SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=223)
-   -   [Halifax] Queen's Marque | 30 m | 10 fl | U/C (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=145372)

sdm Feb 3, 2008 3:13 PM

[Halifax] Queen's Marque | 30 m | 10 fl | U/C
 
www.queenslanding.ca

Forgot about this project that The Armour Group is trying to do. Worthy of having a thread, unless there is one already.

Hopefully we will hear more news on this soon as it was announced in 2005.

Project highlights

250 Room Hotel
170,000 Sqft Class A office
70,000 Sqft of Res
Retail
Redevelopment of Maritime Museum as well as raising the last corvette (HMCS Sackville) and placing it indoors etc.

Would be increaible to see this started/ completed. Would change the waterfront.

Haliguy Feb 3, 2008 3:48 PM

Good to hear this project is still alive. I was kind of worried it may have died.

Wishblade Feb 3, 2008 3:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haliguy (Post 3328206)
Good to hear this project is still alive. I was kind of worried it may have died.

Well the website looks like it hasn't been updated in some time, and the bulletin board is down so I don't know if theres been any recent news about the project. The silence around it is killing me though lol.

sdm Feb 3, 2008 5:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wishblade (Post 3328216)
Well the website looks like it hasn't been updated in some time, and the bulletin board is down so I don't know if theres been any recent news about the project. The silence around it is killing me though lol.

No kidding.

With the shortage of downtown office along with the need for more of a waterfront attraction site i am surprised this is not already going.

someone123 Feb 3, 2008 8:03 PM

The project involves various levels of government and that assures several years of minimal progress it seems.

The Salter Block development has also been in the works for ages. Both projects are needed to improve the waterfront.

(PS - I changed the thread names. This subforum and the suburb subforum both have naming conventions to make it easier to browse through different projects. Threads in the rest of the local section can have any name.)

Dmajackson May 28, 2008 1:26 AM

From their website:
http://queenslanding.ca/images/boards/1.jpg
Credit: http://queenslanding.ca/plans.php.

Good news is the Salter Block is moving ahead. Hopefully this follows suite and starts soon.

Dmajackson Aug 22, 2008 2:57 AM

I think its about time to revive this thread.

"SDM" some other things you might want to add to your list is the aquarium, redevelopment of Sackville Landing and the theatres.

reddog794 Aug 22, 2008 6:06 PM

This may seem a bit silly of a question, but what is this development waiting for to break ground?

Are we waiting for it to go to council? I don't know much about this project save for what's on the website, and on here.

Something like this would drastically change the face of the DT/WF area. So at times, I wonder if this isn't just more smoke being blown uncomfortably. I highly doubt it is, but growing up here, has made me never to expect what I'm told by anybody from any level of govt.

Dmajackson Aug 22, 2008 6:29 PM

The waiting is caused by the three levels of government this project has to go through.

Council has to approve it, the Waterfront Development Corp. (WDC) is provincially operated and I'm guessing the feds have something to do with the museum part of it. And as everyone arund here knows getting all levels of government to agree on something is a long process. This is getting a little bit too long though. Normally we'd know something after THREE YEARS!

someone123 Aug 22, 2008 6:46 PM

It's not merely the approval that's causing the delay, it's the fact that much of the developer's plans include public-sector funding from multiple levels of government. Some of the land is also owned by the government or WDC. I believe the HRM owns Sackville Landing for example and I seem to recall reading somewhere that they're planning to overhaul it soon.

I hope some development moves forward as soon as possible for this area but I'm not surprised by the delay, especially given how slowly the government tends to work in Halifax and NS.

Dmajackson Apr 5, 2009 5:04 PM

This development was brought up in a Halifax Magazine article this month focused on the Waterfront and the developments happening (or not happening).

It mentioned that this one is still on the list of happenings but it will be at least 2011 before any construction happens.

sdm Jan 9, 2010 11:22 AM

Halifax waterfront projects in works

ROGER TAYLOR
Sat. Jan 9 - 4:46 AM

IT SHOULD take another couple of years before the Queen’s Landing development proposed for the Halifax waterfront could begin construction, even though the idea was announced back in 2005.

