General Updates and News

[Colin May]

Increasingly there is development on the peninsula and there will be growing trip demand within that area. I'm not sure the city has an answer that is a fit for the scale of development and planning density increase over the longer term. Active transportation can be a part of it but not 100% modal share for the new trips.

Again I don't understand the objection that ferries are not going to by themselves solve the transportation problems of the metro area. This kind of thinking always seemed emblematic of how little regional transportation planning happens in Halifax. There will have to be many projects that suit different areas and different kinds of trips. The framework should be cost-benefit and alternatives, not "does this project solve transportation".

My posts on this subject are about the electric ferry, not other possible ferry routes. HRM has not studied the Bedford to Halifax electric ferry proposal. Once you get into the data you realise what a waste of time and money the electric ferry would be. HRM doesn't want to publish data because the public would see that this notion is a waste of money. If you support the electric ferry ask your councillor for all the details.
Herring Cove location is at Eastern Head on this electronic chart ...http://fishing-app.gpsnauticalcharts.com/i-boating-fishing-web-app/fishing-marine-charts-navigation.html#13.16/44.5754/-63.5464 and south of the DND or SW of Mars Rock

[someone123]

As far as funding from the federal government goes... isn't that a good thing for Halifax? :shrug: I mean, won't those funds just go to another municipality in another province if Halifax doesn't use them?

In many countries there are showcase projects that are meant to evaluate new technologies in practice or are simply viewed as nice amenities where they are built. A lot of high speed rail, streetcars, and so on fall somewhere in these categories. Sounds like this project in Halifax would tick both boxes. While there are studies of these projects ahead of time their level of success is not possible to predict and many of them are not net cash generators. Usually only a small percentage of the overall budget is spent on these projects and they don't affect overall finances much.

People in Halifax can fight against any non purely utilitarian federally funded project if they want but as you suggest they'll just be built somewhere else. The federal government won't be cutting taxes just for Halifax. My impression is that there is an appetite for better and nicer transit and a nicer public realm with more urbanity in Halifax, particularly in younger demographics, while naysayers have a disproportionate voice. An example of this is how the media in Halifax for years made it sound like everybody hated highrises and there was even something a little suspicious or corrupt about the city letting developers build on land they bought, while the average local consulted was a prof and future defined benefit pensioner living in a million dollar Victorian in the South End (not that I'm condemning this group, but they ain't the typical resident of the city). :haha:

[OldDartmouthMark]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/housing-is-both-a-human-right-and-a-profitable-asset-and-thats-the-problem-172846

Housing is both a human right and a profitable asset, and that's the problem

Brian Doucet, University of Waterloo

It seems like everyone is talking about housing these days. For many, it is in a state of crisis. But for others, it is a market doing exactly what it should be doing: making money. The crux of the housing problem is that it is both a basic human right and a commodity from which to extract wealth.

Most housing debates largely ignore this contradiction. Those who oppose new developments and those who believe we need more housing both focus on numbers, design, zoning and density. These perspectives miss key questions about housing for whom, against whom, who profits and who is excluded.


Point well taken, but I think everybody understands what the commodification of housing has done to our housing situation (not only Canada's either)... but we still need to have places for people to live.

So, while government (mostly the feds?) needs to dig into the causes and solutions to the commodification/investment/laundering problem, there still needs to be places for people to live.

Therefore, increasing housing supply has to help to improve the situation... which makes me wonder what folks would consider a better alternative.

On that note, as long as it took to put together, I'm thinking that perhaps the Centre Plan needs some major changes to increase height limitations everywhere, but especially on the peninsula. IMHO it could be the quickest, easiest way to add housing units that are needed... yet we still seem to be stuck in some idea that increasing density through building height will ruin the city. I really don't get it... All those years to create a plan that basically cripples growth in the part of the city that needs it the most...

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Oh I'm all for taking as much cash as the Feds want to give. But why shouldn't the city benefit? Why should federal cash be wasted when it could be put to good use? We could retire the disel ferries and electrify the whole ferry fleet. That'd be a better use of the $ and perhaps lesson air pollution. We could put a ferry terminal near Herring Cove and another at Shannon Park both of which would actually be used. It just doesn't make much sense to run a ferry route parallel to the Bedford Highway and parallel to the 102 and parallel to a rail corridor that may someday be a rail transit corridor.

[Colin May]

Oh I'm all for taking as much cash as the Feds want to give. But why shouldn't the city benefit? Why should federal cash be wasted when it could be put to good use? We could retire the disel ferries and electrify the whole ferry fleet. That'd be a better use of the $ and perhaps lesson air pollution. We could put a ferry terminal near Herring Cove and another at Shannon Park both of which would actually be used. It just doesn't make much sense to run a ferry route parallel to the Bedford Highway and parallel to the 102 and parallel to a rail corridor that may someday be a rail transit corridor.
Go down to Herring Cove and observe the sea state - wide open to weather systems and guaranteed to induce vomiting. The Halifax ferry terminal ramp has problems after several years because of the sea state....the Dartmouth ferry terminals do not have the same problems because they are more protected. And underground transit is not feasible...removing rock is very expensive. The future lies off peninsula,the rest of HRM where 80% of residents live, not to mention those who commute from outside HRM. A couple with 2 kids don't want a condo/apartment on the peninsula and they cannot afford such a place.
Herring Cove is on this chart..at Eastern Head south of the green circles of DND ... http://fishing-app.gpsnauticalcharts.com/i-boating-fishing-web-app/fishing-marine-charts-navigation.html#12.62/44.5863/-63.5410

[IanWatson]

We could put a ferry terminal near Herring Cove and another at Shannon Park both of which would actually be used. It just doesn't make much sense to run a ferry route parallel to the Bedford Highway and parallel to the 102 and parallel to a rail corridor that may someday be a rail transit corridor.

Shannon Park has been on every map of the proposed fast ferry system that I've ever seen. Seems like Mill Cove will be first because it's needed now and will lay the groundwork for the overall system, and then Shannon Park will be added as development occurs there.

[Keith P.]

I recall a conversation with the Deputy to the Premier many years ago where he decried the billion or so dollars put on the NS debt chasing what he called 33-cent federal dollars. The problem was (as he saw it) that those projects represented fed priorities, not our most pressing needs. But it was a difficult thing to argue against and saying "Well, if we don't do it here, the money will just go somewhere else" was usually the fallback position. So we ended up with roads to nowhere (or likely troublesome and unreliable electric ferries) and the like, plus all the long-term costs of maintaining whatever it was we bought.

To me the only sensible thing would be to have a credible group identify those transportation options offering the best bang for the buck, be it BRT, LRT, monorails, gondolas, whatever, and then stick to whatever mix is deemed best. Going for every bright shiny object dangled in front of us or succumbing to the power of special-interest lobby groups be they entrenched interests, activists, or whomever, is the best way to get on the road to ruin. Get a plan, stick to it long-term, and don't be swayed.

[MonctonRad]

To me the only sensible thing would be to have a credible group identify those transportation options offering the best bang for the buck, be it BRT, LRT, monorails, gondolas, whatever, and then stick to whatever mix is deemed best. Going for every bright shiny object dangled in front of us or succumbing to the power of special-interest lobby groups be they entrenched interests, activists, or whomever, is the best way to get on the road to ruin. Get a plan, stick to it long-term, and don't be swayed.

Well said.

