General Updates and News

[Citizen_Bane]

By-laws in this city prevent me from razing my house and leaving my neighbours with an ugly gaping hole or a parking lot or a beer garden etc. next door. I understand why and I respect the rigid restrictions placed upon me through my / our elected government. Giving credit where credit is due, the many developers we are lucky to have in our great city work hard and often do wonderful things to contribute to our city. But there should be no free pass to be a bully because of doing something wonderful. And the message to the city (we citizens and our duly elected government who created a heritage zone) from this developer seems pretty clear in that they chose to ignore the wishes of the citizens in favour of their own individual desires.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I can think of a few (thankfully) Communist totalitarian states that might be a better home for those who believe govt should control property owners to such an extent, too.

What if this lot becomes a landscaped pocket park? Or a beer garden? Or some other thing in the absence of new construction? Maybe even HRM, with its deep pockets of taxpayer gold to spend waste, could be convinced to pitch in and aid the cause. The millions they spent to turn Argyle into a haven for the bar-going students and under-30s, and unwelcome to anyone else, offends me. Just so you know.

Overstated on both parts, IMHO.

1) Placing some constraints or limitations on how a developer can treat his property in the downtown city core is far from being a communist totalitarian state. In fact, in most democratic countries, it is considered normal and reasonable.

2) I haven't been under 30 in over 2 decades, but still enjoy (or did before Covid) Argyle Street in its current configuration, as did many others I've observed who are even older than I. Have never felt unwelcome, so I can't say that I share your opinion even remotely.

Just my 2¢.

[spaustin]

The hand-wringing about this Blowers building is noteworthy because it is far from your own district and the building is in no way noteworthy. One suspects a personal connection to it for you in one of its past lives, just like Mason with the Khyber. Imagine if the millions of dollars that HRM has/will be sinking into that dump were spread around for preservation of actual heritage. One must also question the property valuation process if a largely derelict old building with little prospect of reuse is valued more than a cleared lot ready for development.

One can suspect anything they want. I suspect you're five cats and a goat in a Keith suit, but that doesn't make it true. I have no personal connection to this whatsoever although I do find the continual loss of our old streetscapes concerning and as a member of the Heritage Advisory Committee that would have considered this building, I resent seeing the process short-circuited by strategic demolitions.

[Keith P.]

I can certainly understand your resentment at seeing an evil developer escape the clutches of HRM bureaucracy that would tie their hands and make an asset they bought with their own hard-earned money largely worthless. It must be frustrating for you, first the developer in Dartmouth slipped through your hands by building a hotel instead of the sawed-off condos you wanted, now this.

Just so you know, I am thinking of purchasing the lot and creating a new private park called Chebucto Square with a monument of Eddie Cornwallis just to drive you and your fellow progressives at City Hall over the edge. As for your suspicions, for the record I have never owned a goat. :haha:

[OldDartmouthMark]

One can suspect anything they want. I suspect you're five cats and a goat in a Keith suit, but that doesn't make it true. I have no personal connection to this whatsoever although I do find the continual loss of our old streetscapes concerning and as a member of the Heritage Advisory Committee that would have considered this building, I resent seeing the process short-circuited by strategic demolitions.

I am 100% in agreement with this (the streetscapes, not the cat and goat thing).

This does not make one anti-development or against developers, but there simply has to be some direction given by the city. Nobody argues that zoning laws shouldn't exist, so therefore it's logical that there be some kind of heritage protection as well.

Yet we still hear that a developer should be able to do whatever they want with no interference from anybody. It's perplexing, and makes one wonder if some posters have a vested interest in the business, as the level of protest and superlative wording can border on the extreme.

[Keith P.]

I am 100% in agreement with this (the streetscapes, not the cat and goat thing).

This does not make one anti-development or against developers, but there simply has to be some direction given by the city. Nobody argues that zoning laws shouldn't exist, so therefore it's logical that there be some kind of heritage protection as well.

Yet we still hear that a developer should be able to do whatever they want with no interference from anybody. It's perplexing, and makes one wonder if some posters have a vested interest in the business, as the level of protest and superlative wording can border on the extreme.

Well, it could have been destroyed in a mysterious fire, like the old building (Hell Hotel, popular among a gang of youthful squatters back in the day) previously adjacent to this site, or the NFB Building, which has been a blight on Barrington St for 3 decades when HRM decided it could not be demolished as it should have been. At least this property owner was up-front about it.

One concludes certain elected members are anti-development from their actions, and the council member in question, like several others, has demonstrated that trait. In this specific case it is due to what seems to be a slavish devotion to planning policies and bylaws regardless of whether they make sense, unlike his mentor from the south end of Halifax who is far more blatant in his pandering to influential voters in his district. We mock the public hearings where we constantly hear "I'm not anti-development, I'm just against this development!" yet that is what has happened too often at Council.

Listening to the tripe being spewed at Council today one can only hope voters have had enough of this bunch and clean house this fall.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Well, opinions on council notwithstanding, I think this one should at least have been given the opportunity to go through the heritage evaluation process, and then if it was deemed worthy of demolition, so be it. The optics of this, whether it be the case or not, are that the developer hurriedly tore it down to avoid being required to include the building facade or whatever in the new development. It reeks of a sleazy act, if only because it's been done time and time again. If it turns into yet another lot that remains vacant for a decade or two, then it's just a slap in the face of citizens and council alike.

And, FWIW, we've conversed enough over the years on this board that we both know very well that we share opposite views on the NFB site (I believe that is what prompted you to adopt your 'wrecking ball' avatar), but for my 2¢ I'm happy that they saved it and are now turning it into a decent development that continues the theme of the heritage conservation district (though I wish they'd work a little faster...).

[Querce]

Looking forward to you declaring your candidacy, Keith

[Colin May]

Listening to the tripe being spewed at Council today one can only hope voters have had enough of this bunch and clean house this fall.[/QUOTE]

Everyone re-offering will be elected. If Linda Mosher runs against Cleary it will be tight, he won by 89 votes when she was busy with her dying husband.
Money will be tight next year and many businesses will be unable to pay rent and property taxes.

