General Updates and News - Page 106

-Harlington- · #**2101** Posted **Feb 12, 2011, 11:03 PM**

Just finished watching the BC vs Quebec hockey game on tsn 2 and they had some really nice aerials of Halifax
they are showing long track on monday and various other hockey games as well as curling and short track.

fenwick16 · #**2102** Posted **Feb 12, 2011, 11:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Harlington-

Just finished watching the BC vs Quebec hockey game on tsn 2 and they had some really nice aerials of Halifax
they are showing long track on monday and various other hockey games as well as curling and short track.

It is interesting that TSN2 has their broadcast centre set up at the NS Community College in Dartmouth so they have the Halifax skyline in the background. The hockey game was sponsored by Destination Halifax so they had several interesting ads about Nova Scotia.

TSN is having short video clips about the Winter Games made by volunteer broadcast students from NSCC - the video clips that I saw, looked very professional.

someone123 · #**2103** Posted **Feb 14, 2011, 3:42 AM**

There was an article in ANS this evening about the acquisition and potential development of the funeral home on Robie near Quinpool.

One misleading part of the article was that they talked about MPS four to six storey "height limits", which I believe is just the limit for as-of-right development. The intention of that threshold was to encourage more careful consideration of larger developments, not to limit everything to 4 storeys as STV and others would have us believe.

worldlyhaligonian · #**2104** Posted **Feb 14, 2011, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

There was an article in ANS this evening about the acquisition and potential development of the funeral home on Robie near Quinpool.

One misleading part of the article was that they talked about MPS four to six storey "height limits", which I believe is just the limit for as-of-right development. The intention of that threshold was to encourage more careful consideration of larger developments, not to limit everything to 4 storeys as STV and others would have us believe.

From what I hear it may include the house next door as well. I would love to see something with groundfloor retail across that whole section (Funeral home and house lots) with a tower above it... like 10-16 floors.

kph06 · #**2105** Posted **Feb 14, 2011, 7:52 PM**

What Westwood now owns runs from the Armco building on the corner up to and not including the blue house beside the Welsford.

worldlyhaligonian · #**2106** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 3:46 AM**

I can't find the thread for this, but its the newest office building on Agricola:

Credit: lisa enman on flickr

Dmajackson · #**2107** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 4:19 AM**

I really hope more of these pop up in the neighbourhood. It's just a shame the McCully project didn't go through.

halifaxboyns · #**2108** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 5:41 AM**

This office building is nice; but too small. Mixed use, all the way and lets called the STV BS ('put all the tall towers on Agricola and Quinpool') and really go for it. Mixed use, some big box format stores as the ground floor occupants like in Vancouver and crank the density to the max - 30 to 35 stories. If the STV crowd are going to harp that this is the appropriate place for 'towers' then lets build some towers and put in a streetcar to give them an option on how to get to and from work.

I'd suggest a route from the Hydrostone (because if you put high frequency transit it there, it would encourage bigger developments and I would think encourage policy to be adopted to allow for it - so no more knocking off 2 floors to keep buildings under 10 storeys because it's too tall) down Agricola to Hollis Street and double back via Lower Water Street.

Like I said - if they are going to make the case that this is a more appropriate place for towers, then lets put them there, but to heck with this 10 storey non-sense. Mega Density, all the way.

Jonovision · #**2109** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 2:05 PM**

AllNS was reporting today that Danny Chedraw is ready to start construction on a 6 storey condo building on the triangle piece of land beside the citadel adjacent to the commons. He is waiting for HRM By Design approval and if all goes well will start construction in the summer.

DigitalNinja · #**2110** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 2:33 PM**

Yeah, we have a thread about it already

-Harlington- · #**2111** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 2:41 PM**

yeah, thats the drum condos, that thread just started so i guess you just missed it, aha
ill repost that though.

worldlyhaligonian · #**2112** Posted **Feb 15, 2011, 4:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

This office building is nice; but too small. Mixed use, all the way and lets called the STV BS ('put all the tall towers on Agricola and Quinpool') and really go for it. Mixed use, some big box format stores as the ground floor occupants like in Vancouver and crank the density to the max - 30 to 35 stories. If the STV crowd are going to harp that this is the appropriate place for 'towers' then lets build some towers and put in a streetcar to give them an option on how to get to and from work.

