[Halifax] The Ventura on Young (6189 Young) | 25 m | 9 fl | Completed

[Dmajackson]

New proposal by WM Fares for a 9-storey / 58 unit residential building with ground floor commercial at 6189 Young Street, Halifax. This is currently occupied by a one-storey commercial building housing a tattoo parlour and furniture store. The Design Advisory Committee will be discussing the project at their meeting next week.

Case # 23031: Level III Site Plan Approval Application for 6189-6191 Young Street, Halifax, N.S. (PID 00153098)

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

New proposal by WM Fares for a 9-storey / 58 unit residential building with ground floor commercial at 6189 Young Street, Halifax. This is currently occupied by a one-storey commercial building housing a tattoo parlour and furniture store. The Design Advisory Committee will be discussing the project at their meeting next week.

Case # 23031: Level III Site Plan Approval Application for 6189-6191 Young Street, Halifax, N.S. (PID 00153098)

This area’s really filling up nicely.

[DigitalNinja]

I like the wall on the side it looks quite interesting rather than just one color, hopefully it will turn out that way.

Hopefully the development proposed for the old DND grounds gets approved soon. Either than that the other other development spot on Young would be 6176 across from this one which appears to be a 2 story office building. No idea what business is in there though.

I can't see the forum parking lot being developed at least any time soon.

[RyNyeScienceGuy]

It’s pretty funny how the renderings show the surroundings of the project as a forest.

Hopefully this one will get started around the same time as the 3 building proposal on Young & Windsor as well as the Forum renovation plan. Haven’t heard any updates on those in awhile though.

[TheNovaScotian]

So one of the few areas designated for up to 90M is getting a building 25M tall.
That's wonderful, really maximizing the limited spaces we have on the peninsula......
At least we know the planning department have succeeded in beating the notion into developers heads that short buildings get approved quickly and developing tall buildings here is not worth the hassle.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

So one of the few areas designated for up to 90M is getting a building 25M tall.

Does this area have a FAR limit? It may be less practical to build a 90 m building on a small lot like this.

I think it's a pretty good proposal. It looks like a building that can eventually be a part of an urban streetscape, even though right now it's being built in a wasteland of empty lots and strip malls.

I wish there would be a bit more care put into the lower 3-4 floors of these buildings, and that the blank wall of glass were less common. Queen's Marque managed to do something a little different.

[Querce]

Max FAR on this lot is 8.0, which could get pretty tall if the lot was bigger and larger setbacks were possible

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

So one of the few areas designated for up to 90M is getting a building 25M tall.
That's wonderful, really maximizing the limited spaces we have on the peninsula......
At least we know the planning department have succeeded in beating the notion into developers heads that short buildings get approved quickly and developing tall buildings here is not worth the hassle.

I think it's the FAR limit that's doing this - if the developer wanted 90m height, they'd have to reduce the footprint.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

So one of the few areas designated for up to 90M is getting a building 25M tall.
That's wonderful, really maximizing the limited spaces we have on the peninsula......
At least we know the planning department have succeeded in beating the notion into developers heads that short buildings get approved quickly and developing tall buildings here is not worth the hassle.

Well, when there is no land left on the peninsula... things will have to change.

The idea that this centre plan is set in stone forever is not true.

It may be seen as a success in terms of getting things approved... yet, it would seem that even buildings that meet the requirements are subject to the court of public opinion. This being said, the plans will have to grow with the city and so will the mentality of people.

When there is no land left, there won't be a choice to build squat buildings.

Is the one for the corner lot of Windsor / Young grandfathered in? Or will it too become a victim of the height phobia or ridiculous limits imposed in this area?

[mleblanc]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Is the one for the corner lot of Windsor / Young grandfathered in? Or will it too become a victim of the height phobia or ridiculous limits imposed in this area?

I was wondering that as well. Latest update on that site was I believe 6 years ago? IIRC, same company that is behind the 32-storey mystery tower by the Armdale roundabout. Doesn't leave me with much hope.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

I think it's the FAR limit that's doing this - if the developer wanted 90m height, they'd have to reduce the footprint.

