HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 3:34 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,660
Has there been any news on this great proposal?

Now that the election has passed... maybe there will be a representative for the district who won't vote against literally every development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 4:23 PM
terrynorthend terrynorthend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian View Post
Has there been any news on this great proposal?

Now that the election has passed... maybe there will be a representative for the district who won't vote against literally every development.
Well this one happens to fall in District 9 (Armdale/Peninsula West). Shawn Cleary is the new councilor. I will reserve judgement until he starts voting in council chambers, but his campaign painted a picture of a fairly obstructionist member. Far more so than Mosher (love her or hate her).

On the other hand, I'm cautiously optimistic for District 8, Watt's old area. Lindell Smith may bring a more balanced view than, "Lets keep this entire district full of single family, free standing homes for me and all my (well-off) middle-class friends." Which is entirely the attitude I took from Jen Watts whenever she spoke on the subject. An elitist, Jane Jacobs form of classism. It hides behind a left-leaning, all about diversity front. All for diverse groups of people, so long as they can afford a half-million dollar home.

The good news is that one councilor, even in a specific district, should have little effect on developments. We still have a regime where everyone eventually gets to vote on proposals, and the ranks of council are still full of incumbents who seem largely pro-development. Even when staff gives a proposal a thumbs down, council has shown a propensity to allow it. Add to this the impending implementation of the Centre Plan, it all gives me hope.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 6:30 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrynorthend View Post
On the other hand, I'm cautiously optimistic for District 8, Watt's old area. Lindell Smith may bring a more balanced view than, "Lets keep this entire district full of single family, free standing homes for me and all my (well-off) middle-class friends." Which is entirely the attitude I took from Jen Watts whenever she spoke on the subject. An elitist, Jane Jacobs form of classism. It hides behind a left-leaning, all about diversity front. All for diverse groups of people, so long as they can afford a half-million dollar home.

The good news is that one councilor, even in a specific district, should have little effect on developments. We still have a regime where everyone eventually gets to vote on proposals, and the ranks of council are still full of incumbents who seem largely pro-development. Even when staff gives a proposal a thumbs down, council has shown a propensity to allow it. Add to this the impending implementation of the Centre Plan, it all gives me hope.
Nailed it. I am hopeful as well. Its easy to be an "activist" for your cause when you and all your friends already own 400k houses (minimum estimate). Great commentary and something may be reflected in the result for the district. Good to see some real, and local, diversity in this seat.

Also, my mistake, I thought this was in district 8, but Oxford must be the cut off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 6:44 PM
terrynorthend terrynorthend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian View Post
Nailed it. I am hopeful as well. Its easy to be an "activist" for your cause when you and all your friends already own 400k houses (minimum estimate). Great commentary and something may be reflected in the result for the district. Good to see some real, and local, diversity in this seat.

Also, my mistake, I thought this was in district 8, but Oxford must be the cut off.
Thanks! Yes, there is a cutoff here, for most of the campaign (and past few years) I thought I lived in 8, then saw a Cleary sign, followed shortly by a Mosher sign, prompting me to double-check the boundaries. Oops! Glad now I didn't call Watts to complain about garbage pickup a couple of months ago, lol. (I had moved a few streets west since the last municipal vote)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 7:02 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrynorthend View Post
Thanks! Yes, there is a cutoff here, for most of the campaign (and past few years) I thought I lived in 8, then saw a Cleary sign, followed shortly by a Mosher sign, prompting me to double-check the boundaries. Oops! Glad now I didn't call Watts to complain about garbage pickup a couple of months ago, lol. (I had moved a few streets west since the last municipal vote)
No problem, but you raise really good points.

When a development is proposed that would have units in the 200k range and people with ~400k houses oppose it... they are, effectively, saying they don't want those people to live in the area.

The arguments about being "pro family" are complete and utter nonsense. IF people were truly pro family, they would allow for all kinds of families to exist in the same neighborhood.

It isn't like this is some mega development either and shadows could only possibly impact two houses (one of which I believe is either rental to student or commercial.

Hopefully bullshit is called on those trying to shut this down. The area is actually more sketchy with that big empty lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2016, 10:40 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrynorthend View Post
Well this one happens to fall in District 9 (Armdale/Peninsula West). Shawn Cleary is the new councilor. I will reserve judgement until he starts voting in council chambers, but his campaign painted a picture of a fairly obstructionist member. Far more so than Mosher (love her or hate her).

On the other hand, I'm cautiously optimistic for District 8, Watt's old area. Lindell Smith may bring a more balanced view than, "Lets keep this entire district full of single family, free standing homes for me and all my (well-off) middle-class friends." Which is entirely the attitude I took from Jen Watts whenever she spoke on the subject. An elitist, Jane Jacobs form of classism. It hides behind a left-leaning, all about diversity front. All for diverse groups of people, so long as they can afford a half-million dollar home.