[Keith P.]

Everyone re-offering will be elected. If Linda Mosher runs against Cleary it will be tight, he won by 89 votes when she was busy with her dying husband.
Money will be tight next year and many businesses will be unable to pay rent and property taxes.

Sadly you are probably right. Mason, Cleary, Blackburn, Mancini, Austin, Smith and Zurawski all need to go. If Karsten is reoffering he needs to go too. I am disappointed in the recent change in Steve Streatch who used to be sensible but now seems to have been brainwashed by the "progressives" on numerous issues.

[IanWatson]

Karsten is not re-offering. Neither is Steve Adams or Lorelei Nichol. Matt Whitman is running for mayor, so his district is open. Russel Walker hasn't announced his intentions, as far as I'm aware.

[Dmajackson]

Karsten is not re-offering. Neither is Steve Adams or Lorelei Nichol. Matt Whitman is running for mayor, so his district is open. Russel Walker hasn't announced his intentions, as far as I'm aware.

According to the news today Walker is NOT re-offering after 26 years at the table.

[teddifax]

I think new blood will be good!!!

[Colin May]

I think new blood will be good!!!
The names I see have no experience for the position and will soon discover they have entered public life at a very difficult time. Quite amazing that Savage has such an easy time, almost never quoted in the media and has never been to a BOPC meeting other than when the FN member was sworn in and he had a few selfies taken and then left the room. He also made sure he was out of town when Chief Kinsella gave the apology to the Black community.

[IanWatson]

The names I see have no experience for the position

Does anyone really have experience for the position? Usually municipal councillors come from other walks of life; it's not like there's a training program or degree you can get in municipal politics.

[Colin May]

Does anyone really have experience for the position? Usually municipal councillors come from other walks of life; it's not like there's a training program or degree you can get in municipal politics.
I attended all Dartmouth council meetings for 3 years prior to being elected in 1991 and also attended many many meetings prior to 1988. I read all the financial statements from when Dartmouth became a city in 1961. My wife was
a member of Dartmouth School Board from 1985-91.
The Municipal Accounting Manual was amended after I raised questions regarding the improper investments by the city of Dartmouth.
Any prospective candidate needs to understand how the money flows and how the power of council of is exercised. And also needs to know how to read financial statements.

[Querce]

3411 Joseph Howe has received a building permit for a 100 unit, 8 story building (HR-1)

[Colin May]

A 'must read' account of life as a construction worker : https://quillette.com/2020/08/02/my-life-pouring-concrete/

[someone123]

East West Street

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116429137_2587847761318807_5317781515835593999_o.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=1JlkbISwOLUAX80OjO3&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=0baed47d3820895235438585acb7738b&oe=5F4D2ACB

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116289961_2587852791318304_759763449466083607_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=zNyF-ALXDpUAX-ePZ25&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=e539c3edb575e3606e4cff2155479f8f&oe=5F4F1DFD
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/)

The site:

https://i.imgur.com/7gUULHC.jpg

[HalifaxRetales]

Sounds like tenants were told it's the last weekend for the Harbourview Market on Canal St

Mosaik bought the property in 2012
makes sense to redevelop now that the streets are being realigned

[Querce]

A building permit was issued for a 7 story, 81 unit building at 670 Portland Hills Drive

[someone123]

Brewery Park on Agricola Street. Looks nice overall but I wish they had built a cornice on the building on the right, and maybe extended the ground floor woodwork along the side elevation more.

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/117436515_2603540736416176_4533773179330577968_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=7wxrBc2zDUgAX-7oADX&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=368e2e2394558091ce41e63363f9bbd9&oe=5F55A2E7
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/photos/pcb.2603555246414725/2603540733082843)

[Dmajackson]

^This is a 8-suite boutique hotel. BreweryPark.ca (https://brewerypark.ca/) has the rental information. They run at $100-150 per night usually.

[Dmajackson]

East West Street (5684 West Street). The project has no online presence. The developer is Atlantic Developments Ltd who also constructed Theatre Lofts (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=158692). The hatched area in the foreground is the hazard zone for West Fire Station. Facing the project Maynard Street is to the left and Agricola Street is to the right. In the immediate proximity is a fire station, 3-storey office building, convenience store, minor general commercial, a hotel, two bars, car mechanics, mixed housing (gernally lower-end to the east, nicer to the west), and Harris East is in the backyard. This site used to be home to Hydrostone Mechanic which closed early this year. The property is zoned HR-1 under the new Regional Centre Plan - Agricola Street Corridor. I assume this project was approved under this zoning. Since there is no indication of variances it must conform to the design requirements.

https://64.media.tumblr.com/68425e6c5eecb8b4676e958969ecb9f8/4588397882de1584-60/s400x600/19ab6e705161e7606df2e022bbbc94ec312aedbd.jpg
Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson) (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/EastWestStreet)

[Dmajackson]

And since I'm on the topic of North-End updates here is the mysterious 5510 Falkland Street / 2050 Gottingen Street. I'm not sure how they are putting 40-units on a quarter circle site but whatever this ends up looking like it will be unique. For reference the condos across Falkland are 5 floors (+ ground floor commercial) and total 55 units on a larger lot. The corner of this lot is encumbered by municipally owned ROW so the street frontage is a long curve along most of the property. The property is zoned CEN-2 under the new Regional Centre Plan. It's in a growth centre which has a maximum height of 90 metres subject to meeting F.A.R. of 7.50.


https://64.media.tumblr.com/091dd39412412483598219bcfd5cc618/4f24289dee4a85a8-01/s540x810/62545ca4b9cb45afd2b3b2c6813ec5bce83f77bc.jpg
Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson) (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/)

[someone123]

I'm pretty sure I saw a rendering for that one but I can't find it. Not sure if it was up to date.

It'll be interesting to see some pictures looking down Gottingen in a year or two when these new buildings are mostly finished and the barricades are down (although by then there may be some new ones under construction like the Housing Trust developments).

[OldDartmouthMark]

Brewery Park on Agricola Street. Looks nice overall but I wish they had built a cornice on the building on the right, and maybe extended the ground floor woodwork along the side elevation more.

