are whispers that Mr. Mason has aspirations to be a candidate for council himself and this is a convenient issue for him to raise his profile with.

[someone123]

Thanks for the link. I have not seen any proof that the sale was carried out improperly or that the nonprofits should have gotten bonus points in the scoring. In a few cases people have also claimed that the nonprofits were not given an opportunity to present proposals. That is false according to the report.

The idea that these lots should go to public uses doesn't make a ton of sense. There is an attitude that these buildings are all "free", amazing opportunities and belong to the residents of the neighbourhoods they are located in. None of these assumptions are very reasonable.

More fundamentally it's very unfortunate that so many people in Halifax have such a sense of entitlement and that the municipal government is one of the worst in the entire country. As a result, a lot of business is driven away and everybody loses, including those who simply want entitlements, because there is little money to go around. Uniacke Square is not going to be fixed by handing mouldy old buildings and empty lots over to nonprofits -- that will just perpetuate the ghetto situation by scaring away investors like Jono that actually have the means to improve big blocks of the city. At best the Reverend et al. are setting the neighbourhood up for a pyrrhic victory.

This is a bit of a tangent, but I'm pretty interested in starting a (tech) business someday and I've sort of entertained the thought of moving back to Halifax. It would be an uphill battle compared to here (and Vancouver is much worse than the Bay Area). Imagine being successful and having to quickly grow a company there, only to have the Paceys or "Africville 2!!" crowd come out. I guess the suburbs are an option, but then what really is the point of moving to Halifax, particularly when the commercial tax rates are some of the highest in Canada?

Similarly imagine the thinking of skilled person who might work for the city. Why apply to work for the HRM? Presumably their pay sucks and periodically you'd have councillors and Waye Mason calling for you to be fired basically regardless of whatever your real performance was. Christ. Why bother?

This is how cities get stuck with economies in the doldrums and how big institutions become cults of ineptitude. Sometimes I think it's getting better in Halifax and other times I don't. Atlantic Canada still has a negative reputation and much of it is deserved.

[Waye Mason]

1 - Well, I think Keith's assessment is wrong, though he didn't have all the information.Here is the policy (http://www.thecoast.ca/general/pdfs/StPats.pdf), there is all sorts of direction in there, but especially read the flow chart in Attachment 3 (last page) and see for yourself.

2 - I may well run for office, I would think being an active community member and commentator for almost two decades would be a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. I've never said I would never run for office, in fact, I've said that I am exploring running for council on Rick Howe about 5 months ago.

3 - Let me clarify - I actually defended the professionalism of staff on CBC yesterday. A lot of staff are dedicated and hard working. I think senior staff who signed off on this may need to be replaced, especially if they are involved in other policy lapse embarrassments that have recently plagued this municipality.

[fenwick16]

HRM needs more Councillors representing 21st century progressive viewpoints. I wish some of the local-area developers and more businessmen would start running for HRM Council (cheers to all the Councillors who regularly advocate growth and prosperity in the HRM).

[Keith P.]

1 - Well, I think Keith's assessment is wrong, though he didn't have all the information.Here is the policy (http://www.thecoast.ca/general/pdfs/StPats.pdf), there is all sorts of direction in there, but especially read the flow chart in Attachment 3 (last page) and see for yourself.

I have read the entire document. I do not see any variance from the policy in the process that was followed. It seems quite clear that sale of the property at market value is the preferred option, with community groups being given the chance to build a business case of their own. This was apparently done given that 3 such comunity proposals were received.

2 - I may well run for office, I would think being an active community member and commentator for almost two decades would be a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. I've never said I would never run for office, in fact, I've said that I am exploring running for council on Rick Howe about 5 months ago.

3 - Let me clarify - I actually defended the professionalism of staff on CBC yesterday. A lot of staff are dedicated and hard working. I think senior staff who signed off on this may need to be replaced, especially if they are involved in other policy lapse embarrassments that have recently plagued this municipality.

A true politician's answer. :sly:

[DigitalNinja]

Ugh, sometimes I wish people who ran for office, went in with their own opinions and did not feed off someone else, and weren't afraid of backlash. So what if the community wants a decrepit church now, the city doesn't have much money and the sale of any land that WILL generate tax revenue in my view is a good thing. Private investment needs to come to a neighborhood before any of the community investment. Otherwise it will just fall back to the state it was in before.

