Development Rumours

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by hokus83

UGH 5 stories is too short for that space. what a waste.

It's an awfully large lot for anything much taller. 5 storeys could be decent if it's a continuous streetwall with enough variety to be interesting and enough repetition to feel cohesive.

[Keith P.]

Hopefully it is a properly designed building and not a vinyl-clad Highfield Park Special.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Hopefully it is a properly designed building and not a vinyl-clad Highfield Park Special.

There was a rendering. It looked similar to the Housing Trust renderings. Not much detail, but apparently some kind of panelling (precast, maybe metal, etc.), a brightly coloured corrugated cladding on some parts, somewhat like Southport, and glass balconies. There's a lobby canopy along with large glass storefronts. It looks much nicer than Highfield Park style architecture, and roughly in line with what you might expect from proposals in other parts of town.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

I really like that graffiti-bomb and often think how nice it would be if it were cleaned up and used for a restaurant or bar. I suspect it's planned to be demolished though, which I think is a shame.

Yeah, that thing has acquired so much character from the murals and whatnot, it'd be cool if they left it and reused it, if it's salvageable. I mean, it's not a big loss, but it'd be a cool building to repurpose.

[Keith P.]

Once again, the Khyber raises its ugly head and demands HRM's attention:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/khyber-sale-council-tee-up-1.3498966

So now the idea is to give it away (good) to the KAS (why?) and help fund the restoration of it as their clubhouse (you have to be kidding!).

Most of the comments on the story do my cold, black heart some good. The majority clearly are starting to see the folly of Coun. Mason's ongoing pandering to the KAS.

[hokus83]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Once again, the Khyber raises its ugly head and demands HRM's attention:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/khyber-sale-council-tee-up-1.3498966

So now the idea is to give it away (good) to the KAS (why?) and help fund the restoration of it as their clubhouse (you have to be kidding!).

Most of the comments on the story do my cold, black heart some good. The majority clearly are starting to see the folly of Coun. Mason's ongoing pandering to the KAS.

Hahaha you're probably too old to understand and realize both they and you fall under the category of a YouTube commenter

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Most of the comments on the story do my cold, black heart some good. The majority clearly are starting to see the folly of Coun. Mason's ongoing pandering to the KAS.

Yes, clearly some brilliance in the comments section, such as:

Too bad brick and mortar doesn't hold up well in a northern climate.

Yes, it's only been there for 128 years so far....

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Yes, it's only been there for 128 years so far....

The "cold climate" in Halifax is kind of maddening. Quebec City is much colder and has lots of well-preserved masonry buildings of a similar age and construction to the oldest buildings in Halifax. There are cities in Europe like St. Petersburg and Stockholm that have cold climates and lots of old architecture.

The same thing goes for wood construction. Europe has wooden buildings from circa 1000 AD. It really just comes down to whether or not the desire is there to perform the necessary maintenance and preserve the buildings rather than tear them down. Most of the heritage buildings in Halifax that are falling apart are in their present state because the landlords want to make them look as bad as possible so they can argue that they should be replaced.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by someone123

Most of the heritage buildings in Halifax that are falling apart are in their present state because the landlords want to make them look as bad as possible so they can argue that they should be replaced.

I was talking to an (out-of-city) developer a few months ago and he said something that was very interesting that I hadn't previously known: I guess a lot of owners will purposely let their buildings decay for income tax reasons.

The way I understand it*, you get charged capital gains tax on the appreciation of a property when you sell it. However, capital gains only applies to the building, and not the land. As a land owner you tell CRA what percentage of the value applies to the land, and what percentage applies to the building, but this "split" needs to be justified. So what you do, you buy a building, rent it out for 25 years without putting any money into it. By the time 25 years rolls around, the building is depreciated to the point where it is "worthless" (from an accounting point-of-view), so you sell the package as "land" and don't pay any capital gains on the sale.

*I may be butchering it, so if anyone here is an accountant, please correct me

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

The "cold climate" in Halifax is kind of maddening. Quebec City is much colder and has lots of well-preserved masonry buildings of a similar age and construction to the oldest buildings in Halifax. There are cities in Europe like St. Petersburg and Stockholm that have cold climates and lots of old architecture.

The same thing goes for wood construction. Europe has wooden buildings from circa 1000 AD. It really just comes down to whether or not the desire is there to perform the necessary maintenance and preserve the buildings rather than tear them down. Most of the heritage buildings in Halifax that are falling apart are in their present state because the landlords want to make them look as bad as possible so they can argue that they should be replaced.

Yes! Well said!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

The "cold climate" in Halifax is kind of maddening. Quebec City is much colder and has lots of well-preserved masonry buildings of a similar age and construction to the oldest buildings in Halifax. There are cities in Europe like St. Petersburg and Stockholm that have cold climates and lots of old architecture.

The same thing goes for wood construction. Europe has wooden buildings from circa 1000 AD. It really just comes down to whether or not the desire is there to perform the necessary maintenance and preserve the buildings rather than tear them down. Most of the heritage buildings in Halifax that are falling apart are in their present state because the landlords want to make them look as bad as possible so they can argue that they should be replaced.