:hmmm:

https://goo.gl/maps/KkQXGuR3WhNQVWja6

[planarchy]

The JAG hotel planned for corner of brunswick and gottingen has been cancelled. Thank god. It was a terrible proposal.

[JonHiseler]

The JAG hotel planned for corner of brunswick and gottingen has been cancelled. Thank god. It was a terrible proposal.

Where did you hear that?

[planarchy]

Where did you hear that?

There is an information report on the agenda for Regional Council on Tuesday explaining why the bonus agreement is not coming back to council for approval. There is an email attached to it from the architect saying the owners have deciding not to complete the application due to COVID.

https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/city-hall/regional-council/200818rci03.pdf

[JonHiseler]

There is an information report on the agenda for Regional Council on Tuesday explaining why the bonus agreement is not coming back to council for approval. There is an email attached to it from the architect saying the owners have deciding not to complete the application due to COVID.

https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/city-hall/regional-council/200818rci03.pdf

I see. A shame about the circumstances, but hopefully whatever happens to the property next has something that's designed better.

[Keith P.]

The Usual Suspects are calling for the HRM Auditor-General to look into the development consultation process:

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/community-groups-call-for-public-consultation-audit-on-hrm-developments-488434/

“The consultative process is a right of the public under the (municipal) charter so that the public is able to participate in the finalization of planning strategies,” said Peggy Cameron of the group Friends of the Common Halifax Common, one of 10 municipal societies and associations that co-signed a letter requesting the municipal auditor general conduct a review of the HRM planning department and the public engagement process.

In the letter to the office of the auditor general, the groups acknowledged the July 2018 report on the planning department to HRM council from Auditor General Evangeline Colman-Sadd but said the report did not address the crucial aspect of public participation.

“It’s a very big component of how development agreements are supposed to proceed but it wasn’t something that was reviewed,” Cameron said.

The letter included 10 sample case studies that identified dissatisfaction with public consultation on projects that ranged from the municipality’s extensive centre plan, the Young Avenue heritage homes, a six-storey apartment building on the residential corner of Coburg Road, a 25-storey building at Robie Street and Quinpool Road,, the former St. Pat’s high school site and plans for the Memorial Library, cenotaph and mass burial site.

“It should be clear why people feel manipulated by, and cynical about, public consultation -- the results often have little in common with the views expressed at public hearings,” Michael Bradfield, a retired Dalhousie University economics professor and a former two-term member of the Halifax Peninsula Regional Planning Advisory Committee, commented in one of the case studies.

“Surveys are like having a one-way “conversation This dampens the enthusiasm to participate in the process which so often seems pre-determined and futile.”
Bradfield said any analysis of the cost-effectiveness of public consultation must therefore assess how much decisions have reflected public input.

“There are any number of other examples of community groups having tried to influence the planning process and having failed,” Cameron said of the sample cases attached to the letter to the auditor general.

“All of the citizens who wrote are very credible, well known Halifax citizens who are more or less heavy hitters, they are not just there because they are complainers, they are not there because they are just about one issue -- the box that HRM likes to put people in is to save Halifax -- it’s not about heritage, it’s about overall vision for the city.

“If the city is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on planning and the public are able to participate in that process, then there should be something that affirms that the citizens’ wishes are in some way, a better way, respected in the plans.”



So much nonsense in this article that it is difficult to fully explain.

[eastcoastal]

The Usual Suspects are calling for the HRM Auditor-General to look into the development consultation process:

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/community-groups-call-for-public-consultation-audit-on-hrm-developments-488434/

“The consultative process is a right of the public under the (municipal) charter so that the public is able to participate in the finalization of planning strategies,” said Peggy Cameron of the group Friends of the Common Halifax Common, one of 10 municipal societies and associations that co-signed a letter requesting the municipal auditor general conduct a review of the HRM planning department and the public engagement process.

In the letter to the office of the auditor general, the groups acknowledged the July 2018 report on the planning department to HRM council from Auditor General Evangeline Colman-Sadd but said the report did not address the crucial aspect of public participation.

“It’s a very big component of how development agreements are supposed to proceed but it wasn’t something that was reviewed,” Cameron said.

The letter included 10 sample case studies that identified dissatisfaction with public consultation on projects that ranged from the municipality’s extensive centre plan, the Young Avenue heritage homes, a six-storey apartment building on the residential corner of Coburg Road, a 25-storey building at Robie Street and Quinpool Road,, the former St. Pat’s high school site and plans for the Memorial Library, cenotaph and mass burial site.

“It should be clear why people feel manipulated by, and cynical about, public consultation -- the results often have little in common with the views expressed at public hearings,” Michael Bradfield, a retired Dalhousie University economics professor and a former two-term member of the Halifax Peninsula Regional Planning Advisory Committee, commented in one of the case studies.

“Surveys are like having a one-way “conversation This dampens the enthusiasm to participate in the process which so often seems pre-determined and futile.”
Bradfield said any analysis of the cost-effectiveness of public consultation must therefore assess how much decisions have reflected public input.

“There are any number of other examples of community groups having tried to influence the planning process and having failed,” Cameron said of the sample cases attached to the letter to the auditor general.

“All of the citizens who wrote are very credible, well known Halifax citizens who are more or less heavy hitters, they are not just there because they are complainers, they are not there because they are just about one issue -- the box that HRM likes to put people in is to save Halifax -- it’s not about heritage, it’s about overall vision for the city.

“If the city is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on planning and the public are able to participate in that process, then there should be something that affirms that the citizens’ wishes are in some way, a better way, respected in the plans.”



So much nonsense in this article that it is difficult to fully explain.

Yes, this is a difficult area to dissect. On the one hand, lots of people may feel that planners, urban designers, and architects shouldn't undertake these types of planning/design decisions themselves as they're unable to see past their egos and whatever the prevailing dogma is. On the other hand, many may feel that average citizens (no matter if they are "heavy hitters" or not - what is WITH that little qualifier?), don't have the understanding of broader planning/design implications and may solely focus on what they perceive as best for them.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I don't know how to weigh in on this topic.

