HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2017, 4:34 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
Realistically, Salter St is never going to be an inviting pedestrian streetscape. It is dark, windy, cold and steeply inclined.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2017, 8:13 PM
mleblanc mleblanc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Realistically, Salter St is never going to be an inviting pedestrian streetscape. It is dark, windy, cold and steeply inclined.
It's also right in the middle of downtown, and a connection between Spring Garden and the waterfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2017, 9:45 PM
ScovaNotian ScovaNotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Halifax
Posts: 239
The Salter Street side has a blank concrete wall of at least five times the width of the proposed garage door. I don't find the door particularly objectionable. The loss of underground retail area isn't really lamentable either. I do like the current outdoor space that Niche occupies in the summer though, and I think that squaring off the building takes away from its appearance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2017, 3:38 AM
lawsond lawsond is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 554
Quote:
Originally Posted by cormiermax View Post
What a mess.
Agreed. This is the only podium plaza I really,like in the city. That new box looks chunky and claustrophobic.
__________________
lawsond
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 5:39 PM
Grav's Avatar
Grav Grav is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 52
I agree with the earlier comment that the new addition doesn't respect and carry down the aesthetic and design elements of the Existing tower. Its inching towards post modern where they are trying to relate the addition more towards its surroundings then the building they are expanding onto. The cornice, while it has its functions is a bit out of place, and I would have loved to see them reference the coffir windows of the tower a bit more. the cladding seems to matching concrete but it's hard to tell from the computer renderings. Rainscreen would be a total headbutt.

That being said there have been worse proposals and projects(peachtree center's messy new retail facades) Most folks don't realize there are retail levels below because the large eye catching awning that was originally on the barrington salter corner was removed and minimized years ago. Shopping centers need some kind of anchor too and that was a missing element in the design. Maybe instead of converting the shopping areas into more parking they should look at accommodating a large anchor store like Simons.

The loss of the plaza will be felt most of all. It draws you in, has good setback and has good function as a restaurant venue in the summer. Originally I think some of the planters were water fountains. You can see a slit where the water may have originally plunged down from and into the lower pools. I like to imagine what it would be like if all the terraced planters were water features. It would be like Halifax's very own mini Fort Worth water garden down there. I always thought trees would be a great addition to the area, however depending on what lies underneath that may not be possible.

Anyone think having the new doors right on the sidewalk could cause a foot traffic problem? You will have folks going in and out of the building, walking up and down the street all in the same small space. I foresee clustering and difficulty in navigating that section of sidewalk!

Last edited by Grav; Nov 27, 2017 at 5:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 9:55 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grav View Post
That being said there have been worse proposals and projects(peachtree center's messy new retail facades) Most folks don't realize there are retail levels below because the large eye catching awning that was originally on the barrington salter corner was removed and minimized years ago. Shopping centers need some kind of anchor too and that was a missing element in the design. Maybe instead of converting the shopping areas into more parking they should look at accommodating a large anchor store like Simons.

Thirty-plus years of retail failure would suggest otherwise. Downtown is dead for retail due to traffic congestion and lack of convenient parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2017, 6:40 PM
Grav's Avatar
Grav Grav is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Thirty-plus years of retail failure would suggest otherwise. Downtown is dead for retail due to traffic congestion and lack of convenient parking.
Population density downtown is increasing gradually. The next Thirty years will be much different then the last now that downtown condo living is starting to take hold. People who can just walk out the front door of their building and get anywhere downtown within a few minutes will be more commonplace. It would be nice to easily access great stores without having to deal with Halifax transit.

