[Dartmouth] King's Wharf (16 Kings Wharf Place) | 85 & 49 m | 27 & 15 fl | U/C

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by cormiermax

Tacky as sin. Looks like something from Astana...

That was exactly my thoughts?! I'm hoping the design will be refined slightly so its not quite as tacky. The massing is great though.

[Dmajackson]

Fares has big plans for latest development
JAMES RISDON
Published November 30, 2016 - 6:25pm
Last Updated November 30, 2016 - 7:24pm
Luxury harbour hotel plus condos worth up to $2 million

When the roughly $100-million King’s Wharf Maristella — Italian for Star of the Seas — is finished in three years, hotel patrons will be able to call from the tallest building in the Halifax Regional Municipality for a water taxi to pick them up at their front door.

Developer Francis Fares’ latest building is expected to eclipse the current tallest building, the Fenwick Tower, when it’s completed in 2019.

And it will also feature a marina.

...

Read more at the chronicleherald.ca

[pblaauw]

Future of King’s Wharf will look different (Chronicle Herald article)

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by pblaauw

Future of King’s Wharf will look different (Chronicle Herald article)

36 stories? Is that tower approved? The views would be incredible.

Also, it sounds like a better plan... more short townhomes that won't block the existing 4 "towers", a few tall buildings and the marina. Sounds more like a cohesive neighbourhood and the townhomes will be a great place to live when the weather is nice.

[mleblanc]

Not sure if anyone's seen these as well - but they seem fairly updated and include the new direction that the Herald was talking about. They are from the Breakhouse website that is partnered with Fares for the project. Looks quite stunning, getting excited to see how this is all going to turn out. Not sure about the beach though

[Keith P.]

The beach is pretty ambitious. So is kayaking in the winter.

Meanwhile I see Frances Fares is being sued by some disgruntled investors.

[IanWatson]

Some thoughts:

1) Looks great!
2) Jeeze, there are still years and years of construction to do.
3) Hopefully in those years and years I can save up enough to get one of those waterfront townhouses.
4) No second road access???
5) Apparently only white people will go there / are allowed to go there.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Some thoughts:

...
5) Apparently only white people will go there / are allowed to go there.

Touche. Time for architects to start showing some diversity in their renderings, I guess.

[Colin May]

The barely visible red hyphenated line starting at Ferry Park Trail defines the boundary of HRM property. HRM could infill part of that water area between the trail, Cove Beach and Beacon Park and then expand the existing park into the water lot and build a public boat launch ramp. Or HRM could fill in the whole area and create an even larger park.

Use viewpoint.ca to see the water lots owned by HRM. http://www.viewpoint.ca/sidebarmap#!

[jslath]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The barely visible red hyphenated line starting at Ferry Park Trail defines the boundary of HRM property. HRM could infill part of that water area between the trail, Cove Beach and Beacon Park and then expand the existing park into the water lot and build a public boat launch ramp. Or HRM could fill in the whole area and create an even larger park.

Use viewpoint.ca to see the water lots owned by HRM. http://www.viewpoint.ca/sidebarmap#!

...or it could be left as is.

[Takeo]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Some thoughts:
5) Apparently only white people will go there / are allowed to go there.

White people and snowmen ⛄️

[Dmajackson]

The proposed changes have a HRM case number;

Case 21296 - King's Wharf Place

[kph06]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Some thoughts:

1) Looks great!
2) Jeeze, there are still years and years of construction to do.
3) Hopefully in those years and years I can save up enough to get one of those waterfront townhouses.
4) No second road access???
5) Apparently only white people will go there / are allowed to go there.

An application is in with the city to defer construction of the 2nd access by 2 years from the previously required April 2017 start date. Additionally they are asking the city to consider looking at other means of access. Fares has already bumped this requirement at least one. Reading between the lines, I don't think they intend to build it. It would be very costly but it was part of the original requirements.

The application is here (application letter and here (detailed analysis). Some of the justification seems a little loose to me.

Here are the quoted reasons not to have it from the letter linked above:

- Kings Wharf has a very low incidence of emergency calls – and none of which have every been impeded due to the train or other blockage;
- Further, across HRM, which has many crossings, there is no recollection of an emergency response being impeded by a train;
- Due to a variety of factors, the likelihood of an emergency response being delayed due to an obstruction of our access is statistically very low;
- Medical Assistance, not Fire, is not the most likely incident on this site. As such, response by foot is possible;
- Pursuant to Transport Canada regulations, trains may not occupy a crossing for more than 5 minutes, either stopped, or during shunting. Further, when moving, based upon speed, train length and crossing - arm actuation time, the crossing will not be occupied for more than 5 minutes at a time while moving. CN advises that there are 8 trains per day however this seems high based on casual observation.
- There exists an emergency hotline which connects to CN dispatch where there is a concern that a train may be at risk of blocking the access. This provides for a timely halt or hasten order being delivered to the conductor.
- Anticipated turning movements (cross product risks) are, and will continue to be, substantially lower than the threshold at which CN would require a GSA.