Colin MacLean, president and CEO of the provincially owned Waterfront Development Corp. Ltd., said his organization is working in conjunction with private developer Armour Group Ltd. on a feasibility study to determine whether the idea is still a good one.

The 2.8-hectare site is located on Lower Water Street, bordered by Sackville Landing and Cable Wharf.

The Queen’s Landing plans call for combining a permanent home for HMCS Sackville (Canada’s Naval Memorial), expansion of the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic and a commercial development complex.

The original plans included "destination-oriented" retail and entertainment areas and a 250-room, four-star hotel complex with convention space.

There would also be about 120,000 square feet of class A office space created and 70,000 square feet of either residential or commercial space.

Although there are concerns about future demand for office space and hotel rooms, MacLean said he’s feeling quite positive about the estimated $200-million project proceeding.

In a conversation earlier this week, Armour Group chairman Ben McCrea said the start of construction on Queen’s Landing is delayed until a replacement for the biosciences building at 1718 Lower Water St. is built on the Dalhousie University campus.

"We did enough negotiations on the HRM by Design that we think Queen’s Landing is going to be all right under it," McCrea said.

He estimates it should take a couple of years before construction begins and, in the meantime, he’ll be concentrating on building his Waterside Centre at 1864 Upper Water St., not far from where Queen’s Landing would be.

MacLean said the proposal is for a private-public partnership. Armour will have to come up with part of the phased project, while the government financial involvement still has to be determined.

The fact that McCrea is feeling somewhat optimistic about the commercial prospects of Queen’s Landing, MacLean said, makes his organization more comfortable about its role.

"If it makes sense on the private side, then let’s complete the feasibility study and present it for the public side of it."

MacLean said he believes the concept originally put forward by McCrea will make sense.

"And so we’re beginning to feel we can make something out of it."

Meanwhile, there could be two major waterfront projects on the go at the same time in a couple of years. MacLean said Waterfront Development is working with another developer, Ralph Medjuck, chairman and CEO of Centennial Group Ltd., to bring his waterfront project to reality.

Medjuck’s estimated $100-million residential and hotel project slated for the Salter Block — 1.4 hectares near the proposed Queen’s Landing development on Lower Water Street, between Salter Street and Bishop’s Landing — has been in the planning stage since 2004.

MacLean says the developer has brought together a team to design the project to go "somewhat" beyond what the original plan, which had been approved by the municipality.

"Together we’ve been looking at one of the key components for us, which was one acre of public park space, and so we’re looking at designs of that space."

MacLean said the fact that new plans are being developed for the Salter Block is another signal from a developer that they’re feeling more positive about the market outlook.

( rtaylor@herald.ca)

terrynorthend Jan 9, 2010 3:08 PM

I'd call this one a push. At least its not lost, but it doesn't sound like it'll even start construction for a couple of years, along with Salter.

Interesting the mention of a permanent home for HMCS Sackville, which of course was in the original plans. I wonder if this summer's 100th anniversary of the RCN could be synergistic with multi-level funding commitments to the public side of this project, in principle at least.

sdm Jan 9, 2010 3:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrynorthend (Post 4642203)
I'd call this one a push. At least its not lost, but it doesn't sound like it'll even start construction for a couple of years, along with Salter.

Interesting the mention of a permanent home for HMCS Sackville, which of course was in the original plans. I wonder if this summer's 100th anniversary of the RCN could be synergistic with multi-level funding commitments to the public side of this project, in principle at least.

Memory serves me correct the project was to be completed to honour the 100th anniversary. Obviously that won't be the case.

5 years later and neither project makes one wonder what is holding the projects back, as i can't see its economics being the only reason.

beyeas Sep 17, 2010 11:34 AM

Heard last night a rumour that "might" be related to this. Apparently none of the leases are being renewed in the Biosciences building (people are moving to the new LSRI at Dal), and a person who works there said they were told the building will be demolished next year to "make way for a hotel or something" they said. Can't place too much weight on that, but might be a glimmer of hope for this project.

someone123 Sep 17, 2010 5:24 PM

I heard that as well, although I don't know if it is the only holdup for this project.