I imagine the solution will be multifactorial:

- Ferries for the Halifax/Dartmouth route, and as a niche solution for those living near Mill Cove.
- LRT/Trolleys for the peninsula
- Commuter rail for the main transit corridor along Bedford Basin, Sackville, Windsor Junction and Enfield
- BRT for the inner suburbs

No one solution will please everyone, but together, we may be able to prevent Halifax from suffocating itself. I predict that commuter rail will end up being the heavy hitter in this solution however.

[teddifax]

The overhaul has to be done from outside interests. This will be truly the only way to be objective in an effective transit system upgrade. Also, this group has to have the power to have their suggestions actually completed. Consider it like binding arbitration in a labour dispute.... the outcome has to be accepted by all sides, city and labour, as well as the citizens.

[TheNovaScotian]

The future lies off peninsula,the rest of HRM where 80% of residents live, not to mention those who commute from outside HRM. A couple with 2 kids don't want a condo/apartment on the peninsula and they cannot afford such a place.


“Statistics Canada recently ranked growth in downtown Halifax as number one in the entire country between 2016 and the end of last year. The overall population grew by 9.1 per cent and downtown Halifax grew by 26.1 per cent,” Mr. Sullivan says."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/industry-news/property-report/article-office-and-industrial-markets-strive-to-keep-up-with-halifaxs-rapid/

[someone123]

“Statistics Canada recently ranked growth in downtown Halifax as number one in the entire country between 2016 and the end of last year. The overall population grew by 9.1 per cent and downtown Halifax grew by 26.1 per cent,” Mr. Sullivan says."

Impossible to know what will happen in the future but I think it's pretty clear the growth is continuing beyond 2021 and there was probably less growth toward the beginning of the census period. It's plausible that there will be 10,000 more people living on the peninsula in the next 5-10 years and they will be disproportionately likely to get around on transit or via active transportation.

It looks like development in Dartmouth is picking up too.

[Querce]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FLKxxaSVgAM0Rlr.png

wow, imagine the population of the peninsula growing by 10 000 people in just 5 or 10 years. Wow, how crazy that would be.

[Good Baklava]

Point well taken, but I think everybody understands what the commodification of housing has done to our housing situation (not only Canada's either)... but we still need to have places for people to live.

So, while government (mostly the feds?) needs to dig into the causes and solutions to the commodification/investment/laundering problem, there still needs to be places for people to live.

Therefore, increasing housing supply has to help to improve the situation... which makes me wonder what folks would consider a better alternative.

On that note, as long as it took to put together, I'm thinking that perhaps the Centre Plan needs some major changes to increase height limitations everywhere, but especially on the peninsula. IMHO it could be the quickest, easiest way to add housing units that are needed... yet we still seem to be stuck in some idea that increasing density through building height will ruin the city. I really don't get it... All those years to create a plan that basically cripples growth in the part of the city that needs it the most...

One key point of the article is that investor demand is not the same as those who need to live in the units, causing the wrong types of units to be built. A tentative strategy has been to mandate X amount of family sized units, which I know Montréal has done for some time.

[atbw]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FLKxxaSVgAM0Rlr.png

wow, imagine the population of the peninsula growing by 10 000 people in just 5 or 10 years. Wow, how crazy that would be.

Last time we got swaths of CMHC housing too, a ton of which is still around...and a lot of which now sells for $400,000+.

[someone123]

One key point of the article is that investor demand is not the same as those who need to live in the units, causing the wrong types of units to be built. A tentative strategy has been to mandate X amount of family sized units, which I know Montréal has done for some time.

In China there is allegedly an extreme version of this where builders sell condos on paper which may never be built to habitable standards at all. In Vancouver we saw shades of this with condo towers with very shiny marketing and weren't all that desirable but were very pricey and sold out instantly in pre-sales. Supposedly some would be marketed first in places like Hong Kong and would be bought sight unseen. This seems to have peaked maybe around 2016 or so. Since then many regulations have come in.

(A Hong Kong resident often wasn't a "foreign buyer" according to the definition used. Meng Wanzhou, the Huawei CFO who is now back in China, was a "local buyer" at one time in Vancouver, and owned a real estate portfolio in the tens of millions. Not sure how much this happens these days or how much it affected NS.)

There are many people out there who literally buy as many condos as they can get financing for, then they rent them out. They do not pick them according to what they want to live in, they pick them according to the projected financial payoff. In fairness this usually includes renting but the tenants have extremely limited options in many cases and just put up with what housing they can afford. In Vancouver the fit between the type of housing unit, services, and tenant is often poor. I could see this happening in Halifax since it's now a "get rich quick" market.

[Good Baklava]

There are many people out there who literally buy as many condos as they can get financing for, then they rent them out. They do not pick them according to what they want to live in, they pick them according to the projected financial payoff. In fairness this usually includes renting but the tenants have extremely limited options in many cases and just put up with what housing they can afford. In Vancouver the fit between the type of housing unit, services, and tenant is often poor. I could see this happening in Halifax since it's now a "get rich quick" market.

Wow, we agree for once! :haha: While this has become the norm in the GTHA and Vancouver I can definitely picture it creeping into Halifax..

[OldDartmouthMark]

One key point of the article is that investor demand is not the same as those who need to live in the units, causing the wrong types of units to be built. A tentative strategy has been to mandate X amount of family sized units, which I know Montréal has done for some time.

Even if investors prefer 1 bedroom or studio-sized condos, I'm wondering if requiring more family-sized units would really make a difference, as prices are increasing across the board. I mean, larger investment, but also larger profit? Maybe some investors would be out, but then again the housing being sped up by the NS government (the topic that prompted my original comment which led to this discussion) isn't small condos for the most part.

One does have to wonder what the tipping point will be. I don't have an answer, though I'm sure there is tons of speculation out there.

A very sad state of affairs. Sometimes (often, like every day) it disturbs me, how much the world can suck...

[someone123]

There was another great Noticed In Nova Scotia post and it included a shot of the new parkade with some art installed. There is some discussion of the secrecy around the parkade development.

It's interesting to me that there was an expectation that this structure would be ugly and was a kind of "necessary evil", yet this screen seems to add a lot of visual interest. One could imagine more art like this, more colour, and maybe some lighting. Parkades do not have to be ugly.

I wonder if anybody will talk about a do over for the MetroPark? What could happen there if you gave some artists a budget to use it as a canvas?

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2022/04/IMG_3020.jpg
https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/2022/04/noticed-good-news-triggers/

[atbw]

There was another great Noticed In Nova Scotia post and it included a shot of the new parkade with some art installed. There is some discussion of the secrecy around the parkade development.

It's interesting to me that there was an expectation that this structure would be ugly and was a kind of "necessary evil", yet this screen seems to add a lot of visual interest. One could imagine more art like this, more colour, and maybe some lighting. Parkades do not have to be ugly.

I wonder if anybody will talk about a do over for the MetroPark? What could happen there if you gave some artists a budget to use it as a canvas?

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2022/04/IMG_3020.jpg
https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/2022/04/noticed-good-news-triggers/

This is quite interesting. I think it'll really matter when viewed at street level, but I think there is a way to make a parking garage not awful. Some greenery wouldn't hurt, either, but this is worlds better than the faux-parthenon of MetroPark.

[hfxsky]

This was discussed here back in February though I'm not sure what came of the appeal. The existing house on the property was demolished but the lot was only graded and no activity on site since then.