If only emphisis was placed on mixed income developments I don't want to pay 250,000+ For a tiny condo because it has a granite countertop
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 4:53 PM
miesh111 miesh111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grav View Post

If only emphisis was placed on mixed income developments I don't want to pay 250,000+ For a tiny condo because it has a granite countertop
The problem sir, is not that you don't want to pay $250k for a tiny condo because it has a granite counter-top, it's that someone who's willing to pay $250k for a condo WITH granite counter top doesn't want to live in a building with someone with less income / "class".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 6:56 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by miesh111 View Post
The problem sir, is not that you don't want to pay $250k for a tiny condo because it has a granite counter-top, it's that someone who's willing to pay $250k for a condo WITH granite counter top doesn't want to live in a building with someone with less income / "class".
The problem is that finishes only account for a fraction of the cost of a unit. What's the price premium these days for putting in builder-grade granite instead of laminate? Maybe $5,000? Bump up your flooring from $1.50/SF to $4.50/SF and that's a $2100 premium in a 700 SF unit. Go with fancy appliances and that's probably another $5,000. So the difference in cost of a "fancy" unit vs. a "plain" unit is actually only mayyyyybe $15,000.

It's not a $250k condo because of the finishes. It's a $250k condo because of its location (land costs), construction methods (concrete vs. wood frame), underground parking, etc. etc. A large majority of the costs of a downtown condo are set costs, no matter how the units are finished out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 7:12 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
The problem is that finishes only account for a fraction of the cost of a unit. What's the price premium these days for putting in builder-grade granite instead of laminate? Maybe $5,000? Bump up your flooring from $1.50/SF to $4.50/SF and that's a $2100 premium in a 700 SF unit. Go with fancy appliances and that's probably another $5,000. So the difference in cost of a "fancy" unit vs. a "plain" unit is actually only mayyyyybe $15,000.

It's not a $250k condo because of the finishes. It's a $250k condo because of its location (land costs), construction methods (concrete vs. wood frame), underground parking, etc. etc. A large majority of the costs of a downtown condo are set costs, no matter how the units are finished out.
It is a $250,000 unit because the developer believes that is what a willing buyer will pay, nothing to do with the cost.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:08 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
It is a $250,000 unit because the developer believes that is what a willing buyer will pay, nothing to do with the cost.
You're describing a monopoly situation, but the condo market seems pretty competitive in Halifax (you often argue this indirectly when you say there is a surplus of many builders building condos that are barely selling).

In a competitive industry, profits are driven down and prices approach production costs. If someone were building condos at a cost of $100,000 and selling them for $1,000,000, there would be a huge incentive for more builders to enter the market and offer condos for $900,000 (still making $800,000), then $800,000, and so on.

The price people are willing to pay still matters in that if the production cost is higher than that no condos will get built at all. If the market value is $200,000 and the cost to build is $250,000, builders go out of business.

In a monopoly one producer tries to get as close as possible to the maximum customers will spend, because by definition they can't be undercut by competitors. This is what we have in, say, the cell phone industry in Canada. It's hard for other firms to enter the market so there is nobody to undercut prices and drive them down near the level of costs. I don't think the Halifax condo market is much like this though (it is not perfectly competitive either, but somewhere along the spectrum closer to that end).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:16 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
It is a $250,000 unit because the developer believes that is what a willing buyer will pay, nothing to do with the cost.
To some degree, though it's a pretty diverse market in Halifax so prices have to have a fairly strong basis in costs or else a competitor will just use the margin to undercut you and take your business.

I think more likely is that the principle is flipped around (at least in Halifax): prices are based on what people are willing to pay, but so are costs. In other words, if the market is okay with $300k units, developers will build the quality of building and in the locations that produce $300k units; they won't build $200k units and sell them at $300k (because again, competitors will beat them out by cutting into that $100k margin and offering a better product for your $300k).

All of this calculus probably changes in a city like Vancouver, where the supply/demand is so out of whack.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:17 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
It's not a $250k condo because of the finishes. It's a $250k condo because of its location (land costs), construction methods (concrete vs. wood frame), underground parking, etc. etc.
This point is hugely underappreciated when it comes to affordable housing. Halifax is not quite as affected by these factors but they still come into play.

Here in Vancouver we have all kinds of affordable housing advocates who say they hate big developers so they want nice small scale boutique projects that are 4 floors. Then in many cities there are old planning rules that say there have to be setbacks and there has to be a certain amount of parking, etc.

In Vancouver because of land speculation an affordable housing developer might have to buy a multi-unit-sized plot for, say, $10M. Then the planning rules dictate that they can only fit 40 units on that land. The land cost is $250,000 per unit before any construction has even happened yet.