It is kind of annoying how things are rarely "pipelined" in Halifax. Instead, you have a wait for the demolition, then you get to see an unsightly empty lot for years while a project is being approved.

halifaxboyns Sep 17, 2010 5:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 4984555)
I heard that as well, although I don't know if it is the only holdup for this project.

It is kind of annoying how things are rarely "pipelined" in Halifax. Instead, you have a wait for the demolition, then you get to see an unsightly empty lot for years while a project is being approved.

Demolition usually occurs because the property owners don't want to pay taxes on a property that they may not be getting any use out of (if the building is empty).

So then the community is stuck with an empty lot for a while until development occurs - that's been a huge problem here in Calgary.

sdm Sep 17, 2010 5:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 4984555)
I heard that as well, although I don't know if it is the only holdup for this project.

It is kind of annoying how things are rarely "pipelined" in Halifax. Instead, you have a wait for the demolition, then you get to see an unsightly empty lot for years while a project is being approved.

WDCL renewed the lease for the Bioscience building, hence the delay.

The lease expires in April and the building is to come down thereafter.

The project could be a go now, but with the amount of now approved and ready projects i am not sure when one might see construction.

someone123 Sep 17, 2010 6:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns (Post 4984570)
Demolition usually occurs because the property owners don't want to pay taxes on a property that they may not be getting any use out of (if the building is empty).

So then the community is stuck with an empty lot for a while until development occurs - that's been a huge problem here in Calgary.

I think this is a fundamental flaw in how property taxes are structured. Cities like to encourage improvements on land but improvements result in higher taxes - the tax provides a negative economic incentive.

Income taxes are a much better way to go, but it is not within the power of the HRM to levy those. Perhaps they could modify the commercial tax structure a little to raise fees significantly for empty lots and surface parking. This encourages owners either to keep their buildings or to build structured parking in new developments.

The city should also be strict about unsightly premises. If the landlords don't pay up the city can place liens against the property. Eventually they can take the property and auction it off to developers with a time limit after which control reverts to the city.

worldlyhaligonian Sep 18, 2010 5:52 AM

I can't wait for the Bio Science building on Lower Water to be gone... its blue roof makes it look like an unfinished building in our skyline and its generally generic and ugly.

fenwick16 Sep 18, 2010 10:15 AM

Which building is the Bio Science building? Is there a different name for this building or does someone know the address?

Jstaleness Sep 18, 2010 1:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16 (Post 4985456)
Which building is the Bio Science building? Is there a different name for this building or does someone know the address?

1721 Lower Water St.

It's just at the bottom of Prince St. and Lower Water.

fenwick16 Sep 18, 2010 3:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jstaleness (Post 4985520)
1721 Lower Water St.

It's just at the bottom of Prince St. and Lower Water.


Thank you Jstaleness, I have been wondering what building was the Biosciences building for several months. I think that it is referred to as Bionova (according to the label on Google maps). I attached a link to the Bing Maps bird's eye view for anyone else who doesn't know this building - http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=rf7...77&lvl=2&sty=b . Or is it the one to the left (south) of this?

Looking at Bing Maps, Halifax has a world class waterfront (I don't think that this is an exaggeration - it is much better than Toronto's waterfront in terms of accessibility, scenery and vibrancy).

musicman Sep 19, 2010 2:11 AM

That is the one. Rather un-interesting bland building that contributes nothing to the waterfront, streetscape, or halifax... Halifax will be better off without it.

Phalanx Sep 19, 2010 2:41 AM

Indeed. It's pretty much a brick box in a sea of parking lot. I walked past it today on the boardwalk and couldn't really find any redeeming qualities. I won't miss it.

worldlyhaligonian Sep 19, 2010 3:05 AM

I think Halifax is having alot of replacement projects... I'm looking forward to the day when more empty lots are developed!

