HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2022, 10:37 PM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,024
Photo from today:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2022, 4:33 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,354
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2022, 6:06 PM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,024
This crane came down over the weekend. I would suspect this would be the best option for the Press Block site. Timing would work out well too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2022, 11:42 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,354
This has a small skyline impact.


Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2023, 1:22 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,354
Demolition permit has been submitted for 184 Portland Street. This is the current Moffats Pharmacy building so it appears they will be proceeding with phase two.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2023, 5:50 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmajackson View Post
Demolition permit has been submitted for 184 Portland Street. This is the current Moffats Pharmacy building so it appears they will be proceeding with phase two.
Demolition before January 1 2024 results in a reduction in assessment for 2024
and any work on construction of a new building will not be added to the assessment roll until 2025.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2023, 8:06 PM
Saul Goode Saul Goode is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
Demolition before January 1 2024 results in a reduction in assessment for 2024 and any work on construction of a new building will not be added to the assessment roll until 2025.
Close, but not quite. The magic date is not January 1, 2024. It's December 1, 2023. The 2024 assessment must reflect the physical state of the property on that day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2023, 9:36 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Goode View Post
Close, but not quite. The magic date is not January 1, 2024. It's December 1, 2023. The 2024 assessment must reflect the physical state of the property on that day.
One must wonder if there is a memo stuck to a bulletin board in the office that issues demolition permits telling everyone not to issue them from some mid-year date until after Dec. 1. HRM wants that tax revenue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2023, 12:32 AM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
One must wonder if there is a memo stuck to a bulletin board in the office that issues demolition permits telling everyone not to issue them from some mid-year date until after Dec. 1. HRM wants that tax revenue.
Mayor Savage will be gone to the Senate soon after that date. Time to find a good candidate to fill the big chair after the October 2024 election.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2023, 2:01 AM
Dartguard Dartguard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
Mayor Savage will be gone to the Senate soon after that date. Time to find a good candidate to fill the big chair after the October 2024 election.
Oh I imagine Fillmore thinks that seat should be his and it just might be after the next Fed election.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2023, 4:05 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dartguard View Post
Oh I imagine Fillmore thinks that seat should be his and it just might be after the next Fed election.
The seat will be vacant on December 9 2024 and I doubt Trudeau will call an election before that date. And Savage is well regarded by LeBlanc and Trudeau. The pay for a Senator is $169,600 but the HRM pension would be significant at 24% of best 3 years earnings for a pension in excess of $43,000 plus CPP circa $16,000 in June 2025. More money, less work.

Last edited by Colin May; Dec 4, 2023 at 4:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2023, 4:35 PM
Dartguard Dartguard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
The seat will be vacant on December 9 2024 and I doubt Trudeau will call an election before that date. And Savage is well regarded by LeBlanc and Trudeau. The pay for a Senator is $169,600 but the HRM pension would be significant at 24% of best 3 years earnings for a pension in excess of $43,000 plus CPP circa $16,000 in June 2025. More money, less work.
Yes indeed, what did Senator Macdonald call it "twenty hours weeks and six figure salaries". Mike will fit right in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2023, 8:03 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,814
Any pics of the first building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2023, 3:44 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,354
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2023, 5:17 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmajackson View Post
Thanks!, I only live a few blocks from there, but have not been in that area.
Nice to see the progress.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2023, 7:46 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,017
I think I saw that picture in the new Merriam-Webster next to the definition for "uninspiring". Or was it next to "generic"?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2023, 8:00 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
I think I saw that picture in the new Merriam-Webster next to the definition for "uninspiring". Or was it next to "generic"?
More accurately, HRM Generic
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2023, 11:03 PM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,024
Unfortunately Developments HFX posted a photo of an updated phase 2 rendering a few months back and that building changed a lot. The tall unique building has been made much lower and squat.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2023, 3:10 AM
HarbingerDe HarbingerDe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by kph06 View Post
Unfortunately Developments HFX posted a photo of an updated phase 2 rendering a few months back and that building changed a lot. The tall unique building has been made much lower and squat.
Can confirm by hearsay. A friend of mine lives here and chats with the developer who is on-site pretty regularly.

The second building has been reduced to somewhere between 8-11 stories. The Council and their fear of heights strikes yet again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2023, 1:39 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarbingerDe View Post
Can confirm by hearsay. A friend of mine lives here and chats with the developer who is on-site pretty regularly.

The second building has been reduced to somewhere between 8-11 stories. The Council and their fear of heights strikes yet again.
It's not a Council fear of height. This site is as-of-right and the rules allow a higher height, but at the same density (FAR of 4.5). You can choose to build the allotted density tall and thin or low and thicker, depending on target market. This is exactly how FAR is supposed to function as a tool - give the flexibility to the developer to choose what works best for them. In this case AllNS reports the developer saying they chose to go lower to keep per unit costs down and target a more affordable market.

I really like the podium of the first building. The tower is indeed generic, but that is perfectly okay in my mind - it's not an offensive design, it does what it needs to do in terms of providing housing, and it otherwise fades into the background.

It's also interesting comparing this build to 222 Portland, just up the street. That one was a fairly big deal for the time because it was a new build at a time when DT Dartmouth had seen very little investment; however, when you contrast with 186 Portland it's very much apparent how much the quality of builds has increased over the intervening years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:06 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.