HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3081  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 9:04 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
Just looked at the oval design stuff and that's quite the improvement to the ball fields. I'm impressed.

Considering the way the oval is designed - I wonder if it could be used for a summer running track? Personally, I would've put a platform in the middle of the oval (the grassed area) to be able to be used as a stage. Would be kinda cool in the winter to have some choirs singing or bands performing while you skate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3082  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 9:23 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,686
I think the plan is to have it as a track in the summer, or at least there was some sort of year-round use case presented at some point. Perhaps it could be used as part of a concert venue when combined with the entry plaza at the Cogswell/North Park corner.

I like the idea of some points of interest in the interior plus some entry plazas with seating and more of a connection to the neighbourhood. Right now most of it just feel like one big empty sports field. Frequently it's just a kind of obstacle you have to cross and it can be muddy/wet for much of the year. Contrast that with the Public Gardens, which are a gem that people love to spend time in and will go out of their way to walk through.

The North Common will probably also become busier if the population of the North End goes up more. There has already been some infill like Armoury Square (plus hundreds of new residents along Gladstone -- which is actually pretty close by) and there are many more opportunity sites. The Drum is already one proposal and the funeral home site by Quinpool should get a new building. The empty lot next to the Atlantica Hotel is also ripe for development. Not sure why it's been like that for so long. Anyway, if you add up development on all those sites you get thousands of new people. If the Commons are improved and become a nice spot they will be well-used.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3083  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 9:42 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
While I know some people have said the oval is a waste, I don't see the money being spent on it as being a bad thing. The problem with the commons is that aside from summer, it's dead in winter. This will bring people back to the commons in the winter, big time.

I also expect that it will also help make the place busy in summer because you could do summer rollering blading or running.

Personally - I can see the common (or the oval) being a bonusing concept for any redevelopment along the proposed corridors in the Regional Centre Plan. They've identified Robie, Agricola and Quinpool as potential neighbourhood corridors - well if people want to build higher density there, then perhaps a way to get the upgrades paid for is to require (as a mandatory bonusing) contributions to an improvement fund? Setup a formula based on either the size of the dwelling unit or how many habitable rooms there are. This way, some money comes in and can help pay for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3084  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 10:20 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
What's the difference between the oval and the other rinks? Do people only skate in circles on the oval?
Yes, like HRM Council, they go round and round and never get anywhere...

It is also huge yet cannot easily be used for anything other than skating in one direction. Plus, the hole in the middle is useless.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3085  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 10:32 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Yes, like HRM Council, they go round and round and never get anywhere...

It is also huge yet cannot easily be used for anything other than skating in one direction. Plus, the hole in the middle is useless.
I don't know, I think it could be used as a stage. I've made that suggestion previously. Have a stage for say a band or a choir to do stuff when the oval is in use. It would be no different than having choirs sing along street corners, just as cold!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3086  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 10:52 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
An interesting article from Christopher Hume on condo dwellers was passed onto me. It's from the Toronto Star, but still very good. Christopher's articles I find are very interesting and he did a great story from CBC on Cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3087  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 10:53 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,686
It does remind me a bit of, say, the commuter rail story where there's a lack of direction and a kind of publicly-driven tunnel vision that misses everything but the obvious solution. People liked the oval so it had to stay in its present incarnation, even though it was designed for particular sporting events and not as a general-purpose public ice surface. People liked the Dayliners and that's kind of setting the agenda when there should be a study of modern alternatives.

The bottom line for the oval doesn't seem so bad to me though. The capital cost is approximately $4M when you factor in private contributions. A lot of space is being used for this but realistically that area has been left fallow for a long period of time and it is particularly dead in the winter. While this seems suboptimal I could see it being a pretty good investment as far as HRM council goes. It's not hard to imagine more people using this in the winter than the rest of the North Common space.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3088  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 11:09 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
Christopher Hume's City Documentary

