General Updates and News

[haligonia]

The drawings near the bottom of the Quinpool DA are really interesting. I hope to see some sort of redevelopment of the Quinpool Centre in the near future.

[halifaxboyns]

The quinpool proposal is a good first start. If we get a few more of these along Quinpool it will build up a good context to start going higher. Hopefully this project will provide some context for the Regional Centre Plan as well.

I think if the a similar building context were to be done along Agricola (around the 12 to 15 storey range), it would create an attractive corridor there as well, bring a lot of people to around the core and make the commons way busier. A building like the Quinpool Proposal is what I was hoping would start showing up along Gottingen too, but around 10 storeys.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Waye Mason

Everything's contaminated on the peninsula. You just have to work around it. I know from when I was up on Gottingen that all the buildings there had buried oil tanks (that would leak), or small scale industrial (like the drycleaners, or photolabs, or printers, that would have spills ). Or just the fact that for 150 years coal ash was scattered out the back door as "fertilizer" or whatever and now most gardens have 700 to 1000 times the heavy metals in the soil that is allowable.

I know when they were doing the Brickyard on the old Alexandria school property that they found diesel in the soil, but it had come from up the hill somewhere, and it could have been from any one of a dozen old properties, including the then abandoned MET building.

On top of that you have to deal with run off from slate... pretty much I think developers need to plan as if every site on a major, older street has contamination of some significant kind... heh.

All of which is true, but the required response is ridiculous. Nobody is pulling drinking water from wells on the peninsula. There is no further risk associated with these sites than what has already been there for decades. The sites will be excavated in large part anyway, removing most of whatever the particular problem material allegedly is. The entire soil cleanup business is based upon an absurd premise and should just be abandoned for urbanized areas.

[Empire]

Hopefully the stadium is one of the permits.

City Riding Development Wave

http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/49229-city-riding-development-wave

[q12]

Admiral's growth in step with Halifax's bright employment picture
January 6, 2012 - 7:13pm BY JOHN DEMONT BUSINESS REPORTER
http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/49460-admirals-growth-step-halifaxs-bright-employment-picture

Here is an excerpt from this article with some good news even before the shipbuilding contract benefits have really even started:

His isn’t the only company in HRM that’s hiring these days. Figures released Friday by Statistics Canada show that Halifax’s unemployment rate dropped to 5.5 per cent in December, compared to 6.8 per cent a year ago.

The last time the city’s unemployment rate was lower was December, 2008 — before the recession really took hold.

While unemployment deepens across much of Canada, the jobless rate is back to pre-recession levels in the whole of Nova Scotia.

In December, the provincial unemployment rate hit 7.8 per cent — still marginally above the national average of 7.5 per cent— but sharply below 10.4 per cent a year ago.

I would say an unemployment rate in Halifax of 3-4% in a couple years is highly likely especially if the global economy has recovered some by then.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by q12

I would say an unemployment rate in Halifax of 3-4% in a couple years is highly likely especially if the global economy has recovered some by then.

Halifax is set to perform quite well. Unfortunately the city cannot rely on the markets around the world to do the same.

The global economy will not recover, at least in a way of returning to 'business as usual'. We are living in a reality of climate change. Basic resources (clean freshwater, food--especially meat) will continue to dwindle around the world, constantly compromising the economies of countries most severely affected by extreme weather. This shall continue straining international finances as more countries take on more debt to survive(on top of debt from political mismanagement and what seems to be endless consumption from not just western nations, but emerging developing countries).

Canada needs other economies to drive its own. Canada's business partners will more often not be able to afford transacting with us; as well, our partners will drop in number as countries dissolve in their political unionship -- and physically on land that has been reduced in its habitation capacity.

[fenwick16]

The US economy is starting to recover. Many trillions of dollars of its debt were incurred to fight in Iraq. It also got into trouble because of its real estate bubble - the same thing happened in the Toronto area in the early 1990's; it took several years but the GTA real estate market has recovered. I think the US is well on its way to recovery and that should help drag Europe out of its mess; much of Europe's mess is associated with unsustainable social programs and too much leisure time instead of a strong work ethic (e.g. Greece, on the other hand Germany seems to be doing well).

