General Updates and News

[jslath]

It is a fast and easy way to verify what I believe are vastly inflated claims. It was again deserted today.

Perfect example of how data can be manipulated to get the outcome you want. You pick the time, you pick the conditions and you randomly get the outcome you are testing for. Funny how that happens, eh?

If you want a better observation, you have to look at the same webcam (or better yet, go an experience it in person) at the same time for at least a year- or may two years (big pool of data). But then you should filter out storm days (whether rain or snow). The time of day would be an interesting choice... are you looking at 7am, noon, 5pm or 9pm? Noon on a Saturday in winter would be vastly different than 9pm on a Wednesday in summer.

... but I get the impression you are not open to any of this as it may contradict your opinion. :shrug:

[OldDartmouthMark]

Don't know if this has been mentioned here before - old Saint Mary's School on Grafton is for sale:

http://www.metronews.ca/news/halifax/2015/08/18/downtown-halifax-heritage-property-up-for-sale-.html

[Keith P.]

Drove by the jammed oval again today. Part of it was underwater, but there was a massive crowd consisting on one young girl driving her bicycle around on the dry parts.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Drove by the jammed oval again today. Part of it was underwater, but there was a massive crowd consisting on one young girl driving her bicycle around on the dry parts.

I looked on the webcam a couple of times during the scheduled skates and there looked to be around 10 skaters on it at any one time, difficult to tell as you can't see the whole oval on the cam.

I can't say I'd expect to see a lot of people on the oval during a hot summer's weekday, as I tend to think of this more as beach weather. Likely will be more as the weather cools off.

From today on the webcam:
http://i62.tinypic.com/9sxqir.jpg

http://i60.tinypic.com/dboz2g.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/34t71ia.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/30azw3k.jpg

[JET]

I checked the webcam as well this morning, and there was a steady stream of folks going around, but yeah on a nice sunny day there's lots of places to go. But still it's being used, and that's a good thing.

[Hali87]

If you want a better observation, you have to look at the same webcam (or better yet, go an experience it in person) at the same time for at least a year- or may two years (big pool of data). But then you should filter out storm days (whether rain or snow).

You shouldn't filter out storm days. Doing so is basically saying that the climate doesn't matter and doesn't need to be taken into account for things like this.

[OldDartmouthMark]

You shouldn't filter out storm days. Doing so is basically saying that the climate doesn't matter and doesn't need to be taken into account for things like this.

True, but storm days are kind of a wash in that all outdoor activities (i.e. baseball and tennis on the commons) are equally affected.

In winter, those facilities aren't even used so actually the oval is the only venue on the commons that is used year-round.

[Keith P.]

In winter, those facilities aren't even used so actually the oval is the only venue on the commons that is used year-round.

Except that it's not used 90% of the time.

[musicman]

just because it isn't packed does not mean it is not used... There is speed skating lessons, time put aside for our speed skating teams to practice.. Not to mention alot of kids are in school all day. And there is also maintanence to be done..

[Keith P.]

Mere observation indicates it is largely unused. It is interesting to see so many rise to the defense of this monstrosity. Eagerly awaiting the first freeze/thaw crack in the surface that requires more millions on repairs. Yet rinks, which are always heavily utilized, are being closed all over HRM for lack of funds to maintain them. Another example of HRMs misplaced priorities.

[fenwick16]

This questions shows how uninformed I am, but does the city keep ice on the Oval year round? (I assumed it wouldn't be possible during the hot days).

[Keith P.]

This questions shows how uninformed I am, but does the city keep ice on the Oval year round? (I assumed it wouldn't be possible during the hot days).

No. They can barely keep ice on it in the winter. This year I recall that when we finally got a few sunny but cold days in late March, they had to shut it down because they didn't have the chilling capacity to overcome the sun despite the chilly ambient temps.

[terrynorthend]

No. They can barely keep ice on it in the winter. This year I recall that when we finally got a few sunny but cold days in late March, they had to shut it down because they didn't have the chilling capacity to overcome the sun despite the chilly ambient temps.

Not correct. This year we had massive, incapacitating snowfall in the middle of March. They had intended to keep the Oval open a little later this year, but closed it after those storms and just let the snow melt naturally. Generally speaking though, it can't keep ice serviceable at air temps above 10C. Also, as the sun gets higher in late March, while they can technically keep ice if the air temp is cool, intensifying direct sunlight makes the surface very rough for skaters.

In the warmer months, after the winter fences and infrastructure is removed, the concrete Oval track is used both casually and organizationally by rollerskaters, bladers, cyclists and para-athletes. Are there a lot of summer users? No, but on an average summer day, probably 50-100 people would use it in one fashion or another over the length of the day. On days that there are scheduled events, for example the Michelin Kids' Bike Safety Rally, or the CIBC Run for the Cure, hundreds to thousands use the Oval. There are several such events throughout the warm months.

How does this compare to its previous incarnation as a pair of ball diamonds? Pretty evenly, IMO. The diamond closest Citadel Hill was perpetually soggy and underused because of the aquifer and poor drainage. The other diamond did have a pitcher's mound, and was used more, but probably served no more than a few dozen people over a couple of games on any given day. Of course, its use was pretty limited, only ever for ball. Maybe if there wasn't a game going on, there might be a couple of people tossing a frisbee around, but not much else.

There are still plenty of ball diamonds available for use on the Commons, and now there is the added diversity of all these activities as well as cricket and football on the southwestern fields. I know all of these things aren't everyone's cup of tea, but a little something for each. It makes for a far more interesting place in the summer where once there was only ball, and now a place that also thrives in the winter where once there was nothing.

