General Updates and News

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

That is pretty disappointing and not suited to the location. Parking like that shouldn't even be permitted in that area because it disrupts pedestrian traffic. Soon the far end of that block will have 9-storey condos and major retail spaces and it will be on a block with single-width sidewalks and curb cuts.

Because it's not tall nobody cares. Welcome to Halifax I guess..?

I cannot understand why they reno'ed that building instead of knocking it down and starting fresh. Cost I suppose. It truly is hideous and inappropriate - looks like something you would see in rural NS or a place like Moncton. But one can only hope that a mysterious fire destroys the place beyond repair before too long - restaurant kitchens are notorious for fires, after all - and that a more appropriate structure replaces it once the insurance money comes through.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by someone123

A dine-in family pizza restaurant seems like a poor fit for that location and is sort of a retro concept in general. It reminds me a lot of the old Pizza Hut restaurants like the one they had in Bedford.

If this does close down I'm sure we'll get at least a couple "death knell for Spring Garden Road" articles out of it.

Great meme idea:

Pizza shop closes.


Downtown Halifax is proclaimed as dying.

Or like with a local politician. Pizza shop closes. Blames developers.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I cannot understand why they reno'ed that building instead of knocking it down and starting fresh. Cost I suppose. It truly is hideous and inappropriate - looks like something you would see in rural NS or a place like Moncton. But one can only hope that a mysterious fire destroys the place beyond repair before too long - restaurant kitchens are notorious for fires, after all - and that a more appropriate structure replaces it once the insurance money comes through.

I think it looks pretty good personally. My only problem with it is that it's surrounded by parking lots. But the building itself looks pretty nice IMO. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

The only thing pizza delight had going for it is that it's open 24 hours.. I'm sure this will attract a lot of drunk students after 4 am.

[spaustin]

I actually think the Chickenburger is nicer looking than the Pizza Delight. All that sign pollution and the mash of modern materials makes Pizza Delight look like a piece of the suburbs got dropped on Spring Garden.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Hali87

I think it looks pretty good personally. My only problem with it is that it's surrounded by parking lots. But the building itself looks pretty nice IMO. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

The building itself and the signs are kind of interesting looking, but the whole thing looks shabby (the utility poles don't help). It's also an inefficient use of that lot -- the same property could support some office or residential space along with the Chickenburger.

Like I said, it will look weird because this is going to be a high-end shopping district with a little wooden house and parking lot surrounded by modern buildings like the new library and the condos going in on Clyde Street.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by someone123

The building itself and the signs are kind of interesting looking, but the whole thing looks shabby (the utility poles don't help). It's also an inefficient use of that lot -- the same property could support some office or residential space along with the Chickenburger.

Like I said, it will look weird because this is going to be a high-end shopping district with a little wooden house and parking lot surrounded by modern buildings like the new library and the condos going in on Clyde Street.

Its a really inefficient use of the site.

[fenwick16]

A story that was in the Chronicle Herald - http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/72866-apartment-building-booming-halifax

Apartment building booming in Halifax
March 12, 2012 - 8:06pm By ROGER TAYLOR Business Columnist


Halifax is going through an apartment-building construction boom the likes of which the city has not seen since the 1970s.

The apartment buildings now under construction in Halifax have a total of 2,282 units, says Matthew Gilmore, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp.’s senior provincial market analyst.

The national housing agency tracks construction from beginning to end, and Gilmore says this is one of the highest apartment unit totals under construction in Halifax that CMHC has recorded in nearly 50 years.
.
.
.

[fenwick16]

Is there a separate thread for this project?

(source: http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/72858-q-lofts-begin-construction-halifax )

Q Lofts begin construction in Halifax
March 12, 2012 - 7:27pm By REMO ZACCAGNA Business Reporter


Demolition of a north-end industrial building to make room for a multimillion-dollar condominium project has begun, with construction expected to start next month.

A fence was put up around the 15,000-square-foot building at 5666 Roberts St., just off James Street, on Friday, with the roof having been removed over the last few days.

The interior was gutted over the last several weeks.

In its place, Polycorp Properties Inc. will build the Q Lofts, a 72-unit condominium building that will be “approximately the height of a six-storey building,” said developer Peter Polley.

It will be that height because each unit will be designed to take up two levels.

Construction of the building, which Polley estimates to cost in the range of $10 million to $20 million and will have a 20,000-square-foot footprint, will begin “relatively soon,” he said.
.
.
.

[FuzzyWuz]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Is there a separate thread for this project?

(source: http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/72858-q-lofts-begin-construction-halifax )

Kind of an island of condos in the middle of craptown. (I lived there, I know.)

[fenwick16]

Here is a Google map link for the new condo location 5666 Roberts Street, Halifax - http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=5666+robert...unty,+Nova+Scotia+B3K+3W6&gl=ca&t=h&z=19

[someone123]

I made a thread for Q Lofts: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=198176

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

A story that was in the Chronicle Herald - http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/72866-apartment-building-booming-halifax

Mr. Gilmore's comments are indicative of a problem which I'm hoping the Regional Centre Plan will correct; which is the long time it takes to get through a DA. Particularly when it's located in an area where people are knowingly raising NIMBY issues to stall projects (like the Hydrostone). People seem to think that communities they live in shouldn't grow or what I like to call the snooze you loss principle. I got there first and to hell with everyone else.

If the Regional Centre plan can create a more certain application process (hitting the 90 day timelines) while suburban stuff still takes forever, it further lends support to development happening in the regional centre. It's faster and easier.