Its hard to see all of the development happening... but I think the SGR and South Park areas have already improved by just the Trillium, and the waterfront is now very impressive.

halifaxboyns Sep 19, 2010 8:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 4984628)
I think this is a fundamental flaw in how property taxes are structured. Cities like to encourage improvements on land but improvements result in higher taxes - the tax provides a negative economic incentive.

Income taxes are a much better way to go, but it is not within the power of the HRM to levy those. Perhaps they could modify the commercial tax structure a little to raise fees significantly for empty lots and surface parking. This encourages owners either to keep their buildings or to build structured parking in new developments.

The city should also be strict about unsightly premises. If the landlords don't pay up the city can place liens against the property. Eventually they can take the property and auction it off to developers with a time limit after which control reverts to the city.

This was a huge issue for Calgary when the economy tanked. You ended up with all these properties where the buildings had been doozed and to some degree construction began and then stopped. So in some cases you had holes that were barely held together with the supports around the whole. In other cases you just had a vacant parcel.

We (City of Calgary) ended up getting changes to the building code (because that's where the power fell in the Alberta context) to fill in the lots that were big holes when they caused safety issues. We did that for 4 parcels; including one that was causing the building nextdoor to shift. There are liens on the properties now.

As to how to stop the buildings from being demo'ed; I've thought about this one and you make a good point - there isn't really much incentive. Unfortunately; I can't seem to come up with a solution and no one I work with has been able to come up with one either. Although I hope that HRM's economy stays in it's constant strong mode for a long time; should HRM ever really get a boom - I worry that it could suffer the same fate if the bust were to come quickly and they not be ready for this issue.

fenwick16 Sep 19, 2010 1:11 PM

The Biosciences building is an unimpressive building but the Waterfront looks great. I am looking forward to seeing the Queen's Square development proceeding.

sdm Oct 13, 2010 1:12 PM

Waterfront Development CorporationOctober 13, 2010 10:05 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Halifax Waterfront is closer to adding another "star attraction," which could create hundreds of jobs and add millions of tax dollars to the province.

The Waterfront Development Corporation, the province and The Armour Group Limited have agreed on a conceptual plan for Queen's Landing, a major development located in Halifax's central business district on the Halifax waterfront.

"This is a significant project that will enhance the stature of the Halifax Waterfront, create good jobs for Nova Scotians, and help grow our economy," said Economic and Rural Development Minster Percy Paris.

Award-winning developer Armour Group Limited has been granted the development rights to build the project, which includes 100,000 square feet of Class-A office space, a 200-room, 4-star hotel, and underground parking to support the development. Armour Group will now seek municipal approval for the project under HRM By Design.

Armour Group is committed to using green practices and the private-sector component of Queen's Landing will be built to exceed Class A standards. It will be a registered LEED project, designed to meet the standards of the internationally recognized Green Building Certification system.

"For close to 40 years, we have focused on quality developments that create a sense of place," said Armour Group founder and chairman Ben McCrea. "The Queen's Landing development is a project which will have the most positive impact on the Halifax Waterfront since the development of Historic Properties more than 30 years ago.

"The private-sector component is complementary to a bigger vision of creating a star attraction on the Halifax Waterfront -- a destination for the people of Nova Scotia and visitors to learn about our heritage, be entertained and work in a vibrant downtown Halifax."

A preliminary economic impact analysis on the Queen's Landing project in 2006 said it has the potential to create more than 1,300 jobs and $5.95 million in provincial tax revenue.

"We see the Queen's Landing project as the next important step in enhancing the Halifax Waterfront, making the area more accessible, attractive and relevant to the people of and visitors to Nova Scotia," said Colin MacLean, president and CEO, WDCL.

Armour Group Limited is recognized as one of the leading real estate development companies in Atlantic Canada. Its developments represent a mixed asset base ranging from commercial office, residential, retail and hospitality.

