General Updates and News

[xanaxanax]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

I believe the school was one of the ones replaced by Citadel. Regardless, the building was in bad shape, and would likely have needed to have been replaced were the site to continue as an educational facility.

the proposal as advanced yesterday is good, but the financing is questionable, and leaves the door open for additional funding requests from government. Id rather see HRM Sell the site, with a requirement that the developer provide the required program space, in exchange for increased density or something. then HRM gets rid of the property and expenses, the community groups get their space, and everyone wins.

Thats the best possible outcome that I think everyone wants but there is too much emotion and ego with the NCCC for them to work for that

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

I believe the school was one of the ones replaced by Citadel. Regardless, the building was in bad shape, and would likely have needed to have been replaced were the site to continue as an educational facility.

the proposal as advanced yesterday is good, but the financing is questionable, and leaves the door open for additional funding requests from government. Id rather see HRM Sell the site, with a requirement that the developer provide the required program space, in exchange for increased density or something. then HRM gets rid of the property and expenses, the community groups get their space, and everyone wins.

Citadell was a high school - this was an elementary/jr. high - P to 9. So I'm not sure where the students all got transitioned too.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

Do none of these people in the neighborhood have legs?
Bloomfield is a km away and will have community facilities.
What is the matter with our councillors?

The yuppies in the Bloomfield area don't want poor kids and black kids in their schools and community facilities.
Why can't the yuppies walk to a community centre at St Pats Alexandra ?
If there is one place that needs a decent community centre it is those in the area around St Pats Alexandra.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

I believe the school was one of the ones replaced by Citadel. Regardless, the building was in bad shape, and would likely have needed to have been replaced were the site to continue as an educational facility.

It wasn't (it was an elementary school and the students are being shuffled to another, smaller, 60s-esque school in the North End). You're probably thinking of the similarly named St. Pat's High School/Quinpool Educational Centre.

the proposal as advanced yesterday is good, but the financing is questionable, and leaves the door open for additional funding requests from government. Id rather see HRM Sell the site, with a requirement that the developer provide the required program space, in exchange for increased density or something. then HRM gets rid of the property and expenses, the community groups get their space, and everyone wins.

That's exactly what I would have liked to have seen, and it seems fairly obviously the best solution until you realize that nothing is being done in good faith at this point. I doubt there is much trust left between the HRM, the community groups and the developer, if there had been any to begin with before the legal actions.

[ILoveHalifax]

Just think how much better this community could be with apartments for several hundred people built on this land. Gottingen would have a base to support local business and there could be jobs for many locals.

[xanaxanax]

Originally Posted by Hali87

That's exactly what I would have liked to have seen, and it seems fairly obviously the best solution until you realize that nothing is being done in good faith at this point. I doubt there is much trust left between the HRM, the community groups and the developer, if there had been any to begin with before the legal actions.

JONO has to incorporate affordable housing it has nothing to do with in good faith, its a legally signed contact as part of their bid that would be part of the development, its why they scored the highest bid in the first place. NCCC stomping their feet saying they want to do affordable housing for north end pride is stupidity when they don't have the money for it and will have to ask for it from the government.

[JET]

Originally Posted by xanaxanax

JONO has to incorporate affordable housing it has nothing to do with in good faith, its a legally signed contact as part of their bid that would be part of the development, its why they scored the highest bid in the first place. NCCC stomping their feet saying they want to do affordable housing for north end pride is stupidity when they don't have the money for it and will have to ask for it from the government.

Just curious, who is it that is going to provide affordable, acessible housing, if it isn't government through non-profit organizations?

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by JET

Just curious, who is it that is going to provide affordable, acessible housing, if it isn't government through non-profit organizations?

governments should incentiveize developers to do it. on a basic level, construction costs the same whether you are building a a high end condo, or a low end apartment (Finishes being the big differentiators) the difference comes to the return the developer gets.

You could leave it to non profits, but then you end up with "poor" areas which are stigmatized as social housing, and frequently fall into disrepair due to lack of funds.

By having a developer offer affordable units in exchange for fee reductions, or density bonus's the social goals are achieved with little cost to the government, and you avoid stigmatizing the residents who live in those units.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by JET

Just curious, who is it that is going to provide affordable, acessible housing, if it isn't government through non-profit organizations?

Do what they do in many cities/states in the USA - mandate 10% of the units/ space in every development as a low income unit. And provide a definition of 'low income'.
Nobody knows what 'affordable housing' means.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

governments should incentiveize developers to do it. on a basic level, construction costs the same whether you are building a a high end condo, or a low end apartment (Finishes being the big differentiators) the difference comes to the return the developer gets.