On one hand, the city needs density in the downtown/peninsula area and I think it's good to expedite the process to get buildings up and meet the demand for more residential units in the area.

On the other hand, I find it dismaying when salvageable heritage buildings continue to be razed in order to meet this demand, and overall I find myself disappointed by the appearance and apparent quality level of most of the buildings being constructed these days.

The article appears to speak to some of it, but also appears to be a power move by the "friends of" people to try to wrestle the process more in their favour.

Really, I would like the process to be more granular to specifically pick out the cases I mentioned above, while allowing some 'slam dunk' projects to proceed quickly.

That said, all evidence points to this never happening. So the struggle continues...

[Keith P.]

Public consultation as conducted in HRM is IMO a waste of time, energy and money for all concerned, especially in the current climate. Think about it: an overview of whatever is being proposed can be seen virtually without needing to go to a presentation, and questions can be handled the same way. When it comes time for the public to say it's piece, that is where it really goes off the rails. How many times have we talked about those gong-show meetings where people rant and rave about stuff that is totally unrelated to the proposal or completely bogus, where some sing songs, read poems, cry, or otherwise engage in excess drama; and where the Usual Suspects (i.e. Cameron, Bradfield, Ruffman, Epstein, the Haivens and a handful of others) bring up the same tired arguments about height or greedy developers? There is an undercurrent of entitlement in the comments attributed to them in that piece where they seem to believe their POV is correct and anyone who disagrees is either wrong or in the pocket of special interests.

I am certainly no fan of HRM's Planning Dept. I think it has gone badly off track and we are spending a lot of money on a dept that is badly run and is heading in several wrong directions. But this particular issue is about public consultation and that has always been excessive in my view. Whether anyone actually pays attention to what is said is another thing, but that is on Council for not doing its job if that is true. And that is what elections are for, not the Auditor General.

[someone123]

I wonder if the heavy hitters can point to examples where they constructively improved upon developers' and planners' rules and proposals, resulting in better development than otherwise would have occurred while providing the same amount of space for residents and businesses.

My impression is that Cameron et al. are basically BANANAs and fight against any construction. I guess that is understandable since they are already comfortable homeowners and generally tenured profs or retirees, but that does not work for everybody in the city. To many, the housing supply matters, rents matter, the availability of commercial space matters, and so do construction and other jobs.

My impression is that Halifax entered a new golden age as the prominence of the NIMBYs waned. More actual humans living in the core, more commerce, more visitors (until covid). The NIMBYs complained bitterly about the last round of highrise construction, the Nova Centre and the Roy, and yet those are now popular tourist Instagram photo subjects.

[Drybrain]

The article appears to speak to some of it, but also appears to be a power move by the "friends of" people to try to wrestle the process more in their favour.


That's exactly what it is. The signatories are on the Friends of the Common website, and they're all the usuals: Haiven, Cameron, south end homeowners, etc., as well as some stranger bedfellows like the military heritage people.

The funny thing is they're talking about opening up consultation to underrepresented groups--which I take to mean renters, lower-income people, African Nova Scotian and Indigenous communities, weighing in on things that affect them, etc.

But that's obviously not really what these people want; they're just couching their demands that way. Cameron and the rest are obviously just peeved that consultation doesn't equal deference, and that projects can proceed despite their opposition. I don't believe for a moment that they want more diverse viewpoints represented. They just want to dominate the discussion and cast doubt on the consultation process because they don't always get their way.

[HalifaxRetales]

The Letter

Dear Friends of Halifax Common,

FHC has sent a letter to the HRM Auditor General requesting a review of HRM Planning Department’s public consultative process as a charter matter. The letter includes ten case studies as evidence for the need for such a review. These are written by individual citizens representing various volunteer community societies or associations and document their experience with HRM’s public consultation process Please take the time to read these. It is quite the body of evidence.

Media have been very interested in this request. Interviews by News 95.7 Rick Howe and Sheldon MacLeod and a Chronicle Herald story “Community groups call for public consultation audit on HRM developments" explain more on why "the consultation processes are often seen as manipulative or even cynical” and the review by the HRM AG is needed.

The case studies include compelling accounts from:
Young Avenue District Heritage Conservation
Peggy Cunningham PhD Chair, Young Avenue District Heritage Conservation
Professor, (Former Dean of Management) Dalhousie University

Halifax Home Owners Association/Peninsular South Residents Association
Owen Carrigan PhD, Former President Saint Mary’s University

Halifax Military Heritage Preservation Society
Chris Marriott, Chair, Halifax Military Heritage Preservation Society

Development Options Halifax
Larry Haiven, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Department of Management, SMU

Peninsula Advisory Committee, Former Volunteer Member
Michael Bradfield, PhD, Professor (Retired), Department of Economics, Dalhousie

Centre Plan: Corridor Creep: Charles St
Howard Epstein, LLB, Former Halifax City Counsellor, Former Nova Scotia MLA

Oak-Allan Street Bike Corridor–anonymous

WillowTreeGroup—from https://willowtreehalifax.wordpress.com

St Pat’s High School — Quinpool Common Group

Friends of Halifax Common – see www.halifaxcommon.ca, https://www.halifaxcommon.ca/wp-content/uploads/Attachment-new- APL-staff-report-required.pdf?189db0&189db0 etc.

These examples represent a range of situations and concerns but are not exhaustive-others such as Imagine Bloomfield or St Pat’s Alexander abound. Please help make these concerns relevant to the October 17th municipal election and to the on-going Centre Plan process by letting others know. Let us know what you think.

Best Wishes for staying well,
Peggy Cameron for Friends of Halifax Common

[Jonovision]

According to The Examiner the 3 proposals for the new waterfront art gallery will be made public next month for comment.

https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/province-house/public-to-be-asked-to-comment-on-three-design-proposals-for-waterfront-art-gallery/

The 3 teams who have designs are:

Architecture49 with Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Hargreaves Jones

DIALOG + Acre Architects

KPMB Architects with Omar Gandhi Architect, Jordan Bennett Studio, Elder Lorraine Whitman (NWAC), Public Work and Transsolar


I'm really excited to see the Diller Scofidio + Renfro proposal. They were the ones who designed The Shed at Hudson Yards in New York. As well as The High Line!