I don't think that world population is a big strain on the economy - China's population will peak in another 10-15 years and is then forecast to decline - http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/china-and-the-one-planet-equation/. India is still growing but once starvation becomes a problem then they will be forced to do more about their population growth. In any case, I think population growth will take care of itself - once there are unsustainable resource levels and food then governments take action to reduce population growth. Japan's population has already started to decline. Canada's population will continue to grow because Canada wants population growth and encourages population growth through immigration.

One interesting point - according to the law of conservation of mass, which is a well established principle that is commonly used in chemical engineering and chemistry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass, we will never run out of resources. For example, steel isn't being used up and isn't being depleted; iron ore, which is iron oxide, is mined and processed to form steel, which if not maintained will oxide and convert back to iron oxide (iron ore). Similarly, when fossil fuel is burned it is not destroyed but is converted to carbon dioxide and water; as the carbon dioxide levels rise then plants grow more rapidly and the carbon dioxide is converted to the carbon in the plants plus oxygen - this is the carbon dioxide cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle). The carbon in plants can be burned directly or even converted back to oil (http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/13218/). However, as cheap oil is depleted then we will switch more predominantly to cheap natural gas for fuel (as is happening now and it is hurting NS gas royalties). As cheap gas, oil and coal are depleted then the world will switch predominantly to more expensive alternatives (but this won't be during our lifetime, there is too much natural gas available).

This is just my 2 cents worth on the economy, for what it is worth. I can't buy into the doom and gloom scenarios - I have been hearing it for as long as I have been watching the news, since the 1970's.

[someone123]

Here is seasonally unadjusted labour force characteristics data from Dec 2010-2011:
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/lfss04a-eng.htm

According to the table, Halifax had an unemployment rate of 4.7% in December 2011. To put things into perspective, Calgary has an unemployment rate of 5.1% and Toronto has an unemployment rate of 7.9%. 6,500 jobs were created in Halifax in 2011, which is a 3% increase to 225,300 employed.

The economy is already doing very well and the shipbuilding contract has yet to go into full swing. As I've said before I will not be surprised if over the next 5-10 years Halifax develops a reputation as a high growth city and becomes a common destination for people across Canada.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

The economy is already doing very well and the shipbuilding contract has yet to go into full swing. As I've said before I will not be surprised if over the next 5-10 years Halifax develops a reputation as a high growth city and becomes a common destination for people across Canada.

This will help the entire province and even the rest of the Maritimes. Even if the prosperity doesn't spread far out from the HRM, Nova Scotians and Maritimers will be able to grow up and live in the Maritimes instead of having to move to other parts of the country. But to continue to attract more Maritimers, Canadian and international immigrants, it will also have to add to its attractions - performing arts centres, museums and a stadium are all part of the mix of amenities. It will have to become a major city with some big dreams.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

The US economy is starting to recover. Many trillions of dollars of its debt were incurred to fight in Iraq. It also got into trouble because of its real estate bubble - the same thing happened in the Toronto area in the early 1990's; it took several years but the GTA real estate market has recovered. I think the US is well on its way to recovery and that should help drag Europe out of its mess; much of Europe's mess is associated with unsustainable social programs and too much leisure time instead of a strong work ethic (e.g. Greece, on the other hand Germany seems to be doing well).

I don't think that world population is a big strain on the economy - China's population will peak in another 10-15 years and is then forecast to decline - http://trailblazerbusinessfutures.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/china-and-the-one-planet-equation/. India is still growing but once starvation becomes a problem then they will be forced to do more about their population growth. In any case, I think population growth will take care of itself - once there are unsustainable resource levels and food then governments take action to reduce population growth. Japan's population has already started to decline. Canada's population will continue to grow because Canada wants population growth and encourages population growth through immigration.