You could leave it to non profits, but then you end up with "poor" areas which are stigmatized as social housing, and frequently fall into disrepair due to lack of funds.

By having a developer offer affordable units in exchange for fee reductions, or density bonus's the social goals are achieved with little cost to the government, and you avoid stigmatizing the residents who live in those units.

I like this line of thinking. Seems like a win-win for all involved.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

Gottingen would have a base to support local business and there could be jobs for many locals.

I'm pretty confident that this will happen regardless of what happens with the St. Pat's-Alexandra site. Gottingen is definitely on an upward trajectory with new housing and a variety of new businesses, plus other major projects in the works such as the 2 Housing Trust developments (MET and Diamonds). I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of redevelopment happen in the narrow corridor between Gottingen and Agricola over the next few years.

For all the talk of how "Gottingen needs towers and high density this and that to support the retail"... the retail seems to be doing pretty well already.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

governments should incentiveize developers to do it. on a basic level, construction costs the same whether you are building a a high end condo, or a low end apartment (Finishes being the big differentiators) the difference comes to the return the developer gets.

You could leave it to non profits, but then you end up with "poor" areas which are stigmatized as social housing, and frequently fall into disrepair due to lack of funds.

By having a developer offer affordable units in exchange for fee reductions, or density bonus's the social goals are achieved with little cost to the government, and you avoid stigmatizing the residents who live in those units.

I think this is the approach HRM has been trying to take (particularly with the stalled Centre Plan) - I think the stumbling block right now is a lack of coordination between the city and province. IIRC the mechanism for encouraging affordable units through density bonusing can only be applied within the HRM by Design area.

[halifaxboyns]

Isn't this a requirement for development in the HbD area? You have to dedicate at least 10% of the units? There just is no clear definition of what is affordable.

Odd this topic is coming up in Halifax, next week the Alberta Professional Planners Institute is teaming up with the Calgary Library to do the Social Justice Encounter 2014 on Affordable Housing. As far as I know; they will be taping it to put it up on youtube. So when we've got it online, someone remind me to post it.
http://www.calgarypubliclibrary.com/services/programs-events?p=4215

[mcmcclassic]

The block of former crack houses on Victoria Rd. are being demolished as of today. Bulldozer is onsite and has knocked one down already.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

governments should incentiveize developers to do it. on a basic level, construction costs the same whether you are building a a high end condo, or a low end apartment (Finishes being the big differentiators) the difference comes to the return the developer gets.

I hear this often but I think it has a flaw. No high-end condo is going to want low-income residents in it. If somebody built a condo with $1 million units on Young Avenue, making 10% low-income units will seriously hinder the sale of those pricey condos. Then you run into the issue of how those cheap but extremely desirable units get allocated, and how to prevent owners from flipping them for a fast profit.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I hear this often but I think it has a flaw. No high-end condo is going to want low-income residents in it. If somebody built a condo with $1 million units on Young Avenue, making 10% low-income units will seriously hinder the sale of those pricey condos. Then you run into the issue of how those cheap but extremely desirable units get allocated, and how to prevent owners from flipping them for a fast profit.

Toronto's so far very successful redevelopment of Regent Park has proven this to be untrue--it's hard to imagine a Canadian neighbourhood more blighted by bad reputation than Regent Park, but the redeveloped condo properties have sold extremely well, despite not only the area's historical reputation, but the continued presence of low-income housing.

[ILoveHalifax]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Toronto's so far very successful redevelopment of Regent Park has proven this to be untrue--it's hard to imagine a Canadian neighbourhood more blighted by bad reputation than Regent Park, but the redeveloped condo properties have sold extremely well, despite not only the area's historical reputation, but the continued presence of low-income housing.

I was just checking out Regent Park. All I could find was low end condos, nothing in the $1,000,000.00 range. I must have missed something.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

I was just checking out Regent Park. All I could find was low end condos, nothing in the $1,000,000.00 range. I must have missed something.

Yes.

[IanWatson]

Our fears are well founded. Minister Kousoulis will be recommending demolition of the Dennis: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scoti...g-in-halifax-facing-demolition-1.2644588

I'm compelled enough on this one to take action. Any suggestions for what I/we can do?

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Our fears are well founded. Minister Kousoulis will be recommending demolition of the Dennis: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scoti...g-in-halifax-facing-demolition-1.2644588

I'm compelled enough on this one to take action. Any suggestions for what I/we can do?

write letters, protest.
chain yourself to the building?