[someone123]

Thanks for posting. This is a nice update. I'm eager to see the designs.

I think this is pretty significant since it will allow for exhibition of the Annie Liebowitz collection and because it along with Cunard will fill in the last big holes on the waterfront. There will still be room for improvement along the waterfront but it will feel consistently built up and will have a good concentration of attractions all accessible on foot.

[Dmajackson]

Demolition Permits issued for 2850-2860 Isleville Street. This is the vacant commercial building and its neighbour across the street from Camille Residences and kitty corner to 5550 Bilby (both U/C). Unlike a lot of the immediate area it is not subject to a development agreement. It falls under C-2 zoning. The lots have frontage on both Isleville and Bilby Street.

Demoliton Permits issued for 1538 - 1540 Carlton Street. These are residential houses on the dead end near Camp Hill Cemetery. Small lots but they are zoned CEN-2 which is the most dense zoning outside of Downtown Plan Area.

[IanWatson]

Demolition Permits issued for 2850-2860 Isleville Street. This is the vacant commercial building and its neighbour across the street from Camille Residences and kitty corner to 5550 Bilby (both U/C). Unlike a lot of the immediate area it is not subject to a development agreement. It falls under C-2 zoning. The lots have frontage on both Isleville and Bilby Street.

I’m pretty sure this one is going to be a large veterinary clinic.

[atbw]

Demoliton Permits issued for 1538 - 1540 Carlton Street. These are residential houses on the dead end near Camp Hill Cemetery. Small lots but they are zoned CEN-2 which is the most dense zoning outside of Downtown Plan Area.

This is quite a small lot indeed. I wonder if it would be somehow integrated into the Killam proposal across the street? I don't know what else would really go in there.

[someone123]

2050 Gottingen

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/118194687_2664130503690532_4393649573712170490_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=WHUcgdkxi_sAX-nYoLC&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=7daa539a60385e1c76802e820528bd8a&oe=5F6EDD02
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/)

[someone123]

New steps:

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e35/117522439_1062058897530149_5148711977560730003_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=105&_nc_ohc=uM04ttw9ai4AX9E-x0c&oh=5dfc97c787221e9295bfc8c73dcf7c96&oe=5F72E0BD
Source (https://www.instagram.com/p/CD11KY7Hnoe/)

I wonder what the old cast iron work here used to look like, or if it'll be restored? I don't recall ever seeing it there.

[someone123]

Also Tramway Building work is beginning:

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e35/117516626_784461549030187_7342923120200913183_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=107&_nc_ohc=4Z77xRBEP4MAX-4yfPb&oh=adbd532e1511ec6a25041a048d2fa4f0&oe=5F75D586
Source (https://www.instagram.com/p/CD11KY7Hnoe/)

[Keith P.]

New steps:

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e35/117522439_1062058897530149_5148711977560730003_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=105&_nc_ohc=uM04ttw9ai4AX9E-x0c&oh=5dfc97c787221e9295bfc8c73dcf7c96&oe=5F72E0BD
Source (https://www.instagram.com/p/CD11KY7Hnoe/)


Hopefully the work resulted in the colony of rats living in that bank being evicted.

[someone123]

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e35/s1080x1080/82873496_1611268585702486_3256896416678511284_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=110&_nc_ohc=mIz5dnHvyYoAX_CZmF4&oh=494b2085e076bda0dad3086d8a9243e9&oe=5F75B049
Source (https://www.instagram.com/p/CCWZu5mH-pu/)

[Dmajackson]

Case #23066 Details - 1029 Tower Road (https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-23066-heritage-property-1029-tower-road-halifax)

"The applicant is seeking to conserve the heritage building on the property and to construct a new three-storey building beside the heritage building on the same property. In the development proposal, the heritage building will be repositioned to face Tower Road on a new foundation, and it will include a new commercial use on its ground floor.

If approved, the heritage building will be completely restored to its original condition and face Tower Road with a large front yard. The heritage building will include a new coffee shop with residential units in the basement and second storey. The new three-storey building will include six to nine residential units"

A small project but a very unique approach to making the best use of the land.

[Good Baklava]

Thanks for your updates David, very informative. These are what keep the forum alive. I wonder if this type of arrangement will catch on.

[atbw]

Case #23066 Details - 1029 Tower Road (https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-23066-heritage-property-1029-tower-road-halifax)

"The applicant is seeking to conserve the heritage building on the property and to construct a new three-storey building beside the heritage building on the same property. In the development proposal, the heritage building will be repositioned to face Tower Road on a new foundation, and it will include a new commercial use on its ground floor.

If approved, the heritage building will be completely restored to its original condition and face Tower Road with a large front yard. The heritage building will include a new coffee shop with residential units in the basement and second storey. The new three-storey building will include six to nine residential units"

A small project but a very unique approach to making the best use of the land.

Happy to see this, I know some work has been ongoing on this lot for some time now, looking like a lot has been taken out of the house for the renovation. Similar to the project on South/Harvey St., I think a lot of historic buildings in the South End are going to see renovations funded by modern additions on the same lot. I think this works well for residential areas, and appreciate that the focus seems to be on restoring the buildings vs. reducing them to facades.

[someone123]

I think this works well for residential areas, and appreciate that the focus seems to be on restoring the buildings vs. reducing them to facades.

I agree. I think it's the best way forward for these historic areas.

I think sympathetic additions can work well too, particularly third floors added onto 2 storey box type houses. I think the city should focus on preserving and enhancing character and historic styles rather than simply trying to prevent change.

Halifax occupies an unusual spot as far as being a historic city that is also evolving quickly even in a lot of its neighbourhoods.

The weak spot I see is that there are a lot of houses that slowly lose detailing over time or have wood siding and windows replaced with cheap vinyl. The city would look so much better if it had maintenance standards and funding in historic areas like the old South End.

[atbw]

I agree. I think it's the best way forward for these historic areas.

I think sympathetic additions can work well too, particularly third floors added onto 2 storey box type houses. I think the city should focus on preserving and enhancing character and historic styles rather than simply trying to prevent change.