[Aya_Akai]

No. They can barely keep ice on it in the winter. This year I recall that when we finally got a few sunny but cold days in late March, they had to shut it down because they didn't have the chilling capacity to overcome the sun despite the chilly ambient temps.

Does anyone else hear that?

http://i.imgur.com/nci5iss.gif

I think we need to get that broken record looked at.

Seriously.. this is like the 4th thread you've gone on and on like a broken record about how you think something is a waste. we're all entitled to our opinions and all that jazz, but expressing them once is enough. I swear the library thread turned into Keith's Library Hate Zone® So can we not do that here, please. We got it, you don't like it. Perfect. Moving along!

[visualman57]

does anyone else hear that?

http://i.imgur.com/nci5iss.gif

i think we need to get that broken record looked at.

Seriously.. This is like the 4th thread you've gone on and on like a broken record about how you think something is a waste. We're all entitled to our opinions and all that jazz, but expressing them once is enough. I swear the library thread turned into keith's library hate zone® so can we not do that here, please. We got it, you don't like it. Perfect. Moving along!

bravo!

[Keith P.]

I go on about HRM waste because HRM is constantly wasting taxpayer money. If they spent wisely I would be quiet as a mouse. You want me to start a thread about the secret supplemental pension fund for Butts and his already-overpaid direct reports? The senior bureaucrats at HRM are plundering the treasury and nobody knows a damn thing about it.

[hokus83]

Any update on the Dennis building

[OldDartmouthMark]

I go on about HRM waste because HRM is constantly wasting taxpayer money. If they spent wisely I would be quiet as a mouse. You want me to start a thread about the secret supplemental pension fund for Butts and his already-overpaid direct reports? The senior bureaucrats at HRM are plundering the treasury and nobody knows a damn thing about it.

Then why not bring things like this to light and stop focusing on bringing down the things that benefit the public?

What I don't get is that you are always complaining about things from which the public might get some benefit (which, conveniently, you also don't seem to have any interest in), but seem to be quiet about other items that you haven't judged as "wasteful" for some reason or another. Fair enough, complain away, expressing opinions are what forums like this are all about.

Then you make statements like: "It is interesting to see so many rise to the defense of this monstrosity.", as though the rest of us must be idiots if we see value in something that you don't. In reality, statements like that actually have an effect opposite to that which you appear to be hoping for.

For all the waste and corruption that goes on behind the scenes (that you appear to have access to), I'm pleased as punch to see HRM spend some money on projects that anybody is free to use and enjoy. I'd much rather see the money spent on an oval than free parking for politicians, etc....

I'm thinking that you should go to the media with your information about the plundering of the treasury. The public has a right to know what's being done with their money - they can easily see it with the oval, the library, and bike lanes, but don't have access to secret internal corruption like you do. Tax money should be spent on public interests and not to benefit individuals unfairly. :2cents:

[teddifax]

Does anyone else hear that?

http://i.imgur.com/nci5iss.gif

I think we need to get that broken record looked at.

Seriously.. this is like the 4th thread you've gone on and on like a broken record about how you think something is a waste. we're all entitled to our opinions and all that jazz, but expressing them once is enough. I swear the library thread turned into Keith's Library Hate Zone® So can we not do that here, please. We got it, you don't like it. Perfect. Moving along!

I agree!!!

[hokus83]

Does anyone else hear that?

http://i.imgur.com/nci5iss.gif

I think we need to get that broken record looked at.

Seriously.. this is like the 4th thread you've gone on and on like a broken record about how you think something is a waste. we're all entitled to our opinions and all that jazz, but expressing them once is enough. I swear the library thread turned into Keith's Library Hate Zone® So can we not do that here, please. We got it, you don't like it. Perfect. Moving along!

but he loves the bayers road expansion plans because it benefits his SUV

[Keith P.]

but he loves the bayers road expansion plans because it benefits his SUV

Most issues have a correct and incorrect side. I cannot help it if most of you are usually on the incorrect side. ;)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Most issues have a correct and incorrect side. I cannot help it if most of you are usually on the incorrect side. ;)

Whatever you do, don't lose that sense of humour, Keith. :cheers:

[beyeas]

Most issues have a correct and incorrect side. I cannot help it if most of you are usually on the incorrect side. ;)


That statement is a perfect example. It was nominally said as a sarcastic joke, with the fact being that it is instead what you actually think.

You are as entitled to your opinion as anyone else on this forum, but when comes to debate it impossible to actually have reasonable arguments with you. When someone provides numbers taken from publicly accessible sources to back up an argument, you dismiss them as grossly inflated etc without citing an actual source proving they are inflated. When you provide numbers to back up your argument and someone disagrees and asks you to prove your numbers, you throw out statements like "I stand behind my numbers". You wouldn't let anyone else anyway with "truthiness", but it is ok for you.

The longer I spend on this forum the more it is apparent that you in fact refuse to engage in rationale debate, but instead simply enjoy making this all about you and your personal perspective, and then when pushed further retreat to sarcasm and attacks cloaked as humour.

It is unfortunate because you definitely have an interesting perspective and sometimes great things to add, but then ruin it with exhausting and never-ending sarcastic attacks on things that you do not jive with your personal world-view.

[Keith P.]

I feel I am usually correct the same way you and others feel they are usually correct. I have been around long enough to know that "numbers" can be made to support whatever side of an argument one is trying to make. Just because someone quotes numbers does not mean those of opposing views accepts them without question. We have seen far too many examples of numbers being used in misleading or outright fraudulent ways. It is all in their validation and interpretation to the issue at hand. And in many cases, an argument comes down to common sense, gut feel, call it what you want. HRM is spending frivolously on far too many squeaky-wheel fringe-group feel-good projects while ignoring their core mandate. That will always receive criticism from me.

