[Halifax] Skye Halifax (1565 Granville) | 66 m | 2 x 21 fl | U/C

[-Harlington-]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

The HbD map says post bonus height is 66m. I'm not sure how many stories that is?

Well the trillium is 65m and its 19 stories so probably pretty close to that
so im not sure what the news was talking about

[Empire]

Originally Posted by -Harlington-

Well the trillium is 65m and its 19 stories so probably pretty close to that
so im not sure what the news was talking about

Developers should be required to post a bond with the development application in the CBD. 3% sounds good. So for a proposed 100 million dollar development 3 million would be lost if the DA expires. We need to get tough in the CBD. It may stop some proposals but most aren't worth the paper they are written on.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

AH yes; now I remember. Thanks!!
It seems to me that some developers pride themselves on biting off more than they can chew. These guys and the developer for Waterside Centre have been great examples of that.

They give people like Starfish Properties and Medjuck a bad name.

Waterside centre is still waiting for papers related to the easement from the city, which has been very clearly stated in the media. I am not sure i can agree with you that Waterside centre developer is the same. Besides, Waterside Centre began construction but halted it because the paper work was not in place and the city wanted changes to the easement of which the developer didn't suspect was going to be as big of an issue. You should add to your list Halkirk development as well as it was approved before even waterside centre, yet nothing has started.

That said, yes developments need to take place quicker, but real estate developments are market driven.

[someone123]

Part of the problem is that developers are encouraged to sit on empty land because it is taxed at a lower rate than a small building. There is demand to fill all empty downtown lots with small residential buildings but we don't see those because land is priced for future giant office towers. If empty land were taxed more the price structure and incentives would change; we would see faster and more modest development.

Imagine how much better off the downtown would be if all vacant lots were 10 story apartment buildings. In the event that more land were required for office the apartments could be converted or torn down.

[Waye Mason]

Well, they have to do something to reach the bonus height, right? Is the un-bonused height 9 stories, bonus 17? Sounds right to me.

It is not ALL city hall's fault.

Plenty of approved stuff is not being built, not because of government failure, but because the economics are not there. There is over 1 million square feet of development approved for downtown commercial, according to the city, and none of it is being built.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Waye Mason

Plenty of approved stuff is not being built, not because of government failure, but because the economics are not there.

Part of it is beyond the government's control but a large part of the "economics" depend on the government.

A rational developer spending his own money or trying to get bank money pretty much needs to answer this question:

cost <= revenue - desired profit ? (if yes, building. if no, parking lot)

The government adds significantly to the "cost" side by imposing development fees and requiring the developer to go through a lengthy appeal process. Property taxes claw back revenues that would be obtained from the development.

On top of this, the government makes the question harder to answer by adding substantial delays. For example, the Salter block development failed due to "economics" in the sense that it was not clearly profitable to build. Back when it was proposed, the hotel market was good and it was easy to get financing. Today, the hotel market is softer and it is much harder to get financing. Bureaucratic delays made it impossible to build at the right time and are at least part of the root cause of the problem.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by someone123

Part of it is beyond the government's control but a large part of the "economics" depend on the government.

A rational developer spending his own money or trying to get bank money pretty much needs to answer this question:

cost + desired profit >= revenue ? (if yes, building. if no, parking lot)

The government adds significantly to the "cost" side by imposing development fees and requiring the developer to go through a lengthy appeal process. Property taxes claw back revenues that would be obtained from the development.

On top of this, the government makes the question harder to answer by adding substantial delays. For example, the Salter block development failed due to "economics" in the sense that it was not clearly profitable to build. Back when it was proposed, the hotel market was good and it was easy to get financing. Today, the hotel market is softer and it is much harder to get financing. Bureaucratic delays made it impossible to build at the right time and are at least part of the root cause of the problem.

