General Updates and News [Archive] - Page 117

robotropolis

Feb 16, 2024, 1:20 PM

This is the last day to email feedback on amendments to allow for more density as-of-right in Halifax! The usual suspects have staged a write-in campaign for less density. Share your thoughts at haf@halifax.ca.

As you know Halifax is under pressure to allow more density as part of the Housing Accelerator Fund agreement. You can see the amendments here:https://www.halifax.ca/about-halifax/regional-community-planning/housing-accelerator-fund.

Some of the notable amendments:

- Allow a minimum of four units in all low-rise residential zones in the Urban Service Area
- Permit more than 4 units per lot in the Regional Centre, including through internal conversion in some areas
- Increase the maximum height and gross floor area of accessory structures
- Increase maximum lot coverage in the Established Residential (ER) zones within the Regional Centre
- Increase max bedrooms in Er-2 and ER-3
-Increase max. height to 40 storeys and max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to 10 in most Centre (CEN) Zones
- Remove parking requirements for all residential development in the Regional Centre and Suburban Area

Sorry if this topic has been done to death - I did a search and didn't come up with much.

Kittle

Feb 16, 2024, 2:03 PM

Mason has already said he would run if Savage wasnt.

I cringe at the thought of Pizza Wars Waye being our mayor

Musquodoboit County

Feb 19, 2024, 2:39 PM

Musquodoboit County

Feb 19, 2024, 2:41 PM

A city should be viewed as a corporation

Saul Goode

Feb 19, 2024, 2:45 PM

A city should be viewed as a corporation

?

HRM is a corporation.

Saul Goode

Feb 19, 2024, 3:12 PM

Wouldn't it be nice if you got a vote for every piece of real estate you own in a municipality.

Thinking that through for about five seconds should make it clear what a total disaster it would be.

TheCuriousMind

Feb 19, 2024, 4:53 PM

Wouldn't it be nice if you got a vote for every piece of real estate you own in a municipality. That way people who actually have more investment in the municipality have more voting power. I can't stand people who are so anti development and somehow councils bow to them just so they can get their votes

In theory, if our city operates in a purely democratic manner, then the tides could be turned simply by those of us who are pro-development being more active in hearings, information sessions, etc in the way the NIMBYs are in order to demonstrate and represent the pro-development populus.

Giving the voting power to property owners is a terrible idea, however. Bear in mind property owners are increasingly large corporate entities optimizing for profit. This would likely just entrench those myriad issues that have already made life far worse for the average person in NS these past few years.

In my view, although our government would function better if it operated more like a company, it should be a company whose key performance metric is the quality of life of its citizens. Parametric analysis of the inputs that affect quality of life and their externalities should be paramount. Unfortunately, ineptitude abounds.

Dartguard

Feb 19, 2024, 5:05 PM

In my view, although our government would function better if it operated more like a company, it should be a company whose key performance metric is the quality of life of its citizens. Parametric analysis of the inputs that affect quality of life and their externalities should be paramount. Unfortunately, ineptitude abounds.[/QUOTE]

It seems to me that the present administration has worried a little too much about the tent folks but alas a National Music event is imminent so the front porch is being tidied up. I wonder why the old Nova Scotia Hospital has not been re opened to solve a number of our present problems. Hard roof shelter combined with close by professional mental health and dependency resources.
Seems like a DUH opportunity.

eastcoastal

Feb 20, 2024, 3:20 PM

But it doesn't stop some cyclists, it's crazy what weather some folks will bike in. :shrug:

Montreal just expanded its bixi bike share program into Winter. I wonder what the experience is there? Is it a response to the winter biking behaviour of non-bike-share-bikers? How many people take advantage of bixi in the winter, now that it's available?

Seems to me that people most prepared to bike in a Montreal winter would ALSO own their own bikes, but wonder if that's true.

LikesBikes

Feb 20, 2024, 3:31 PM

As winters get less and less snowy there are greater opportunities for people to continue biking year round. Canadian winters aren't what they used to be.

Drybrain

Feb 20, 2024, 4:43 PM

As winters get less and less snowy there are greater opportunities for people to continue biking year round. Canadian winters aren't what they used to be.

Absolutely, I don't know what these comments are about how crazy it is to bike in winter. It's hard to bike during an active snowstorm. That's about it. I biked from the far North End to downtown and back yesterday. It was pleasant and relatively mild, there was no problem at all when it came to weather. The real problem was haphazardly cleared bike lanes full of slush and snow boulders. That's not a seasonal problem, it's a problem of priorities. We wouldn't let the streets look like that days after a snowfall, why let bike lanes--essentially also a lane of traffic--look like that? Priorities.

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 20, 2024, 6:23 PM

The real problem was haphazardly cleared bike lanes full of slush and snow boulders.

Absolutely that's the problem. The cyclist that I mentioned in my previous post wasn't doing anything wrong, it's just that the lanes were narrowed because of the large snowbanks, so there was less room for all vehicles, plus it was dark which made it more difficult to see him (apparently for the driver behind me).

So no wonder that there was only 1 cyclist that I saw on the road, given the conditions.

That said, there are realities, such as after a large dump of snow, the first priority is to clear the roads as well as possible for the majority of users, which are cars and trucks. This is done by pushing the snow to the side, which invariably narrows lanes after a large snowfall. These lanes need to later be widened by use of a snowblower and dump trucks to haul it away, which obviously takes more time. This is for areas where a "bike lane" is just a painted line on the roadway anyhow.

For dedicated bike lanes, there's no excuse for them not to be cleared at the same rate as sidewalks, since the equipment used would be the same.

It sounds like, perhaps, more of a budget issue or a contractor equipment issue if the clearing isn't happening as quickly as desired.

One would think, though, that there would be somebody behind the scenes who might question why we need all this budget for the few cyclists who will use the lanes in the winter, without realizing that if they improve the infrastructure, they will get more cyclists, in theory at least.

Keith P.

Feb 20, 2024, 6:26 PM

Montreal just expanded its bixi bike share program into Winter. I wonder what the experience is there? Is it a response to the winter biking behaviour of non-bike-share-bikers? How many people take advantage of bixi in the winter, now that it's available?

Seems to me that people most prepared to bike in a Montreal winter would ALSO own their own bikes, but wonder if that's true.

I think that last point is correct.

Just yesterday I stumbled upon and watched a walkaround video on YT of the area of NYC encompassing 42nd St and 6th Ave. It was snowing and there was an inch or two on the ground. I believe NYC has a public E-bike program (they looked different from a Victorian bike) and the camera passed by what must have been a hub where they are available for use or returnable. There looked to be a hundred or so of them, all untouched and snow-covered, so many that the storage area was full. Nobody wanted to ride one in the snow and slop. Wisely, no doubt.

Keith P.

Feb 20, 2024, 6:36 PM

For dedicated bike lanes, there's no excuse for them not to be cleared at the same rate as sidewalks, since the equipment used would be the same.

After the first of the two big snow dumps we got in February it took HRM 4 days to clear the sidewalk in front of my house. I get that; it was a very large, heavy snowfall and since I had cleared a path to get to the street it wasn’t like my front door was totally inaccessible. But far more people use the sidewalks than do bike lanes. Sidewalks in most areas need to come first. In fact I wonder if any thought was ever given to declaring some sort of “snow status” when there’s a heavy snowfall, where certain sidewalks are declared temporarily OK for use by the few cyclists wanting to try to ride, and where pedestrians use that side at their own risk until the bike lanes are eventually cleared and the special status revoked. It would almost like a parking ban except with different provisions.