I also find it annoying as hell, that we keep hearing from the same counselors in the media. Does no one else carry a voice?

The africville comment was unneeded. By the time every minority group has their say we might as well be run by a native American tribal group since that is the way it was before.

Humans as a species that has adapted to major change in the past seems to have an uncanny ability as to resisting slight change or taking things as they come and looking towards the future.

[someone123]

Just saw an ANS bulletin about a tender for the demolition of the Bioscience building.

They pointed out again that Ben McCrea stated last year that his development of the site is 5-10 years off. Will the WDC wait for this? They did not wait for Salter.

If there's so little demand, why aren't they switching to apartments like other developers? Some developers seem to adapt (Fares with King's Wharf) whereas others sit on land waiting for their plan to become viable.

[Keith P.]

I also find it annoying as hell, that we keep hearing from the same counselors in the media. Does no one else carry a voice?


This one is interesting because the 2 who have been most vocal on this are Sloane and Watts. Watts has been carrying the ball for a couple of reasons: first, she is against development and it was likely that the Jono proposal would have resulted in something over a couple of floors in height, so she sees that torpedoing the sale is a way to cut that off at the pass. Plus she is a lefty and these are her people who are crying. The other interesting thing here is that Sloane is taking an unaccustomed back seat on this compared to her normal mode. She typically never saw a microphone or TV camera she didn't like - and in fact she was on CBC TV tonight talking about a local procurement policy, wearing her HRM jacket with the embroidered city crest and "Councillor Sloane" custom-embroidered on it as well - one wonders how much that cost us all. Interestingly, that interview was done in front of her taxpayer-subsidized house.

Anyway, she is notably quiet on this issue because it appears she was asleep at the wheel (or perhaps off doing an interview) when she should have been working with these community groups to assist them in the proposal process. There was an article in AllNS today where Uteck blamed Sloane for the whole debacle. Of course Uteck has a motive for that since there is a chance they will be opposing each other at election time. Regardless though, it was refreshing to see someone shining some light on this question for a change.

[fenwick16]

Compared to some Councillors, Councillor Sloane actually seems to be somewhat pro-development.

[kph06]

Compared to some Councillors, Councillor Sloane actually seems to be somewhat pro-development.

The only buildings I can remember her talking positively about before they were approved were the TD building on Spring Garden, Fenwick Reno and the Citadel Hotel.... all shoe-ins to get approved. She was the only vote against the Trillium. The only thing I think she is, is pro-reelection.

[haligonia]

Sloane is pretty fickle, and seems kind of unintelligent. Watts will beat her in the next election.

[Dmajackson]

Sloane is pretty fickle, and seems kind of unintelligent. Watts will beat her in the next election.

I just had a look at the new districts and most the west-end is getting lumped in with the north-end along with north downtown. I don't know exactly where Watts lives of course but I believe this will throw three of the Peninsula Councillors into one race. If Watts if east of Oxford Street it will be a battle between her Blumenthal and Sloane for District "8".

I really hope Watts battles Blumenthal and Sloane moves south to fight for the downtown district. Seeing Uteck and Watts beating anti-everything Sloane and Blumenthal would be awesome!

Whatever happens my area should be interesting to watch. I live right next to the intersection of three districts at the moment.

[mcmcclassic]

I know that these photos aren't from Halifax, but I thought that you guys may be interested in seeing them. These are photos I took over the past week down in Dunedin, New Zealand (I'm here doing a study exchange). One of the things that has impressed me about this city is its impeccable ability to preserve its heritage buildings. Many of the buildings in downtown Dunedin were built prior to 1900 and continue to be occupied to their full potential, as well as remain aesthetically pleasing on the outside.

Dunedin has many features similar to Halifax:
- City is on the ocean
- Its a university/student city
- One of the main drivers of the economy aside from the university is the tourism industry
- The downtown is compact and the majority of the people live in the "burbs"

If a city of 130,000 like this one can take such care of its heritage buildings, I don't see why a bigger (and much busier) city like Halifax has to let its few heritage treasures waste away.