I'd suggest a route from the Hydrostone (because if you put high frequency transit it there, it would encourage bigger developments and I would think encourage policy to be adopted to allow for it - so no more knocking off 2 floors to keep buildings under 10 storeys because it's too tall) down Agricola to Hollis Street and double back via Lower Water Street.

Like I said - if they are going to make the case that this is a more appropriate place for towers, then lets put them there, but to heck with this 10 storey non-sense. Mega Density, all the way.

I totally agree, but the problem comes down to the "Halifax situation".

The STV just say that is where towers "should be" built, but its a lie tactic because all of the hippy/hipster types in this neighborhood will likely shit their pants if anything tall is proposed... further north you are dealing with NIMBY as we have seen with St. Joseph's.

Even the relatively short Agricola NSLC replacement building has been met with criticism.

STV just says that to take the pressure off their own agenda (downtown height/density), they have no authority to say that projects won't be met with similar or worse obstructionism anywhere else in the city.

someone123 · #**2113** Posted **Feb 16, 2011, 4:17 AM**

I don't necessarily think it makes sense to have tons of towers in this area, but it would be interesting to have a few 30-40 storey "focal points".

Here is an example of something that could go on Young Street: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...3.13,,0,-13.37

someone123 · #**2114** Posted **Feb 16, 2011, 4:30 AM**

Also, ANS reported about the future development of the Cruikshank Funeral Home site. Sounds like it's going to be something along the lines of existing projects like Armoury Square and shorter than the Welsford.

halifaxboyns · #**2115** Posted **Feb 16, 2011, 7:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I totally agree, but the problem comes down to the "Halifax situation".

The STV just say that is where towers "should be" built, but its a lie tactic because all of the hippy/hipster types in this neighborhood will likely shit their pants if anything tall is proposed... further north you are dealing with NIMBY as we have seen with St. Joseph's.

Even the relatively short Agricola NSLC replacement building has been met with criticism.

STV just says that to take the pressure off their own agenda (downtown height/density), they have no authority to say that projects won't be met with similar or worse obstructionism anywhere else in the city.

Well I think it was obvious to all of us that it was a ploy from STV. But I look at it this way: If HRM goes and looks at this area and Hydrostone - they are two logical areas where high density could occur connected by something like a streetcar.

If HRM goes ahead with streetcars as a form of LRT for the core - it needs to setup clear policy to support density so that there are no arguments about height. Personally; I'd like to see the policy set out minimum heights and then allow for increased height as other things are achieved (such as a 10% low income housing, street furniture upgrades etc).

Focal points is a great idea and that's not a bad starting point. To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing the Agricola 'corridor' between North and Cunard at a more reasonable height of 20 stories - but at a range between 15 and 25.

This is what I was thinking. A lot of them down the street but in some cases, instead of one level of commercial - two so that you could have a Future Shop on the upstairs and a Winners or homesense at Grade or some sort of two level grocery store like Whole Foods or even an improved Sobeys/Superstore.

Dmajackson · #**2116** Posted **Feb 17, 2011, 4:19 AM**

Agricola @ West Office Building - February 15th, 2011:

3150 Barrington Street - February 15th, 2011:

Jstaleness · #**2117** Posted **Feb 17, 2011, 11:31 AM**

I really like the Agricola at West building. Turned out better than I thought.

DigitalNinja · #**2118** Posted **Feb 17, 2011, 1:54 PM**

That building is going to be so ugly on Barrington.

Empire · #**2119** Posted **Feb 18, 2011, 4:32 AM**

That building on West is not bad. Too bad about the siding and shear concrete.

eastcoastal · #**2120** Posted **Feb 18, 2011, 12:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire

That building on West is not bad. Too bad about the siding and shear concrete.

I live nearby - the concrete and siding are both done quite nicely. I think it looks much better in person. I would characterize it as a thoughtful use of materials to work with the massing. I would also say that at this point, it looks like it'll have a nice relationship to both Agricola and West streets.