Here's a link to the documentary I mentioned by Christopher Hume, for those who missed it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3089  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 11:11 PM
spaustin's Avatar
spaustin spaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Downtown Dartmouth
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I do wonder about the timeline for this though. The Trinity site has been vacant for a while and Fenwick is expected to take another 18+ months, which means that we'll probably still have that parking lot at Brunswick and Cogswell for another 2 years or so. Is the St. Pat's development going to push off Trinity yet again? Are we going to have to wait 5 years for the school site to be developed?
And that's the problem with our demolition laws, tax system and development agreement process as it currently sits. That church could still be there serving some kind of use (theater venue? market? etc), but instead it's an ugly unsurfaced gravel lot. Who knows if the Trinity will ever even happen. This wouldn't be the only spot in our Downtown that became a gravel lot in anticipation for a project that is always just over the horizon. Most the block around the Denis Building on Barrington, for example, was taken down in what, the 80s, for a promised development that never happened. I'm sure that's not the only spot. My biggest fear right now is that Waterside Centre might be on that course. We really need to reform the rules and incentives so that we stop ripping apart our neighbourhoods. Demolition should occur when a project's ready to happen or if the building is basically condemned. Not early on simply because parking lots pay little in the way of taxes, but still generate revenue for the owner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3090  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2011, 11:37 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,686
Yeah, it's really messed up. Our tax system is exactly backwards when it comes to this issue -- it adds an incentive to destroy buildings. Slow approvals and regulations also hurt.

It's easy to imagine penalties for developers but those can easily drive away business. A good system might be revenue neutral and would charge more for empty sites while reducing taxes on developed sites. There should also be tax incentives tied to heritage registration so there's a real financial reason to go through with it and preserve worthwhile buildings. Right now the system is basically just an ill-conceived way to volunteer to be shackled as a property owner.

To some degree changing cities also constantly have "frictional" empty lots that are awaiting development. The balance has been off in Halifax partly because so much is held by the government and ineptly managed (e.g. Clyde lots sat for way too long). If those were removed from the equation sites like Trinity probably would not be so bothersome. Actually that may be the lion's share of the problem because most terrible empty sites in the regional core are publicly owned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3091  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2011, 3:03 AM
musicman musicman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 270
You have to remember that part of the Canada Games concept is to provide a "legacy of venues" to train and support future atheletes... Yes we could have re-configured the oval to be a skating rink or something else but it would have gone against the legacy concept.. I am originally from northern NB and the legacy of the games there is amazing. They now have a world class biathlon facility, that they train the next generation of biathletes on. Yes it may not be for everybody but those kids are some of the nicest most respectfull kids you will ever meet and it is thanks to the legacy of the games. We now have what is considered a world class skating oval (and a great opportunity) in the middle of the city accessible to thousands of people every single day. And a training facility for our next generation of speed skaters who can now do long track as well as short track. Why can we not embrace what we now have and look forward to the benefits of what the oval has to offer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3092  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2011, 3:54 AM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 966
Does anybody know what they are doing with the large mounds of earth, one is by Ceres the other by richmond terminals. I consistently see half to a dozen excavators on site every day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3093  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2011, 4:09 AM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalNinja View Post
Does anybody know what they are doing with the large mounds of earth, one is by Ceres the other by richmond terminals. I consistently see half to a dozen excavators on site every day.
I've been watching this the last few weeks, I think they are moving fill from the Richmond terminals site as part of the $75-million Richmond terminals expansion there. Also they trucked some excess in from work done at Hal-term. Now this week they started dredging in front of the Richmond terminals, and this material is now getting stockpiled. I would suspect that dredge material is quite nasty as it is coming from the former site of the Volvo plant, a coal pier and a sugar refinery. More information can be found herel, another very interesting site (along with his others) that I check regularly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3094  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2011, 2:34 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman View Post
You have to remember that part of the Canada Games concept is to provide a "legacy of venues" to train and support future atheletes... Yes we could have re-configured the oval to be a skating rink or something else but it would have gone against the legacy concept.. I am originally from northern NB and the legacy of the games there is amazing. They now have a world class biathlon facility, that they train the next generation of biathletes on. Yes it may not be for everybody but those kids are some of the nicest most respectfull kids you will ever meet and it is thanks to the legacy of the games. We now have what is considered a world class skating oval (and a great opportunity) in the middle of the city accessible to thousands of people every single day. And a training facility for our next generation of speed skaters who can now do long track as well as short track. Why can we not embrace what we now have and look forward to the benefits of what the oval has to offer.
The "legacy" was intended to be the chiller units and nothing else. There was never any plan nor desire to have a permanent speed skating venue in the middle of the Common. In fact, prior to the Rapture that happened to some residents last winter when the donut was opened up to the public, there was considerable opposition to even using this site for such a venue, even on a temporary basis. A conventional skating surface would have been a far better use than this thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3095  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2011, 5:33 AM
musicman musicman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 270
Yes i agree that it was supposed to be the chillers as the legacy. However I personally would rather see a legacy that includes something that can be used for something other than hockey or figure skating. Yes there was opposition to the site being used but most of that opposition came from people that we as a group on here oppose all the time on pretty well every subject.