This lot, along with five neighbouring properties on Bayer's Road are now listed for $5.5m: https://www.remaxnova.com/multi-family/halifax-real-estate/6471-6445-bayers-road-halifax-mls-202125690

The listing notes the Corridor zoning and that there are initial plans for a 108 unit building with five commercial spaces.

Update on this one, looks like they've firmed up on the assembly for $4.5m: https://www.viewpoint.ca/cutsheet/202126501/1

Sold to Oliver Andrew Gorski of Connect East Development (https://rjsc.novascotia.ca/e-commerce/company/3330110). It looks like this will be their first project ever, and that the two owners (and really the only two employees) of the company are pretty "green" – certainly ambitious.

Will be curious to see how they navigate the Bayers widening plus dealing with a transition line with the Roslyn R-2 homes on the other side – will be an interesting one to watch!

[teddifax]

I wonder if they widen the street, will any developer get density bonusing, allowing more height?

[pblaauw]

There was an excavator....excavating...at the site across from the Barrington Superstore, when I went by on Wednesday. Is that the building with the mansard roof y'all don't like?

[Keith P.]

Made a rare visit to the Dutch Village Rd/Joe Howe Dr area yesterday and was astounded. Dutch Village Rd sadly still looks like a street in an unincorporated municipality with no sidewalks or curbs in some areas which is astonishing. I guess Coun. Cleary doesn't get there very often or at least doesn't care about those constituents. Parts still remain somewhat shabby but even in those there are a few new apartment buildings that have gone up right to the ROW line as per HRM practice, which I will never understand. They are 3 or 4 floors high, but thankfully with a bit of design to them and not Highfield Park Specials. Still a ways to go but it is improving slowly.

Joe Howe Dr in that same stretch is really changing fast. The new build by Fares on the corner of Bayers Rd that replaced the postwar little brick apartments looks really good and is many times larger than what it replaced. They are working on the exterior and it retains some red brick as a homage to what was there. The development diagonally across from it at the intersection is now complete of course and looks really good. As was noted by others there are 4 other developments underway further north on both sides of the street. On the east side the houses on the corner of Scot St have all been cleared and the resulting land assembly next to the Superstore awaits construction to begin. Across the street that large development is underway, and further north the Interchange project is up and finishes appear to be getting started. I think it is the smallest of the ones I saw. Quite the remarkable change in the area!

[fatscat]

Made a rare visit to the Dutch Village Rd/Joe Howe Dr area yesterday and was astounded. Dutch Village Rd sadly still looks like a street in an unincorporated municipality with no sidewalks or curbs in some areas which is astonishing. I guess Coun. Cleary doesn't get there very often or at least doesn't care about those constituents. Parts still remain somewhat shabby but even in those there are a few new apartment buildings that have gone up right to the ROW line as per HRM practice, which I will never understand. They are 3 or 4 floors high, but thankfully with a bit of design to them and not Highfield Park Specials. Still a ways to go but it is improving slowly.

Joe Howe Dr in that same stretch is really changing fast. The new build by Fares on the corner of Bayers Rd that replaced the postwar little brick apartments looks really good and is many times larger than what it replaced. They are working on the exterior and it retains some red brick as a homage to what was there. The development diagonally across from it at the intersection is now complete of course and looks really good. As was noted by others there are 4 other developments underway further north on both sides of the street. On the east side the houses on the corner of Scot St have all been cleared and the resulting land assembly next to the Superstore awaits construction to begin. Across the street that large development is underway, and further north the Interchange project is up and finishes appear to be getting started. I think it is the smallest of the ones I saw. Quite the remarkable change in the area!

Hopefully Dutch Village will look less decrepit by the end of this year, given they should be starting the enhancements (https://www.shapeyourcityhalifax.ca/dutch-village-road) soon.

But yes, the Joe Howe stretch is reminding me of what happened on Adelaide/Richmond in Toronto when I lived there. No life/pedestrians/housing 60km/h artery for traffic transformed into a strip full of residential, restaurants, and bike lanes (!). It's still 5-10 years away from that possibility, but that'd be nice to see.

[RoshanMcG]

I'm not sure if this development has a thread. This is near the corner of Bayers & Oxford:

http://i.imgur.com/VCcKe9N.jpg (https://imgur.com/VCcKe9N)

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

I see that the JJ Mart building on Gottingen St has a pending offer after just two days on the market and being offered at $1.7m. I wonder how long before this lot gets redeveloped into a taller apt. building? The lot is just 5k sq/ft or so so perhaps that smallish footprint limits height? Currently there are a number of one bedroom (likely cheap) apartments on the two floors above the ground level retail. No doubt it was a fine looking building in its day but in the context of how the street has been developing something funky modern might be a better fit.

[TheNovaScotian]

I see that the JJ Mart building on Gottingen St has a pending offer after just two days on the market and being offered at $1.7m. I wonder how long before this lot gets redeveloped into a taller apt. building? The lot is just 5k sq/ft or so so perhaps that smallish footprint limits height? Currently there are a number of one bedroom (likely cheap) apartments on the two floors above the ground level retail. No doubt it was a fine looking building in its day but in the context of how the street has been developing something funky modern might be a better fit.

Sadly, we will see this torn down for 3 more stories as the height limit in this "Corridor" is 20m......

[Keith P.]

Nothing really sad about this. It has vinyl siding, after all... :P

This is also the home of the old Farm Assist weed emporium so it is good to see that go as well. I wonder if the Kit Kat pizza shop next door, another vinyl siding eyesore, will be part of what happens here. Being in what has remained a very sketchy section of the street, the heritage value of these is low to none.

[Aegon123]

I noticed more homes near the latest demos on Robie Street fenced in and being stripped down. Strange though as in one spot it looks like only one home and the other spot looks like two or three homes are being torn down.

I am sad as I quite liked that part of Robie Street across from Camp Hill. I am okay with demolition of certain areas if there is a net win, but the prospect of more vacant lots sitting idle for years while new applications go through the process is just disheartening. Halifax has too many empty lots as it is, and as soon as one is filled in another is opened. I think better coordination is needed - if you are going to tear down buildings, you must have approval and be able to start construction within a six month window. Maybe that might improve things a bit?

[Drybrain]

I noticed more homes near the latest demos on Robie Street fenced in and being stripped down. Strange though as in one spot it looks like only one home and the other spot looks like two or three homes are being torn down.



Where are these exactly?

I noticed a news story mentioning houses at the corner of Binney being readied for demolition. If that's the case, it seems plausible that Tsimiklis has designs to tear down and replace the entire block.

Though I'm not at all on board with the Larry Haiven/Peggy Cameron line of thinking on this (essentially, all demolitions are bad and Robie should be forever untoiuched) I don't at all love the idea that an entire block can be razed and replaced by whatever Tsimiklis--already a bit of a civic villain for his Young Street demolitions--has in mind. Making things worse is the fact that the zoning here permits three storeys max, meaning the density boost isn't even going to be that significant.

[Aegon123]

Unfortunately, I don’t remember off the top of my head but it’s definitely in that area between Coburg and Jubilee. Looking at Binney Street, I do think it’s in that general area. I’ll try to remember to take a photo next time I’m down there.

[Drybrain]

If we were to see, say, an unbroken row of three or four-storey stacked townhouses or apartments along that entire block, tripling or quadrupling the existing density, and built to a reasonably high architectural standard, I could live with this kind of thing, or even see it as a net positive. Given the developers' portfolio and reputation, I expect much less.