[beyeas]

I feel I am usually correct the same way you and others feel they are usually correct. I have been around long enough to know that "numbers" can be made to support whatever side of an argument one is trying to make. Just because someone quotes numbers does not mean those of opposing views accepts them without question. We have seen far too many examples of numbers being used in misleading or outright fraudulent ways. It is all in their validation and interpretation to the issue at hand. And in many cases, an argument comes down to common sense, gut feel, call it what you want. HRM is spending frivolously on far too many squeaky-wheel fringe-group feel-good projects while ignoring their core mandate. That will always receive criticism from me.

Yup, numbers certainly can be manipulated, and sometimes even just plain ol' fabricated to defend a personal opinion. Quite sure that at some point Donald Rumsfeld stood in front of the press and said "You are all wrong about their being no WMDs, and I stand behind my numbers you bunch of commie America-haters".

Of course, there is a far higher probably of numbers given with zero citation and backed up only by "I stand behind my numbers" being manipulated, than ones that at least have a citation to a public source whose veracity can be judged. My spidey sense immediately goes off with respect to the truthiness of someone's numbers the second I hear them say that they can't cite a source that backs them up but they stand behind them. To me that's at best an op/ed piece, and at worst made up.

This entire "debate" (in so much as I can use that term here) around public usage of the Oval or even the library seems most often to descend into "Well you see there known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns. For example, one known known is that real tax-paying Freedom loving Haligonians don't skate on ovals. Everyone knows it is only used a few days a year anyway. Anyone who says differently is a liar and must love high taxes, Celine Dion and yogurt made with organic goat's milk".

Just wanted to put it in sarcastic terms so that you saw my point.

[TheNovaScotian]

I feel I am usually correct the same way you and others feel they are usually correct. I have been around long enough to know that "numbers" can be made to support whatever side of an argument one is trying to make. Just because someone quotes numbers does not mean those of opposing views accepts them without question. We have seen far too many examples of numbers being used in misleading or outright fraudulent ways. It is all in their validation and interpretation to the issue at hand. And in many cases, an argument comes down to common sense, gut feel, call it what you want. HRM is spending frivolously on far too many squeaky-wheel fringe-group feel-good projects while ignoring their core mandate. That will always receive criticism from me.

Well I've been around long enough to know that you are wrong on many points, even on your definition of a good argument. From a legal stand point, peer reviewed empirical data trumps your gut feelings.

[Keith P.]

Well I've been around long enough to know that you are wrong on many points, even on your definition of a good argument. From a legal stand point, peer reviewed empirical data trumps your gut feelings.

Peer reviewed empirical data of the incorrect metric gets thrown out of court.

[beyeas]

Frankly it seems to me that KeithP may in fact be Nova Scotia's version of "The Donald". Similar level of bombast and respect for contrary politics. The response of "I stand by my numbers" is strikingly similar to Trump's response "I stand by my policy" when told by basically every legal expert in the U.S. that he was not able to expel "anchor babies" (aka US citizens). Personal beliefs masqueraded as facts and stated with confidence in a sufficiently angry voice so as to scare away contrary opinions.

[ILoveHalifax]

I have been following these posts the last few days while a bunch of you pile on Keith.
I enjoy Keith's posts and his sense of humor in how he expresses himself.
Seems to me there are a number who are not content to state their opinion and let it rest but are here to debate and try to change somebody's thoughts as if having a posse makes them superior.
I frequently would side with Keith and I laugh at others who think that just because they found a few figures in a book or paper somewhere that makes them right and other thoughts wrong.
I too have been around for much longer than most of you and stand by my opinions. I know that many of the reports are written to meet the desired goal because the planner needs the money and the work to make a living, and the way to get more work is to write a favorable report with the results that are desired.
Only time will tell who is right and wrong and I look forward to laughing at a number of you while I sit in my rocking chair and it is determined that I was right and you were wrong.

[OldDartmouthMark]

*crickets*

[OldDartmouthMark]

Ummmm... OK... any topics other than the oval to discuss? :shrug:

[beyeas]

Ummmm... OK... any topics other than the oval to discuss? :shrug:

Boy those Jays are sure doing well eh?! :-)

[Aya_Akai]

Ummmm... OK... any topics other than the oval to discuss? :shrug:

I got an over-the-phone play by play today from a friend of mine at the ferry terminal who was witnessing a very grumpy councillor McCluskey demanding to get into the waiting area and ride the ferry without paying. Complete with the likes of "do you not know who I am?" and "I don't have to pay for this, I'll ride if I want" .. with a very polite and extremely tolerant security guard having to put up with all this the entire time.

Okay Gloria- it's time you get out of the politics game and go get a little place at the Berkley or Shannex or something.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Boy those Jays are sure doing well eh?! :-)

Yup! I'll be watching them tonight! :cheers:

[OldDartmouthMark]

I got an over-the-phone play by play today from a friend of mine at the ferry terminal who was witnessing a very grumpy councillor McCluskey demanding to get into the waiting area and ride the ferry without paying. Complete with the likes of "do you not know who I am?" and "I don't have to pay for this, I'll ride if I want" .. with a very polite and extremely tolerant security guard having to put up with all this the entire time.

Okay Gloria- it's time you get out of the politics game and go get a little place at the Berkley or Shannex or something.

Yikes!

Sounds like a missed youtube opportunity....

[Jstaleness]

Gloria's time has come and gone. I hope that self entitlement piece was exaggerated, but none the less time to move on Gloria. Can a developer here build a tower and name it after her? McClusky Tower? Gloria Place?

