HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #801  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2017, 4:54 PM
Jonovision's Avatar
Jonovision Jonovision is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,269
Those awful wooden hats over the vents on the sidewalk have now been somewhat tastefully replaced with large benches.

20170826_162607 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

And digging continues.
20170826_162146_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #802  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2017, 9:51 PM
Jonovision's Avatar
Jonovision Jonovision is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,269
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #803  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2017, 12:46 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 585
Apparently this one has been briefly put on hold. Banc acquired the Chester and Felicity building and wants to modify the design of the Margaretta to extend onto that lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #804  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2017, 10:53 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 18,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
Apparently this one has been briefly put on hold. Banc acquired the Chester and Felicity building and wants to modify the design of the Margaretta to extend onto that lot.
This seems like it might be a negative change from an urban development perspective. These buildings already have gigantic footprints compared to everything around them.

In Halifax I think there is too much focus on building heights and not enough focus on building width, footprint size, and lot frontage lengths. The limited heights probably make the lot size issue worse too, since the only way to do a large development in an area with low height limits is to build a squat, massive box with a huge footprint.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #805  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2017, 3:35 AM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This seems like it might be a negative change from an urban development perspective. These buildings already have gigantic footprints compared to everything around them.

In Halifax I think there is too much focus on building heights and not enough focus on building width, footprint size, and lot frontage lengths. The limited heights probably make the lot size issue worse too, since the only way to do a large development in an area with low height limits is to build a squat, massive box with a huge footprint.
Agreed, that was my first thought when reading that they may be merging it with the other property. I hope the design will make it into two buildings to separate the footprint.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #806  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2017, 5:02 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This seems like it might be a negative change from an urban development perspective. These buildings already have gigantic footprints compared to everything around them.

In Halifax I think there is too much focus on building heights and not enough focus on building width, footprint size, and lot frontage lengths. The limited heights probably make the lot size issue worse too, since the only way to do a large development in an area with low height limits is to build a squat, massive box with a huge footprint.
Good points
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #807  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2017, 12:52 AM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
Apparently this one has been briefly put on hold. Banc acquired the Chester and Felicity building and wants to modify the design of the Margaretta to extend onto that lot.
Banc paid $3.25 million on Nov 3 2017 for the small lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #808  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2017, 1:20 AM
yal yal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This seems like it might be a negative change from an urban development perspective. These buildings already have gigantic footprints compared to everything around them.

In Halifax I think there is too much focus on building heights and not enough focus on building width, footprint size, and lot frontage lengths. The limited heights probably make the lot size issue worse too, since the only way to do a large development in an area with low height limits is to build a squat, massive box with a huge footprint.
It would be really cool if they built two buildings there with some kind of public street/plaza in-between.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #809  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2017, 2:09 AM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by yal View Post
It would be really cool if they built two buildings there with some kind of public street/plaza in-between.
Banc is not in the street-building business.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #810  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 3:21 PM
ScovaNotian ScovaNotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Halifax
Posts: 181
The blue house on Birmingham that's right beside the Mary Ann looks like it's coming down. I wonder what the plan for that lot is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #811  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 3:25 PM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScovaNotian View Post
The blue house on Birmingham that's right beside the Mary Ann looks like it's coming down. I wonder what the plan for that lot is.
From what I heard it was in pretty rough shape, no immediate plans, just land banking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #812  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 4:47 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by kph06 View Post
From what I heard it was in pretty rough shape, no immediate plans, just land banking.
Too bad they are creating another empty lot just as they are finally building on all of those empty lots that had been there for decades.

Maybe the Spring Garden area has a minimum 'empty lot' requirement?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #813  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2017, 7:32 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 18,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Too bad they are creating another empty lot just as they are finally building on all of those empty lots that had been there for decades.

Maybe the Spring Garden area has a minimum 'empty lot' requirement?
This is a drawback of a tax system based on assessments (and slanted toward commercial tax rather than residential). If there were land taxes instead that did not tax improvements there would be less incentive to tear buildings down, and "land banking" would be less viable. Developers for the most part are just reacting to the (usually bad) financial incentives we create for them and maximizing profits.

Higher land taxes would also fix the runaway property values in several Canadian cities. They could be revenue neutral if we, say, got rid of the sales taxes in exchange. Unfortunately, different levels of government are tied to different types of taxes so setting optimal tax regimes is harder than it should be.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #814  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 4:40 PM
Jonovision's Avatar
Jonovision Jonovision is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,269
Not much happening on site since the acquisition of the adjacent property. However this seems to be the default Schmidtville thread so I saw they had torn down the house right next to the Mary Anne site. Not sure what the plan for that is.
1320 Queen street has been moved back off of its foundations. My understanding is they plan to repair the foundations, move the house back and then use the incoming historic preservation incentives that will be part of the Schmidtville Historic District designation to restore the house and build an addition on the back half of the lot.

20171211_155321 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20171211_155327 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20171211_155046 by Jonovision23, on Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #815  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 6:16 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,503
At least they are saving 1320, that's something.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #816  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 7:21 PM
teddifax's Avatar
teddifax teddifax is offline
Halifax Promoter!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 705
How and where are they moving it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #817  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 8:18 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by teddifax View Post
How and where are they moving it?
It's already moved. It used to be up to the street line, but the photo shows it moved to the back of the lot. Echoing Jono, my understanding is that they're going to put a new foundation in and then put the house back on top.

And to be clear, 1320 Queen is not related to the Sister Site work. 1320 is being done by one of the Ghosns, while Sister Sites is Banc/WM Fares.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #818  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2017, 9:36 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,208
Yeah, it's all the way down a the other end of the block, near Morris St.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 12:40 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.