[RoshanMcG]

34Eleven (3411 Joseph Howe)

http://i.imgur.com/jDf4PQSh.jpg (https://imgur.com/jDf4PQS)

http://i.imgur.com/yGrN9Cxh.jpg (https://imgur.com/yGrN9Cx)

[someone123]

Mi'kmaw Native Friendship Centre to receive $5M in federal funding: https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/mi-kmaw-native-friendship-centre-receives-federal-funding-to-help-build-new-facility-1.5911089

[mleblanc]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but ZZap has a rendering for an 80 unit building behind the Thomson building on Barrington:

https://i.imgur.com/TAS2yEq.png

This, with their Waverly Inn addition will be a significant amount of infill for the area.

[someone123]

Interesting find. This one has been debated/planned for many years but I don't think I've seen renderings. There is a lot of construction planned for this area, and most of the proposals have an adaptive reuse component.

What I never hear about is proposed development for the parking lots around the Vic Suites. I think part of that used to be oil tanks and so may be difficult, but I don't think that is true of the Hollis Street lot.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

The former Humani-t Cafe on the corner of Agricola and Young is mostly demolished now. I stopped by the site this morning after a visit to Halifax Seed. Apparently we'll end up with a three story building with a law firm as the major tenant. Mixed use building with commercial. No residential. I havent' seen a rendering.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52092711867_b4b216bab4_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nnfLmB)20220523_113643_HDR (https://flic.kr/p/2nnfLmB) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52094237600_a2c3db41bc_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nnozUm)20220523_114149 (https://flic.kr/p/2nnozUm) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

[Dmajackson]

^ Bruno Builders (https://www.instagram.com/p/CciU3nrsar4/) has a rendering on Instagram.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I hadn't realized that they closed that location. Too bad. Used to go there quite a bit before the pandemic hit.

Can't see the rendering as I don't have (and don't want) an Instagram account.

Oh well, law firms need a place to practice as well. Hopefully it will be an attractive building.

[Keith P.]

Don't worry, Mark, it's a pretty unremarkable rendering.

Seeing the picture of the site I was fearing that the new building was going to keep that second-floor balcony, but it appears not. That thing was hazardous to the cranium. The diagonal braces caught many a passerby right in the noggin.

[coastalkid]

Exterior podium for 'the muse' on Spring Garden appears complete:

https://i.imgur.com/ty4Iji2h.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/JbpJRXuh.jpg

Before:

https://i.imgur.com/nIhAe5Dh.png

[Aegon123]

I walked by and noticed some large equipment and workers on the empty lot behind Underground Snacks. Not sure that I’ve seen any applications or renderings for this spot, so maybe they are using it to store equipment for a nearby site?:shrug: Maybe Skye? Not holding my breath though!

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Hopefully they will restore trees to the planters in front of the Muse.

[Keith P.]

I saw a promoted post for The Muse (I think on FB) so I clicked the link to go to the website. Most units, even the 2BR ones, are quite small. In many of them the LR/DR areas are combined and appear to be very tight. Rents are in the $2000/mo range give or take. Did not look particularly appealing to me. The work on the podium seems very quick and dirty as well. Hope I'm wrong.

[atbw]

The work on the podium seems very quick and dirty as well.

Probably looking to get as fast a turn around as possible into residential - would not blame them after the couple years office buildings have had.

[Hali87]

Recent Maritime Centre update:

https://i.imgur.com/s5kFPFr.jpeg (https://i.imgur.com/s5kFPFr.jpeg)

[MastClimberPro]

I saw a promoted post for The Muse (I think on FB) so I clicked the link to go to the website. Most units, even the 2BR ones, are quite small. In many of them the LR/DR areas are combined and appear to be very tight. Rents are in the $2000/mo range give or take. Did not look particularly appealing to me. The work on the podium seems very quick and dirty as well. Hope I'm wrong.

I can't imagine paying $2000 for an apartment of any size where I had no balcony and, by the looks of it, couldn't even open a window. There will likely be a few more office buildings going through this sort of conversion. Let's hope they aren't as half assed as this.

[teddifax]

I would love to see more pictures of the changes at Maritime Centre.

[Keith P.]

I can't imagine paying $2000 for an apartment of any size where I had no balcony and, by the looks of it, couldn't even open a window. There will likely be a few more office buildings going through this sort of conversion. Let's hope they aren't as half assed as this.

Here's the website with details:

https://muse.universalgroup.ca/

I was not totally accurate in my original post. It is the 1-bedrooms that are in the $2K/month rent range. The 2-bedrooms are $3K/mo or more.

[someone123]

I would not want to live in a building with no balconies and no opening windows but if they priced it too high they won't find tenants. Some people will probably value a prime location and are willing to make trade-offs.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Location, location, location.

[pblaauw]

Looks like Scotia Square is getting a makeover! (https://www.instagram.com/p/CeRhPF4JHuF/?hl=en)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Very interesting. More glass and less visible concrete should brighten it up a little! Lighting features help too.

Google maps perspective for comparison:
https://goo.gl/maps/ipYa5f9pAK39iTTT6

[mleblanc]

Still a street level dead zone along Barrington. Definitely an improvement, but damn, what a waste.

[someone123]

Still a street level dead zone along Barrington. Definitely an improvement, but damn, what a waste.

I've heard that part of the complex is full of mechanicals etc. that can't easily be moved (and the whole development assumed Duke would be the "front" side rather than Barrington; the Duke elevation has flaws but on the whole is not that bad).

That rendering has been around for many years and has the old version of Westhill on Duke, but hopefully the repost means the renos are about to happen.

There was this Scotia Square video from 2017:

tO5EARG7ihs

In it they show the Barrington building addition farther north that has now been built. I think that International Place concept is now outdated, but they did some land swapping so maybe there's another Crombie-owned spot for a similar tower nearby that leaves room for the planned public space.

[RoshanMcG]

There was this Scotia Square video from 2017:

tO5EARG7ihs


What ever happened to the Brunswick Tower proposal shown here?

[someone123]

What ever happened to the Brunswick Tower proposal shown here?

I haven't heard anything about it, but I'd guess it will happen eventually. It would be a big improvement for that area. I wonder if it is one of the old grandfathered DAs?

[someone123]

I lost the link but I saw comments that some construction-related activity is taking place on Maitland Street. Sounds like this development: https://compassnshomes.coop/maitland-street-development

[teddifax]

She is part of a new group against development... quelle surprise!!! https://halifax.citynews.ca/local-news/community-group-unveils-the-cost-of-rapid-development-in-halifax-5499088?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email
I hope this is clickable... if not it was under the Halifax City News.... I don't know how credible they are.

[Hali87]

^ I would be curious to see some of their proposed "options". The article makes it sound like the main alternatives to the current pace/nature of development are "less development" and "no development".

The reality is that we urgently need to find ways of improving the current systems while allowing for more units to be created at a higher pace and at lower relative costs than they are now, not ways of making development more desirable or urbanistically perfect than it currently is at the expense of all of those things. As imperfect as things are here, development standards are generally very high compared to the national average - actual design requirements are high, and developers/architects err on the side of trying to impress people rather than going with the bare minimum allowed, at least post-2000. The fact that HRM has turned out, on the whole, to be a very nice environment to live in is a big factor driving the affordability/availability problems. I'm not even sure that the current market is "overvalued", I think it was somewhat undervalued for the last couple decades and in that time there has been tremendous investment in the public realm and much higher standards for new developments, while violent crime rates have gone down relative to the national average. We've succeeded in creating an attractive city that a lot of people want to move to, and fewer people want to leave, but policy has not done a good job of responding to that, and I think the next big wake-up call will be this August/September as thousands of students start trying to move here again, only to find out the vacancy rate is effectively 0. I think this will turn out to be critically bad but hopefully it will spur increased housing development, policy changes, and ideally the universities themselves will build more student housing (or even on-campus housing for staff/faculty).