Antigonish

Feb 21, 2024, 12:46 AM

Do you think Andy Fillmore will resign as MP and run for mayor instead? If he does, what are people's thoughts on that?

Looks like he'll run

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/mp-andy-fillmore-considering-a-run-to-be-halifax-mayor-1.6776204

Who you got, Keith? Fillmore or Mason? Democracy is great (and hard choices!)

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 21, 2024, 5:14 AM

After the first of the two big snow dumps we got in February it took HRM 4 days to clear the sidewalk in front of my house. I get that; it was a very large, heavy snowfall and since I had cleared a path to get to the street it wasn’t like my front door was totally inaccessible. But far more people use the sidewalks than do bike lanes. Sidewalks in most areas need to come first. In fact I wonder if any thought was ever given to declaring some sort of “snow status” when there’s a heavy snowfall, where certain sidewalks are declared temporarily OK for use by the few cyclists wanting to try to ride, and where pedestrians use that side at their own risk until the bike lanes are eventually cleared and the special status revoked. It would almost like a parking ban except with different provisions.

It depends on the circumstances. In a suburb, where people tend to use the sidewalks a lot (to walk dogs, exercise, walk to the bus stop, etc.) and there is little to no bike traffic, then definitely sidewalks should take priority. In a downtown area, where there is more bike traffic, plus pedestrian traffic, it's a toss-up, IMHO, but the same equipment should be used to do the bike lanes and sidewalks concurrently, more or less. Double up the equipment if necessary. I'm sure there are all kinds of permutations and combinations, depending upon local conditions, but regardless bike lanes need to be done. I can't see cyclists using sidewalks as ever being a good idea, BTW. I experienced that in Japan and it's hard on the nerves as they are coming at you from every direction (but are also very conscientious and careful to not bother you for the most part, unlike Canadian cyclists in my experience).

Keith P.

Feb 21, 2024, 12:33 PM

Looks like he'll run

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/mp-andy-fillmore-considering-a-run-to-be-halifax-mayor-1.6776204

Who you got, Keith? Fillmore or Mason? Democracy is great (and hard choices!)

Easy choice. Not that Fillmore is great, but it can only be ABM (Anyone But Mason). A well-behaved chimpanzee would be less dangerous than that guy.

TheCuriousMind

Feb 21, 2024, 1:59 PM

Montreal just expanded its bixi bike share program into Winter. I wonder what the experience is there? Is it a response to the winter biking behaviour of non-bike-share-bikers? How many people take advantage of bixi in the winter, now that it's available?

Seems to me that people most prepared to bike in a Montreal winter would ALSO own their own bikes, but wonder if that's true.

I live in Montreal and commute over 10km each way daily, either by bike or by transit. BIXI is a great service and the winter service is nice but they're only running about 10% of the full network this year, as a pilot, to gauge usage.

For me, I bike when I deem the weather good enough; so, not too much snow, not freezing cold. Probably about 60 days of the year total where I don't bike for weather reasons.

I really don't get the whole "nobody uses bike lanes in the winter so we shouldn't build them". Yes, in the winter the ridership is understandably lower. But by this logic, one could argue tennis courts, swimming pools, baseball pitches, skate parks, etc. Should not be build because they won't be well used year round. Winter is a crummy fact of life in Canada, but it doesn't preclude us building quality public infrastructure for the enjoyment of all (who choose to use it) when the weather is nice enough to do so.

TheCuriousMind

Feb 21, 2024, 2:04 PM

I live in Montreal and commute over 10km each way daily, either by bike or by transit. BIXI is a great service and the winter service is nice but they're only running about 10% of the full network this year, as a pilot, to gauge usage.

For me, I bike when I deem the weather good enough; so, not too much snow, not freezing cold. Probably about 60 days of the year total where I don't bike for weather reasons.

I really don't get the whole "nobody uses bike lanes in the winter so we shouldn't build them". Yes, in the winter the ridership is understandably lower. But by this logic, one could argue tennis courts, swimming pools, baseball pitches, skate parks, etc. Should not be build because they won't be well used year round. Winter is a crummy fact of life in Canada, but it doesn't preclude us building quality public infrastructure for the enjoyment of all (who choose to use it) when the weather is nice enough to do so.

As a follow up to this, it's also worth noting through many of the middle-density neighborhoods of Montreal, on smaller residential streets, there are 2-way, wide bike lanes separated by frequent bollards on one side of the road, and parking on the other side, from April 15 - Nov 15. Then, the bollards are removed and the bike lane becomes a second parking lane during the winter months. On main thoroughfares with higher car traffic the bike lanes, if they exist, are permanent fixtures that are curb separated with dedicated traffic signals, and they are regularly maintained through the wintertime (plowed and salted). This is the sort of compromise that could be useful in Halifax to promote cycling while still retaining the street network's utility for those who need to, want to, or otherwise will travel always by car.

Haliguy

Feb 21, 2024, 2:29 PM

Easy choice. Not that Fillmore is great, but it can only be ABM (Anyone But Mason). A well-behaved chimpanzee would be less dangerous than that guy.

Not the biggest fan of Fillmore but I think I would feel alright with him being Mayor to be honest.

fatscat

Feb 21, 2024, 4:40 PM

The benefit Fillmore may have is his experience within other areas of the political spectrum. What Halifax and the HRM seem to need right now is leadership which can pressure and better work with the provincial and federal governments. The city is growing exceptionally fast, and so is the region, but we regularly see provincial politics lean more rural.

Perhaps under the hood, there is more money and support for the HRM than the press conferences and media make it out to be, so I may be wrong in that judgement.

There is a lot of city building that needs to continue, and with that building we need better services, both on and off the road. At minimum, we desperately need a real mobility strategy and to see that implementation happen as the peninsula simply cannot handle the amount of traffic it's getting and will continue to get (in larger doses).

Summerville

Feb 21, 2024, 4:46 PM

I live in Montreal and commute over 10km each way daily, either by bike or by transit. BIXI is a great service and the winter service is nice but they're only running about 10% of the full network this year, as a pilot, to gauge usage.

For me, I bike when I deem the weather good enough; so, not too much snow, not freezing cold. Probably about 60 days of the year total where I don't bike for weather reasons.

I really don't get the whole "nobody uses bike lanes in the winter so we shouldn't build them". Yes, in the winter the ridership is understandably lower. But by this logic, one could argue tennis courts, swimming pools, baseball pitches, skate parks, etc. Should not be build because they won't be well used year round. Winter is a crummy fact of life in Canada, but it doesn't preclude us building quality public infrastructure for the enjoyment of all (who choose to use it) when the weather is nice enough to do so.

I've been biking throughout the winter. Even the day after a snowfall.

That being said, you really need studded tires in the window and I have only been using bike lanes. I only use the streets when I have to. The current locations of some of the city's bike lanes are not the most efficient for bikes....but as a cyclist in Halifax, I'm happy for anything.

But if there were sufficient bike lanes that are plowed, then anyone can bike in the winter with the proper tires and clothing. Studded snow tires for bikes are a game changer and we probably owe it to the automobile drivers so that we don't get in their way. The city has done a horrible job all around this year in removing snow on streets, sidewalks and bike lanes.

