Additional Info for Who Represents You

Posted April 10, 2013

The Crypto Report: Canadian PM candidate supports adoption of cryptocurrency

Shisha and Bitcoin with Pierre Poilievre

Nova Scotia Residential Tenancies Act

NDP Policy Book

Member’s Manual: Members’ Compensation, Expenses and Constituency Administration from House of Assembly Nova Scotia

Liberal Platform 2015

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)

Share

Related Articles

Who Represents You + Show all articles

Reference Material

Additional info

The noise bylaw passed by Halifax Regional Municipality’s Council has caused quite a fracas. None of the players come out of it looking good.

Communities throughout Nova Scotia need more housing, as quickly as possible. That is what happens when population grows by 2% or more. Halifax gets at least half of that growth—more than 10,000 people per year.

There is a constant tension between the desire of existing residents for the peaceable enjoyment of their homes and the noise that inevitably accompanies heavy construction.

The fracas began with a recommendation by HRM staff that the noise bylaw be amended to disallow rock breaking on weekends. This should have been harmless enough; it is the noisiest part of new construction.

Builders typically take a pause on weekends anyway. Most of those that currently work through the weekend might need an extra week or two to finish their rock breaking, the rare exceptions being the convention centre or the rare project that begins with the demolition of a substantial existing building.

On its own this may not have stimulated too much reaction. But council chose to also reduce the hours that building noise could occur. They begin at 7 AM, and council voted to stop work at 8 PM instead of 9:30. This might affect a minority of projects. Most building sites stop work by 5 PM or earlier.

Duncan Williams, president and CEO of the Construction Association of Nova Scotia, claims the new rules would be devastating to the construction industry. For big projects, he predicts costs could shoot up by 15-20 percent and construction could take six months to a year longer to complete. He seems to believe that construction workers would be demoralized that they can only work 13 hours a day instead of 14.5.

Working that long every day would entitle workers to time-and-a-half overtime pay, so it is hard to understand the assertion that cutting hours would add to cost. Repeated requests to the association to explain how Williams reached his conclusions went unanswered.

Municipal Affairs and Housing Minster John Lohr introduced, without consultation with the mayor or council, legislation that gives the minister the authority to nullify any HRM bylaw in whole or in part. He was quoted as saying that HRM’s changes to the noise bylaw could add up to two months to a two-year build, wouldn’t reduce the noise, and would add to the shortage of skilled trade workers.

The two-month delay calculation is overstated unless the project would otherwise have worked the full 14.5-hour day from beginning to end.

A knowledgeable source in the building trades was asked about adding to the trades shortage. He strongly disagrees: “That makes no sense at all. No one is sitting home that wants to work. To suggest workers are going to leave to go west because they can’t work till 9:30 at night? Who wants to work 14.5 hours a day?”

To no one’s surprise, the mayor and council were deeply upset. Councilor Waye Mason says staff can make exemptions for rock breaking not near residences and have already provided dozens.

He cites, as an example of those hurt by construction noise, a resident near Pepperell and Preston streets who can expect to have construction near her for 10-12 years. The weekend exclusion for rock breaking makes sense for her but the weekday limit on work will be of minimal benefit. Very few projects are active after 5 PM, let alone 8.

Council’s decision to reduce weekday hours in addition to the rock breaking limitations proposed by staff was ill-considered. The province’s response is like using a ten-ton truck to deliver a pizza. The one redeeming feature is that the authority to annul in whole or in part only exists for the first six months after the bylaw is in force, and has not happened so far.

The province and the municipality have a shared goal of rapid population growth. HRM estimates of 525,000 residents by 2027, growing to 650,000 in the following ten years. Unlike the number in last spring’s provincial budget, that is consistent with the provincial goal of doubling by 2060.

A better example of how they should work together is the Deloitte Housing Development Barrier Review. It identifies the need to complete 7,600 units per year between now and 2027, compared to the historical rate of only 3,000 per year, and prioritizes steps needed to accelerate the pace.

The panel that sponsored the report is a creature of the province but HRM is heavily involved. Cooperatively pursuing the recommendations represents the best chance to produce enough housing.

In the meantime, the two governments must have an effective working relationship. For that to happen they need to stop surprising each other.

+ Show all reference material

Post a Comment

Most Recent Comments

Please feel free to leave a comment.