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6808/sam0477b.jpg

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3510/sam0456u.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9240/sam0466c.jpg

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/80/sam0516k.jpg

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/738/sam0520a.jpg

http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/4081/sam0522z.jpg

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1535/sam0523b.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/4994/sam0524k.jpg

[someone123]

I don't think Blumenthal will be running this year.

Heritage buildings are really a matter of priorities. It's always easy for owners to come up with reasons why it's not financially feasible to save them, but the larger social value should be taken into account. The cost is not actually very high in a growing city because the stock of heritage buildings is relatively small.

[fenwick16]

I know that these photos aren't from Halifax, but I thought that you guys may be interested in seeing them. These are photos I took over the past week down in Dunedin, New Zealand (I'm here doing a study exchange). One of the things that has impressed me about this city is its impeccable ability to preserve its heritage buildings. Many of the buildings in downtown Dunedin were built prior to 1900 and continue to be occupied to their full potential, as well as remain aesthetically pleasing on the outside.

Dunedin has many features similar to Halifax:
- City is on the ocean
- Its a university/student city
- One of the main drivers of the economy aside from the university is the tourism industry
- The downtown is compact and the majority of the people live in the "burbs"

If a city of 130,000 like this one can take such care of its heritage buildings, I don't see why a bigger (and much busier) city like Halifax has to let its few heritage treasures waste away.

Thanks for the pictures. I think if those buildings existed in Halifax then they would be protected - there are many significant heritage buildings in Halifax that are being protected.

Many of the old buildings in Halifax that were torn down look like the ones below or worse (posted by kph06 in the Found Photos thread - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=147357&page=15). Other heritage buildings burnt to the ground because fire was a major threat in the 1800's and early 1900's because of non-existent fire safety building codes. Many Northend heritage buildings were destroyed by the Halifax Explosion.

Should buildings like the old Chronicle Herald Building have been saved; or should the Roy Building be saved?

I wish Scotia Square was built differently to maintain more of the original street structure but many of the buildings were just wooden tenements. Most of those buildings weren't worth keeping, but there might have been a few.

Honestly speaking, I don't see many heritage buildings being destroyed in Halifax. One that should be protected, in my opinion, is the old Halifax Forum; it will be 100 years old in another 18 years.

I have been looking through the HRM online archives and have found many interesting photos, here are a few:

http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5006588_cr6-024_across%20from%20scotia%20sq_april%201978.jpg

[Empire]

I know that these photos aren't from Halifax, but I thought that you guys may be interested in seeing them. These are photos I took over the past week down in Dunedin, New Zealand (I'm here doing a study exchange). One of the things that has impressed me about this city is its impeccable ability to preserve its heritage buildings. Many of the buildings in downtown Dunedin were built prior to 1900 and continue to be occupied to their full potential, as well as remain aesthetically pleasing on the outside.

Dunedin has many features similar to Halifax:
- City is on the ocean
- Its a university/student city
- One of the main drivers of the economy aside from the university is the tourism industry
- The downtown is compact and the majority of the people live in the "burbs"

If a city of 130,000 like this one can take such care of its heritage buildings, I don't see why a bigger (and much busier) city like Halifax has to let its few heritage treasures waste away.


http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3510/sam0456u.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9240/sam0466c.jpg

http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/4081/sam0522z.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/4994/sam0524k.jpg

Thanks for the photos, it's always nice to see a city proud of its heritage. I think these are similar to what you see in Halifax. Hopefully our remaining heritage buildings can be preserved. The problem in Halifax is that there are a number of buildings with significance historic and architectural merit that are not protected at all. Unless a building is a registered heritage property it can be altered or demolished as soon as the permit is issued. The registered heritage buildings are not completely protected either. A registered heritage building can be demolished.

The heritage stock in Halifax is now low enough that major tax breaks should be implemented for owners of registered heritage properties.
(I would suggest that the tax rate for a registered heritage building be at least 50% less than the current rate) These tax breaks would come with conditions to ensure the properties are maintained and kept authentic and of course no demolition would be possible.