Summerville

Feb 21, 2024, 6:41 PM

Not the biggest fan of Fillmore but I think I would feel alright with him being Mayor to be honest.

Just reported that Andy Fillmore is suggesting that the Canada Post processing centre be moved off the peninsula to provide for housing for 5K people.

...sounds like the beginning of a campaign

TheCuriousMind

Feb 21, 2024, 8:15 PM

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 23, 2024, 6:18 AM

Just reported that Andy Fillmore is suggesting that the Canada Post processing centre be moved off the peninsula to provide for housing for 5K people.

...sounds like the beginning of a campaign

IIRC there was once suggestion in another thread that this would have been a good site for a stadium. How times have changed.

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 23, 2024, 6:30 AM

I've been biking throughout the winter. Even the day after a snowfall.

That being said, you really need studded tires in the window and I have only been using bike lanes. I only use the streets when I have to. The current locations of some of the city's bike lanes are not the most efficient for bikes....but as a cyclist in Halifax, I'm happy for anything.

But if there were sufficient bike lanes that are plowed, then anyone can bike in the winter with the proper tires and clothing. Studded snow tires for bikes are a game changer and we probably owe it to the automobile drivers so that we don't get in their way. The city has done a horrible job all around this year in removing snow on streets, sidewalks and bike lanes.

I'm curious as to how the studded tires work on dry pavement. Any slippage during higher speed turns, when you have a good lean on?

They would have been a game changer for me years ago. I quit riding in the winter when I was cutting through a Dartmouth park, my wheels slipped on ice and I fell onto a gravestone. Luckily I didn't hit my head but I had a large bruise on my rear end for a few weeks... it could have very easily been seriously worse, compounded by the fact that nobody probably would have found me for awhile.

That, and the fact that without cleared, separate bike lanes, I always felt like a sitting duck with nowhere to go should a car lose traction, or cut it too close with the narrowed roadways - probably why seeing that cyclist almost get clocked last week rattled me so (luckily, I don't think he saw it, because it happened behind him - I just happened to be looking in my rearview mirror at the time).

Halifax really needs to be set up better to support cycling. Problem is, it's easy for people to balk against the infrastructure costs when there aren't many people using it. And many people won't use it if it's not there or inadequately built. Catch 22.

Keith P.

Feb 23, 2024, 12:37 PM

Halifax really needs to be set up better to support cycling. Problem is, it's easy for people to balk against the infrastructure costs when there aren't many people using it. And many people won't use it if it's not there or inadequately built. Catch 22.

Well, 100 years ago the govts of the time did not build roads to encourage vehicle use. People realized they were a solution to a lot of problems and bought vehicles to replace horses and buggies. Only then was adequate street/road infrastructure developed. Cycling is just the opposite. There has never been a critical mass *cough* of cyclists large enough to justify the amount of money HRM is wasting spending on bike lanes and their associated foolishness.

Speaking of which, Wednesday mid-afternoon (so not a particularly busy time of day) I passed 8 vehicles queued up on Wyse Rd waiting to make a right turn onto Boland which were prevented from doing so by Sam Austin's absurd "no right on red" rules for the ghost cyclists who allegedly ride there. It was ridiculous since there was nothing that would have prevented them from making that turn safely both for them and anyone else. HRM doing its part for climate change I guess.

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 23, 2024, 2:31 PM

Well, 100 years ago the govts of the time did not build roads to encourage vehicle use. People realized they were a solution to a lot of problems and bought vehicles to replace horses and buggies. Only then was adequate street/road infrastructure developed. Cycling is just the opposite. There has never been a critical mass *cough* of cyclists large enough to justify the amount of money HRM is wasting spending on bike lanes and their associated foolishness.

Speaking of which, Wednesday mid-afternoon (so not a particularly busy time of day) I passed 8 vehicles queued up on Wyse Rd waiting to make a right turn onto Boland which were prevented from doing so by Sam Austin's absurd "no right on red" rules for the ghost cyclists who allegedly ride there. It was ridiculous since there was nothing that would have prevented them from making that turn safely both for them and anyone else. HRM doing its part for climate change I guess.

Road networks evolved from walking paths to wider roads to accommodate horses and wagons. Sidewalks were built so that people could have a place to walk, away from the horse and wagons. Cars came along which were faster and heavier, roads were paved, more sidewalks were built as it was becoming even less safe for pedestrians to mix with moving traffic. A sidewalk network was created, even in areas where there wasn't a lot of pedestrian traffic, so that people could walk from one area to another, safely. It was an evolution in infrastructure.

Now, we are faced with massive population growth, and the threat of climate change. Road networks to facilitate cars grew to be massive and ubiquitous, and sidewalks have followed. More people want to travel independently of public transit, but they don't want to (or can't afford to) drive cars. Bicycles are this neat little piece of technology that have been around forever (even before cars), are compact and light, don't require fuel, and are relatively inexpensive to purchase. Their use has caught on in other cities, and they have become a recognized alternative to the car in urban areas around the world.

Problem is, riding on the street with vehicles that have become larger, faster, heavier, and in many cases more difficult to see a cyclist out of (try driving one of those massive pickups that are all over the place now), has become much more dangerous now. Vehicles now have infotainment units with touch screens that require taking your eyes off the road to operate. Drivers are still using cell phones while driving, despite that it has been made illegal to do so (I see it every day). Vehicles have all kinds of sensors and nanny systems that give a false sense of security, and (IMHO) drivers have become even less attentive and less skillful than ever. People are more stressed and more aggressive than ever, and it shows in their driving.

Cyclists rightfully feel unsafe, and the theory is that if infrastructure is further evolved, more cyclists will come out of hiding and start to use their bikes on the cycling infrastructure, to the benefit of everybody, actually, as it helps reduce pollution (i.e. helps mitigate climate change), plus less motor vehicles on the road would theoretically result in less wear and tear on the street network, and yes, less vehicle traffic, making for a better driving experience for those who still use cars.

As I see it, evolving the infrastructure to include a cycling network, will potentially draw cyclists to that network, and away from more contentious roads. As usage grows, the network will be optimized for efficiency and cost, and mistakes made along the way (like those signals you like to complain about, perhaps) will be worked out of the system and cycling networks will become standardized infrastructure, just like sidewalks have become.

Also, if the network is built, but never used, new cycling infrastructure projects will likely not be created out of a cost/benefit calculation. I suspect, though, that this won't be the case as the infrastructure in places like Montreal, as discussed, is well used, and optimized (like temporary lanes that exist in the nice weather seasons but disappear in winter when they are not used so much).

The past will always be the past, and the present will also become the past, but the future is what we have to anticipate. Cycling growth is something we anticipate, but we don't know how it will go until we actually make an effort to do something about it. We have to try, and then let the cards fall as they may...

:2cents:

Drybrain

Feb 23, 2024, 2:56 PM

Now, we are faced with massive population growth, and the threat of climate change. Road networks to facilitate cars grew to be massive and ubiquitous, and sidewalks have followed. More people want to travel independently of public transit, but they don't want to (or can't afford to) drive cars. Bicycles are this neat little piece of technology that have been around forever (even before cars), are compact and light, don't require fuel, and are relatively inexpensive to purchase. Their use has caught on in other cities, and they have become a recognized alternative to the car in urban areas around the world.