Something needs to be done to move development on lots like the Texpark. There should be a vacant lot tax in the CBD. The assessment for a vacant lot should be based on the allowable development for that site, perhaps 75% of that amount. It is bad enough to have hack parking lots like the Texpark holding up development but now we have parking lots not even being used for parking like the Salter lot.

[Northend Guy]

Originally Posted by Empire

Something needs to be done to move development on lots like the Texpark. There should be a vacant lot tax in the CBD. The assessment for a vacant lot should be based on the allowable development for that site, perhaps 75% of that amount. It is bad enough to have hack parking lots like the Texpark holding up development but now we have parking lots not even being used for parking like the Salter lot.

I think you are on the right track here - then if something can't be built in a timely fashion, subsidize the property taxes if the developer converts to temporary greenspace in the interim - at least that would make the empty pockets in DT a little less offensive. (pretty sure someone had this idea on the forum last year - thought for sure it would have been implemented by now...)

[Waye Mason]

Originally Posted by someone123

Part of it is beyond the government's control but a large part of the "economics" depend on the government.

A rational developer spending his own money or trying to get bank money pretty much needs to answer this question:

cost <= revenue - desired profit ? (if yes, building. if no, parking lot)

The government adds significantly to the "cost" side by imposing development fees and requiring the developer to go through a lengthy appeal process. Property taxes claw back revenues that would be obtained from the development.

On top of this, the government makes the question harder to answer by adding substantial delays. For example, the Salter block development failed due to "economics" in the sense that it was not clearly profitable to build. Back when it was proposed, the hotel market was good and it was easy to get financing. Today, the hotel market is softer and it is much harder to get financing. Bureaucratic delays made it impossible to build at the right time and are at least part of the root cause of the problem.

Well to the second point, HRMbD shortens the application process to 60 days if they stay inside the requirements, right? So that has been addressed, unless you want to go outside of that.

To the first point on taxes, every city has commercial property tax, and some cities are building a lot and some are not building at all.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Waye Mason

To the first point on taxes, every city has commercial property tax, and some cities are building a lot and some are not building at all.

What a vague statement.

If you go here you can download property tax statistics for Canadian cities: http://www.realpac.ca/property-tax/

I am looking at the PDF right now. Finally Halifax can be #1 at something...

2010 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES PER $1,000 OF COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT

Calgary $13.79
Edmonton $15.56
Vancouver $18.64
Average $27.92
Winnipeg $28.54
Ottawa $34.98
Toronto $35.98
Montreal $37.65
Halifax $38.25

I believe HRM also has variable tax rates for different areas. If that is the case then the effective rate for the downtown is higher than what is listed. Higher assessments also result in disproportionately high tax rates.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by someone123

What a vague statement.

If you go here you can download property tax statistics for Canadian cities: http://www.realpac.ca/property-tax/

I am looking at the PDF right now. Finally Halifax can be #1 at something...

2010 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES PER $1,000 OF COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT

Calgary $13.79
Edmonton $15.56
Vancouver $18.64
Average $27.92
Winnipeg $28.54
Ottawa $34.98
Toronto $35.98
Montreal $37.65
Halifax $38.25

Wow, that's wild. Its clear that Halifax needs to start building, our municipal government could have a better budget with taxes like that.

More that Montreal, wow.

[Haliwood]

I was recently able to talk to Mr.Saberi and he's quite ecstatic about the project. They're working on the design with the new elevated height now. They only made the proposal for the initial height because they knew once that gets approved, they can increase the height limit without much problems.

It may take a while, but it's going to be worth it. Trust me. Siamak Hariri is not your average architect from Halifax.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Haliwood

It may take a while, but it's going to be worth it. Trust me. Siamak Hariri is not your average architect from Halifax.

I hope you are right. That architect has done some interesting work but as of yet all we have is a parking lot.

I don't personally believe it matters much if the buildings are 81 m or 66 m or even 10 storeys at this point.

