[Halifax] The Wynwood (2710 Agricola) | 23 m | 7 fl | Completed

[Dmajackson]

The crane came down yesterday.

[mleblanc]

That might be a Halifax record, crane was only up for 364 days! They made good time for a building of this size.

[ScovaNotian]

Originally Posted by mleblanc

That might be a Halifax record, crane was only up for 364 days! They made good time for a building of this size.

With the possible exception of the first Brenton Suites one.

[kph06]

Originally Posted by ScovaNotian

With the possible exception of the first Brenton Suites one.

I was going to say that but didn’t go there….

I actually loosely note up and down dates, the one over by Mic Mac Mall was up almost the same amount of time this one was. Considering the height of that building they made great time. I don’t think they had much below ground work on that site however.

[Dmajackson]

Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)

[Dmajackson]

Windows are being installed.


SIZE="1"]Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)[/SIZE]

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

20220219_115201_HDR by AJ Forsythe, on Flickr

20220219_115158_HDR by AJ Forsythe, on Flickr

[Dmajackson]

The retail space along May Street appears to be leased. The remaining two units are listed as available via CBRE.


Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)

[Dmajackson]

Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)

[Empire]

Very lazy design.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Empire

Very lazy design.

Lots o' wires too.

[IanWatson]

Is this one even Passive House in the end? Watching the construction details it sure didn't seem like the walls will provide the level of insulation and air sealing to qualify.

[mleblanc]

Rent is getting insane. $1755 a month for a bachelor for this one.. $1955 a month if you want parking.

[Keith P.]

Living in the center of Hipsterland comes at a cost.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by mleblanc

Rent is getting insane. $1755 a month for a bachelor for this one.. $1955 a month if you want parking.

I actually think the $1,900 range for a good, brand-new two-bedroom, heat included, isn’t nuts. Not anyone’s definition of affordable, but not outrageous.

What’s strange to me is the fact that bachelors are barely cheaper. $1,700 IS very high for that.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I actually think the $1,900 range for a good, brand-new two-bedroom, heat included, isn’t nuts. Not anyone’s definition of affordable, but not outrageous.

What’s strange to me is the fact that bachelors are barely cheaper. $1,700 IS very high for that.

The layout and size are probably more informative than the number of rooms. There are bachelor suites that are basically open concept one bedroom units, comparable in square footage and somewhat roomier feeling, that some people like.

We can debate how affordable this is for people but it's not out of line with rents in a lot of comparably nice neighbourhoods of other cities. In Vancouver, in a comparable area, the 2 BR would likely be $3,000 or more.

The pricing complaints often seem confused or mistargeted. If the pricing is "too high" (max buyer will pay $X but unit is > $X) the unit will sit empty. If they are all rented immediately then the price is either correct or may have been too low. The debate around housing supply is different from developer pricing, and housing affordability or supply issues won't be solved by guilt tripping developers into picking modest prices (which would cause shortages and subtletting). If affordable housing is the goal then the government needs to get involved, changing the rules in some way (ideally this since there is so much red tape) or funding the developments (can work for certain housing but probably not a good idea if housing is deemed unaffordable for most of the population).

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Living in the center of Hipsterland comes at a cost.

Note that "trendy" is used twice in the post...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

We can debate how affordable this is for people but it's not out of line with rents in a lot of comparably nice neighbourhoods of other cities. In Vancouver, in a comparable area, the 2 BR would likely be $3,000 or more.

The pricing complaints often seem confused or mistargeted. If the pricing is "too high" (max buyer will pay $X but unit is > $X) the unit will sit empty. If they are all rented immediately then the price is either correct or may have been too low. The debate around housing supply is different from developer pricing, and housing affordability or supply issues won't be solved by guilt tripping developers into picking modest prices (which would cause shortages and subtletting). If affordable housing is the goal then the government needs to get involved, changing the rules in some way (ideally this since there is so much red tape) or funding the developments (can work for certain housing but probably not a good idea if housing is deemed unaffordable for most of the population).

I don't dispute the supply/demand reasoning, and the fact that pricing will be determined by what people can afford or are willing to pay, but I don't think pricing complaints are really "confused" per se. I think it's simply a reaction to being priced out of a particular market, at a time when people are being forced to accept that a larger portion of their income has to be spent on housing than in the recent past. The resultant decrease in quality of life seems like a reasonable source for complaint (to me).

Additionally we have to remember that the relatively recent gentrification of the Agricola area is shutting out people that used to be able to live there. Not going into the gentrification debate, but just stating that complaints about high pricing aren't really that complicated. I wouldn't pay those prices even if I could afford it, as IMHO what you're getting for that cost does not appeal to me. Not confused or mistargeted, just an opinion...

[someone123]

Well sure, some people are just expressing frustration without regard for causes or solutions. But there are lots of bad arguments. An example bad argument is when people say that it's just Halifax so rents shouldn't be that high (but they are complaining about the market rate) or talk about "greedy" developers. The common thread is usually that they ignore markets and regulations and focus on moralizing and complaints about capitalism.

In this particular case the property used to be a small strip mall with surface parking.

I'm a skeptical of arguments that tie new construction to gentrification as well, as though the Peninsula would be more affordable if only there were less construction of fancy new condos. I don't think that's obvious at all. I would expect that rents have climbed even in areas with no construction, and new construction by and large is almost certainly a net win (net increase in supply > nebulous contribution to gentrification of having the new building). The most gentrification-inducing policies are probably the ones that aim to maintain stable areas of low density residential near core parts of the city (including opposition to transportation projects) and development controls around the urban fringe.

[Hali87]

I think the arguments make more sense when you break down what people mean by "too expensive". Some people are mostly looking at Halifax in isolation as a city with a population that has needs, while others are looking at it as part of the national/global housing market that people can freely move to and from depending on what makes financial sense. It is both of these things but it's hard to reconcile these views.

It feels like we've shifted from a paradigm where most new housing in Halifax was geared towards locals - prices tended to be based on what the local market could support - to one where prices tend to be based on what the national/global market can support. This seems to be a price bracket or two above what most people here can afford, so locals are being squeezed out while a wealthier cohort who can afford the new developments moves in.

This is why people complain about housing being both "too scarce" and "too expensive". From an abstract housing market perspective things are as they should be - there is high demand and low supply, so prices are high, and the correct thing to do is allow prices to increase as long as there continues to be enough people who are willing to move here and pay those prices.

On the other hand, most people who can't afford the increased prices are basically screwed. And none of the new housing that's being built really fills in that gap - it is all above-average stuff for Halifax. There is nothing that lacks frills, the focus is on an attractive product that people will choose to pay a bit extra for, and it's working, and the buildings seem to fill up quickly. But most of this is totally out of reach for a large and growing segment of the population, and the supply that is available to them is shrinking and becoming more expensive/less available.

I think ultimately the solution is much more construction, with about half of it being simpler and frankly "cheaper" than most of what we've seen here over the past 10-20 years. The other half can be directed towards discretionary buyers who want to move here.