Problem is, riding on the street with vehicles that have become larger, faster, heavier, and in many cases more difficult to see a cyclist out of (try driving one of those massive pickups that are all over the place now), has become much more dangerous now. Vehicles now have infotainment units with touch screens that require taking your eyes off the road to operate. Drivers are still using cell phones while driving, despite that it has been made illegal to do so (I see it every day). Vehicles have all kinds of sensors and nanny systems that give a false sense of security, and (IMHO) drivers have become even less attentive and less skillful than ever. People are more stressed and more aggressive than ever, and it shows in their driving.

Cyclists rightfully feel unsafe, and the theory is that if infrastructure is further evolved, more cyclists will come out of hiding and start to use their bikes on the cycling infrastructure, to the benefit of everybody, actually, as it helps reduce pollution (i.e. helps mitigate climate change), plus less motor vehicles on the road would theoretically result in less wear and tear on the street network, and yes, less vehicle traffic, making for a better driving experience for those who still use cars.

Exactly. I've said it before on here, but cycling is by far my preferred way to travel short and medium distances, unless I need to haul a lot of stuff. It's almost as fast as driving, generally more pleasant, and is cheaper. It's also far more efficient in every way than driving, which requires A: hauling a few thousand pounds of steel and plastic through the city, even to accomplish the most minor tasks, B: Burning fossil fuels or powering up an electric motor to do so, and C: Finding somewhere to store the thing temporarily near your destination. That's is fine if the entire landscape around you was built with car storage in mind (new suburbs) or if space is just plain abundant (rural areas) but it doesn't work so well in the city.

If I want to visit a friend or go to a doctor's appointment or do some light shopping, a bike is the go-to, pretty much year-round, because it's actually a better way to get around.

AnotherNorthender

Feb 23, 2024, 3:30 PM

Bike infrastructure, like automobile infrastructure, serves a purpose. There's no getting around the fact that we've developed our communities around the automobile for decades and they're necessary for a lot of people in their day to day lives. That doesn't negate the fact that alternatives exist and for them to be viable, proper infrastructure is necessary. I drive, walk, bike and bus around Halifax but there are some trips I will only make by car because of the lack of cycling infrastructure. It's not a distance or laziness factor for me not biking - I've done century rides on country back roads - its the lack of dedicated space to get away from aggressive drivers that pushes me away from using alternative modes of transport for some trips. If we expect to only support automobile infrastructure, we'll just dig ourselves further into the hole we are trying to get out of.

OldDartmouthMark

Feb 23, 2024, 6:07 PM

ns_kid

Feb 23, 2024, 8:23 PM

Well said.

Ditto. It’s been years since I biked regularly (I often biked to work in Ottawa, where the infrastructure made it both feasible and relatively safe) and have two gas guzzlers in my driveway. But I absolutely agree that we need to take seriously the importance of active transportation and public transportation alternatives.

Empire

Feb 26, 2024, 1:33 PM

I hope Andy Fillmore runs for Mayor.

Canada Post Sorting Facility - Almon St.
https://twitter.com/AndyFillmoreHFX/status/1760296078727840171?t=RbcogX3-o3pQA2PZvvpzpQ

Arrdeeharharharbour

Feb 26, 2024, 3:49 PM

Keith P.

Feb 26, 2024, 4:01 PM

It sure looks like he's running for mayor. There's a good chance I'd vote for him. But don't we already have vacant formerly federal land that sits empty? ie. Shannon Park, the Ralston site, and the former RCMP site.

Those are all spoken for already.

The Bragg land on Robie next door is already an eyesore. We don't need more of that in the same area.

It's privately-owned property that they will likely do something with in due course.

The city will have a number of lots to sell on the Cogswell lands soon.

Those will not be appropriate for any sort of lower-income housing. HRM needs to cash in big on the selling prices to pay for their Cogswell dreams.

And we have the Micmac, Hfx Shopping Centre and Sobeys land in Clayton Park all working on plans to redevelop their sites. ...just thinking out loud.

Again, all privately-owned and planned for redevelopment eventually. You need to remember there is only so much construction capacity available to do all of these things, and the construction industry is going flat-out as it is. Everything will happen in due course.

eastcoastal

Feb 26, 2024, 4:31 PM

... The Bragg land on Robie next door is already an eyesore. We don't need more of that in the same area. ...

Yes - I think what Andy is making noise about is tied to a comprehensive plan for the lands bounded by Young, Almon, Windsor, and Robie. It's a big parcel of land, with multiple owners, and I suspect having the Canada Post site become developable, like the Bragg-former-Piercy's-former-rail-depot, would be important to minimizing compromises to the planning.

Edited to add: good access to road networks, good access to existing transit routes, proximity to planned transit priority corridors, and proximity to impending active transportation infrastructure makes this chunk more critical than some of the others you mentioned (at least, to me).

Arrdeeharharharbour

Feb 26, 2024, 4:46 PM

Yes, my point being don't tear anything down until there's an immediate need for it. Also, I'm curious, is there an assumption that housing on this site will be more affordable than elsewhere? In the case of the Cogswell land the city could sell with conditions whereas the city wouldn't own the former post office land. Also, given the development in the north end, it could easily soon become the more desirable place on the peninsula to live (for urban lovers) as opposed to the current downtown. Little doubt that developers are picking up on this and will act accordingly.

Those are all spoken for already.

It's privately-owned property that they will likely do something with in due course.

Those will not be appropriate for any sort of lower-income housing. HRM needs to cash in big on the selling prices to pay for their Cogswell dreams.

Again, all privately-owned and planned for redevelopment eventually. You need to remember there is only so much construction capacity available to do all of these things, and the construction industry is going flat-out as it is. Everything will happen in due course.

Dmajackson

Mar 7, 2024, 4:49 PM

5 Floors | 50 Units | Mixed-Use | $9.5 M | 25 Crystal Drive, Dartmouth | Unknown

https://halifaxdevelopments.files.wordpress.com/2024/03/20240306_1346472756892399877385164.jpg?w=1024
HalifaxDevelopments.ca (Photo by David Jackson) (https://halifaxdevelopments.ca/tag/25crystal/)

AnotherNorthender

Mar 7, 2024, 10:23 PM

Is highfield park up next for some ol' gentrification?

Arrdeeharharharbour

Mar 8, 2024, 11:15 AM

Below is a screenshot taken from the proposed urgent planning changes document showing the Highfield Park area with heights of up to 40 stories.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53573826157_44df6c967b_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2pC8S2T)Screenshot 2024-03-08 11.06.10 AM (https://flic.kr/p/2pC8S2T) by AJ Forsythe (https://www.flickr.com/photos/194233676@N07/), on Flickr

OldDartmouthMark

Mar 8, 2024, 12:11 PM

Well that's interesting. There are some businesses that have large surface parking lots or take up a lot of area with floor space. Depending upon ownership and business case, they could be good candidates for density-adding. There's a small bus terminal along Highfield that would be of benefit. Perhaps it could be expanded and routes added (someday) to the Shannon Park ferry that is planned.

There are a lot of 3 storey residential units that would be ripe for redevelopment as well at some point, once the housing crisis has become less critical.

https://i.imgur.com/HoBl89e.png
Source (https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.6917296,-63.60057,809a,35y,118.98h,51.48t/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu)

alps

Mar 8, 2024, 3:36 PM

Highfield Park Drive is also supposed to have transit lanes and a protected bikeway in the future, under the Rapid Transit Strategy and Integrated Mobility Plan respectively.