Halifax occupies an unusual spot as far as being a historic city that is also evolving quickly even in a lot of its neighbourhoods.

The weak spot I see is that there are a lot of houses that slowly lose detailing over time or have wood siding and windows replaced with cheap vinyl. The city would look so much better if it had maintenance standards and funding in historic areas like the old South End.
My mind immediately went to the flatiron building at Inglis & Victoria. It's all brick, but covered in vinyl. What looks like a drab old building could become a landmark again.

[Drybrain]

My mind immediately went to the flatiron building at Inglis & Victoria. It's all brick, but covered in vinyl. What looks like a drab old building could become a landmark again.


A property owner with vision would absolutely restore this thing to a neighbourhood landmark, and perhaps use it as the lynchpin for additional development.

My fear is that, given our mostly mediocre development community, where very few of the big players seem to understand how to work in a historic context, it'll be bought, razed, and replaced by something mundane and featureless.

[someone123]

A property owner with vision would absolutely restore this thing to a neighbourhood landmark, and perhaps use it as the lynchpin for additional development.

My fear is that, given our mostly mediocre development community, where very few of the big players seem to understand how to work in a historic context, it'll be bought, razed, and replaced by something mundane and featureless.

Time to push city politicians to put rules in place to prevent that. Turn Inglis Street into a historic district with selective protections for character buildings while allowing development on other sites.

Inglis might be my #1 pick for a streetscape that has a lot of potential but isn't quite there and could go either way. In general the old South End (Bishop to Inglis or so) has tons of character buildings but poor maintenance and lots of reno hack jobs.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Case #23066 Details - 1029 Tower Road (https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-23066-heritage-property-1029-tower-road-halifax)

"The applicant is seeking to conserve the heritage building on the property and to construct a new three-storey building beside the heritage building on the same property. In the development proposal, the heritage building will be repositioned to face Tower Road on a new foundation, and it will include a new commercial use on its ground floor.

If approved, the heritage building will be completely restored to its original condition and face Tower Road with a large front yard. The heritage building will include a new coffee shop with residential units in the basement and second storey. The new three-storey building will include six to nine residential units"

A small project but a very unique approach to making the best use of the land.

What a great project - thanks for posting it!

I wish this could be used as an example on how to treat heritage buildings in the future in Halifax - preserve the character, yet update and build new while respecting the heritage aspects of the property. Very nice.

As a side note, it would be interesting to see how they will move the building to its new orientation - I know it's been done before but it always amazes me that these old buildings are so structurally sound that you can just lift them up, rotate them and place them down on a new foundation like that. Very cool. :tup:

[someone123]

A parcel of land is for sale including 1525 Birmingham:

https://www.commerciallistings.cbre.ca/en-CA/listings/land/details/CA-Plus-292799/1525-birmingham-street-halifax-b3j-0b5?view=isSale

This area:

https://www.commerciallistings.cbre.ca/resources/fileassets/CA-Plus-292799/c9caab7e/Queen%20and%20Birmingham%20Image%202_watermark_Photo_2_large.jpg

Another angle:

https://www.commerciallistings.cbre.ca/resources/fileassets/CA-Plus-292799/6972a9f6/Queen%20and%20Birmingham%20Image%201_watermark_Photo_1_large.jpg

[Nouvellecosse]

Oh no!! They better not be turning that charming human-scaled strip into some large souless development. I've got a horrible feeling about this.

[mleblanc]

Oh no!! They better not be turning that charming human-scaled strip into some large souless development. I've got a horrible feeling about this.

I'm on your side about this one. It's one of the most charming retail rows in Halifax, and right off Spring Garden. Unfortunate that none of them are heritage designated, as CBRE is listing this as a redevelopment opportunity, and we all know the developers won't preserve these unless they are forced. Too prime of a location.

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

Pizza Corner will never be the same. I lived upstairs over King of Donair for one year when I was a student at Dalhousie.

[IanWatson]

That strip was one of the ones that was up for a city-initiated heritage designation. The owners complained to Council and the designation didn’t go through.

[Good Baklava]

I believe there was recently a Coast article talking about the landlord's refusal to implement heritage designation. I suppose it was only a matter of time before these structures met their end. If there's one advantage I could point out about wooden siding, it would be the near unlimited possibilities for adding vivid colours to the streetscape. This may be highly unlikely to materialize, but it would be neat if parts of the new shopfronts could each have a section of wooden siding that could be repainted to whatever colour pleases the tenant.

[someone123]

It's a tough one. It's hard to see what you'd do to preserve that row other than just keeping it as it's always been, which probably amounts to the owner losing out on a huge amount of potential income since this area has become so expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if the municipality has also contributed to this through tax rates. Maybe the owner would have been more receptive to the heritage designation deals if it involved adjusting the tax rates to suit the lowered development potential? I don't know the details.

I'm not sure the wooden boxes are that incredibly architecturally but they provide texture and colour that the glassy (often simple and generic without much ornamentation or detail) new developments do not. In principle there's no reason why a new development couldn't be just as nice or nicer.

I will also miss the Birmingham side if that streetscape goes.

[Dmajackson]

This probably won't amount to anything major but 5047 Salter Street is being demolished. It is one the few leftover waterfront industrial buildings and its been in rugged shape for as long as I can remember. At least it will provide a better view coming out of the Salt Yard and up onto the Salter Street boardwalk.

Also the Volvo dealership at 3363 Kempt Road is being demolished. Safe to assume this is part of the never ending list of dealerships rebuilding and rebranding along that strip.

[atbw]

I will also miss the Birmingham side if that streetscape goes.

I always find that little end of the Spring Garden area so nice. The mishmash of buildings is so much more interesting than some of the block-sized developments we've gotten. I think there is a level of loss we have to accept, but it's sad to see these three iconic buildings go up with no protection.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I always find that little end of the Spring Garden area so nice. The mishmash of buildings is so much more interesting than some of the block-sized developments we've gotten. I think there is a level of loss we have to accept, but it's sad to see these three iconic buildings go up with no protection.