[TheNovaScotian]

Hopefully Austin gives it another try the next election to finally dethrone her and let Dartmouth enter the 21st century.:cheers:

[teddifax]

Gloria's time has come and gone. I hope that self entitlement piece was exaggerated, but none the less time to move on Gloria. Can a developer here build a tower and name it after her? McClusky Tower? Gloria Place?

.
She should have been gone a LONG time ago, along with at least one other councillor!

[counterfactual]

I got an over-the-phone play by play today from a friend of mine at the ferry terminal who was witnessing a very grumpy councillor McCluskey demanding to get into the waiting area and ride the ferry without paying. Complete with the likes of "do you not know who I am?" and "I don't have to pay for this, I'll ride if I want" .. with a very polite and extremely tolerant security guard having to put up with all this the entire time.


One of the many useless Councillors who, I hope, finally gets turfed in the next election.

[pblaauw]

Here (http://www.brintonphotography.ca/blog/2015/9/7/shannon-park-video-tour-a-community-in-ruins) is some aerial footage of the ruins of Shannon Park.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Here (http://www.brintonphotography.ca/blog/2015/9/7/shannon-park-video-tour-a-community-in-ruins) is some aerial footage of the ruins of Shannon Park.

Surprising how quickly it has gone to ruin. It really doesn't take long for nature to take over once maintenance is abandoned.

[Wishblade]

Jeez, the place doesn't look far off from Chernobyl :/

[terrynorthend]

Here (http://www.brintonphotography.ca/blog/2015/9/7/shannon-park-video-tour-a-community-in-ruins) is some aerial footage of the ruins of Shannon Park.

Nice! Great place to film a Walking Dead spin-off.

[Jstaleness]

Whatever paint was used for the crosswalks needs to be brought back. It's been 10 years since that place was inhabited (by people at least). They are still very visible. I haven't biked in there for about 2 years. It was always such a waste to just have all that land going to waste.
I love the video. I love the soundtrack playing in the background. It's just so sad to see it this way.

[curnhalio]

Jeez, the place doesn't look far off from Chernobyl :/

That was my first thought as well. It really is becoming an eyesore and the sooner that something, anything is done there, the better.

[counterfactual]

Here (http://www.brintonphotography.ca/blog/2015/9/7/shannon-park-video-tour-a-community-in-ruins) is some aerial footage of the ruins of Shannon Park.

Wow. That videos is spooky. :haha:

The sound effects, I think, make it seem worst than it looks.

But still awful. Are people still actually living there? What the hell is Shannon Park supposed to be?


Classic low-density, sprawl development, now a ghost town. Take a look at the future of the suburbs.

[Colin May]

Wow. That videos is spooky. :haha:

The sound effects, I think, make it seem worst than it looks.

But still awful. Are people still actually living there? What the hell is Shannon Park supposed to be?


Classic low-density, sprawl development, now a ghost town. Take a look at the future of the suburbs.
The residential area has been MT for several decades.

[Keith P.]

Wow. That videos is spooky. :haha:

The sound effects, I think, make it seem worst than it looks.

But still awful. Are people still actually living there? What the hell is Shannon Park supposed to be?


Classic low-density, sprawl development, now a ghost town. Take a look at the future of the suburbs.


Don't be silly. It was built as a low-bid, govt-designed married quarters for forces members during the Cold War. It was miserable when new. No surprise it is miserable after being abandoned for 10 years. To suggest this is "the future of the suburbs" is simply a ridiculous comment.

[Colin May]

Don't be silly. It was built as a low-bid, govt-designed married quarters for forces members during the Cold War. It was miserable when new. No surprise it is miserable after being abandoned for 10 years. To suggest this is "the future of the suburbs" is simply a ridiculous comment.

Nobody knows where 'the suburbs' are, some posters are unwilling/incapable of providing a definition. Fairview perhaps?

[OldDartmouthMark]

But still awful. Are people still actually living there? What the hell is Shannon Park supposed to be?

As Keith said, it was typical low-cost military housing, the type of which there used to be many in the Maritimes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_Park,_Nova_Scotia

Many of them have been closed and either torn down or repurposed (such as CFB Chatham in the Miramichi, which has been turned into a retirement village, though it consists mainly of single and double detached dwellings http://www.retirenb.ca/) over the years as the threat of the cold war died off.

After it was closed down there was some talk of repurposing it as low-cost housing, though I think that would have been a bad idea. IIRC, the units were no longer fit to live in due to mold and other concerns. Still the best option for a stadium IMHO - with the potential for ferry service to the downtown as previously suggested by someone123.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Nobody knows where 'the suburbs' are, some posters are unwilling/incapable of providing a definition. Fairview perhaps?

The issue in Halifax is that practically everything outside of downtown/south end/some north and west end, could be considered "suburban", technically.

Look at Westmount, Fairview, eastern parts of Clayton Park etc... those were formally the outskirts of the city and the first suburbs.

But, realistically, in 2015, these are not the suburbs... nothing on the peninsula and in close proximity on the mainland are "suburbs", some of those areas are even an easy walk / bike ride to downtown.

[Drybrain]

Nobody knows where 'the suburbs' are, some posters are unwilling/incapable of providing a definition. Fairview perhaps?

I'd say the entire peninsula counts as urban. Even though some of it has a suburban feel, it's centrally located, grid-based, and has the strongest potential for intensification. I'd say the same about central Dartmouth--let's say everything within the area bounded by Highway 111. That's pretty generous, especially on the south side, but I'll apply the same logic as in Halifax: central, mostly grid-based, intensification potential. Feel free to carve Woodside out of that, however.

Everything else is suburban, IMO. Fairview, Clayton Park, etc, are what we'd called "inner suburbs"--same way you'd refer to Etobicoke or Scarborough.