I wish that groups like this would change their tone a bit towards actively promoting things like backyard-and-secondary-suite-development (https://www.shapeyourcityhalifax.ca/allowing-secondary-suites-as-a-permitted-use) rather than their current focus on actively opposing everything else. I do think there should be more regulations on building demolition and lot consolidation but I don't really think there should be additional regulations on what can be built for at least the next several years. Or maybe I'm being unfair here and it's the journalists who always ask them the wrong questions.

[Colin May]

^ I would be curious to see some of their proposed "options". The article makes it sound like the main alternatives to the current pace/nature of development are "less development" and "no development".

" while violent crime rates have gone down relative to the national average. "

HRM is the most violent place east of Thunder Bay and has been for many years. We should not compare Halifax with the national average, we should compare Halifax with other urban areas. I have produced many graphs comparing rates with other cities since 1998. HRP has never published data and the provincial Justice Department does not publish the data but the Statistics section of the provincial Finance department has published data for recent years including a graph; see here and scroll down to the second last graph. The national average includes very violent places such as Yukon,NWT,and Nunavut. See here :
https://www.novascotia.ca/finance/statistics/archive_news.asp?id=17005&dg=&df=&dto=0&dti=12
or....
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3510002601&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.1&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=1998&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2020&referencePeriods=19980101%2C20200101
Hard to believe we are more violent than Montreal and Toronto. In recent years Brampton has become more violent with Indo-Canadian gangs fighting for supremacy.
We all know the fuss about street check data but what was missing in the report is as important as what was in the report. The report did not compare street check data with the days following a violent crime. I have the annual data and compared it with the number of homicides in other jurisdictions
And lastly, our solvency rate for violent crime is poor - for obvious reasons.
The Mayor never talks about crime and its roots and has never attended a Board of Police Commissioners meeting.

[atbw]

I think they resonate with folks who see these vacant lots and wonder "what's going on here?" But ultimately these are private properties owned by developers who are either tied up in other projects or are not in a financial position to develop these lots. There's no incentive to, and even if there was, are there any construction crews available?

What I've heard is that local developers are able to get some work done, and can chain projects together, retaining crews from one job to the next. With such a limited supply of labour, it's pretty hard to advance anything else beyond the current pace.

[atbw]

HRM is the most violent place east of Thunder Bay and has been for many years. We should not compare Halifax with the national average, we should compare Halifax with other urban areas. I have produced many graphs comparing rates with other cities since 1998. HRP has never published data and the provincial Justice Department does not publish the data but the Statistics section of the provincial Finance department has published data for recent years including a graph; see here and scroll down to the second last graph. The national average includes very violent places such as Yukon,NWT,and Nunavut. See here :
https://www.novascotia.ca/finance/statistics/archive_news.asp?id=17005&dg=&df=&dto=0&dti=12
or....
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3510002601&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.1&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=1998&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2020&referencePeriods=19980101%2C20200101
Hard to believe we are more violent than Montreal and Toronto. In recent years Brampton has become more violent with Indo-Canadian gangs fighting for supremacy.
We all know the fuss about street check data but what was missing in the report is as important as what was in the report. The report did not compare street check data with the days following a violent crime. I have the annual data and compared it with the number of homicides in other jurisdictions
And lastly, our solvency rate for violent crime is poor - for obvious reasons.
The Mayor never talks about crime and its roots and has never attended a Board of Police Commissioners meeting.

On this point, I wonder what context the actual area of HRM plays. More poor and rural areas seem to score higher on violent crime, like SK and NL. With so much of the actual HRM being rural, would that skew our crime stats whatsoever?

[Dartguard]

On this point, I wonder what context the actual area of HRM plays. More poor and rural areas seem to score higher on violent crime, like SK and NL. With so much of the actual HRM being rural, would that skew our crime stats whatsoever?

To answer the question NO. HRM has had a collection of the usual suspects from long standing communities for decades. I had long suspected that HRP knows what goes on but lets the usual suspects clean up their own business unless a civilian gets in the cross fire. That suspicion was confirmed while chatting with a local RCMP member of the combined RCMP/HRP Major crimes task force. The Feds contribute Ottawa paid for assets to the local knowledge of HRP to try to solve crime. My RCMP friend mentioned that the greatest challenge is HRP did not always share their intimate knowledge of the spider web of local crime activities and connections and they had a tendency to hold back when the paybacks started. Those violent paybacks bubble up about every 7-10 years.

[Colin May]

On this point, I wonder what context the actual area of HRM plays. More poor and rural areas seem to score higher on violent crime, like SK and NL. With so much of the actual HRM being rural, would that skew our crime stats whatsoever?
No. I studied the HFX CMA data
Plenty of shootings in Dartmouth and on the peninsula over the years. I have extensively studied the issue and my file is over 12 inches thick.
HRP has a crime map but does not show homicides.
Here is a link from February 2012 public meeting of the Police Commission : https://legacycontent.halifax.ca/boardscom/bpc/documents/120213bopc631.pdf .... not much has changed. The visual would be much the same today.
And then a February 26 2018 presentation from an RCMP officer re Trafficking of young girls and women : https://cdn.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/city-hall/boards-committees-commissions/180226bopc911.pdf
Mayor Savage shows no interest in the violent crime problem and does not want to talk about it and shows no leadership on addressing the matter in conjunction with the provincial and federal governments. The issue can be explained by poverty, families with no father present, poor educational outcomes and racism.
The trafficking of girls and women is well known in certain social agencies and has not changed (according to a recent conversation with a person involved in the issue)
The next Statscan release will be circa July 21. The data is also released with explanations and easy to follow graphs. Last year release of 2020n data here : https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2021001/article/00013-eng.htm

[Hali87]

HRM is the most violent place east of Thunder Bay and has been for many years. We should not compare Halifax with the national average, we should compare Halifax with other urban areas.

This is from a couple years ago: https://www.macleans.ca/canadas-most-dangerous-places-2020/. There were other cities east of Thunder Bay that were considered more violent that year, including Toronto and all 3 of the main NB cities. I haven't seen the 2021 stats but maybe they were radically different.

For context, there have been years in recent decades where Halifax was #1 on that list, and it was near the top for quite a while (though I'm sure you know this).

That's what I mean by "going down relative to the national average", not that it's a crime-free place by Canadian standards. It doesn't really have the reputation of being one of Canada's most dangerous cities anymore. Most of the cities that do are, as you say, in the west.

[LikesBikes]

Having no dog in this fight I've always heard Halifax is a very safe city and that's my on-the-ground impression also. Having lived across the country and in the US there are usually a couple of neighbourhoods I would not go to for safety reasons, and many places where my girlfriend would not be able to walk alone at night. So far I have yet to see anywhere like that here.

[Keith P.]