One interesting point - according to the law of conservation of mass, which is a well established principle that is commonly used in chemical engineering and chemistry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass, we will never run out of resources. For example, steel isn't being used up and isn't being depleted; iron ore, which is iron oxide, is mined and processed to form steel, which if not maintained will oxide and convert back to iron oxide (iron ore). Similarly, when fossil fuel is burned it is not destroyed but is converted to carbon dioxide and water; as the carbon dioxide levels rise then plants grow more rapidly and the carbon dioxide is converted to the carbon in the plants plus oxygen - this is the carbon dioxide cycle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle). The carbon in plants can be burned directly or even converted back to oil (http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/13218/). However, as cheap oil is depleted then we will switch more predominantly to cheap natural gas for fuel (as is happening now and it is hurting NS gas royalties). As cheap gas, oil and coal are depleted then the world will switch predominantly to more expensive alternatives (but this won't be during our lifetime, there is too much natural gas available).

This is just my 2 cents worth on the economy, for what it is worth. I can't buy into the doom and gloom scenarios - I have been hearing it for as long as I have been watching the news, since the 1970's.

Your generation doesn't have to.

You can describe it as gloom and doom as you please: I've decided to pay attention and accept the numbers of what is happening to our biosphere as fact.

If the high levels of CO2 in our atmosphere are to, as you've mentioned, compliment the growth of plants -- then for what are they waiting? The speed of growth and CO2 conversion rate in our surviving species of trees has not change. There is also the problem of where these plants shall grow. We're sure not going to let any forest crop up on farmlands, which are producing less because of desertification and flooding.

And what shall we do about the massive quantities of methane (20X more severe than CO2 in terms of heat-trapping) that are being released from the arctic as more ice recedes? Seeing ice-free arctic summers is something even your generation will get to experience with the rest of us.

Toronto experienced the same thing as the U.S.? I've never known Canada to have such lax banking regulations as to allow gambling of mortgages.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Your generation doesn't have to.

You can describe it as gloom and doom as you please: I've decided to pay attention and accept the numbers of what is happening to our biosphere as fact.

If the high levels of CO2 in our atmosphere are to, as you've mentioned, compliment the growth of plants -- then for what are they waiting? The speed of growth and CO2 conversion rate in our surviving species of trees has not change. There is also the problem of where these plants shall grow. We're sure not going to let any forest crop up on farmlands, which are producing less because of desertification and flooding.

And what shall we do about the massive quantities of methane (20X more severe than CO2 in terms of heat-trapping) that are being released from the arctic as more ice recedes? Seeing ice-free arctic summers is something even your generation will get to experience with the rest of us.

Toronto experienced the same thing as the U.S.? I've never known Canada to have such lax banking regulations as to allow gambling of mortgages.

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.

How do you explain the ice-age and natural warming that occurred over thousands of years afterwards? Would you be more comfortable if there was another impending ice-age. I will take global-warming over global-cooling, especially since we live in Canada.

Rising carbon dioxide levels do increase vegetation growth - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm. Do you also not believe in photosynthesis?

[haligonia]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.

It is possible that global warming is not entirely man-made, however there is scientific evidence to prove that we are a massive contributor to the situation. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have spiked so sharply over the past century (The same time during which the world experienced immense industrialization) that I am fairly certain that our destructive ways are the root of the problem.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I didn't say that rising green house gases doesn't lead to climate change, it probably does since I believe in scientific facts. However, it is necessary to separate natural effects from man-made effects. What percentage of global warming do you think is natural and what part is man-made. Anyone who thinks that it is 100% man-made should be doubted.

How do you explain the ice-age and natural warming that occurred over thousands of years afterwards? Would you be more comfortable if there was another impending ice-age. I will take global-warming over global-cooling, especially since we live in Canada.

Rising carbon dioxide levels do increase vegetation growth - http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm. Do you also not believe in photosynthesis?

So...for the sake of argument, if climate change is not vastly due to human activity -- we should ignore it? Or at least not feel responsible as the news gets more depressing.

The Earth goes through cycles of cooling and warming, like a pulse. It's fascinating to look over the graphs and see the numerical repetition. The numbers of CO2 in our atmosphere have never been higher, hence why scientists are very troubled. There is so much carbon, such an extreme change in chemical composition throughout the atmosphere, that we have no point of reference to which a comparison can be made.

To clarify my grade school knowledge of plants and photosynthesis: you've taken my questions as a rejection of CO2's fertilising properties on plants. I realise carbon is used by plants, but my point was that carbon is just one and only one element to a plant's growth.