[Colin May]

I'd say the entire peninsula counts as urban. Even though some of it has a suburban feel, it's centrally located, grid-based, and has the strongest potential for intensification. I'd say the same about central Dartmouth--let's say everything within the area bounded by Highway 111. That's pretty generous, especially on the south side, but I'll apply the same logic as in Halifax: central, mostly grid-based, intensification potential. Feel free to carve Woodside out of that, however.

Everything else is suburban, IMO. Fairview, Clayton Park, etc, are what we'd called "inner suburbs"--same way you'd refer to Etobicoke or Scarborough.

Good points from you and worldlyhaligonian. Read this article about suburban development NW of London,UK http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/10/metroland-100-years-england-original-vision-suburbia

A well argued point of view.
Two quotes worth considering :

"Laura Vaughan, professor of urban form and society at University College, London, thinks urbanists and intellectuals have underestimated the care taken by Metroland’s interwar building firms. “Although housebuilding happened at low density, there was coherence to the layout,” she says. “The perception of sprawl isn’t entirely fair, because [builders] worked well with road networks, with pre-existing village centres of shops and pubs, with a lot of commons and woodlands retained. There’s a reason the suburbs were popular.”

and " Yet suburbia’s ongoing appeal – space, greenery and privacy – remains a telling reminder of what people actually want, not what planners think they should want. It has become fashionable in recent years to wish away London’s housing shortage by talking about the availability of brownfield sites, to imagine an urban renaissance of “sustainable” and “compact” living. But blocks of tiny flats on brownfield sites cannot satisfy everyone, and won’t get anywhere near meeting pent-up demand across the capital. "

Many other relevant articles are available in The Guardian.

[Keith P.]

I have not bothered to research this at all, but I remember a couple of points from growing up in the late 1950s/early '60s.

1. I seem to recall that the original City of Halifax was only the peninsula, with everything westward beyond what is now Joesph Howe Drive being part of the county.

2. I am less clear on Dartmouth's city boundary but I believe it was approximately in the vicinity of the current Forest Hills drive/Main St intersection. Everything eastward beyond that was again part of Halifax County. Heading north I believe the boundary was just beyond the intersection of Akerley Blvd/Windmill Rd. I have no knowledge of where the southern boundary fell.

Halifax annexed parts of the county in the late '60s/early '70s to add the Fairview/Rockingham/Armdale areas to the city.

While many of those areas on the edges would be considered suburbs, overall the two areas, if taken together, would have made for a reasonably manageable city. Unfortunately the Savage govt forced amalgamation with the remainder of Halifax County and created a cumbersome municipality.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Everything else is suburban, IMO. Fairview, Clayton Park, etc, are what we'd called "inner suburbs"--same way you'd refer to Etobicoke or Scarborough.

That's a fair description... just look at the eastern part of Clayton Park... its entirely 70's suburbia (although better in terms of walking traffic than the far flung McMansion areas of the 2000s).

Westmount is sort of the wartime suburb, but definitely in the city and more urban than suburban (although more apartment towers in this area would be good for on-peninsula density).

Would the hydrostone be considered an early suburb? Its definitely one of the nicest non-South End areas in the city.

[OldDartmouthMark]

2. I am less clear on Dartmouth's city boundary but I believe it was approximately in the vicinity of the current Forest Hills drive/Main St intersection. Everything eastward beyond that was again part of Halifax County. Heading north I believe the boundary was just beyond the intersection of Akerley Blvd/Windmill Rd. I have no knowledge of where the southern boundary fell.

This is purely going by memory from looking at old Dartmouth maps from the engineering dept. many years ago, but I believe the original southern boundary actually fell on Boundary Street (hence the name). If I come across any concise info I'll post it.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Boundary+St,+Dartmouth,+NS+B2Y/@44.6598823,-63.5547979,18z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4b5a23c1d31fbc89:0xc59352c504d7f5e3

[Drybrain]

Would the hydrostone be considered an early suburb? Its definitely one of the nicest non-South End areas in the city.

I think of it as akin to Toronto's Parkdale or Vancouver's Kitsilano--a former streetcar suburb that became, as the city grew outward, an inner-city neighbourhood.

I don't really have a sense of how "central" it felt when it was built, however.

[Colin May]

This is purely going by memory from looking at old Dartmouth maps from the engineering dept. many years ago, but I believe the original southern boundary actually fell on Boundary Street (hence the name). If I come across any concise info I'll post it.

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Boundary+St,+Dartmouth,+NS+B2Y/@44.6598823,-63.5547979,18z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4b5a23c1d31fbc89:0xc59352c504d7f5e3
The Dartmouth census districts today are the same census districts as the former City of Dartmouth.
Same answer for Halifax.

[OldDartmouthMark]

The Dartmouth census districts today are the same census districts as the former City of Dartmouth.
Same answer for Halifax.

Depends on how far back you want to go... ;)

[Hali87]

Would the hydrostone be considered an early suburb? Its definitely one of the nicest non-South End areas in the city.

The short answer is yes, but it's kind of complicated.

The original Town of Halifax was basically just where downtown is today, and everything outside of this was originally considered "suburbs". What's now thought of as the "old" or "inner" North/South Ends (south of North and north of South, and west of Brunswick/Barrington) were originally called the North and South Suburbs (because they were outside of the officially designated townsite). Some of this area was actually farmland in the city's early history. By the time of the explosion, these areas would have been considered part of the city (I'm not sure if people would have still referred to them as the North or South Suburbs by then). Richmond itself was a true industrial suburb in many ways, and was basically the equivalent of what Burnside is now (but with more housing). Africville and Dutch Village were also probably considered suburbs, and were more residential.