If it does work out it will be complemented nicely by the Discovery Centre redevelopment. There is also an opportunity for something great on the block below Hollis that fronts Sackville, next to the Bank of Canada building.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Haliwood

I was recently able to talk to Mr.Saberi and he's quite ecstatic about the project. They're working on the design with the new elevated height now. They only made the proposal for the initial height because they knew once that gets approved, they can increase the height limit without much problems.

It may take a while, but it's going to be worth it. Trust me. Siamak Hariri is not your average architect from Halifax.

Do you mean the Texpark proposal and what elevated height are you referring to?

[Haliwood]

Originally Posted by Empire

Do you mean the Texpark proposal and what elevated height are you referring to?

I mean the 'Twisted Sisters' development. Is that in texpark? Sorry, I'm not sure.

Mr.Saberi said that since the approval, they've increased the height in the building plans. That's why we haven't seen any progress there yet.

Inevitably, the twin buildings will be the tallest buildings east of Montreal - even taller than the condo that was approved for Kings Wharf.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Haliwood

I mean the 'Twisted Sisters' development. Is that in texpark? Sorry, I'm not sure.

Mr.Saberi said that since the approval, they've increased the height in the building plans. That's why we haven't seen any progress there yet.

Inevitably, the twin buildings will be the tallest buildings east of Montreal - even taller than the condo that was approved for Kings Wharf.

The development agreement for the twisted sisters has expired so why are they reworking the design and how much higher than 27 floors are they talking about?

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

What a vague statement.

If you go here you can download property tax statistics for Canadian cities: http://www.realpac.ca/property-tax/

I am looking at the PDF right now. Finally Halifax can be #1 at something...

2010 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES PER $1,000 OF COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT

Calgary $13.79
Edmonton $15.56
Vancouver $18.64
Average $27.92
Winnipeg $28.54
Ottawa $34.98
Toronto $35.98
Montreal $37.65
Halifax $38.25

I believe HRM also has variable tax rates for different areas. If that is the case then the effective rate for the downtown is higher than what is listed. Higher assessments also result in disproportionately high tax rates.

No wonder there is so little development downtown. For a small $500,000 old building downtown the tax rate would be $19,125 per year. For comparison, just imagine if an average home owner in a city such as Mississauga had to pay $19,125 per year in taxes. That commercial tax rate indicates that Halifax is grossly over-taxed.

[fenwick16]

There was a story in the allnovascotia.com (March 30th, 2011) that indicated that Saberi was considering three options - two 27 storey towers as proposed, or a 27 storey tower, or a downsized 20 storey tower.

Since residential/hotel storeys are around 10 feet (3.05 meters) per storey, 27 storeys would be about 82.3 meters high. The 1801 Hollis Street Tower is about 87 meters - (reference - Emporis). Although 1801 Hollis is only 22 storeys, commercial stories are higher per storey than residential storeys. Fenwick Tower is 98 meters, but I think that would be above Citadel Hill ramparts maximum at the United Gulf Texpark location. So I don't think that this could possibly become the tallest east of Montreal.

[Haliwood]

Originally Posted by Empire

The development agreement for the twisted sisters has expired so why are they reworking the design and how much higher than 27 floors are they talking about?

I can't disclose too much. Just know that the new proposal (which we'll see in about 3 months), is something absolutely unheard of in Halifax.. And would totally eclipse any structure in the city.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Haliwood

I can't disclose too much. Just know that the new proposal (which we'll see in about 3 months), is something absolutely unheard of in Halifax.. And would totally eclipse any structure in the city.

It will be interesting to see. Personally, I hope that they won't go above 27 storeys since it would likely mean that the development agreement would have to be re-approved. It wouldn't bother me to see something taller, but I don't want to see years of discussions and appeals. If Saberi comes out with a design over the Citadel ramparts maximum then it is likely not a serious proposal since it would never be approved even under the previous height limitations (ramparts maximum).

I would much rather see 20 - 27 storeys of an interesting design.