Waterfront Development Corporation is a provincial Crown corporation developing the strategic potential of the four waterfronts in Bedford, Dartmouth, Halifax and Lunenburg. Revenues are directly reinvested in the waterfronts to drive economic opportunity, enhance tourism, provide experiences and reflect and protect marine heritage

someone123 Oct 13, 2010 6:17 PM

This is good news although they still haven't really begun work on Waterside Centre. Neither office nor hotel is doing particularly well right now - why aren't they including a residential component?

It's also unclear what public money will go into this project. They just spent some money to renovate the Maritime Museum despite the fact that a major expansion was originally included in the Queen's Landing plans.

phrenic Oct 13, 2010 8:08 PM

Oh good. So now we must be only 5-10 years away from something happening.

sdm Oct 13, 2010 8:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phrenic (Post 5014561)
Oh good. So now we must be only 5-10 years away from something happening.

Well i know the developer wasn't the hold up, it was the lease extension by the province for the bio science building that caused the biggest part of the delay.

Buckey Oct 13, 2010 10:24 PM

what happened to medjuck
 
a few years ago in the midst of councile percievd anti development stance a waterfront development of some sort was approved as they had adjusted the design for views etc.I am sure it was Medjuck. It was a nice looking building but it is not on this list

http://halifax.ca/council/agendasc/d...01012cai04.pdf

anyone help me out there.I thought it was significant combined space of some size and not the only medjuck one listed unless he is Halkirk that is #9 on list but that has Stephen Lockyer and some lawley guy. Lockyer is likely the guy that sued the government when his sole sourced immigrant management contract was terminated and also had some other lawsuits and now he is in development. Oh dear His lwyer will be busy

spaustin Oct 13, 2010 10:57 PM

Buckley, I could be wrong but isn't Salter Street Medjuck's development?

Regarding Queens Landing, it's a nice little baby step, but I would hold off on breaking out the champagne. There still needs to be agreement and funding from the three levels of government and right now the market conditions aren't great. If this were residential maybe it would be different, but right now Armour seems to be stopped on little old Waterside. Other projects like Nova Centre will likely proceed before this one further sucking up the demand. Maybe Queens Landing will get tweaked and modified or maybe it'll proceed in bits and pieces, but my guess is the Bio-Science Building will get demolished and turned "temporarily" into more parking and we'll still be talking about this one as a someday project for years to come. Frustrating. Hopefully the end product will be worth the long wait!

terrynorthend Oct 14, 2010 12:39 AM

I notice the article and press releases have steered clear of talk about the new museum. I wonder if the plan is to go ahead without the museum portion.

sdm Oct 14, 2010 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaustin (Post 5014760)
Buckley, I could be wrong but isn't Salter Street Medjuck's development?

Regarding Queens Landing, it's a nice little baby step, but I would hold off on breaking out the champagne. There still needs to be agreement and funding from the three levels of government and right now the market conditions aren't great. If this were residential maybe it would be different, but right now Armour seems to be stopped on little old Waterside. Other projects like Nova Centre will likely proceed before this one further sucking up the demand. Maybe Queens Landing will get tweaked and modified or maybe it'll proceed in bits and pieces, but my guess is the Bio-Science Building will get demolished and turned "temporarily" into more parking and we'll still be talking about this one as a someday project for years to come. Frustrating. Hopefully the end product will be worth the long wait!

The annoucement today is for the private porition of the development, not the public.

When annouced in 2005 the project was split into to sections, the private (hotel and office) and public (museum aquarimum, etc).

Therefore the private is approved and needs only be submitted through HRM by design to begin construction. The CBC reported the bio science building is due to come down in march 2011 and that the developer hopes to have the plans submitted throught HRM by Design in six months.

phrenic Oct 14, 2010 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdm (Post 5014584)
Well i know the developer wasn't the hold up, it was the lease extension by the province for the bio science building that caused the biggest part of the delay.

Aha, allnovascotia says construction is perhaps 5-10 years away. I hate being right, even though I was guessing.

sdm Oct 14, 2010 1:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phrenic (Post 5015385)
Aha, allnovascotia says construction is perhaps 5-10 years away. I hate being right, even though I was guessing.