All parts of the planet that receive enough sunlight to allow plant growth are taken up by human colonisation, farmlands, and industry. The small forests that are remaining are all burning at record rates, or are being washed away from flooding.

It would appear that all this CO2 is changing the medium in which all plants grow, presenting such extremes that I doubt even the notion of miracle forests suddenly springing out of the ground.

Too much fertiliser, it would appear.

As more of the planet's filtration system dies, I'm concerned our slow response is futile when this is an in-process long-term problem, requiring attention now.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

So...for the sake of argument, if climate change is not vastly due to human activity -- we should ignore it? Or at least not feel responsible as the news gets more depressing.

No, we should continue to do all that we can to reduce pollution. However, the human percentage of total carbon dioxide produced is a small proportion of the total - most is naturally produced. It should also be noted that water vapor is the predominant greenhouse gas - a factor that we have little control over.

To clarify my grade school knowledge of plants and photosynthesis: you've taken my questions as a rejection of CO2's fertilising properties on plants. I realise carbon is used by plants, but my point was that carbon is just one and only one element to a plant's growth.

The primary elements are carbon, hydrogen and oxygen - the carbon comes almost entirely from the atmosphere and is a large percentage of the composition of plants. That is why planting trees and other plants is a method or removing atmospheric carbon dioxide.

All parts of the planet that receive enough sunlight to allow plant growth are taken up by human colonisation, farmlands, and industry. The small forests that are remaining are all burning at record rates, or are being washed away from flooding.

Crop yields have increased dramatically over the past 100 years; this is a result of fertilizers, crop rotation, better crop varieties, better knowledge of growth patterns, irrigation of desert land, etc (and quite possibly because of increased CO2 levels which is a nutrient for plants). Growing crops removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, so how is it bad for the environment? Forests are constantly being replenished.

In any case, humans only occupy a minuscule percentage of the earth's total land mass.

It would appear that all this CO2 is changing the medium in which all plants grow, presenting such extremes that I doubt even the notion of miracle forests suddenly springing out of the ground.

Too much fertiliser, it would appear.

As more of the planet's filtration system dies, I'm concerned our slow response is futile when this is an in-process long-term problem, requiring attention now.

I feel quite confident that an equilibrium will be reached based on the laws of nature (or scientific principles, if you prefer) and mankind will live on for many more millennia. I think a far greater threat is nuclear arms than global warming.

[hoser111]

Personal Peeve -

Signing up to a forum for updates and discussion on construction and development related activities, yet having to listen to debates about marijuana, Climate change, "Occupy" this and that.......

ad nauseum.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by hoser111

Personal Peeve -

Signing up to a forum for updates and discussion on construction and development related activities, yet having to listen to debates about marijuana, Climate change, "Occupy" this and that.......

ad nauseum.

I agree. I prefer development news and pictures; primarily positive development news.

In any case, if someone wants to start a thread on how climate change will affect development in Halifax then it could be put under a separate thread and then people can skip the ones that aren't of interest.

[bluenoser]

Construction boom: Cranes busy in Halifax
January 9, 2012 - 4:35am THE CHRONICLE HERALD | EDITORIAL


Construction workers are seen near the top of a tower at the King's Wharf construction site on the Dartmouth waterfront on Dec. 13, 2011. (TIM KROCHAK / Staff) .HALIFAX


Mayor Peter Kelly, like any politician seeking re-election, knows the value of getting out in front of a good-looking parade.

So Mr. Kelly, who faces municipal elections this fall, certainly wasn’t shy about issuing a news release last week predicting Halifax will likely issue $1 billion in development permits in 2012, which would be more than 20 per cent above last year.

The Halifax mayor based his prediction not on staff reports but on his own optimism, he said in an interview.

Mr. Kelly is correct that the city is currently buzzing with construction activity — and could see a lot more, particularly if Rank Inc.’s $500-million Nova Centre development, which includes the convention centre, gets off the ground this year. However, the credit belongs with macro factors like the pent-up demand for commercial and residential space in Halifax, continuing low interest rates and the afterglow from Irving’s winning bid on the $25-billion shipbuilding contract last fall.

......