Ahh yes, yet another layer of height restrictions baked into the Centre Plan. How much difference of the quality of life in a city does this formula really have?

Honestly, I've looked high and low for a peer reviewed study of the efficacy of FAR with quantifiable data showing the benefits. If it's a formula that touches untold aspects of billions of peoples day to day lives, why is it not based on any statistical analysis? Urban planning mistakes can destroy communities and the lives of the people that live there. The decision they make shouldn't be based off dogma or long standing notions but facts and data.

If any planners among us have access to one that is available publicly or otherwise, I would be in your debt. I've been researching it for awhile now since studying it in school and would love any additional information if someone is aware of it, I'd just like to understand it better and why no one seems to question it.


I agree, WordlyHaligonian, my fear is that we're going to lose a lot of heritage properties before they catch on.

[Good Baklava]

Before worrying about how high the site could potentially be, it’s worth noting a lot of the new 40+ storey buildings you see in the GTA are packed with 300 square foot investorboxes. Rampant land values there mean it’s difficult for a developer to recoup their investment otherwise. You could say it’s somewhat of a blessing we don’t have the demand for such buildings.

[RyNyeScienceGuy]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

Before worrying about how high the site could potentially be, it’s worth noting a lot of the new 40+ storey buildings you see in the GTA are packed with 300 square foot investorboxes. Rampant land values there mean it’s difficult for a developer to recoup their investment otherwise. You could say it’s somewhat of a blessing we don’t have the demand for such buildings.

What’s an investorbox?

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by RyNyeScienceGuy

What’s an investorbox?

It’s just to poke fun at properties that clearly aren’t meant to be anyone’s primary residence, or that lack some sense of adequacy.

[IanWatson]

Yeah looks like it's the FAR that's capping them, since they're pretty much at 100% lot coverage. That being said, I don't see how you could realistically go much higher on a site of that size. You'd have to start going really deep to accommodate enough parking.

A FAR of 8.0 is quite high for a normal site. For example Fenwick Tower only had a FAR of somewhere in the range of 4.5 prior to the development of the new buildings on the site.

[Takeo]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Either than that the other other development spot on Young would be 6176 across from this one which appears to be a 2 story office building. No idea what business is in there though.

I can't see the forum parking lot being developed at least any time soon.

The 2 story building beside Monaghan is government I believe.

The Forum redevelopment master plan has the north parking lot being redeveloped as… a parking lot.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Yeah looks like it's the FAR that's capping them, since they're pretty much at 100% lot coverage. That being said, I don't see how you could realistically go much higher on a site of that size. You'd have to start going really deep to accommodate enough parking.



A FAR of 8.0 is quite high for a normal site. For example Fenwick Tower only had a FAR of somewhere in the range of 4.5 prior to the development of the new buildings on the site.

I must admit when I seen the case include two PID#'s I thought this was including the NSPI lands to the north east. On a site this small, its design is understandable but still a lost opportunity.
The point of contention is that within the small areas that permit anything over 27 stories on the peninsula, there are not many super blocks. Most PID's in the red have too small of a footprint to ever achieve a FAR that tests that limit. Unless the planning department anticipates consolidation and demolition of these areas, achieving the highest allowable building would be quite difficult.

If Fenwick is the example why FAR should be used, I'm worried. I'm currently looking at the eyesore as I type this. I can say with certainty the giant sore thumb that should be clustered with other buildings its size instead will remain a obelisk forever defining the south end skyline thanks to a 26m height restriction surrounding it. From what I'm seeing Fenwick couldn't be built if proposed today though it previously had a FAR of 4.5 .

[Dmajackson]

Apparently the commercial building has been demolished.

[Dmajackson]

This is now called The Ventura on Young. Foundation is going in and there the crane base is on site.


Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)

[kph06]

The crane pieces were getting assembled onsite today. Same crane from the TED building on Quinpool.