Yeah and it seems that the reason for that is the hotel market is not brisk right now, and if the convention centre goes ahead it is their opinion it will flood the market

Buckey Oct 14, 2010 1:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaustin (Post 5014760)
Buckley, I could be wrong but isn't Salter Street Medjuck's development?

Regarding Queens Landing, it's a nice little baby step, but I would hold off on breaking out the champagne. There still needs to be agreement and funding from the three levels of government and right now the market conditions aren't great. If this were residential maybe it would be different, but right now Armour seems to be stopped on little old Waterside. Other projects like Nova Centre will likely proceed before this one further sucking up the demand. Maybe Queens Landing will get tweaked and modified or maybe it'll proceed in bits and pieces, but my guess is the Bio-Science Building will get demolished and turned "temporarily" into more parking and we'll still be talking about this one as a someday project for years to come. Frustrating. Hopefully the end product will be worth the long wait!

I noted that Mcrea spoke out against the new CC in the herald. I suppose that would make sense as it might be tough to get funding if the CC goes thru.

sdm Oct 14, 2010 1:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckey (Post 5015453)
I noted that Mcrea spoke out against the new CC in the herald. I suppose that would make sense as it might be tough to get funding if the CC goes thru.

Hotel, office part of Halifax waterfront project clears hurdle

By BRUCE ERSKINE Business Reporter
Thu, Oct 14 - 4:53 AM
Ben McCrea is itching to get started on reshaping a good chunk of the Halifax waterfront.

"We now have the development right to proceed with the office and hotel," the founder and chairman of The Armour Group Ltd. said in an interview Wednesday.

"We’re very excited."

Armour and the Waterfront Development Corp. announced Wednesday they have agreed on a conceptual plan for the $70-million private portion of the $190-million Queen’s Landing development on the waterfront between Sackville Landing and Cable Wharf.

The private component includes 100,000 square feet of new office space, a 200-room, four-star hotel with harbour views from every room, and underground parking.

McCrea, whose company rebuilt Historic Properties in the 1970s, said under the terms of the agreement announced Wednesday, the provincial Crown corporation will demolish the BioNova building on Lower Water Street next spring.

The BioNova building houses the association representing the province’s life sciences association, which is moving to Dalhousie University.

The hotel and office complex are part of a larger waterfront development that includes the transformation of the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic into a national naval memorial.

McCrea said the hotel and office complex will move forward as market conditions dictate, noting that the convention centre project endorsed by the province on Wednesday, which includes a 400-room hotel, could flood the local market.

"The hotel business is not that brisk," he said.

McCrea added, however, that Queen’s Landing has the advantage of being located on the harbour, which he said defines Halifax, rather than being underground like the planned convention centre.

"For close to 40 years, we have focused on quality developments that create a sense of place," McCrea said.

WDCL president and CEO Colin MacLean called Queen’s Landing "the next important step" in enhancing Halifax’s waterfront, while Economic and Rural Development Minister Percy Paris called it "a significant project" that will create good jobs and grow the economy.

Armour still has to get municipal approval for the project, which is designed to meet the standards of the internationally recognized green building certification system.

A preliminary economic impact analysis on the Queen’s Landing project done in 2006 said it has the potential to create more than 1,300 jobs and generate almost $6 million in provincial tax revenue.

McCrea said Armour’s other notable downtown development, the Waterside Centre across from Historic Properties, is proceeding, although discussions are still underway with municipal officials about easements for piping seawater from the harbour to use in the project’s cooling system.

"We’re optimistic about that," he said. "We’re marketing it."

( berskine@herald.ca)

Keith P. Oct 14, 2010 9:40 PM

The amount of time this has taken to get to this point is just ridiculous. the amount of time it will take until something is actually built is even more ridiculous. What is the WDC thinking?

someone123 Oct 14, 2010 9:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 5016071)
What is the WDC thinking?