Dmajackson

Mar 10, 2024, 3:50 PM

Another North Dartmouth used car dealership will be closing/relocating. This time it's Capital Auto at 294 WINDMILL ROAD (at Farrell) which is planned to become a 7-floor, 79-unit residential building.

Dmajackson

Mar 19, 2024, 3:28 PM

Development-only Permit submitted for 119 PINECREST DRIVE for a 5-storey residential building. This is the fourth new building for the immediate area. Nice to see the walkshed for Highfield Terminal is seeing good infill projects.

Also over in Halifax,

7 Floors | 117 Units | Residential | $21.0M | 3521 Windsor Street, Halifax | Unknown

https://halifaxdevelopments.files.wordpress.com/2024/03/20240317_1620426744656775029522903.jpg?w=1024
HalifaxDevelopments.ca (Photo by David Jackson) (https://halifaxdevelopments.ca/tag/3521windsor/)

fatscat

Mar 19, 2024, 7:39 PM

Also over in Halifax,

7 Floors | 117 Units | Residential | $21.0M | 3521 Windsor Street, Halifax | Unknown

Great! I was just walking by this while running an errand on Strawberry Hill and was curious, no doubt Dmajackson had the goods :cool:

Slowly but surely the Kempt Rd. parking lot will be filled in ... slowly...

Jstaleness

Mar 20, 2024, 11:29 AM

Development-only Permit submitted for 119 PINECREST DRIVE for a 5-storey residential building. This is the fourth new building for the immediate area. Nice to see the walkshed for Highfield Terminal is seeing good infill projects.

Hoping to gradually see some higher infill projects though. Infill is great, but lets dare to take some to the 10s and 12s for a bit.

rdaner

Mar 21, 2024, 3:03 AM

Howdy

I saw on IG today that Dalhousie is having a big announcement in Toronto in April. Does anyone know anything about it? The best case scenario is some sort of campus in the central city. Or it could be nothing.

Dmajackson

Mar 23, 2024, 8:20 PM

1018 SOUTH PARK STREET, HALIFAX is setting up it's construction barriers.

8 Floors | 55 Units | Residential | $12.0 M | 1018 South Park Street, Halifax | Unknown

https://halifaxdevelopments.files.wordpress.com/2024/03/20240323_1404098972251433074724287.jpg?w=1024
HalifaxDevelopments.ca (Photo by David Jackson) (https://halifaxdevelopments.ca/tag/1018southpark/)

Dmajackson

Mar 24, 2024, 4:03 PM

The residential conversion of Nelson Place (5675 Spring Garden) had it's building permit issued last week for 76 units at $10.6M.

Keith P.

Mar 24, 2024, 4:43 PM

1018 SOUTH PARK STREET, HALIFAX is setting up it's construction barriers.

8 Floors | 55 Units | Residential | $12.0 M | 1018 South Park Street, Halifax | Unknown

[I'll insert a photo here when the post is made public :tup:]

That's the former Chrisian Science reading room, always a pleasant building on that corner on a lovely lot. Sadly I suspect the landscaping will not survive (if it even has made it this far already).

Nelson Place is, I assume, another office-to-residential conversion? That is an office structure I have never set foot in. One of the most under-the-radar office buildings downtown.

Saul Goode

Mar 25, 2024, 4:08 AM

Nelson Place is, I assume, another office-to-residential conversion? That is an office structure I have never set foot in. One of the most under-the-radar office buildings downtown.

Under the radar for sure. I was in it several times in the 70s and it's a totally forgettable, plain vanilla, generic office building of its day (or at least it was back then; I have no idea whether it was ever renovated). I suspect that most who were never in it and only saw it from the outside probably just assumed that it was part of the Lord Nelson.

new2halifax

Mar 25, 2024, 5:21 PM

1018 SOUTH PARK STREET, HALIFAX is setting up it's construction barriers.

8 Floors | 55 Units | Residential | $12.0 M | 1018 South Park Street, Halifax | Unknown

Finally! Was looking forward to see that corner used. Anyone knows if there are any renders available?

Jreeb

Mar 26, 2024, 8:02 PM

Finally! Was looking forward to see that corner used. Anyone knows if there are any renders available?

No renders on the owner's site so far. It's owned by NorthPoint Properties who typically owns smaller and older buildings with an exception for the addition at the heritage property they built across the street at 1027 South Park. The addition seems nice from the street but they are asking $3,000 for a two-bedroom which is worrisome for the future rents at this development.

Regardless and from what I know, this appears to be their first large-scale project so I am curious to see what their development style is. Fingers crossed it is something unique!

Dmajackson

Mar 27, 2024, 2:41 AM

^Northpoint also built the new building across Inglis Street at Ivanhoe (civic 5726).

Northpoint Properties Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/northpointproperties_hfx/)

I wonder if they own any other lots in the area.

OldDartmouthMark

Mar 30, 2024, 5:25 AM

My apologies if this has already been posted elsewhere, but it sounds like a step in the right direction for the old industrial north end neighbourhoods:

Halifax considers plan to create new neighbourhood in city's north end (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/halifax-looks-to-create-new-north-end-neighbourhood-1.7156398)

Halifax has kicked off the planning process for a new neighbourhood in the north end that could see thousands of housing units built in an area currently dominated by businesses and car lots.

On Tuesday, Halifax regional council agreed to move ahead with plans for the Strawberry Hill Future Growth Node, which will see staff consider various zoning and land-use changes to allow for major development.

The 4.9-hectare site falls along Strawberry Hill Street between Windsor Street and Kempt Road, and is next to the Windsor Street Exchange. Currently the land is home to a Steele car dealership, warehouses, the Salvation Army thrift store, and other commercial buildings near some residences along Windsor.

Three major property owners on the site have joined together to propose a vision for the area, which would include 14 mixed-use buildings ranging between eight and 42 storeys high that would create 3,656 housing units.

https://i.cbc.ca/1.7156409.1711490517!/fileImage/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/16x9_780/strawberry-hill-future-growth.JPG

https://i.cbc.ca/1.7156413.1711490708!/fileImage/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/original_1180/strawberry-hill-development.JPG

https://i.cbc.ca/1.7156428.1711491092!/fileImage/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/original_1180/strawberry-hill-future-growth-node.JPG

Jstaleness

Mar 30, 2024, 2:47 PM

I get excited by thinking this could be a super high density and transit hub community. I also fear we'll get a low rise special due to Nimbyism.

Keith P.

Mar 30, 2024, 4:51 PM

There is already a discussion about this HERE (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=258497)

Drybrain

Mar 30, 2024, 7:20 PM

I also fear we'll get a low rise special due to Nimbyism.

I doubt it, the city has targeted these future growth nodes as ideal sites for density, hence why the landowners are coming forward with this. There’s zero heritage value in the area, no incumbent residents to oppose it, zero concern about displacement… I’m sure there will be some NIMBYism around it, but I would be shocked to see it swaying things very much. If we continue to see strong population growth and housing need, I think this will happen, the question is more around the timeline and the quality of the execution.

Jreeb

Apr 4, 2024, 12:30 PM

https://flic.kr/p/2pHf3uS

Rendering of the development at the corner of Inglis and South Park was made public in AllNS today. Been a while since I have uploaded a photo, not sure if it will work but here is the link just incase it doesn't:

https://flic.kr/p/2pHf3uS

---
turns out I don't know how to upload photos - sorry!

kzt79

Apr 4, 2024, 12:35 PM

Drybrain

Apr 4, 2024, 12:45 PM

This is an HR-1 zone, so eight storeys is the max. Interesting that this location didn't get a density bump with the proposed HAF changes. (Even a kick up to HR-2 zoning could get this to 12 storeys, which I dbn't think would engender any howls of outrage.)