They appear to say that a 5 minute delay is acceptable. 5 minutes could greatly change the outcome of someone in need of paramedic response.

Another item to consider is that the Port Authority has recently said the preferred way forward with future planning is a new container pier on the Imperial refinery lands (this plan seems long term and far fetched). If this happens there would be increased train traffic on this line.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by kph06

Another item to consider is that the Port Authority has recently said the preferred way forward with future planning is a new container pier on the Imperial refinery lands (this plan seems long term and far fetched). If this happens there would be increased train traffic on this line.

Somewhat off topic, but a new container facility at Imperoyal would make a nifty replacement for Halterm on the peninsula. This would free up a lot of valuable land for development on the waterfront, eliminate freight trains in the rail cut (perhaps hastening commuter rail to the downtown) and create new possibilities for a potential third harbour crossing.

What are we waiting for???

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by kph06

An application is in with the city to defer construction of the 2nd access by 2 years from the previously required April 2017 start date. Additionally they are asking the city to consider looking at other means of access. Fares has already bumped this requirement at least one. Reading between the lines, I don't think they intend to build it. It would be very costly but it was part of the original requirements.

The application is here (application letter and here (detailed analysis). Some of the justification seems a little loose to me.

...
They appear to say that a 5 minute delay is acceptable. 5 minutes could greatly change the outcome of someone in need of paramedic response.

...

Yikes. I don't think I'd want to live somewhere where the developer thought so little of my safety.

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Somewhat off topic, but a new container facility at Imperoyal would make a nifty replacement for Halterm on the peninsula. This would free up a lot of valuable land for development on the waterfront, eliminate freight trains in the rail cut (perhaps hastening commuter rail to the downtown) and create new possibilities for a potential third harbour crossing.

What are we waiting for???

1. where did you see this?
2. halterm is not going away. period. full stop. its fairvew cove that is now constrained by the bridges, and in need of replacement. also Halterm is only 2 of the piers at the south end - the rest is the ocean terminals, and likewise, not going anywhere.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

1. where did you see this?
2. halterm is not going away. period. full stop. its fairvew cove that is now constrained by the bridges, and in need of replacement. also Halterm is only 2 of the piers at the south end - the rest is the ocean terminals, and likewise, not going anywhere.

Didn't see this anywhere - I was responding to kph06.

The truck traffic generated by Halterm is a pox on the downtown. The land it sits on would be ideal for redevelopment. I'm just stating the obvious.

Also, if CNR didn't need the rail cut for container trains, the lines could be freed up for commuter rail......

[someone123]

I always thought the argument that the Halterm land is valuable was a bit strange. Yes, it is, but it is infill that was created for the container terminal. The container terminal would have to be moved to make that land available and building a new one would cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The net value of the land as a place for new development is probably negative.

Similarly people sometimes say it would be nice just to get rid of the container terminal and shipping but that is one of the bases for the city's economy. Without it there won't be as many people to buy the housing and shop at the businesses that the container terminal could make way for.

There are a bunch of ways to get truck traffic out of downtown Halifax that would have a lower cost than moving the container terminal (inland terminal, rail cut highway, Northwest Arm bridge, third crossing). The fact that none of these has happened is evidence that there's very little will or ability to build new transportation infrastructure of any kind in the Halifax area. This is the major root problem, and the truck traffic is but a symptom. There's been very little improvement during a time when the city's population has increased by 30% or more.

[kph06]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

1. where did you see this?
2. halterm is not going away. period. full stop. its fairvew cove that is now constrained by the bridges, and in need of replacement. also Halterm is only 2 of the piers at the south end - the rest is the ocean terminals, and likewise, not going anywhere.

It's been rumored and reported in a couple local news sources. The Port Authority had the study done, so its not specific to one terminal operator. Even if it happened, I don't think it's on any near term horizon, but within the lifespan when looking at the train crossing at King's Wharf.

I think there's probably two independent things happening. The Port Authority is getting the study done so they have the backup for a big ask for Federal funding to support long term planning to defend against other regional competitors. On another path, Ceres and McQuarrie, the two operators have long been rumored to be in merger talks here as they have already merged elsewhere.

I think they should infill the finger piers at Halterm to have a long north/south pier to focus on multiple 8,000+ TEU ships, and send the smaller ones to Fairview Cove.

[lawsond]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Didn't see this anywhere - I was responding to kph06.

The truck traffic generated by Halterm is a pox on the downtown. The land it sits on would be ideal for redevelopment. I'm just stating the obvious.

Also, if CNR didn't need the rail cut for container trains, the lines could be freed up for commuter rail......

Was down there this week and thought the same thing. It is a waste of dense urban space. Fairview Cove makes somewhat more sense but Halterm could be its own Kings Wharf and right by the park. It would also make PPPark a much more inviting place.