The good news is that one councilor, even in a specific district, should have little effect on developments. We still have a regime where everyone eventually gets to vote on proposals, and the ranks of council are still full of incumbents who seem largely pro-development. Even when staff gives a proposal a thumbs down, council has shown a propensity to allow it. Add to this the impending implementation of the Centre Plan, it all gives me hope.
Cleary did not impress me at all during the campaign and the ganging up on Mosher by many on social media - especially the pro-cycling zealots - was very unseemly. They now have their desired outcome, though it remains to be seen what electing this person will mean. Remember, this is someone who blamed the closing of a video rental store on property taxes. Riiight.

While any replacement for Watts would be an improvement, I am optimistic about Smith. Watts was the worst kind of council member, and I found her slippery stance on Spirit Place to be indicative of her true character.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2016, 6:24 PM
terrynorthend terrynorthend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post

While any replacement for Watts would be an improvement, I am optimistic about Smith. Watts was the worst kind of council member, and I found her slippery stance on Spirit Place to be indicative of her true character.
I agree. Spirit Place is the perfect example of her obstructionist ways. I can think of nothing but social positives from the development of these modest retirement apartments, yet instead we are left with a moldering fenced-off brick church with graffiti on the walls and trees growing in front of its front doors. Thanks Jen!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 7:14 AM
alps's Avatar
alps alps is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,421
Watts kept out of the Spirit Place thing because she is a member of the St. John's congregation.

Quote:
MOVED by Councillor Mosher, seconded by Councillor Walker that Halifax Regional Council approve the proposed amendments to the Halifax Municipal Planning Strategy and the Halifax Peninsula Land Use By-law, as contained in attachments F and G of the staff report dated May 27, 2013.

MOTION PUT AND DEFEATED (6 in favour, 10 against).

Voting in favour of the motion were Mayor Savage, Deputy Mayor Rankin and Councillors Hendsbee, Fisher, Mosher and Walker.

Voting against were Councillors Dalrymple, Karsten, Nicoll, McCluskey, Mason, Adams, Whitman, Johns, Craig and Outhit.

Councillor Watts, having declared a potential conflict of interest, neither participated nor voted on this matter.

https://www.halifax.ca/council/agend...ts/c130730.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 4:01 PM
portapetey portapetey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 509
Some of the political hit pieces that get written on this forum rival Breitbart's conspiracy theories.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 5:06 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by portapetey View Post
Some of the political hit pieces that get written on this forum rival Breitbart's conspiracy theories.
I'm pretty sure she only joined the congregation after she got wind of the tower proposal so she could sidestep the issue entirely and preserve her political skin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 21, 2016, 7:47 PM
RussellLake RussellLake is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Cleary did not impress me at all during the campaign and the ganging up on Mosher by many on social media - especially the pro-cycling zealots - was very unseemly.
I did my fair share of commenting on that issue but just because I did doesn't mean I'm a pro-cycling zealot. I happen to cycle in addition to driving and walking and bussing. What bothered me was the sleaze around how she wriggled out of any sense of public accountability. She really blew any degree of trust I had for her, that's for sure, and that's from a resident of her district and not based on how I travel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2016, 3:05 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussellLake View Post
I did my fair share of commenting on that issue but just because I did doesn't mean I'm a pro-cycling zealot. I happen to cycle in addition to driving and walking and bussing. What bothered me was the sleaze around how she wriggled out of any sense of public accountability. She really blew any degree of trust I had for her, that's for sure, and that's from a resident of her district and not based on how I travel.
She never registered on my Radar, but I have two friends that live in what used to be Linda Mosher's district and they felt she had been a terrible councilor. They aren't cyclists, but I can't remember exactly what their beefs were. All I remember is that they were pretty passionate about trying to convince anyone who would listen (in their district or not) that Linda Mosher HAD to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2016, 10:30 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastal View Post
She never registered on my Radar, but I have two friends that live in what used to be Linda Mosher's district and they felt she had been a terrible councilor. They aren't cyclists, but I can't remember exactly what their beefs were. All I remember is that they were pretty passionate about trying to convince anyone who would listen (in their district or not) that Linda Mosher HAD to go.
Now they have an even worse one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2018, 2:18 PM
HalifaxRetales HalifaxRetales is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 355
They have made a lovely new pile of rocks on this property, maybe the strategy is to make it look worse?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2018, 2:51 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,936
I saw those the other day. I would guess remediation made them dig a large part of the soil and truck it away because of petroleum contamination. I assumed the rocks were brought in to fill that hole? Though they seem very large and not something that would be a good base for building upon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2018, 7:29 PM
terrynorthend terrynorthend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
I saw those the other day. I would guess remediation made them dig a large part of the soil and truck it away because of petroleum contamination. I assumed the rocks were brought in to fill that hole? Though they seem very large and not something that would be a good base for building upon.
No, there was no excavation, which will need to take place before they build here. They've trucked in and dumped loads over the past week. My guess is it is temporary and came from another site the developer is working on. They did this before with snow and a also smaller amount of rock debris.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2019, 10:47 PM
terrynorthend terrynorthend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 937
They seem to be excavating this site now. Apparently they received final approval on May 7. Not sure when the two houses will be demolished, they still seem inhabited.
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 1:12 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.