Time will tell, but I suspect the 'land rush' has already begun, particularly in areas where the regional centre plan is concentrating growth. I would guess a lot of land purchasing going on around Q condos.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

Mr. Gilmore's comments are indicative of a problem which I'm hoping the Regional Centre Plan will correct; which is the long time it takes to get through a DA. Particularly when it's located in an area where people are knowingly raising NIMBY issues to stall projects (like the Hydrostone). People seem to think that communities they live in shouldn't grow or what I like to call the snooze you loss principle. I got there first and to hell with everyone else.

I feel like this is a delicate issue, because the NIMBY argument in this case is not entirely without merit. The Hydrostone was a stable/stagnant neighbourhood for decades and a lot of people chose to live there for that specific reason - things were predictable, there were no disruptions due to new construction, etc. All of a sudden this is no longer the case, and some new developments are being plunked down in some pretty random places.

I think a plan similar to the "Toronto Avenues" might help mitigate this a bit, by making sure that moderately-sized infill projects are directed to major mixed-use corridors such as Robie or Young. This would have a major impact on these specific streets, but a very minor one on the surrounding neighbourhoods. The only thing I'm not sure about is how aware people are of how much this would transform the major corridors - imagine Quinpool if every building doubled its height, for example. Maybe not a "bad" thing, but this is arguably a larger scale change than building a couple high-rises downtown - we'd essentially be redeveloping all of our main streets.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Hali87

I feel like this is a delicate issue, because the NIMBY argument in this case is not entirely without merit. The Hydrostone was a stable/stagnant neighbourhood for decades and a lot of people chose to live there for that specific reason - things were predictable, there were no disruptions due to new construction, etc. All of a sudden this is no longer the case, and some new developments are being plunked down in some pretty random places.

I don't think there is much validity in any NIMBY argument... its flawed because there is no actual vote from everybody in the neighborhood and the loudest voices are heard. Honestly, private ownership / rights are seemingly out the window in Halifax. You'll eventually need to have a public hearing to mow your lawn. Think of the grass!

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I don't think there is much validity in any NIMBY argument... its flawed because there is no actual vote from everybody in the neighborhood and the loudest voices are heard. Honestly, private ownership / rights are seemingly out the window in Halifax. You'll eventually need to have a public hearing to mow your lawn. Think of the grass!

You're right, and maybe "merit" was the wrong word. I just meant that it makes sense that some people would be upset by the sudden increase in developments and corresponding change to the landscape, because in some (but not all) cases, people bought houses and settled down in a stagnant area simply because it was stagnant.

[scooby074]

Maybe Im a greedy capitalist, but i dont think there should be ANY restrictions on development, particularly being forced to keep a set number of units for low income.

If I invest millions in a development, I should have say in what I do with it, not special interests nor council. My goal is to maximize my return and having units tied up by low income and other restrictions makes it that much harder.

I have family who does development in Halifax (some of their units are discussed on these pages), and its something that I've always wanted to get into, but between the special interests, NIMBY's and council, I don't know how anything gets done.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by scooby074

Maybe Im a greedy capitalist, but i dont think there should be ANY restrictions on development, particularly being forced to keep a set number of units for low income.

If I invest millions in a development, I should have say in what I do with it, not special interests nor council. My goal is to maximize my return and having units tied up by low income and other restrictions makes it that much harder.

I have family who does development in Halifax (some of their units are discussed on these pages), and its something that I've always wanted to get into, but between the special interests, NIMBY's and council, I don't know how anything gets done.

Well, this is part of the problem... the association of point on the political spectrum with rights.

There is nothing specifically "capitalist" about being pro development... centrally planned, left wing, economies are very in favour of high density development. Obviously libertarians believe you can do whatever you want with your land.

This public consultation process has gone way beyond its intention. I don't even think they allow this much, particularly uninformed / loud voices, in the Netherland's polder model.

However, the "anti-development" crowd has somehow pitched themselves as the "morally superior" and that tall buildings are not "left-wing". This is totally b/s. If we aren't going to live in huts, then tall buildings are the most environmentally sound, morally responsible, and "left wing" thing to do. They enable more people to potentially own/rent a place in the city as opposed to the McMansion concept of development.

I want these anti-development people to be called out for what they are. They sure as hell don't truly represent the left or the environment, or even heritage for that matter.

[Wishblade]

Im pro development and consider myself quite "left wing". One of the most appealing things to me in regards to high density is the positive environmental impact of it. It's why it always perplexes me to see environmentalist types opposing high density and not saying a thing about the sprawling suburbs (unless it has to do with BL I guess). It's almost as if many of them just havn't done their research and can't connect the dots. Or maybe because they think tall buildings have a more "unnatural" look and are therefore worse for the environment?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Wishblade

Im pro development and consider myself quite "left wing". One of the most appealing things to me in regards to high density is the positive environmental impact of it. It's why it always perplexes me to see environmentalist types opposing high density and not saying a thing about the sprawling suburbs (unless it has to do with BL I guess). It's almost as if many of them just havn't done their research and can't connect the dots. Or maybe because they think tall buildings have a more "unnatural" look and are therefore worse for the environment?

Many of the "environmentalist types" are also the "heritage and authenticity types" (read: hipsters) who truly believe that allowing tall buildings will cause Halifax to lose its identity (because they saw it in an article that they skimmed over at Starbucks). Many people think that the obvious solution is just to densify the peninsula without any tall buildings. Unfortunately they don't stop and think about if/how that can actually be done.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by scooby074

Maybe Im a greedy capitalist, but i dont think there should be ANY restrictions on development, particularly being forced to keep a set number of units for low income.

So.. if there are no units set aside for low income, and no developer would do that on their own because it doesn't make economic sense, where do low-income people live? The public housing projects haven't exactly been a resounding success..