The Hydrostone was designed on Garden City principles (the modern equivalent would be "complete communities" and for the most part, New Urbanism). Garden City advocated carefully laid-out, low-to-mid density developments that tended to be mostly residential but also included retail, day-to-day services and light industry. The idea was that some of the residents would work in the neighbourhood while others would commute to nearby areas. So while the design principles would have been considered suburban at the time, I think the Hydrostone was always planned with the expectation that it would be a core neighbourhood surrounded by "more city" on all sides (true Garden Cities would have been separated by greenbelts).

Westmount was similar but was based more on the Radburn style. This focused less on mixed uses and more on schools and civic spaces and pedestrian walkways - the idea was to keep a safe distance between pedestrian spaces and car traffic. In both cases the designers experimented with transportation networks, with back lanes and a switchback in the Hydrostone and the interesting little trail network through Westmount.

Suburbs can be kind of hard to define in context here because of the way the region's developed. A lot of areas commonly thought of as suburbs started as independent communities with their own economies, institutions, culture, etc (I'm thinking areas like Dartmouth and Spryfield). The growth of the Halifax region has been both a process of a couple large centres expanding outwards as well as a network of smaller towns with some de facto degree of independence growing towards each other and eventually merging into a coherent urban area. The "newest parts" don't necessarily align with the furthest from the city centre as they do in the Prairie cities, for example.

[Colin May]

Depends on how far back you want to go... ;)
Definitions of rural and urban used in Canadian censuses are:

1871 to 1941

Urban: population living in incorporated villages, towns and cities regardless of size.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-516-x/sectiona/4147436-eng.htm

1951

Urban: all persons living in cities, towns and villages of 1,000 and over whether incorporated or not, plus the urban fringes of census metropolitan areas.

[counterfactual]

Nobody knows where 'the suburbs' are, some posters are unwilling/incapable of providing a definition. Fairview perhaps?

Colin you keep persisting in this, playing with definitions, but then when people get fed up and school you with data proving you're wrong about development and wrong about population patterns and wrong about urban sales and suburban sales... well then you conveniently disappear from the thread and fail to respond to the data.

Anyways. I wasn't actually saying Shannon Park was a suburb, but that this is how suburbs are eventually going to look (ghost towns).

And asking for a precise definition of "suburban" is silly, because it's going to evolve over time. As people have pointed out, the Hydrostones were once arguably a suburb, but wouldn't be considered so today.

Rough definition: Everything on the peninsula is urban. Old downtown Dartmouth is urban, stretching to some of the lakes. The rest is getting into suburbs. And beyond that exurbs.

If you want precise latitude coordinates, or precise streets, seriously, go find it yourself.

[counterfactual]

Don't be silly. It was built as a low-bid, govt-designed married quarters for forces members during the Cold War. It was miserable when new. No surprise it is miserable after being abandoned for 10 years. To suggest this is "the future of the suburbs" is simply a ridiculous comment.

I grew up in the suburbs. It had advantages but a lot of disadvantages, and I aim to never return.

And yes, but many exurbs and suburbs will, in fact, eventually be ghost towns. There's already a glut of supply and they're not selling. Again, we're behind these trends, but they'll eventually catch up. They're happening all over the world:

The Old Surburban Office is the New American Ghost Town
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-old-suburban-office-park-is-the-new-american-ghost-town/2015/07/20/b8e7653a-1f6e-11e5-bf41-c23f5d3face1_story.html

The Suburban Paris Ghost Town
http://www.messynessychic.com/2013/07/01/the-suburban-paris-ghost-town/

Ireland's Suburban Ghost Towns Are Just. Plain. Creepy. (PHOTOS)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/11/irelands-suburban-ghost-towns_n_5481028.html

American suburbs turning into ghost towns: How homeowners are ditching out of town areas to live in big cities
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125507/American-suburbs-turning-ghost-towns-How-homeowners-ditching-town-areas-live-big-cities.html

A Sprawl of Ghost Homes in Aging Tokyo Suburbs
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/24/world/a-sprawl-of-abandoned-homes-in-tokyo-suburbs.html

Ghost Town: The Abandoned Suburb of California City
http://magazine.good.is/articles/ghost-town-the-abandoned-suburb-of-california-city

Welcome to a Suburban Ghost Town in New Jersey
http://writerswithoutmoney.com/2015/07/29/welcome-to-a-suburban-ghost-town-in-new-jersey-2015/

Ghost town Piligrim Porto in Moscow suburbs
http://www.russiaeguide.com/ghost-town-piligrim-porto.html

A View of the Suburban Ghost Towns Surrounding Charlotte
http://www.streetsblog.net/2012/08/24/a-view-of-the-suburban-ghost-towns-surrounding-charlotte/

Photos: Beijing's eerie suburban ghost town
http://shanghaiist.com/2013/12/07/beijing-eerie-suburban-ghost-town.php

Again, I wasn't arguing Shannon Park was a suburb, but just that many suburbs will look like it; a spooky abandoned ghost town, over time.

[Keith P.]

Again, I wasn't arguing Shannon Park was a suburb, but just that many suburbs will look like it; a spooky abandoned ghost town, over time.

Frankly, your sources are mostly rubbish. The only two credible publications talk about an overbuilt office park market in one instance and Japan's population decline in the other. The rest are simply not believable sources trying to make a point about segregation or the housing bubble or whatever leftists like to write about.

Everything is cyclical, and it seems to me that when Josh and Jenn decide to have kids they won't want to be in a concrete apartment block in a concrete jungle for very long.