She is part of a new group against development... quelle surprise!!! https://halifax.citynews.ca/local-news/community-group-unveils-the-cost-of-rapid-development-in-halifax-5499088?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email
I hope this is clickable... if not it was under the Halifax City News.... I don't know how credible they are.

One of the principals named in the article is a member of this forum.

[IanWatson]

Development Options Halifax has been around for a little while. I believe they formed in response to the twin proposals at SGR and Robbie.

Peggy Cameron is not necessarily wrong about the environmental impact of development—we really should be talking about how much concrete we use and its CO2 impact—but she’s looking at it from too narrow of a viewpoint. Saying no to big buildings doesn’t mean they don’t happens, it means they happen out in far-flung areas where you cause even more CO2 for transportation purposes.

I like to think of development and planning like a pressure vessel. You can bleed the pressure off and direct it to do useful things; what you can’t do is close all the valves and turn your back on it while the pressure continues to build.

[eastcoastal]

Having no dog in this fight I've always heard Halifax is a very safe city and that's my on-the-ground impression also. Having lived across the country and in the US there are usually a couple of neighbourhoods I would not go to for safety reasons, and many places where my girlfriend would not be able to walk alone at night. So far I have yet to see anywhere like that here.

Violent crime doesn't impact everyone the same way. I generally feel safe (there have been a few instances where that feeling was proven to be false), but my understanding is that violent crime in Halifax tends to be targeted and the victims and perpetrators know one another. This doesn't mean it's *not* a problem but means that because I (and possibly you) don't know many perps or victims, we aren't likely to experience the *type* of violent crime that is most common in HRM.

[Drybrain]

Violent crime doesn't impact everyone the same way. I generally feel safe (there have been a few instances where that feeling was proven to be false), but my understanding is that violent crime in Halifax tends to be targeted and the victims and perpetrators know one another. This doesn't mean it's *not* a problem but means that because I (and possibly you) don't know many perps or victims, we aren't likely to experience the *type* of violent crime that is most common in HRM.

Exactly.

e.g., Statcan data shows that Halifax has higher crime severity than Toronto, but lower rates of gun crime (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2022001/article/00009/tbl/tbl03-eng.htm).

So what kinds of violent crime are we experiencing? Domestic violence? Sexual assault? Do we have more bar brawls?

It seems like in any city, your likelihood of experiencing violence has less to do with the city you live in and more to do with your specific life situation, economic circumstances, etc. Which isn’t to say we should ignore the fact that Halifax has a relatively higher violent-crime rate--that also allows those of us fortunate enough not to experience that violence to disregard the problem. But it’s not like people are being randomly attacked in the streets with regularity or anything.

[MastClimberPro]

Development Options Halifax has been around for a little while. I believe they formed in response to the twin proposals at SGR and Robbie.

Peggy Cameron is not necessarily wrong about the environmental impact of development—we really should be talking about how much concrete we use and its CO2 impact—but she’s looking at it from too narrow of a viewpoint. Saying no to big buildings doesn’t mean they don’t happens, it means they happen out in far-flung areas where you cause even more CO2 for transportation purposes.

I like to think of development and planning like a pressure vessel. You can bleed the pressure off and direct it to do useful things; what you can’t do is close all the valves and turn your back on it while the pressure continues to build.

Older building stock also has its own environmental costs - many are not energy efficient or oil burning, etc. On a per person basis I would have to imagine the residents of a large apartment block are consuming less energy than a couple in a single family dwelling (happy to be fact checked there). Not saying old houses have more environmental impact than apartment buildings, just saying that they aren't old stock forests or wetlands either. Unless you look at the city broadly it is difficult to grasp the true environmental cost/benefit.

I'm also struck by the personal narratives that are used by opposition to development. The story of walking around the city ("I'm just a simple low tech citizen") and being surprised by the disappearance/appearance of a building ("those developers are sooo sneaky") seems really loaded and irrelevant to me. Are we supposed to prioritize the imposition of variance on someone's daily stroll over the housing/business desires of hundreds of others? I seems so privileged to me. IMO

[someone123]

I'm also struck by the personal narratives that are used by opposition to development. The story of walking around the city ("I'm just a simple low tech citizen") and being surprised by the disappearance/appearance of a building ("those developers are sooo sneaky") seems really loaded and irrelevant to me. Are we supposed to prioritize the imposition of variance on someone's daily stroll over the housing/business desires of hundreds of others? I seems so privileged to me. IMO

It is motivated reasoning. You start by getting upset by something (e.g. SGR highrise proposal) then come up with reasons why it's bad (affordable housing, environment, heritage; take whatever people seem to be worrying about these days). The reasons aren't necessarily wrong but there are trade-offs in life -- as you say heating, transportation, etc. -- as well as agency and preferences of others. Maybe residents value modern units more highly than some of the older stock.

It's telling that you don't hear this group praising development of empty brownfield sites much or talking about how to thoughtfully increase density on underused sites like the SGR block. In the past they mostly wanted lowrise everywhere. I think this makes some of the issues they worry about worse as the development pressure moves elsewhere and more sites are developed. As IanWatson says, the pressure is directed, it doesn't just disappear if you ban construction on one block or in one neighbourhood.

I tend to think the city would be better off allowing finer grained small footprint development and making that more financially viable with taller height limits. In exchange there would be more preservation of existing stock. Think of the Press Block site for example where HRM demanded a square 9/10 storey building. The developer could have fit the same amount of space in a narrow tower along Barrington while fully preserving both heritage buildings but that was not permitted. Then we have the Cogswell area which will just be empty lots and the city is capping the heights and densities. Again, trade-offs. HRM decides that height limits come first, partly apparently because that has been seen as a prime lever for public input, and everything else follows.

[mleblanc]

Older building stock also has its own environmental costs - many are not energy efficient or oil burning, etc. On a per person basis I would have to imagine the residents of a large apartment block are consuming less energy than a couple in a single family dwelling (happy to be fact checked there). Not saying old houses have more environmental impact than apartment buildings, just saying that they aren't old stock forests or wetlands either. Unless you look at the city broadly it is difficult to grasp the true environmental cost/benefit.

I'm also struck by the personal narratives that are used by opposition to development. The story of walking around the city ("I'm just a simple low tech citizen") and being surprised by the disappearance/appearance of a building ("those developers are sooo sneaky") seems really loaded and irrelevant to me. Are we supposed to prioritize the imposition of variance on someone's daily stroll over the housing/business desires of hundreds of others? I seems so privileged to me. IMO

Agreed on all points. I find the issues they bring up interesting - it's definitely not something I think of when discussing development. I noticed Hadrian Laing mentioned in that article being a part of it, and he's in this forum, would be interesting to hear your perspective if you notice this!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Meh. Every group has a right to express their views, and it's always good to have a number of perspectives on any particular topic. All and all, though, stuff still gets built, and is being built (ref: cranes currently in the city), so I'm not sure that anti-development groups in Halifax are all that successful. It's been said on this forum that there aren't enough tradespeople to get everything done here anyhow, and the evidence is that there are lots of projects in the queue that have been empty lots for a long time, while demolitions are still continually occurring (probably the motivation for this group).

I'm actually surprised that there isn't a group lobbying to council to increase height limits and build more tall buildings to increase density and tackle the housing shortage thusly. There would be good arguments available to present (many of which have been presented already in this forum), and opportunities to get some media time to get the idea out there. Somebody should form a "friends of urban density" group, perhaps.