Still, looks decent. Not exactly thrilling but tasteful and pleasant, which is an achivement in itself given some of the competition.

worldlyhaligonian

Apr 4, 2024, 12:51 PM

Form isn't bad. Don't love the faux wood trend (looks like flooring on the outside of some of these buildings).

That being said - what a great location to live and it will round out that block nicely.

new2halifax

Apr 4, 2024, 2:14 PM

Keith P.

Apr 4, 2024, 2:29 PM

Here it is inline.

https://i.ibb.co/47skXX7/inglis-sopark.jpg (https://ibb.co/s257NN2)

Another signature HRM 7-storey box.

LikesBikes

Apr 4, 2024, 6:38 PM

Jstaleness

Apr 4, 2024, 8:15 PM

Colin May

Apr 5, 2024, 12:02 AM

[QUOTE=Drybrain;10177876]This is an HR-1 zone, so eight storeys is the max. Interesting that this location didn't get a density bump with the proposed HAF changes. (Even a kick up to HR-2 zoning could get this to 12 storeys, which I dbn't think would engender any howls of outrage.)

This is maddening given its proximity to schools, transit, AT infrastructure, and high walkability. We have the infrastructure here - why we can't build higher than eight storeys is maddening.
On our street we have seen the transition from many children to few/not many children and back to many children. People with children and who can afford their own home predominantly avoid high rise apartment/condos for obvious reasons ( obvious to people who have children or plan on having children). Park space at both ends of the street and schools for all grades, and close to transit. Developers build to the needs of the market.

HarbingerDe

Apr 5, 2024, 12:37 AM

[QUOTE=LikesBikes;10178187]
On our street we have seen the transition from many children to few/not many children and back to many children. People with children and who can afford their own home predominantly avoid high rise apartment/condos for obvious reasons ( obvious to people who have children or plan on having children). Park space at both ends of the street and schools for all grades, and close to transit. Developers build to the needs of the market.

The fact that developers virtually always build to the exact height limitation of a given zoning area, suggests they are not being permitted to build to the needs of the market.

OldDartmouthMark

Apr 5, 2024, 6:30 AM

The fact that developers virtually always build to the exact height limitation of a given zoning area, suggests they are not being permitted to build to the needs of the market.

I've said this before. It seems odd that the city has been so restrictive on height, even before the housing crisis, but especially now.

From a labour/materials standpoint, once all the site prep, etc., is done, adding more floors should be relatively painless for the developer since you're just doing more of the same, and you've already got a crane and crew on site.

The number of building lots is finite, especially on the peninsula where it makes more sense to densify the population, so in a city where growth is showing no indication of slowing down in the foreseeable future, we should be making the best use of these lots. As a side benefit, it allows there to be less of a threat to those heritage properties that are ripe for the taking as good/easy building sites dry up.

Furthermore, if developers are willing to go higher, then why not let it happen? They are taking the risk of having empty units (not likely to happen anytime soon), so why not let them decide the best business case for building capacity and add all of those extra units into the market that could at least give us a shot of supply exceeding demand, and the resultant market price adjustment?

It makes no sense to me that the city is placing arbitrary limits on densification of the peninsula. Even if they are concerned about infrastructure capacity, that's just an engineering solution away, as water supply/wastewater capacity, electrical, etc. can all be increased and costs will eventually be resolved by the increased tax base (not to mention the coming property tax rate increases). Road capacity can't be increased, but then we could have improved transit options, plus more density will mean that amenities can be supported by the population such that the downtown could be more walkable or practical to get around by cycle. LRT, or at least more buses, could be possible as well.

Anyhow... this has become a bit of a pet peeve of mine. Every time I see a new rendering on this site, or a new completed building, it hits the magical 7/8 floor number, and I see another lost opportunity. This from a city council that lauds itself as being progressive, environmentally aware, etc etc... It's frustrating.

new2halifax

Apr 5, 2024, 11:52 AM

Every time I see a new rendering on this site, or a new completed building, it hits the magical 7/8 floor number, and I see another lost opportunity. This from a city council that lauds itself as being progressive, environmentally aware, etc etc... It's frustrating.

100% agree with all your points.

I've been here a few years only, I can imagine the frustration of folks that either grew up here or been here the majority of their lives.

Keith P.

Apr 5, 2024, 12:21 PM

Anyhow... this has become a bit of a pet peeve of mine. Every time I see a new rendering on this site, or a new completed building, it hits the magical 7/8 floor number, and I see another lost opportunity. This from a city council that lauds itself as being progressive, environmentally aware, etc etc... It's frustrating.

B...But... but the Centre Plan!!! It's perfect!!! We can't possibly do any better!!! If heights were any taller, the globe would spin off its axis!!! :eeekk:

Drybrain

Apr 5, 2024, 1:14 PM

100% agree with all your points.

I've been here a few years only, I can imagine the frustration of folks that either grew up here or been here the majority of their lives.

Okay, but in fairness, the proposed Housing Accelerator zoning changes have blown past what anyone thought the city would do re: density, and are probably among the most ambitious such changes in the country. I agree this location could use a taller building, but it's not like Halifax is alone in limiting heights to these ranges on these kinds of streets. It's still the norm nationwide; I think we need to get a little bit past the old saw that Halifax is uniquely or especially height-phobic or NIMBYish. If this was the case in the past, it's not now. The same debates are happening everywhere.

Keith P.

Apr 5, 2024, 2:17 PM

Okay, but in fairness, the proposed Housing Accelerator zoning changes have blown past what anyone thought the city would do re: density, and are probably among the most ambitious such changes in the country. I agree this location could use a taller building, but it's not like Halifax is alone in limiting heights to these ranges on these kinds of streets. It's still the norm nationwide; I think we need to get a little bit past the old saw that Halifax is uniquely or especially height-phobic or NIMBYish. If this was the case in the past, it's not now. The same debates are happening everywhere.

I could not disagree more. While we finally appear to have largely moved on from the old "Nothing over 16 floors because it is Too TALL!!", the HAF proposals/changes (because it is a certainty that our money-hungry Council will take the money and run) will see 7-storey boxes popping up adjacent to otherwise stable single-family home neighborhoods all over town assuming there is a market for the units. In turn they will degrade quality of life in those neighborhoods and change the fabric of living in such neighborhoods.

In the case of this Inglis St project, it is adjacent to a 1970s 13-storey apartment block, which tells me this site could be roughly double the proposed height with no difficulty whatsoever. For whatever reason the archtects of the Centre Plan decided that nothing could be taller than 7 floors unless it was in designated areas. One size does not fit all.

someone123

Apr 5, 2024, 8:22 PM

I think we need to get a little bit past the old saw that Halifax is uniquely or especially height-phobic or NIMBYish. If this was the case in the past, it's not now. The same debates are happening everywhere.

Halifax has been pretty progressive with development, at least for a Canadian city, for a number of years now. It's true that in the media there was a lot of focus on a small number of NIMBY voices, but in practice lots of development did happen and the latest changes are interesting. Halifax had the fastest growing downtown population in Canada from 2016-2021, and that would not have happened the NIMBYs were effective.