I am personally glad that we will see something different to the status quo, not to mention a decision by council that did not require years of study and debate only to be back at square one in 10 years...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3096  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2011, 11:14 PM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 966
Interesting about the port. Would be nice to see more activity down that end of Halifax.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3097  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2011, 9:02 PM
ewjonsson ewjonsson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 27
News about the St. Pats Alexandra school site on Gottingen street

http://http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nov...12/12/ns-st-pats-school-development.html
A former Halifax school could be turned into a private development instead of being handed over for community use.

A non-profit group in the Gottingen Street area had hoped Halifax Regional Municipality would turn the site of St. Patrick's-Alexandra Elementary School over to them, but city staff have recommended tearing down the building and using the lot for a residential and commercial complex.

Jane Moloney of the North End Community Health Clinic wanted to share the building with the nearby MicMac Native Friendship Centre.

She said the clinic's current space is "very cramped" and does not meet accessibility standards. There are two buildings at the school and the groups want to share the space and develop the outdoor areas for their clients and the general public.

"I think it's just really short sighted. There are lots of vacant lots around on the peninsula still that would be developed for housing, but we would really need to be within two or three square blocks of where we are now to really be part of the community that we serve," she said Monday.

"It takes a very courageous governing body to not accept $4 million, but I think sometimes we do need to be brave and we do need to be visionary ... That piece of land is very precious and there won't be another opportunity like this."

Friendship centre in disrepair
The clinic is renting a building near the school for its nutrition and dental programs. The friendship centre is in disrepair and needs work, or to move to a new location. The two groups submitted proposals to share the space.

Pam Glode, the executive director of the friendship centre, has said it badly needs the former school because its current building is cramped and in disrepair.

"The floor is separating from the walls in certain spots, we have major leaks, and we have mould, which we've contained," Glode told CBC in August.

"Sometimes we have a lineup waiting for the computers, even to sit down and have tea and coffee, people will be waiting sometimes, so this would be space. I would like to expand and offer more resources."

The large former school has been empty for a year. The city asked for proposals to re-use the site in the summer of 2011. It is valued at $4 million.

HRM staff have recommended that councillors approve a bid by Jono Developments. Its proposal includes five to 10 per cent of the residential sector designated for affordable housing and five to 10 per cent of the commercial area set aside for community or non profit space.

Moloney said that would not be enough.

"It seems unlikely that a few rooms — which is what 5 to 10 per cent of the commercial space is likely to be, a few community meeting rooms — that won't meet our needs," she said.

Councillors are debating the issue Tuesday afternoon. Moloney hopes they chose to not follow the staff recommendation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3098  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2011, 9:37 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,772
The Micmac Friendship Center is an unsightly dump and a drag on the area and should be demolished. As for the community health clinic, how can they need an entire school? That is a large building complex and to state that it should be handed over to them is bureaucratic empire-building at its best. Of course, they have no way to maintain something that large so they would soon be back knocking on the taxpayers door for more money. We don't need more run-down buildings in this part of town, thanks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3099  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2011, 10:12 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 35,686
Yeah, this site seems far too large to hand over to a couple of local nonprofits. I'm sceptical of how they mention the use of the rest of the property, as if it were an afterthought that would just be sorted out eventually. More likely it would be Bloomfield II.