Seems like we're not the only ones who feel this way:
https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/john-demont-how-much-longer-will-halifaxs-fabled-vintage-row-be-around-495193/

I think it's sad that so many people seem to see the charm in these structures, yet we are all resigned to accept that they will likely be torn down and replaced by a building that will be functional, but probably possess very little character in return, and that the streetscape will probably suffer from it.

But this is Halifax, one of the more historic cities in the country, but one that doesn't really value its heritage. Sigh...

[Keith P.]

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

[kzt79]

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

I agree entirely with your sentiment.

I abhor this whole “give your head a shake” expression that has become so popular. My opinion remains unchanged even after a good shake, and I bet it’s the same for anyone else.

[someone123]

I suspect the negative sentiment has as much to do with the imagined replacement as it does with the old buildings. There is a tendency to go from finer-grained, more detailed buildings with more street-level interest to larger buildings with long, plain facades. Many new buildings use a grey or beige colour palette and frankly look pretty dull. They remind me of shopping malls. If they had a bit more texture and colour or maybe even ornamentation I think they'd be a net win compared to most wooden box type houses.

Another simple fact is that Halifax is not a very big city so these older areas are not very extensive. Once they're gone they're gone. There are some preserved residential areas like Schmidtville but there not much preserved commercial of this type.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Tbh, the Birmingham side is a much bigger loss... why is nobody talking about that?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Gave my head a shake, but my ideas haven't changed... ;)

At least I can gain comfort from the fact that I can always count on Keith to pass judgement on any thoughts and opinions that I post here. :haha:

Fully agree with someone123's post. :tup:

[Drybrain]

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

[OldDartmouthMark]

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

Well said. While they may appear unremarkable to some, they add architectural variance to an area where it's needed, as well as some evidence of the type of building that was once very common in the area - like a small window to the past.

I know it's hard to explain cultural value to folks for whom property values are the only values that are important, but small sections like this are important to providing character and interest to neighbourhoods like this.

The thing I find somewhat amusing is that anytime somebody posts that an old building should be saved, the usual folks always step up and provide derision to their comments - as if the who like old buildings don't have a right to voice their views. However, in reality, the building is almost always torn down, so the anti-heritage folks almost always have a 'win'... yet they still can't stand anybody to post any views that don't align with theirs. :shrug:

[bluenoser]

I'm not sure if this is any consolation but the parcel in question doesn't seem to include the entire row on Queen (4 out of the 7 older buildings) nor the two Woozles buildings and its two neighbours on Birmingham. Assuming the prospective buyer doesn't turn around and purchase the neighboring properties, that should at least mean more of these buildings intact for the time being, and a finer-grained development as opposed to a 'blockbuster'.

Having said that, it sounds like the entire row on Queen is in trouble:

According to the CEO of I.H. Mathers, the Queen Street row houses were in poor shape when they were acquired and an engineer has found them to be not structurally sound.https://globalnews.ca/news/7327381/historic-buildings-for-sale-halifax-heritage/

Apparently, a number of the owners were open to heritage designations but not enough incentive was provided beyond fixing up facades.

I've always liked the 1525 Birmingham with its little underpass to the courtyard, and there's not a lot of mid-century stock downtown, but I could live with it being replaced if the quality were right.

[someone123]

People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

There's another strip like this on Agricola, which I'd imagine can be demolished at any time.

It seems like there's a disconnect between the popularity of this architecture and how the city develops or how buildings are maintained. I think this is a classic market failure or tragedy of the commons, where people like a certain look in the city but don't necessarily have a strong incentive to maintain their own buildings in that way. With the Birmingham and Queen houses most of the benefit of the appearance goes to the people walking by while the owners pay the bill.

The obvious fix is to make heritage incentives stronger, and it's good to see some discussion of that. Not just that the owners are Evil Developers but that they were offered compensation that amounted to just a tiny sliver of what they'd have to give up to preserve these buildings.

[Keith P.]

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

Sorry, but a lot of this is simple nonsense. You have all sorts of these kind of buildings throughout the area. They just aren't painted lime green and bright blue. Walk a block or two and there are plenty to choose from if you are looking for "cultural significance" (which to me sounds more like someone saying they stand out just because of how they are painted, like the similar ones we see in places like St. John's). There is no logical reason to leave them where they are. The issue is that they are on a busy street in a commercial district and so are likely to finally be redeveloped, just like the old Radio Shack that used to be on the corner of SGR and Queen was back in the '80s. It is more of a commentary on how sluggish HRM has been economically for the last 30 years or so until just recertly.

The "widespread reaction in favor of preservation" is not at all widespread from what I have been seeing elsewhere. I think it is more the typical HRM reaction to virtually any development that gets proposed pretty much anywhere. Yes, progress means you are probably losing something in just about any case. But we need to be able to see beyond the end of our noses at what gains it also brings, something Haligonians and even many members of this forum seem to have difficulty doing. Living in the past seldom works out well.

I have to think this is just the start. Assuming HRM's heavy-handed social experiments in eliminating vehicles from the DT and limiting deliveries and access to businesses in the area don't kill commercial activity on SGR entirely, I would expect many of the other old buildings on SGR to disappear in the near future. It's not like many of them look like they belong on Bond or Oxford Sts in London after all.

[pblaauw]

Gave my head a shake and now I feel like Sir John A. MacDonald.

Too soon?

[eastcoastal]

... I've always liked the 1525 Birmingham with its little underpass to the courtyard, and there's not a lot of mid-century stock downtown...

This is possibly one of my favourite buildings in the area.

[Dmajackson]

Demolition permit has been issued for 5515-5527 Cogswell Street. These are the two brick commercial buildings on the Northwest corner of Cogswell and Gottingen formerly home to Family SOS and radio stations.

I haven't heard of any plans for redevelopment of the site. Whatever gets built there will be under CEN-2 zoning with a maximum F.A.R. of 7.5 so it will be substantial and on a prominent corner site at the edge of downtown.

[Colin May]

Demolition permit has been issued for 5515-5527 Cogswell Street. These are the two brick commercial buildings on the Northwest corner of Cogswell and Gottingen formerly home to Family SOS and radio stations.
Good place for a new police station.