I think Halifax is disappointing when it comes to heritage preservation. This is sometimes presented as being at odds with new development but it isn't, and density makes heritage preservation easier.

The big logjam I see how is that the province isn't doing much about transit and there doesn't seem to be a lot of effort going into planning how to overhaul the city's infrastructure to support the current population. This requires improvements in every area, whether it's transit, active transportation, or roads and highways. If Halifax's infrastructure were keeping up with population growth it would have major new features like new bridges, highways, and rail lines. The Burnside connector is the only example like that, and maybe the ferry eventually. I wonder if NS could somehow partner with another province like ON to take advantage in expertise in transit projects there.

OldDartmouthMark

Apr 6, 2024, 4:26 AM

Okay, but in fairness, the proposed Housing Accelerator zoning changes have blown past what anyone thought the city would do re: density, and are probably among the most ambitious such changes in the country. I agree this location could use a taller building, but it's not like Halifax is alone in limiting heights to these ranges on these kinds of streets. It's still the norm nationwide; I think we need to get a little bit past the old saw that Halifax is uniquely or especially height-phobic or NIMBYish. If this was the case in the past, it's not now. The same debates are happening everywhere.

Sure, it's not uncommon to say that we're not so bad, because other cities are bad as well. On the other hand, NS and PEI had the lowest vacancy rates in Canada in 2023, at 1.1% (https://www.statista.com/statistics/198684/vacancy-rates-for-rental-units-in-canada-by-region/), so slightly worse than other areas, and thus more poignant in Halifax, IMHO, than most others. But yes, it's bad everywhere.

I still cringe when I read things like "I agree this location could use a taller building, but it's not like Halifax is alone in limiting heights to these ranges on these kinds of streets", with all due respect, because bad policy is bad policy. I harken back to my parents telling me "well, if Joey jumped off the roof, would that make it okay for you to do it as well?"... lol

Granted, they have made some changes, so let's see how it goes. The fact that many of us have looked at the artificial limitation of building height as a problem for several years is the root of the frustration. And frankly, I think we all have a right to be frustrated with the housing situation, no matter whether it's been mismanaged equally across the country or not. I don't feel better reading 'it sucks everywhere, so it's not so bad'... it still sucks. ;)

Arrdeeharharharbour

Apr 6, 2024, 12:28 PM

Halifax has been pretty progressive with development, at least for a Canadian city, for a number of years now. It's true that in the media there was a lot of focus on a small number of NIMBY voices, but in practice lots of development did happen and the latest changes are interesting. Halifax had the fastest growing downtown population in Canada from 2016-2021, and that would not have happened the NIMBYs were effective.

I think Halifax is disappointing when it comes to heritage preservation. This is sometimes presented as being at odds with new development but it isn't, and density makes heritage preservation easier.

The big logjam I see how is that the province isn't doing much about transit and there doesn't seem to be a lot of effort going into planning how to overhaul the city's infrastructure to support the current population. This requires improvements in every area, whether it's transit, active transportation, or roads and highways. If Halifax's infrastructure were keeping up with population growth it would have major new features like new bridges, highways, and rail lines. The Burnside connector is the only example like that, and maybe the ferry eventually. I wonder if NS could somehow partner with another province like ON to take advantage in expertise in transit projects there.

Your post prompted me to check out the JRTA site for a progress update. The most recent update/news item is dated January 30, 2023. More than a year ago. Very discouraging. Oh, and they're looking to hire a summer student to assist in writing polices. There's obviously no urgency in dealing with our transportation issues. A complaint to the current govt. will result in a response such as 'we were elected to fix healthcare and that's our priority'. However, they do seem to be working hard on trying to eliminate my quarterly carbon rebate.

Drybrain

Apr 6, 2024, 3:05 PM

Your post prompted me to check out the JRTA site for a progress update. The most recent update/news item is dated January 30, 2023. More than a year ago. Very discouraging. Oh, and they're looking to hire a summer student to assist in writing polices. There's obviously no urgency in dealing with our transportation issues. A complaint to the current govt. will result in a response such as 'we were elected to fix healthcare and that's our priority'. However, they do seem to be working hard on trying to eliminate my quarterly carbon rebate.

It’s been more active than that; there was public engagement late last year, and an information session in February, and there’s more outreach/community events being held across the province this spring. The final plan is supposed to be announced in fall. Definitely agree though that they could be stepping on the gas more.

someone123

Apr 6, 2024, 5:40 PM

It’s been more active than that; there was public engagement late last year, and an information session in February, and there’s more outreach/community events being held across the province this spring. The final plan is supposed to be announced in fall. Definitely agree though that they could be stepping on the gas more.

It would be good if they released some very preliminary visions of the kind of improvements they are contemplating. Hopefully this includes higher-order transit beyond ferries.

I find the materials and some descriptions a bit "triggering". They talk a lot about how central NS is full of far-flung communities with special needs. But a huge amount of the congestion and in particular latent transit demand is concentrated in the inner city, while it will be impossible to achieve much cost recovery in villages in Hants County. It reminds me of 2000's era HRM materials about how the municipality is essentially an arbitrary collection of small communities when it's a metropolitan area with the usual challenges of a medium-sized city. And sure, it has some villages and rural areas around it where 5% of the people live; probably less of this than most metros surrounded by farmland.

Jstaleness

Apr 6, 2024, 8:38 PM

I had been browsing the Ottawa forums as well, and that city is still very much dealing with their height restrictions. Seems they are struggling to go above their averages as well.

Drybrain

Apr 6, 2024, 9:12 PM

It would be good if they released some very preliminary visions of the kind of improvements they are contemplating. Hopefully this includes higher-order transit beyond ferries.

I find the materials and some descriptions a bit "triggering". They talk a lot about how central NS is full of far-flung communities with special needs. But a huge amount of the congestion and in particular latent transit demand is concentrated in the inner city, while it will be impossible to achieve much cost recovery in villages in Hants County. It reminds me of 2000's era HRM materials about how the municipality is essentially an arbitrary collection of small communities when it's a metropolitan area with the usual challenges of a medium-sized city. And sure, it has some villages and rural areas around it where 5% of the people live; probably less of this than most metros surrounded by farmland.

I’ve interacted online with some people who are involved with the planning on the city side who are optimistic about what’s coming out of it, but I really don’t know how much stock to put in that. It’s all very floaty right now.

Colin May

Apr 7, 2024, 1:02 AM

Dmajackson

Apr 7, 2024, 1:46 AM

^It's Building 'F' (Robie Street) at Richmond Yards. They submitted a building permit a few months back that said they would be finalizing the unit count after the number of affordable units was determined.

kijoma

Apr 10, 2024, 12:40 AM

Danny Chedrawe offering 105 units at $1,722 a month ( circa $1,000 a month below normal cost) with federal government paying the subsidy.
CTV Halifax April 4 at 16:05 https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/video/c2891398-ctv-news-atlantic-at-six-for-thursday--april-4--2024?binId=1.1145507

Location of units not disclosed, announcement made at Richmond Yards.

Affordable based on median household income, but how big are these units going to be I wonder. Renters are more likely to be lower income as it is, because they tend to be people that can't afford to buy a home. If these are studio and one-bedroom apartments that only house 1 or 2 people those rents are still pretty horrendous.