Two fundamental, related problems with this area are a lack of population density to support businesses/amenities and an excessive concentration of undesirable institutions and public housing. The way to fix this is to add more middle class residents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3100  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2011, 11:31 PM
Empire's Avatar
Empire Empire is offline
Salty Town
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Halifax
Posts: 2,197
Here is an article about the worth of Citadel Hill. The Feds say that because the lower portion can't be built on it is worthless.

The site should be assesssed in terms of lost revenue for the city. Potentially the site would represent millions and millions of $$$ in assessment if it wasn't there and developed as part of downtown.

Not only does the hill represent a major loss of tax revenue for HRM, the site itself causes reduced assessments for all properties from the hill to the harbour due to the viewplane legislation.

Point being for the feds ....don't complain as you are getting off easy.




Citadel Hill: What’s it really worth? December 12, 2011 - 4:37am By PAUL McLEOD Ottawa Bureau

Legal dispute over historic site’s tax value hits Supreme Court

Federal evaluators say Citadel Hill in Halifax is worth just $10. But provincial assess­ment authorities value it at $17.5 million. (TED PRITCHARD / Staff) .OTTAWA — The legal battle over whether most of Citadel Hill is worthless hits the Supreme Court of Canada today.

The decade-long dispute between Halifax and the federal government will likely set a precedent about whether national historic sites are valuable pieces of land or worth nothing from a tax perspective.

The federal government gives cash payments to Halifax Regional Municipality in lieu of property taxes for Citadel Hill. Ottawa claims that 18.8 hectares of the 19.4-hectare site have no tax value because nothing can be built there.

The federal government decided that Citadel Hill fortress is worth about $5 million. The grassy incline around the fortress is valued at little more than pocket change: $10.

"(It) has no development potential whatsoever," federal lawyer Reinhold Endres said back in 2010 when the case was before the courts in Halifax.

"You cannot put anything on it, you cannot excavate it, you cannot do a thing with it."

The municipality contends that the entire national historic site should be worth just over $20 million. Municipal lawyers say under their proposal, the city would receive an extra $500,000 in revenue each year.

There is also an outstanding tax bill worth more than $7 million if the municipality wins.

Municipal lawyers argue that even though nothing can be built there, Citadel Hill has intrinsic value as a national historic site.

The land that federal evaluators say is worth just $10 was deemed by provincial assessment authorities to be worth $17.5 million.

Ottawa argues that only Parks Canada offices, kiosks, a conference centre and some historic structures used for storage have taxable value.

Court documents filed by the municipality call this conclusion "startling and unreasonable" and say it "cries out for rectification."

Federally owned national historic sites are not taxed directly. But under the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act, the federal government provides grants to municipalities that are supposed to represent what the assessed value would be if the properties were taxable.

The court case now centres on whether the federal government can set its own assessment values when it makes payments in lieu of taxes or if it is compelled to consider outside property valuations.

"If the (federal government’s) discretion is unconstrained with respect to value, the result will bear no resemblance to taxes that would be payable if the property were taxable," reads a municipal filing with the Supreme Court of Canada.

Provincial property assessors calculate the value of all land in Nova Scotia, regardless of whether it is taxable. In 2005, the province assessed Citadel Hill at a value of $38 million. That figure is agreed to be too high because it includes improvements that are exempt under the act.

The Supreme Court hearing marks the last chapter to over a decade of litigation. The municipality first appealed the federal assessment 11 years ago.

In 2007, the case went before a dispute advisory panel, which ruled the land beneath the ineligible improvements had no value. The panel pegged the taxable value of Citadel Hill at just $4.1 million.

The municipality successfully appealed and had the ruling quashed by the courts. Ottawa then appealed that ruling to the Federal Court of Appeal and had the decision reinstated, with the court siding two to one in favour of the federal argument.

Another municipal appeal now has the case going to the top court in the land this morning.

( [email protected])
__________________
Salty Town
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.