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorials/50055-construction-boom-cranes-busy-halifax


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Halifax area shows biggest jump in building permits
January 9, 2012 - 6:39pm By JOHN DeMONT Business Reporter


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


6112 Quinpool Rd.

Quinpool businesses face displacement
January 6, 2012 - 8:43pm By REMO ZACCAGNA Business Reporter
Council to mull 8-storey structure on retail stretch


Pedestrians cross the street in front of 6112 Quinpool Rd. in Halifax on Friday. (PETER PARSONS / Staff) .

Several businesses will need to find a new location if a proposed Quinpool Road development goes ahead.

On Tuesday, Halifax regional council will look at starting the process to amend its municipal planning strategy and land-use bylaw to permit an eight-storey, mixed-use building at 6112 Quinpool Rd., where businesses like Cyclesmith, Noble Grape Urban Winery, Atlantic Cat Hospital and Etc. Press Ltd. are currently located.

.....

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/49471-quinpool-businesses-face-displacement

[Northend Nerd]

I don't know if this has been shared yet, but Bobby Mac from Q104 has launched a Facebook group called "SCREW THE VIEW!! We want to join the 21st century in Halifax."

It was created Jan 4th and has 270+ members already. Here is the link.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/205066832916557/

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by Northend Nerd

I don't know if this has been shared yet, but Bobby Mac from Q104 has launched a Facebook group called "SCREW THE VIEW!! We want to join the 21st century in Halifax."

It was created Jan 4th and has 270+ members already. Here is the link.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/205066832916557/

There appears to be two different groups...because I joined one (which has 34 members) and then there is this one with 270+.

[-Harlington-]

Free parking in peninsular Halifax may end


Permits could be needed on eight streets in February
CBC News
Posted: Jan 9, 2012 8:50 PM AT
Last Updated: Jan 9, 2012 8:57 PM AT

The city charges commuters $60 per month to park on William Street, near the Halifax Common. The city charges commuters $60 per month to park on William Street, near the Halifax Common. (CBC)


It may soon be more difficult to find a free parking spot on the Halifax peninsula.

Right now, many downtown commuters leave their vehicles on residential streets that allow all-day parking at no charge.

But if Halifax regional council agrees to go ahead with changes, permits will be required on a total of eight streets. The permits would go on sale in February.

They would cost from $20 to $40 a month, except for residents who can park on their own street for $30 per year, Dave McCusker, HRM's manager for strategic transportation planning, said Monday.

"The rationale for doing this is really to have control on the parking on the street so that there is parking availability for the people who live on them," he said.

"A number of streets in high demand areas get saturated with parking and residents just simply can't find a space when they need it."

Right now, William Street, off of Robie Street, is the only street on the peninsula where permit parking is allowed. It costs $60 per month.

Todd Yeadon can't park near his home on Maynard Street because so many commuters take advantage of the free parking.Todd Yeadon can't park near his home on Maynard Street because so many commuters take advantage of the free parking. (CBC)Very few commuters find that to be much of a deal, so William Street is practically empty on a weekday.

Todd Yeadon lives a few blocks away on Maynard Street, where anyone can park free all day.

"We have a lot of commuters coming in here and not wanting to pay a dime," he said. "So, it ends up as a taxpayer and a homeowner on the street and community, I can't even park near my house, let alone sometimes even on my street."

So to accommodate homeowners like Yeadon and to make some money, the city is going to charge commuters to park on Maynard Street and six other streets on the peninsula including Woodill, Wright and Falkland.

Residents on those selected streets will pay $30 per year.

McCusker said the city thinks this will reduce congestion.

"The other message that this project is trying to put forward is that we would prefer people not to drive and to park downtown, and to use transit and park and ride or car pooling to get to work," he said.

The city is also dropping the price of the permit for non-residents from $60 to between $20 and $40 depending on how close the street is to downtown.

Bill Josef, who parks his car on Trollope Street, said he'd be happy to pay for this kind of permit, but it doesn't mean there would be a spot waiting for him.

"The thing I mind is there is no guarantee of a spot. So you could end up paying $40 and still not parking here. That would be a concern," he said.

Council wanted to have permit parking on 12 streets, but residents on those other streets voted against it.