[counterfactual]

Frankly, your sources are mostly rubbish. The only two credible publications talk about an overbuilt office park market in one instance and Japan's population decline in the other. The rest are simply not believable sources trying to make a point about segregation or the housing bubble or whatever leftists like to write about.

Everything is cyclical, and it seems to me that when Josh and Jenn decide to have kids they won't want to be in a concrete apartment block in a concrete jungle for very long.

Well, it's very simple Keith, because most of the links have photos and rather vivid first person testimony as to the phenomena the articles and links are describing.

As in, you know, concrete testimony and physical evidence of the ghost towns they're documenting.

But please, go ahead and just dismiss evidence out of hand because it contradicts your ideology.

The sprawl lobby was never really about evidence-based public policy. It was simply about making money off cheap land and creating terrible and unhealthy places to live.

I'm not worried though, because you can reject the links, the evidence, and cover your eyes and ears. It doesn't matter. The times they are a-changing.

[planarchy]

And asking for a precise definition of "suburban" is silly, because it's going to evolve over time. As people have pointed out, the Hydrostones were once arguably a suburb, but wouldn't be considered so today.

Rough definition: Everything on the peninsula is urban. Old downtown Dartmouth is urban, stretching to some of the lakes. The rest is getting into suburbs. And beyond that exurbs.


It's all subjective. Colin at least is using accepted definitions from a statscan perspective. They are high level and don't capture the reality on the ground but they serve a purpose.

You seem to base it strictly on form which is very subject and dependent upon experience/exposure. I live in the far north end of the peninsula, but I don't consider it urban in any way. It just isn't. It is single family detached homes on large lots, with strict separation between uses. They hydrostone was suburban and I'd argue it still is. Most European suburbs have similar densities and housing types. It's a post-war suburban and it works. Gottingen was the original north suburb, but is actually urban today. It's dense, mixed use, messy. "Suburban" means many things depending on context.

[counterfactual]

It's all subjective. Colin at least is using accepted definitions from a statscan perspective. They are high level and don't capture the reality on the ground but they serve a purpose.

You seem to base it strictly on form which is very subject and dependent upon experience/exposure. I live in the far north end of the peninsula, but I don't consider it urban in any way. It just isn't. It is single family detached homes on large lots, with strict separation between uses. They hydrostone was suburban and I'd argue it still is. Most European suburbs have similar densities and housing types. It's a post-war suburban and it works. Gottingen was the original north suburb, but is actually urban today. It's dense, mixed use, messy. "Suburban" means many things depending on context.

So you spent basically two paragraphs essentially re-iterating my point that it's pointless to try to define "suburban" because it's contextual:


And asking for a precise definition of "suburban" is silly, because it's going to evolve over time. As people have pointed out, the Hydrostones were once arguably a suburb, but wouldn't be considered so today.


You sort of left out that part of my post. But anyways, I didn't need the help, but thanks nevertheless.

[someone123]

Lots of construction evident in this photo, including the towers in the North End. Click to go to the gallery and see more:

Downtown Halifax

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/t31.0-8/11879045_1057367760962675_2897252452118672610_o.jpg
Source (https://www.facebook.com/flitelab/photos)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Definitions of rural and urban used in Canadian censuses are:

1871 to 1941

Urban: population living in incorporated villages, towns and cities regardless of size.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-516-x/sectiona/4147436-eng.htm

1951

Urban: all persons living in cities, towns and villages of 1,000 and over whether incorporated or not, plus the urban fringes of census metropolitan areas.

What does that have to do with the price of eggs?

I was simply stating, as a tangent to Keith's question, that I remember Boundary Street as once being on the boundary of Dartmouth from way back.

Since it's been about 25-30 years since I saw the plan, I can't remember which era that was in. Perhaps it was the boundary of the Town of Dartmouth before it was incorporated as a city in 1961? Dunno, but wasn't discussing the definition of 'urban', FWIW.

However, thanks for the link, it is interesting reading.

[OldDartmouthMark]

The short answer is yes, but it's kind of complicated.

The original Town of Halifax was basically just where downtown is today, and everything outside of this was originally considered "suburbs". What's now thought of as the "old" or "inner" North/South Ends (south of North and north of South, and west of Brunswick/Barrington) were originally called the North and South Suburbs (because they were outside of the officially designated townsite). Some of this area was actually farmland in the city's early history. By the time of the explosion, these areas would have been considered part of the city (I'm not sure if people would have still referred to them as the North or South Suburbs by then). Richmond itself was a true industrial suburb in many ways, and was basically the equivalent of what Burnside is now (but with more housing). Africville and Dutch Village were also probably considered suburbs, and were more residential.

The Hydrostone was designed on Garden City principles (the modern equivalent would be "complete communities" and for the most part, New Urbanism). Garden City advocated carefully laid-out, low-to-mid density developments that tended to be mostly residential but also included retail, day-to-day services and light industry. The idea was that some of the residents would work in the neighbourhood while others would commute to nearby areas. So while the design principles would have been considered suburban at the time, I think the Hydrostone was always planned with the expectation that it would be a core neighbourhood surrounded by "more city" on all sides (true Garden Cities would have been separated by greenbelts).

Westmount was similar but was based more on the Radburn style. This focused less on mixed uses and more on schools and civic spaces and pedestrian walkways - the idea was to keep a safe distance between pedestrian spaces and car traffic. In both cases the designers experimented with transportation networks, with back lanes and a switchback in the Hydrostone and the interesting little trail network through Westmount.

Suburbs can be kind of hard to define in context here because of the way the region's developed. A lot of areas commonly thought of as suburbs started as independent communities with their own economies, institutions, culture, etc (I'm thinking areas like Dartmouth and Spryfield). The growth of the Halifax region has been both a process of a couple large centres expanding outwards as well as a network of smaller towns with some de facto degree of independence growing towards each other and eventually merging into a coherent urban area. The "newest parts" don't necessarily align with the furthest from the city centre as they do in the Prairie cities, for example.