Many buildings fall through the cracks like the brick row houses on South St. that were demolished with little or no pushback. The block that houses the BMO building on Spring Garden Rd. is of immediate concern. If it too slips through the cracks the whole block could disappear.

South St. row houses demolished Nov. 2011: Photo by Empire
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q7/empire1_2007/IMG_3551.jpg

[Keith P.]

Actually those Dunedin buildings look far more interesting in terms of design than most of the old structures in Halifax. There are some that are similar to St. Mary's, and to some of the old Victorian houses in the south end, but some of the other large buildings in the pics have no equivalent in Halifax. Most old Halifax buildings are wooden, 2-story structures of minimal interest that have no reason to remain. If Halifax had any number of architecturally interesting large stone buildings like those in Dunedin I would agree they should stay. But those are not what the argument usually involves.

[q12]

Has anyone seen this new Google maps app called History Pin?

http://www.historypin.com/

It's pretty cool you can blend google streetviews from today with old pictures of Halifax. Here is one of Argyle Street in 1892 with today.



http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/751/oldhfx.jpg

http://www.historypin.com/photos/#/geo:44.648444,-63.575486/zoom:17/date_from:1840-01-01/date_to:2012-12-31/fs/sv:1883054/heading:334.59750/pitch:8.75750/sv_zoom:0.00000/

[Jstaleness]

Just a bit of personal news. I'm going back to work after I took parental leave for the last 9mos. Looking forward to bringing as many site photos as I can grab each day.

[fenwick16]

I really hope Watts battles Blumenthal and Sloane moves south to fight for the downtown district. Seeing Uteck and Watts beating anti-everything Sloane and Blumenthal would be awesome!


Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

[Keith P.]

Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

Nothing specific. A few years ago we taxpayers paid to send her on a trip to Sweden and she came back all enthused about the 6-storey wood-frame structures she saw there. That is the only thing of any size I have ever heard her speak favorably about.

[Wishblade]

Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

She is definately anti development but especially for her district which unfortunately resides on the penninsula. She's far worse than Sloane in this regard in my opinion. Maybe she'd be better suited to being the councillor for the eastern shore or something.

[someone123]

There are different levels of heritage buildings.

The most important examples in Halifax are buildings like Province House or the Bank of NS. Those are protected and have been fairly well-preserved inside and outside. They are of national cultural and historic significance and stand out even compared to many other cities.

A step below are buildings like Morse's Teas, the nicer commercial buildings on Barrington, Keith Hall, etc. I think those should still mostly be preserved (at least on the outside), and there are enough of them that the cost to the city is reasonable. These buildings are still very exceptional within Canada, and in some cases they have a unique regional style you can't find anywhere else.

A step below that we have more run-of-the-mill brick buildings. There's a value to preserving these in order to maintain the integrity of old streetscapes, but I also think many are a great candidate for adaptive reuse. An example of this would be Barrington Espace, which is a great arrangement. The inner parts will be modern and useful but we will still have the outer facades, which were as far as I know 90% of the heritage value of those buildings.

South Street was in a range where you couldn't claim that the buildings were landmarks, but you could argue that they help establish the character of the city. It would have been better to reuse them in some way, but I don't think they needed to be perfectly preserved. It would have looked great to have the facades and some townhouses in front of a newer midrise or highrise building.

The modest wooden box type housing in a lot of the city is not really of much heritage value. I suspect they are loved mostly because people prefer them to some new building designs. There's no particular reason why they can't be replaced with higher-quality buildings.

[Empire]

A typical building that really defines Halifax is the brick building at SMU on the corner of Inglis and Tower Rd. This type of building doesn't seem to get much recognition in Halifax. This particular building might be torn down to make way for SMU redevelopment.

Brick buildiing should be saved:
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=en&ll=44.63324,-63.578146&spn=0.000958,0.001789&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=28.297189,58.623047&vpsrc=6&hnear=Halifax,+Halifax+County,+Nova+Scotia&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.633334,-63.578125&panoid=2aKG_2OGvD4_iZ2aWImX4Q&cbp=12,282.48,,1,-5.56

There are many examples of single family residences that should be protected as well.