LikesBikes

Apr 10, 2024, 11:44 AM

It would be good if they released some very preliminary visions of the kind of improvements they are contemplating. Hopefully this includes higher-order transit beyond ferries.

There's this video from February showing where they're at - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjWd0o2DfaE&t=14s.

If you're hoping for rail, prepare to be disappointed.

Keith P.

Apr 10, 2024, 12:42 PM

Affordable based on median household income, but how big are these units going to be I wonder. Renters are more likely to be lower income as it is, because they tend to be people that can't afford to buy a home. If these are studio and one-bedroom apartments that only house 1 or 2 people those rents are still pretty horrendous.

"Affordable housing" projects like these tend not to be aimed at families on welfare but rather the "working poor". As an example you can look back to the subsidized home-buying program that led a pre-HRM Council Dawn Marie Sloane to purchase a newly-built house for herself on Creighton St because at the time she was working for a non-profit group of activists and making peanuts. Shortly thereafter she hit the jackpot when she got elected to HRM Council but was not disqualified from the subsidy program despite her income taking a huge jump. I remember her getting up on her hind legs at a Council meeting and telling everyone how she was entitled to that subsidy despite now living high on the hog courtesy of HRM taxpayers.

Arrdeeharharharbour

Apr 11, 2024, 2:52 PM

There's this video from February showing where they're at - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjWd0o2DfaE&t=14s.

If you're hoping for rail, prepare to be disappointed.

Thank you for posting this link. I wasn't aware of this. It's a bit of a painful watch. The thematic bundles and scoring system is interesting but I really don't see how a single score can be realistic to a region that hosts Halifax and Hantsport and all the area in between. There's a spot in the presentation where the presenter says that a score can't take the place of good judgement. I think this comment sums up the exercise.

Dmajackson

Apr 13, 2024, 3:12 AM

The Housing Accelerator Fund changes are on Heritage Advisory Committee's agenda for next week. It'll hit Regional Council on the 23rd.

April 17, 2024 Heritage Advisory Committee Agenda (https://www.halifax.ca/city-hall/boards-committees-commissions/april-17-2024-heritage-advisory-committee)

Dmajackson

Apr 14, 2024, 4:19 PM

RoshanMcG

Apr 14, 2024, 5:49 PM

Don't think there is a thread for this but it appears to be called The Delmore

http://i.imgur.com/Rlp76dZh.jpg (https://imgur.com/Rlp76dZ)

http://i.imgur.com/uzAOuMhh.jpg (https://imgur.com/uzAOuMh)

http://i.imgur.com/pGkoQh0h.jpg (https://imgur.com/pGkoQh0)

http://i.imgur.com/d699bpmh.jpg (https://imgur.com/d699bpm)

terrynorthend

Apr 14, 2024, 11:54 PM

Man that Suburban Site Specific request document is depressing. Staff has gutted most of the requests in the name of HA dogma. Eg. A request for multiple 12-18 story developments within 800 metres of the Bedford have been cut to maximum of 5 storys.

The Housing Accelerator Fund changes are on Heritage Advisory Committee's agenda for next week. It'll hit Regional Council on the 23rd.

April 17, 2024 Heritage Advisory Committee Agenda (https://www.halifax.ca/city-hall/boards-committees-commissions/april-17-2024-heritage-advisory-committee)

HarbingerDe

Apr 15, 2024, 3:34 AM

Man that Suburban Site Specific request document is depressing. Staff has gutted most of the requests in the name of HA dogma. Eg. A request for multiple 12-18 story developments within 800 metres of the Bedford have been cut to maximum of 5 storys.

The Boomer NIMBY groups are all over Facebook celebrating their victories and "progress" in the crusade against solving the housing crisis.

It's incredibly infuriating. These people are lobbying to create generations of pain and financial suffering for everyone who didn't ride the housing rocket to wealth and a comfortable retirement like they did.

They fight development at every opportunity even though, ironically, most of them will never even live long enough to see the developments they so vehemently oppose... The rest of us will certainly have to live with the fallout for decades/generations though.

OldDartmouthMark

Apr 15, 2024, 4:55 AM

Ah yes... another installment of "us vs them" rhetoric on SSP. I was missing that as it seemed to have fallen off recently. All is right again.

Arrdeeharharharbour

Apr 15, 2024, 11:40 AM

Ah yes... another installment of "us vs them" rhetoric on SSP. I was missing that as it seemed to have fallen off recently. All is right again.

I agree that negativity is no fun but in this poster's defense the document is a discouraging read. This is especially true given that there is no rationale provided for denying what seems to be reasonable. My immediate take away after a first read through is that the top two reasons for denying requests for additional height are: 1, ensure there is not enough density along major routes to support mass transit and 2, cluster same-height buildings together to ensure the most boring and unattractive built-form possible.

OldDartmouthMark

Apr 15, 2024, 1:07 PM

I agree that negativity is no fun but in this poster's defense the document is a discouraging read. This is especially true given that there is no rationale provided for denying what seems to be reasonable. My immediate take away after a first read through is that the top two reasons for denying requests for additional height are: 1, ensure there is not enough density along major routes to support mass transit and 2, cluster same-height buildings together to ensure the most boring and unattractive built-form possible.

Absolutely. Then slam the document and leave out the ageism/culture war crap. It's not my place to tell people what to post, but crap like "most of them will never even live long enough to see the developments they so vehemently oppose" doesn't do anything to advance the discussion.

Just my opinion. I like to keep things more about the development and less about personal feelings towards particular groups of people. :2cents:

HarbingerDe

Apr 15, 2024, 4:46 PM

Absolutely. Then slam the document and leave out the ageism/culture war crap. It's not my place to tell people what to post, but crap like "most of them will never even live long enough to see the developments they so vehemently oppose" doesn't do anything to advance the discussion.

Just my opinion. I like to keep things more about the development and less about personal feelings towards particular groups of people. :2cents:

I understand that the optics of my post are "controversial". But I consider my frustration to be completely warranted.

Given that your name is "OldDartmouthMark" I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you own a home, have a decently rent-capped apartment, or otherwise we're able to benefit from the previous decades of affordable housing and rental options to secure financial stability.

I appreciate that you're here supporting development, and enjoy uncontroversial discussion of the aesthetics and shape of housing development in our city. It is a privilege and a luxury to view housing development through that lens. I do not have that luxury.

Every canceled or dramatically limited developed further erodes my chances (and the chances of everyone who didn't get into the housing market pre-pandemic because they were too young or for any other reason) of ever owning a home or even simply surviving comfortably without the constant threat of renoviction.

I have an engineering degree. I make $70,000/yr. Yet between paying off my student loans, and paying for the car (that I need to reliably commute to my job) I cannot afford to live in this city. Hell I can barely afford to split a 2-bedroom apartment in this city if I want to contribute to my savings.

The situation is dire and getting worse by the day, so forgive me for being frustrated with people who (in their ignorance) are dead set on either making me (and people worse off than me) homeless or financially crippled for the rest of our lives by these absurd rental/housing prices.

Also, it is not ageism; it is simply a fact. I can start providing links to the Facebook community groups behind this anti-development lobbying if youd really like... The demographics are quite consistent, and unsurprising.

Most people my age can barely afford to survive. They certainly do not have the time to lobby the government to prevent new housing developments. These anti-developmemt groups are overwhelming comprised of Boomer and older Gen-X homeowners. It's a simple fact whether you like it or not.