Complain all you want about Peggy Cameron... everybody is aware of her views, whether you agree with them or not. I say good for her to have the gumption to get her ideas out there and fight for what she believes in.

[TheNovaScotian]

I'm actually surprised that there isn't a group lobbying to council to increase height limits and build more tall buildings to increase density and tackle the housing shortage thusly. There would be good arguments available to present (many of which have been presented already in this forum), and opportunities to get some media time to get the idea out there. Somebody should form a "friends of urban density" group, perhaps.

Complain all you want about Peggy Cameron... everybody is aware of her views, whether you agree with them or not. I say good for her to have the gumption to get her ideas out there and fight for what she believes in.

Most people work all day and pay taxes. We expect the people paid to plan an affordable and attractive city to do so undeterred by reactionaries.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Most people work all day and pay taxes. We expect the people paid to plan an affordable and attractive city to do so undeterred by reactionaries.

I expect this too, and am not overly disappointed in how things are going for Halifax in reference to the rest of the country.

However some aren't happy and have the time to complain about groups who get their voice out there while they remain silent. Having a job and paying taxes is not an excuse, IMHO.

Life is hard. It's a fact. But you have to fight for what you believe in or be content in your silence.

[Empire]

Meh. Every group has a right to express their views, and it's always good to have a number of perspectives on any particular topic. All and all, though, stuff still gets built, and is being built (ref: cranes currently in the city), so I'm not sure that anti-development groups in Halifax are all that successful. It's been said on this forum that there aren't enough tradespeople to get everything done here anyhow, and the evidence is that there are lots of projects in the queue that have been empty lots for a long time, while demolitions are still continually occurring (probably the motivation for this group).

I'm actually surprised that there isn't a group lobbying to council to increase height limits and build more tall buildings to increase density and tackle the housing shortage thusly. There would be good arguments available to present (many of which have been presented already in this forum), and opportunities to get some media time to get the idea out there. Somebody should form a "friends of urban density" group, perhaps.

Complain all you want about Peggy Cameron... everybody is aware of her views, whether you agree with them or not. I say good for her to have the gumption to get her ideas out there and fight for what she believes in.

I think it has a really good ring! "The Friends of the Towers".

Build higher and reduce demolition and carbon footprint. Maximize a very small and restricted landmass by building a 35 storey building as opposed to an 8 storey building just to appease certain groups who want no development whatsoever. Restore architectural significant buildings and build much higher on vacant sites including the Cogswell lands & Shannon Park.

[someone123]

Every group has a right to express their views, and it's always good to have a number of perspectives on any particular topic.

This is true although I think the media presentation is often warped with journalists putting developers on the "pro" side and then hunting for citizens who are on the "anti" side, with some usual suspects being lined up to fill that role. The local media are weak when it comes to getting to the bottom of questions like housing affordability, really sketching out the trade-offs, or wider public opinion beyond the sound bites. In fact they don't do much analysis at all. And I think people are right to be skeptical when figures who have provided anti-development soundbites in the local media outlets for years promote material through these groups.

There is nothing wrong with the ideas being out there but once they're out they're open to respectful responses and critiques. Unfortunately I think the public debate is often really bad with some terrible tropes in municipal politics, one being the "housing affordability through banning expensive housing" plan, and another being vague environmentalist claims that only look at part of the picture.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I think it has a really good ring! "The Friends of the Towers".

Build higher and reduce demolition and carbon footprint. Maximize a very small and restricted landmass by building a 35 storey building as opposed to an 8 storey building just to appease certain groups who want no development whatsoever. Restore architectural significant buildings and build much higher on vacant sites including the Cogswell lands & Shannon Park.

:tup: That's what I'm talking about! :)

[Hali87]

https://i.imgur.com/CvA4g0B.jpeg

[Keith P.]

Meh. Every group has a right to express their views, and it's always good to have a number of perspectives on any particular topic. All and all, though, stuff still gets built, and is being built (ref: cranes currently in the city), so I'm not sure that anti-development groups in Halifax are all that successful.

Seriously? We have gone through decades of every proposed new development of any size at all being decried by various interest groups for being either "Too TALL!!" or too out of character or too big for the neighborhood or too much like Toronto. Proposals have been sawed off, made short and stubby, had features deleted to get under height limits, had finishes cheapened to make them financially viable at smaller sizes, delayed and delayed as they ground through a process seemingly designed to not allow anything different or new, you name it. All aided and abetted by a Council with exceedingly craven and inept members who get re-elected time and time again by citizens who are totally disengaged for the most part and vote based on name recognition alone, and by a lazy and none-too-bright local media who give the squeaky wheels like Cameron a disproportionately loud voice. The list of torpedoed developments is long and rather shameful.

Finally the pressure to build became too much and we are finally seeing some activity on that front at long last, but there remains an undercurrent that the media is only too happy to give voice to that this is bad. The Camerons and Ruffmans are still beating their drums despite aging out. The more scary thing is that from what I see on certain online spaces is that there is a new generation of loonies who have been molded by our education system to believe that govt owes them everything, from an inexpensive place to live to food and recreation and college degrees, all of which will be paid for by someone other than themselves since their prospects of gainful employment are slim to none. They become fertile ground for the same types of arguments made by the old anti-development types to grow and prosper, since clearly anyone proposing a development is evil in all ways, being "rich", probably a landlord, and hence an oppressor. It is sad.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Keith has summed it up pretty well. I don't want to be though of as a negative nancy (oops!, am I allowed to say that? I don't want to offend any of the nancys out there), but it seems folks are not learning to think for themselves these days and are instead just jumping onto any popular passing bandwagon without question. The local media prints mostly crap tailoring their content to what they perceive as popular hoping to attract (entertain) enough readers to stay in business. ...discouraging. Me: "Your view has changed since I was last here pre-covid." Dental Hygenist: "Oh, that building is just too tall". Me: "Why?" Dental Hygenist: ...blank stare.

[someone123]

https://i.imgur.com/CvA4g0B.jpeg

Nice picture. I think a lot of the blank concrete surfaces on a lot of concrete buildings could be improved with lighting displays. Scotia Square too. This is something that is still relatively new since modern LEDs are so much more flexible, powerful, and have low energy requirements.

I know The Doyle's architecture is not widely loved and the old buildings probably should not have been demolished as they were, but it does look to me like it has some nice medium scale massing. Hopefully The Mills will complement it well.

[OldDartmouthMark]

This is true although I think the media presentation is often warped with journalists putting developers on the "pro" side and then hunting for citizens who are on the "anti" side, with some usual suspects being lined up to fill that role. The local media are weak when it comes to getting to the bottom of questions like housing affordability, really sketching out the trade-offs, or wider public opinion beyond the sound bites. In fact they don't do much analysis at all.
There's no disputing that the days of good journalism seem to be mostly behind us, and the reasons are well-known for the most part. If we put aside potential conspiracy theories (there are already enough of them out there), the situation you describe should lend itself well to anybody pro-development/urban density/etc., if they can present their arguments clearly and factually. There would probably be some interest from the media in playing one side off vs the other.


And I think people are right to be skeptical when figures who have provided anti-development soundbites in the local media outlets for years promote material through these groups.
I agree, however I am also skeptical as to whether these soundbites result in great success for the "friends of" groups. I'd be happy to be proven wrong if some evidence could be presented.