[someone123]

Hopefully this will be a nice looking mixed-use building with some commercial space that complements the growing cluster of new-ish businesses along Gottingen Street.

One day I hope the Staples gets torn down too. It really sticks out now as an inappropriate development.

I posted this recently in the Canada section. It still has some holes but Gottingen is looking more and more like an evenly built up medium density area. North Park also stands out a bit; the Armoury facade will be a big improvement when the scaffolding comes down. If it were to become a heritage streetscape with a sympathetic infill building just south of the armoury building and then renos to the vinyl-clad houses it would be pretty impressive. I don't think it is one yet but Falkland-Maynard (bounded by Cogswell and North Park) should be a heritage district like Schmidtville.

https://i.imgur.com/bnZR9mC.jpg
Source (https://www.flickr.com/photos/baileyparsons/50324707672/)

[Drybrain]

The new developments along Gottingen in the past few years have been pretty good, and a huge step up from the Theatre Lofts-type stuff built not long ago.

A lot of the new buildings seem to fly under the radar because they're small, but the street is all the better for that scale. Developers don't seem to be assembling big parcels for tear-downs and rebuilds, and the result is that the eclectic and varied nature of the street is being retained even as the density is being built up. e.g., the building that replaced the Forbes building, or the two under construction visible here (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6525058,-63.5841393,3a,75y,357.46h,97.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSJ5v0iSgEO8_QX3tliCD_g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

And yes, that Staples needs to go. A building that meets the corner really well would be a great entree into the North End (I know, I know, not really the North End...).

[teddifax]

Yesterday's paper had the regular City offerings and one was that the 12 storey development on Joseph Howe Drive to replace the Pink low rise building, was approved.

[j.graham]

Southwest Properties owns the Staples lot and they plan to "eventually redevelop the site".

[someone123]

Southwest Properties owns the Staples lot and they plan to "eventually redevelop the site".

Interesting. It seems like local developers like to maintain a pipeline of projects that starts with land acquisition and then moves on to project approval and construction. This makes sense since it can take years to complete a project and availability of land varies.

Southwest worked on the Maple and then Curve/Pavilion and now it looks like their next major project will be Cunard.

I wonder if Staples could be after Cunard or if they have other plans before then? Has a developer been chosen for the Ralston site?

[DigitalNinja]

Interesting. It seems like local developers like to maintain a pipeline of projects that starts with land acquisition and then moves on to project approval and construction. This makes sense since it can take years to complete a project and availability of land varies.

Southwest worked on the Maple and then Curve/Pavilion and now it looks like their next major project will be Cunard.

I wonder if Staples could be after Cunard or if they have other plans before then? Has a developer been chosen for the Ralston site?

South West also has the huge Sutton Ridge development that they haven't really started on yet.

[pblaauw]

I think Cogswell/Gottingen is where the new Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre is being built.

[JonHiseler]

I think Cogswell/Gottingen is where the new Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre is being built.

Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre is going across the street from the police station

[MonctonRad]

Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre is going across the street from the police station

That should create some interesting...…...synergy. :rolleyes:

[Hali87]

The old BMO tower seems to be getting a rebrand:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50354212378_5301cb3c16_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jHCv2u)
Untitled (https://flic.kr/p/2jHCv2u) by Hali87 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/72021271@N05/), on Flickr

[Keith P.]

Makes sense since BMO relocated to the Nova Centre a couple of years ago. Too bad; I really liked the old main branch much better.

[atbw]

The old BMO tower seems to be getting a rebrand:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50354212378_5301cb3c16_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2jHCv2u)
Untitled (https://flic.kr/p/2jHCv2u) by Hali87 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/72021271@N05/), on Flickr

Was there other work set to take place on this? It’s nice to see them lean into the Art Deco styling.

[mleblanc]

Was there other work set to take place on this? It’s nice to see them lean into the Art Deco styling.

There was originally a podium planned as well as upper building lighting. It looks like the podium was scrapped?

[Jonovision]

All of the windows and spandrel panels in between are slowly being replaced. All of the ones in the pic are new. They still have the Hollis and midblock facades to finish.

Still hoping there is lighting embedded in these new panels that will get turned on once its done.

[Dmajackson]

Demolition permit has been issued for 5515-5527 Cogswell Street. These are the two brick commercial buildings on the Northwest corner of Cogswell and Gottingen formerly home to Family SOS and radio stations.

I haven't heard of any plans for redevelopment of the site. Whatever gets built there will be under CEN-2 zoning with a maximum F.A.R. of 7.5 so it will be substantial and on a prominent corner site at the edge of downtown.

For future reference this is how 5515 Cogswell currently looks.

https://64.media.tumblr.com/13f7592de7f8f5b109ed3cb2479fc1d7/bc3e3cf406d9afde-2c/s1280x1920/22ccfa08565ecae4da946ac5fed7e4bf029bcdb2.jpg
Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson) (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/)

[Keith P.]

The nearest thing to a flatiron-style building we have; will be a bit sorry to see it go. It still looks good for what it is and being 70 years old.

[teddifax]

What does a F.A.R. of 7.5 mean exactly... Please explain like I don't understand... which is what it is... ha, ha...

[Phalanx]

Here's a good explanation of FAR with diagrams:
https://www.shapeyourcityhalifax.ca/1041/widgets/5965/documents/15253

Basically if the building takes up its entire site and all floors are equal, then it can be 7.5 stories high. If it takes up less area, then it can be taller (up to a point). In all likelihood, only the podium would use close to the maximum plot area, so it could be several stories taller.

[teddifax]

Thank you so much... reading this now.

[Jonovision]

Saw this in the Toronto Thread:

https://canada.constructconnect.com/app/uploads/2020/09/IH-Don-Valley-bridges-bridge-paint-FRONT-mainweb.jpg

https://canada.constructconnect.com/app/uploads/2020/09/IH-Don-Valley-bridges-bridge-paint-FRONT-mainweb.jpg

It's the new bridge for the large Port Lands development. It is being fabricated and painted here in Woodside and then shipped to Toronto.