This Italianate design on Inglis is one that should be protected at all cost.
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=en&ll=44.634274,-63.576344&spn=0.000958,0.001789&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=28.297189,58.623047&vpsrc=6&hnear=Halifax,+Halifax+County,+Nova+Scotia&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.63424,-63.576466&panoid=RC3ci3b6ZMKDYL0OZAEugw&cbp=12,178.82,,0,-22.5

The best example of Italianate architecture was on Tower Rd. near Inglis. The building was around 10,000 sq. ft. and was a teriffic estate until it was demolished so the Highfield Park garbage shown here could be built.
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=en&ll=44.634765,-63.578012&spn=0.000958,0.001789&sll=49.891235,-97.15369&sspn=28.297189,58.623047&vpsrc=6&hnear=Halifax,+Halifax+County,+Nova+Scotia&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.634858,-63.578028&panoid=5FINuV9l7nI9EXBHnABX4A&cbp=12,227.29,,0,0

[fenwick16]

There are many significant heritage buildings in Halifax. Here is a link to a photo tour by isaidso (there are 7 pages of pictures of heritage buildings): http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898

I think Halifax has done well at keeping many of its worthwhile heritage buildings. However, without destroying significant heritage buildings, I want to see more significant buildings in Halifax, including modern skyscrapers.

[coolmillion]

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors. I see her at all kinds of events and public meetings and she seems genuinely interested in connecting with her constituents and representing their perspectives at Council.
I believe she is supporting the proposed redevelopment of the strip mall on Young Street.

[Keith P.]

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors.

For a smart person, she sure supports all sorts of dumb causes.

And while she may be "engaged" with her constituents (when are they getting married?), it would appear the majority are a bunch of NIMBYs who want nothing to ever change in their district or, for that matter, on the peninsula. That is a non-starter.

It would sure be refreshing to have councilors who ask the question "How can we make this project happen?" instead of "How can we stop this project?"

[Empire]

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors. I see her at all kinds of events and public meetings and she seems genuinely interested in connecting with her constituents and representing their perspectives at Council.
I believe she is supporting the proposed redevelopment of the strip mall on Young Street.

Most of the facts that Watts recites are for the purposes of promoting anti-development. She doesn't want development over 4 storeys anywhere near her. She may connect with her constituents but it is for the same old anti-development campaign or more specifically NIMBY.

Watts made the comment that the additional 3 floors at the old Bay building would create traffic and parking issues. You can see from that statement that see doesn't think outside the anti-development in my backyard box.

How much traffic was generated by the Bay store and does she not know that there is a massive parking garage built into that building, not to mention parking behind it? This site is also footsteps from a major transit hub (Mumford Terminal) and has endless busses at the front door. This is exactly what she should be promoting.

She is also anti-stadium because her district needs new playgrounds.

[coolmillion]

For a smart person, she sure supports all sorts of dumb causes.

And while she may be "engaged" with her constituents (when are they getting married?),

Engaged in the sense of "involved with", which I'm sure you know was what I meant...

[RyeJay]

Engaged in the sense of "involved with", which I'm sure you know was what I meant...

He does.

When one hasn't much fodder on-topic...

[RyeJay]

How much traffic was generated by the Bay store and does she not know that there is a massive parking garage built into that building, not to mention parking behind it? This site is also footsteps from a major transit hub (Mumford Terminal) and has endless busses at the front door. This is exactly what she should be promoting.

I agree with your impression of her, especially with her stance on the Bay.

Going taller at this location should be an absolute given. Often, criticism of higher developments is based on a lack of public transportation.

[Keith P.]

He does.

When one hasn't much fodder on-topic...

Well, we can always count on you to criticize, can't we? A real Johnny One-Note.

"Engaged" has become one of those trite, over-used bits of corporate-speak, like "accountability", "game-changer", and "team player".

Next, please.

[someone123]

Watts may personally be wonderful and she may attend an impressive number of tea parties and little league games but her stance on development issues is completely unreasonable.

I think that councillors should be removed from the case-by-case development approval process. They make it far too political and it is absurd to expect individual developers to have to go through years of negotiation for some of these proposals. It's also very unfair how these are always upwards battles, with NIMBY groups demanding excessive restrictions ahead of time.