They get to collect their paycheques either way? ;)

sdm Oct 14, 2010 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 5016071)
The amount of time this has taken to get to this point is just ridiculous. the amount of time it will take until something is actually built is even more ridiculous. What is the WDC thinking?

Well i give the developer credit to sticking with it as the WDC extended the lease at the bio science building in 2006 (expiring 2011). Most would have pulled out. If the project was not stalled by this lease extension i truly believe a majority of the project would have been built by now.

fenwick16 Oct 20, 2010 12:30 AM

Might there be a connection between the announcement of the Queen's landing proposal and the Nova Centre proposal on the same day by the NDP? I also read that the NDP is considering a land swap in this area next to the Law Courts building.

The reason that I was thinking about this is because I watched the Haligonia.ca broadcast of the Nova Centre financing discussions at HRM council today and heard an interesting fact - it will take about one full year to finishing excavating the two blocks for the Nova Centre (and I can add that they will be excavating 50 - 70 feet deep). So I started wondering where all that Nova Centre rock would be dumped. The Queen's landing is only a few blocks away from the Nova Centre and the Queen's Landing isn't expected to begin for at least 5 years. Could the Queen's Landing area be the planned location for an in-fill project to get rid of all the Nova Centre excavated rock? If not, then where would it be dumped?

Here is a map link http://www.bing.com/maps/explore/#/s723fp2lfdogoynp . The two locations are very close and were announced on the same day by the NDP ...

sdm Oct 20, 2010 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16 (Post 5023164)
Might there be a connection between the announcement of the Queen's landing proposal and the Nova Centre proposal on the same day by the NDP? I also read that the NDP is considering a land swap in this area next to the Law Courts building.

The reason that I was thinking about this is because I watched the Haligonia.ca broadcast of the Nova Centre financing discussions at HRM council today and heard an interesting fact - it will take about one full year to finishing excavating the two blocks for the Nova Centre (and I can add that they will be excavating 50 - 70 feet deep). So I started wondering where all that Nova Centre rock would be dumped. The Queen's landing is only a few blocks away from the Nova Centre and the Queen's Landing isn't expected to begin for at least 5 years. Could the Queen's Landing area be the planned location for an in-fill project to get rid of all the Nova Centre excavated rock? If not, then where would it be dumped?

Here is a map link http://www.bing.com/maps/explore/#/s723fp2lfdogoynp . The two locations are very close and were announced on the same day by the NDP ...

Simple answer, no. Queens Landing will be removing fill as they have underground parking within the proposal.

someone123 Oct 20, 2010 12:55 AM

I'm guessing they'd be trucking it out to Bedford or whatever.

It will be cool to watch them excavate down that far. 70 feet is quite deep.

kph06 Oct 20, 2010 1:15 AM

Most of the rock on the peninsula is pyritic slate, Bedford is currently the only nearby dumping spot for it. An old classmate of mine works for the contracter doing the excavation on the convention center if it goes and they will be blasting much of the material.

worldlyhaligonian Oct 20, 2010 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123 (Post 5023196)
I'm guessing they'd be trucking it out to Bedford or whatever.

It will be cool to watch them excavate down that far. 70 feet is quite deep.

Fingers crossed.

NC will clearly add some parking in that area...

fenwick16 Oct 20, 2010 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06 (Post 5023230)
Most of the rock on the peninsula is pyritic slate, Bedford is currently the only nearby dumping spot for it. An old classmate of mine works for the contracter doing the excavation on the convention center if it goes and they will be blasting much of the material.

Thank for the information. I guess they will need several trucks running continuously to get it out there. Is that where the excavated ground from the Trillium was trucked to?

Dmajackson Oct 20, 2010 1:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06 (Post 5023230)
Most of the rock on the peninsula is pyritic slate, Bedford is currently the only nearby dumping spot for it. An old classmate of mine works for the contracter doing the excavation on the convention center if it goes and they will be blasting much of the material.

Logical and probably correct. The Bedford Waterfront is also owned by a provincial body so if fill is still required then both projects are likely to get cheap dumping in the Basin, especially Queen's Landing.


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.