There's also just not that much desirable land in most Canadian cities zoned for multi unit, because so much land is taken off the table. Most land in Halifax is reserved for single family dwellings or commercial. Same here in Vancouver. There is therefore added competition for the remaining lots, and they get bought up by developers building higher end buildings. A private-sector developer is not going to build affordable units on a prime lot that could be filled with $1M condos.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:24 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,220
Ah, you beat me to the punch responding to Colin, and said it much more eloquently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
The price people are willing to pay still matters in that if the production cost is higher than that no condos will get built at all. If the market value is $200,000 and the cost to build is $250,000, builders go out of business.
I think this is a really important point in the context of downtown. You'll see a lot of people (especially on these boards) suggest that we need to unleash unlimited development in the downtown to make it so units are affordable. But even if you allowed 100 storeys downtown, you a'int getting $150k units. There is a cost to building downtown that sets the floor for unit costs. If the market prices fall below that floor, developers aren't going to sell cheap units, they're just going to stop building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:25 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
I think more likely is that the principle is flipped around (at least in Halifax): prices are based on what people are willing to pay, but so are costs. In other words, if the market is okay with $300k units, developers will build the quality of building and in the locations that produce $300k units
This reminds me of a video I saw a while back from a real estate advisor warning people that they have to buy now because they will be able to "afford" less house next year when mortgage rules in Canada are tightened.

For most people, home buying is an exercise where they go to some banks and the banks tell them how much they can borrow for a mortgage. People then use that as their budget and go find the most desirable places they can "afford". In a competitive market this drives the quality of houses up to the best it can be at the price. In an uncompetitive market like Vancouver when there are low interest rates it creates the situation where bungalows sell for $800,000.

Unfortunately, most people cannot really afford the amount of money they are borrowing. They are spending so much on housing that they are not saving up for retirement, emergencies, etc.

Education is really similar. Tuition has been going up in lock step with student loan amounts. The loans might improve access to education somewhat, but really they are allowing universities to capture more and more of the earning potential of students. In the same way, loose credit allows the real estate industry to dip into future earnings in a way that otherwise would not be possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:28 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
I think this is a really important point in the context of downtown. You'll see a lot of people (especially on these boards) suggest that we need to unleash unlimited development in the downtown to make it so units are affordable. But even if you allowed 100 storeys downtown, you a'int getting $150k units. There is a cost to building downtown that sets the floor for unit costs. If the market prices fall below that floor, developers aren't going to sell cheap units, they're just going to stop building.
This makes me thankful for improvements in construction technology, another hugely underappreciated facet of the housing market.

It's not inconceivable that in the future there might be wooden highrises that are safer, cheaper, and more environmentally friendly than what we're building out of concrete and steel today. The cost floor for building in 2040 could be the equivalent of $100,000 in 2017 dollars instead of $150,000. This is actually what happened with construction for hundreds of years, and it is what made it possible for people to have more living space. Heritage buildings are lovely but their cost in labour per square foot was astronomical compared to modern buildings, so only the rich could afford generous living space.

But we also need to make sure our planning rules are good. They need to allow for the new technologies and they need to allow for competition in the markets. Right now most Canadian cities are mediocre when it comes to the first point and terrible when it comes to the second.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2017, 8:38 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,220
All very well said points!

Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
In a competitive market this drives the quality of houses up to the best it can be at the price.
Quality to some degree, though even moreso I would say the slack gets taken up by building size. Today's cheap-money home isn't much better built than the homes of the 1970s... it's just twice as big.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2018, 6:51 PM
q12's Avatar
q12 q12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 4,500
Are both of these happening (podium and recladd)?


Source:
https://greenpowerlabs.com/portfolio...ime-centre-sb/


Source:
http://maritimecentre.ca/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2018, 1:51 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
A new rendering:


Source


I wonder how long it will be before construction starts on this one?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2018, 2:23 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,968
Geez I wish they'd just leave it alone. It's fine as it is...
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:12 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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