[Dartmouth] King's Wharf (Building E) | 85 m | 27 fl | U/C

[Keith P.]

Hard to believe any fish went up that river with all that industrial infrastructure there at its mouth.

Unfortunate that all of that is gone now. Five marine railway drydocks! I wonder how many people they employed.

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

For interests sake, here's what the King's Wharf site looked like in the 1950s when it was the Dartmouth shipyard:



Source

For comparison, Google's 3D map view:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.65208.../data=!3m1!1e3

Looks like a nice, possibly brick warehouse building in the cove too. Anyone have any other shots that might show more of it?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

Looks like a nice, possibly brick warehouse building in the cove too. Anyone have any other shots that might show more of it?

I'll keep my eye open when I peruse the archives and will post a pic if I fine one.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Here's one apparently from the 1970s, but it appears that the older building is gone (or modified?):



Halifax Municipal Archives

[OldDartmouthMark]

Another one of the Kings Wharf site, from the 1970s:



And from 1963:


Yet another from the 1960s:


Halifax Municipal Archives

[someone123]

The HRM planning information for King's Wharf has been updated:

https://www.halifax.ca/business/plan...lace-dartmouth

There aren't any detailed renderings but there are some site plans, shadow studies, etc.

A public meeting is coming up:

A public information meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. at Christ Church Hall, 61 Dundas Street, Dartmouth.

[pblaauw]

So they're planning to remove the curved berm? That makes no sense to me.

[BLeagues]

Would anyone have a PDF of the floor plans, possibly the original brochure, for the Anchorage at King's Wharf?

[OldDartmouthMark]

A pic from the 1970s looking towards the current location of King's Wharf. Looks like it was taken from Dartmouth City Hall.



Source

[Colin May]

The 49 units in the Anchorage that he was unable to sell :
" Francis Fares appealed the 2015 and 2016 assessments of 49 condominiums he owned.

An assessment appeal tribunal upheld his appeal, reducing the property values by a total of $6.6 million. That would have meant a maximum savings of $81,000 in property taxes."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...axes-1.4946640

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The 49 units in the Anchorage that he was unable to sell :
" Francis Fares appealed the 2015 and 2016 assessments of 49 condominiums he owned.

An assessment appeal tribunal upheld his appeal, reducing the property values by a total of $6.6 million. That would have meant a maximum savings of $81,000 in property taxes."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...axes-1.4946640

You missed the actual number that was agreed upon.
"The director of assessments took the cases to the provincial regulator. But before there was a ruling, both sides decided on a settlement.
Overall, the property assessments are down, but only by a total of $2.1 million. That means a maximum savings of $25,000."

I don't understand Colin, you obviously want this city to be affordable as per our earlier discussions. Why do your posts always seem to favour the status quo? You feel these developers are over building but who's the victim here? The developers carry the risk and the costs. If these units sit empty, it still taxes the city would never have seen because the housing capacity wouldn't exist. As of right now they have 18 units for sale left in the Anchorage which means in a year or two it will be full. Why do you constantly advocate that we should stop building new units? I'm just trying to understand the doom and gloom.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

You missed the actual number that was agreed upon.
"The director of assessments took the cases to the provincial regulator. But before there was a ruling, both sides decided on a settlement.
Overall, the property assessments are down, but only by a total of $2.1 million. That means a maximum savings of $25,000."

I don't understand Colin, you obviously want this city to be affordable as per our earlier discussions. Why do your posts always seem to favour the status quo? You feel these developers are over building but who's the victim here? The developers carry the risk and the costs. If these units sit empty, it still taxes the city would never have seen because the housing capacity wouldn't exist. As of right now they have 18 units for sale left in the Anchorage which means in a year or two it will be full. Why do you constantly advocate that we should stop building new units? I'm just trying to understand the doom and gloom.

I am not advocating any attempt to limit building residential properties. I just don't like the BS that Fares fed to the media, primarily the Herald, where he insisted sales were booming when they weren't. I never spoke against his development and I always thought he was taking a great risk, which has been the case. And the number of unsold units is 29, including 3 commercial units. Data from PVSC.
I never hear Chedrawe,Lauwen or Spatz hyping their properties in a misleading manner. I have known Chedrawe since his parents ran a corner store near where I lived, I served on the board of Neptune with Spatz, and Lauwen is a man who was given a very hard time by HRM staff when he was renovating Greenvale. Because of my experience with them I regard all 3 men as honest and reliable business people.
As for doom and gloom; the TSX and the Dow are lower than a year ago, interest rates are rising, the Canadian dollar is the lowest in 18 months, my retirement account has given up almost all the gains of this year, the world economy is a mess and over at City Hall some councillors want to hike my taxes - I'll accept a 2% hike and not a penny more. And the HRM pension plan is once again underwater.
Other than that, have a great Christmas - we'll be in Toronto.

[someone123]

What happens if you don't accept the tax hike that HRM imposes?

Every developer hypes their project. It's their job. Could it be that you are predisposed to like the others more than Fares because you know them more?

At the end of the day anybody can see what King's Wharf sales are like. Development has been happening for many years and they have only built a small portion of the total. It may still be financially successful.

I hope we see the next phase start up soon, and I think it's a good development for Dartmouth.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by someone123

What happens if you don't accept the tax hike that HRM imposes?

Long way to go before the tax rate is set. There are not enough votes to go past 2% so that means hiking other taxes and fees in combination with expenditure cuts. If they don't make cuts this year they will be in trouble in the next year,which happens to be an election year. Or they could draw down from reserves. I suggest the council ask for an independent review of HRM compensation.
Or they could ask Dube to find some more 'innovative financing'.
At the Police Commission meeting the budget numbers were grim, details were circulated to the board at the meeting and Blais deliberately avoided giving a copy to members of the media. The document was added to the online agenda page after the meeting. https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default...81210bopc4.pdf
The boom is over... according to reputable sources quoted in national and international media.
Our assessment has increased by 1.45% and our taxes will increase 1.5%, leaving HRM room to increase the residential tax rate by 0.5%.
Our income will not increase by 2% in 2019.

[Keith P.]

Well, you can't pay the majority of your bloated numbers of employees six figures and keep giving them generous raises and lavish benefits without running out of money. Cut the bloat by letting surplus people go, freeze salaries for nonunion staff and Council, send a message to the unions that the gravy train has pulled into the station. But by spending like drunken sailors HRM continues to do just the opposite.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

But by spending like drunken sailors HRM continues to do just the opposite.

I was in a bar recently and I saw a lot of sailors spending money like sober politicians.

[someone123]

There is a new building up on the King's Wharf website called Brightwork:


Source

[dtown]

Hard to tell from the one rendering on the website but looks as if it's on the opposite side of Alderney Dr. as the rest of the development. Theres a parking lot at King and Alderney
currently so this would be a nice addition.

[someone123]

It doesn't really seem to fit the site plan. There are some townhouses in the revised plan but I don't see any that are situated near a 12 storey tower. The rendering doesn't quite match the King Street site either, although it's possible that the background is not accurate.

You'd think it would be good to fill in the development with some townhouses at the point to make it feel like more of a neighbourhood.

[Keith P.]

HRM is rerouting a number of streets in that area so perhaps this is going on one of the changed ones.