There is nothing wrong with the ideas being out there but once they're out they're open to respectful responses and critiques. Unfortunately I think the public debate is often really bad with some terrible tropes in municipal politics, one being the "housing affordability through banning expensive housing" plan, and another being vague environmentalist claims that only look at part of the picture.
I'm not sure if there really is a public debate, other than perhaps the comments section below the articles, which I always take with a huge grain of salt.

[Colin May]

Media just need a larger Rolodex. The CBC has been bought off by Justin Trudeau - on P & P tonight they spent time talking about the USA abortion decision and ignored the RCMP Commissioner and the Portapique Inquiry shambles.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Seriously? We have gone through decades of every proposed new development of any size at all being decried by various interest groups for being either "Too TALL!!" or too out of character or too big for the neighborhood or too much like Toronto. Proposals have been sawed off, made short and stubby, had features deleted to get under height limits, had finishes cheapened to make them financially viable at smaller sizes, delayed and delayed as they ground through a process seemingly designed to not allow anything different or new, you name it. All aided and abetted by a Council with exceedingly craven and inept members who get re-elected time and time again by citizens who are totally disengaged for the most part and vote based on name recognition alone, and by a lazy and none-too-bright local media who give the squeaky wheels like Cameron a disproportionately loud voice. The list of torpedoed developments is long and rather shameful.

Finally the pressure to build became too much and we are finally seeing some activity on that front at long last, but there remains an undercurrent that the media is only too happy to give voice to that this is bad. The Camerons and Ruffmans are still beating their drums despite aging out. The more scary thing is that from what I see on certain online spaces is that there is a new generation of loonies who have been molded by our education system to believe that govt owes them everything, from an inexpensive place to live to food and recreation and college degrees, all of which will be paid for by someone other than themselves since their prospects of gainful employment are slim to none. They become fertile ground for the same types of arguments made by the old anti-development types to grow and prosper, since clearly anyone proposing a development is evil in all ways, being "rich", probably a landlord, and hence an oppressor. It is sad.

In my opinion, that's a bit of a stretch, Keith. It reads like a cool dystopian novel in the making (could even make it to the movie stage... maybe as a dark comedy), but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a direct link between Ms. Cameron and the Centre Plan, for example.

I agree with your assessment of the media, but they are mostly just repeating what's out there. Without some form of counterargument being in place (other than the developers' opinions, which would be viewed through the 'vested interest' looking glass), that's what you're going to read about in the media. It might sway some readers, but in my negative view of things I see most readers skimming the headlines, reading a sentence or two to get the flavour of it, and moving on... I get the feeling that not a lot of deep thought goes into it after that (as evidenced by the "comments" sections that most articles have at the end). Not much power over outcome yielded there.

IMHO, there are many knowledgeable posters on this board who could probably easily counter her arguments if they had the time to do it, but I completely understand the concept of life getting in the way of good intentions and higher ideals. It happens to most of us, actually.

However the 'squeaky wheel getting the grease' is not a new concept, so it wouldn't be surprising if somebody could present some evidence that 'friends of' groups actually cause change in direction. But as yet I have not seen such evidence, just a bunch of 'friends of' bluster, and a bunch of people who are annoyed about it, meanwhile the cranes are still working away and stuff is getting built.

[Hali87]

https://scontent.fyhz1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/291463300_1752434471766267_724753484468802109_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=a26aad&_nc_ohc=3KJwLQxl0CwAX-DhJ2S&_nc_ht=scontent.fyhz1-1.fna&oh=00_AT_ZWc-VUJLW4Kid4Tqae-I2o-wp43kMS2U_I6AdSvpYCQ&oe=62CB6389
Source (https://scontent.fyhz1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/291463300_1752434471766267_724753484468802109_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=a26aad&_nc_ohc=3KJwLQxl0CwAX-DhJ2S&_nc_ht=scontent.fyhz1-1.fna&oh=00_AT_ZWc-VUJLW4Kid4Tqae-I2o-wp43kMS2U_I6AdSvpYCQ&oe=62CB6389)

[RoshanMcG]

Will the white paint be the final product or are there any plans to paint a mural overtop?

[Empire]

Will the white paint be the final product or are there any plans to paint a mural overtop?

Blank wall works best.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Rent out the space for advertising?

https://d1fd34dzzl09j.cloudfront.net/Images/CFACOM/Stories%20Images/2015/07%20July/20%20Years%20of%20Cows/Water%20Tower%20copy.jpeg

Source (https://www.chick-fil-a.com/stories/inside-chick-fil-a/20-years-of-cows)

;)

[Keith P.]

Blank wall works best.

Large murals in public spaces are almost always a poke in the eye.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Interesting....a planter on Gottingen Street.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52201268779_df2e83a1c9_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nwR9xv)IMG-20220704-WA0000 (https://flic.kr/p/2nwR9xv) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52199999602_2807974b2d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nwJDg9)IMG-20220704-WA0001 (https://flic.kr/p/2nwJDg9) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

[Empire]

Interesting....a planter on Gottingen Street.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52201268779_df2e83a1c9_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nwR9xv)IMG-20220704-WA0000 (https://flic.kr/p/2nwR9xv) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52199999602_2807974b2d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nwJDg9)IMG-20220704-WA0001 (https://flic.kr/p/2nwJDg9) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

Much more thought than Spring Garden Rd.

Appears as though an attempt was made to cover up the unattractive exposed concrete planter.

[Keith P.]

Looks difficult to mow, however. :P

[Dmajackson]

Maitland Street Cooperative Housing (Compass NS Homes) is now under construction.

Website (https://compassnshomes.coop/maitland-street-development) if you need a refresher on the plans.

https://64.media.tumblr.com/3664666941ab538d010f44d80faf338e/c25682e366708d97-ce/s540x810/e36c48476f4c8cf0410eaf88732099055aa3bdb4.jpg
Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson) (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/)

[Northend Guy]

Looks difficult to mow, however. ������

Perhaps they will hire a pygmy goat.

[someone123]

Website (https://compassnshomes.coop/maitland-street-development) if you need a refresher on the plans.

I was a bit confused about this one. I thought phase 1 was the surface lot and phase 2 was the parking deck, and that the 2 separate buildings shown in the rendering were connected.

The gap between the buildings looks promising, like there will be a tiny block with a pedestrian area.

This is reminiscent of Ironstone Lane where there was an old lane that became a non-entity due to empty lots or surface parking, and may be resurrected. The floor plan shows "grade related units" on the Pickard Lane side.

It show just how much the complex urban fabric in the old parts of the city got trashed and simplified over time.

[atbw]

I was a bit confused about this one. I thought phase 1 was the surface lot and phase 2 was the parking deck, and that the 2 separate buildings shown in the rendering were connected.

The gap between the buildings looks promising, like there will be a tiny block with a pedestrian area.

This is reminiscent of Ironstone Lane where there was an old lane that became a non-entity due to empty lots or surface parking, and may be resurrected. The floor plan shows "grade related units" on the Pickard Lane side.

It show just how much the complex urban fabric in the old parts of the city got trashed and simplified over time.

One of my favourite things is looking at 'ghost streets' on Viewpoint - there's lots along Barrington between downtown and the MacDonald as well as a few on McNabs Island.

[kph06]

At one point I thought there was a thread for this, but I can't find it now. The long in the waiting site of "Cushing Hill" seems to be underway. Excavation has been chugging along for a few months. The issue was always access to this site bound by Oakmount Drive, Bedford Highway and the 102 (and ramps). I think a hotel was the original approval.