However, those cold climates you cite are different from ours. There, it gets cold and stays cold for months. Here, it can be -15 one day and +10 the next, with lots of moisture and freeze/thaw cycles through the course of a winter. Those are what play hell with masonry structures. The wet climate here also has a lot to do with the decay of wooden structures. The original comment was overstated somewhat, but is not totally groundless either.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

However, those cold climates you cite are different from ours. There, it gets cold and stays cold for months. Here, it can be -15 one day and +10 the next, with lots of moisture and freeze/thaw cycles through the course of a winter. Those are what play hell with masonry structures. The wet climate here also has a lot to do with the decay of wooden structures. The original comment was overstated somewhat, but is not totally groundless either.

True, and that exacerbates decay. But Toronto and a lot of the great lakes cities get similarly wet weather hovering just above and below freezing. It is a factor, but the biggest factor is still regular, basic preventive maintenance, (which probably has to be slightly more frequent in harsher climates).

So the comment is onto something, but the idea that brick is no good for Halifax is a wild overstatement.

[Phalanx]

Not to mention Boston, which has a very similar climate to our own... But you know, it's completely unsuited to brick or stone...



Construction materials often have more to do with era, availability and economics than climate.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

However, those cold climates you cite are different from ours. There, it gets cold and stays cold for months. Here, it can be -15 one day and +10 the next, with lots of moisture and freeze/thaw cycles through the course of a winter. Those are what play hell with masonry structures. The wet climate here also has a lot to do with the decay of wooden structures. The original comment was overstated somewhat, but is not totally groundless either.

I think if you research the weather patterns of most populated areas of Canada you would find that they all experience weather variations/temperature fluctuations. Halifax is not unique in that respect.

Regardless, the original comment could be considered 'not totally groundless' if you are saying in broad terms that "the environment in general causes all structures to degrade over time". Every climate has its challenges, yes, and those challenges extend to all structures, regardless of materials/building techniques.

Saying brick and mortar doesn't hold up well in our climate is ludicrous. Look at basically all the 100-plus-year-old structures on Barrington that you would like to have torn down, and realize that many of them have had 'zero' maintenance done to them in the past half-century at least. How many buildings of any style will hold up to that kind of neglect?

The arguments against the Khyber, as I see it, come from how the population values (or doesn't) the arts community, and not the esthetic/historical value of the building. If you take comments posted at the end of a news article to be a cross-section of society (which I believe is far from the actual situation), then it appears that many people don't understand the richness that an arts community ads to society and would only notice the negative effects if it ceased to exist. They can't believe that there is value in the city suggesting to basically 'give' them the building in order to be used for cultural purposes. All they see is lost $$$.

Then there's the lunatic fringe who see no value in history or architecture whatsoever and think that we would be better off just leveling everything that doesn't fit their idea of being 'useful'. IMHO, in a business environment these people have a useful role in keeping things from going too crazy, but thank the deity of your choice that they don't make all the decisions for us....

[OldDartmouthMark]

Stumbled upon this old article from the Herald and was surprised to see so many developers that are discussed here in it:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/25703-call-it-diman-connection

Interesting read.

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Stumbled upon this old article from the Herald and was surprised to see so many developers that are discussed here in it:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/25703-call-it-diman-connection

Interesting read.

Ah, Diman, and the Qadisha Valley over which it looks, are spectacularly beautiful. I've toured and visited several of the monasteries there.

It's amazing the outsized influence its descendants have had on our city.

If I knew how to upload photos into here directly from my hard drive I'd post a few pics I took.

This is a pretty good perspective on the village I found online:



Closer:



Another angle:

[OldDartmouthMark]

Wow, what a gorgeous area!

[kph06]

Doing my regular scan of developer/architect websites I came across the "future projects" list on the Dexel website and lists the following:

6030 Pepperell Street
Quinpool Road
Spring Garden West
1333/43/49 Barrington Street
5140 Bishop Street

This is what I figure each are:

6030 Pepperell Street - Empty lot across from former QEHS
Streetview

Quinpool Road - McDonald's Redevelopment?
Streetview

Spring Garden West - block from Carlton to Robie (half depth to College)
Streetview

1333/43/49 Barrington Street - existing Heritage buildings
Streetview

5140 Bishop Street
Streetview

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by kph06

Doing my regular scan of developer/architect websites I came across the "future projects" list on the Dexel website and lists the following:

6030 Pepperell Street
Quinpool Road
Spring Garden West
1333/43/49 Barrington Street
5140 Bishop Street

This is what I figure each are:

6030 Pepperell Street - Empty lot across from former QEHS
Streetview

Quinpool Road - McDonald's Redevelopment?
Streetview

Spring Garden West - block from Carlton to Robie (half depth to College)
Streetview

1333/43/49 Barrington Street - existing Heritage buildings
Streetview

5140 Bishop Street
Streetview

They had two of those showing at VivaCity this past year. The Pepperell Street is a 10 story building and the Spring Garden is aiming to be around 30 stories if city staff will allow it.

[stevencourchene]

I love dexel!!! they do great designs and I hope they get approved for all they want because it will only better our city.

the only top think I wish a developer should include in their condos/apartments more would be pools.

GO DEXEL GO!!!!!


reach for the stars and build UP!