Interesting post.

The Hydrostones were built around 1919, IIRC to replace some housing which had been destroyed in the Halifax Explosion (Dec. 6, 1917, for those unfamiliar with this event).

Were automobiles and commuting large concerns for planners of the time? The reason I ask is that the auto industry was still in its infancy at the time, and although the Model T was now in full swing as one of the early cars that the "average person" could afford, it would be probably another decade or two before the idea of using cars for daily transportation really caught on in this area. Of course, Halifax did have a trolley system at the time, and perhaps that's the idea in mind when referring to commuting to work in that time period.

Just curious, as it seems that in those days, most people would live within walking distance of their work, unless they used the ferry or the trolleys to get where they were going. Am thinking that staying away from automobile traffic was more of a concern to keep horses from becoming spooked, than to make for a more pleasant living environment. :2cents:

[Colin May]

What does that have to do with the price of eggs?

I was simply stating, as a tangent to Keith's question, that I remember Boundary Street as once being on the boundary of Dartmouth from way back.

Since it's been about 25-30 years since I saw the plan, I can't remember which era that was in. Perhaps it was the boundary of the Town of Dartmouth before it was incorporated as a city in 1961? Dunno, but wasn't discussing the definition of 'urban', FWIW.

However, thanks for the link, it is interesting reading.
On September 11th you posted : " Depends on how far back you want to go.."
My reply explained how a census district is defined, and thus the census district of Dartmouth has been the same since incorporation as a town in 1873. In 1871 Dartmouth was included in the census of Halifax County. The census maps illustrate the boundary.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=1iVYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=Dartmouth+population+1881&source=bl&ots=uJt0luDOfC&sig=Qg9MJDLKEYEMdL6g2GvcD9nXCtw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwA2oVChMItLXpoKv3xwIVzRaSCh3bLwMo#v=onepage&q=Dartmouth%20population%201881&f=false

[OldDartmouthMark]

On September 11th you posted : " Depends on how far back you want to go.."
My reply explained how a census district is defined, and thus the census district of Dartmouth has been the same since incorporation as a town in 1873. In 1871 Dartmouth was included in the census of Halifax County. The census maps illustrate the boundary.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=1iVYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=Dartmouth+population+1881&source=bl&ots=uJt0luDOfC&sig=Qg9MJDLKEYEMdL6g2GvcD9nXCtw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwA2oVChMItLXpoKv3xwIVzRaSCh3bLwMo#v=onepage&q=Dartmouth%20population%201881&f=false

Great! Where's the map? Can you post it?

[Colin May]

Great! Where's the map? Can you post it?
Not as easy to find as 2 years ago but here is the link to a map which includes part of what was Halifax County.
The Dartmouth tracts were : 0100.00 - 0114.00 inclusive and delineate the boundaries of the City of Dartmouth. The eastern boundary is a line through the middle of Loon Lake and Cranberry Lake.

http://geodepot.statcan.gc.ca/2006/13011619/13011619_030118200519/03130103010320/1419/03130120205-02-0902.pdf

Population has been almost stagnant for over 40 years.

[Ziobrop]

Interesting post.

The Hydrostones were built around 1919, IIRC to replace some housing which had been destroyed in the Halifax Explosion (Dec. 6, 1917, for those unfamiliar with this event).

Were automobiles and commuting large concerns for planners of the time? The reason I ask is that the auto industry was still in its infancy at the time, and although the Model T was now in full swing as one of the early cars that the "average person" could afford, it would be probably another decade or two before the idea of using cars for daily transportation really caught on in this area. Of course, Halifax did have a trolley system at the time, and perhaps that's the idea in mind when referring to commuting to work in that time period.

Just curious, as it seems that in those days, most people would live within walking distance of their work, unless they used the ferry or the trolleys to get where they were going. Am thinking that staying away from automobile traffic was more of a concern to keep horses from becoming spooked, than to make for a more pleasant living environment. :2cents:

Time to Plug some posts - the first few posts in this series (http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2013/06/the-60s-halifax-thinks-big/) discuss the garden city and its origins in General terms. Ill actually get in more detail when I write about the examples.

Cars were seen as saviors of the city. Also the architects and planners of the time were enamored with their technological efficiency. there was an interest in keeping pedestrians separated from traffic, but that had more to do with ideas of being close to nature.

for more on horses - see the Urban horses of Halifax (http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2015/03/the-urban-horses-of-halifax/).

[OldDartmouthMark]

Not as easy to find as 2 years ago but here is the link to a map which includes part of what was Halifax County.
The Dartmouth tracts were : 0100.00 - 0114.00 inclusive and delineate the boundaries of the City of Dartmouth. The eastern boundary is a line through the middle of Loon Lake and Cranberry Lake.

http://geodepot.statcan.gc.ca/2006/13011619/13011619_030118200519/03130103010320/1419/03130120205-02-0902.pdf

Population has been almost stagnant for over 40 years.

Thanks Colin.

There it is... 0101.00, the southern border of which once defined the limits of the Town of Dartmouth. An insignificant point to pretty much everybody but me... ;) I just like historical minutia...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Time to Plug some posts - the first few posts in this series (http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2013/06/the-60s-halifax-thinks-big/) discuss the garden city and its origins in General terms. Ill actually get in more detail when I write about the examples.

Cars were seen as saviors of the city. Also the architects and planners of the time were enamored with their technological efficiency. there was an interest in keeping pedestrians separated from traffic, but that had more to do with ideas of being close to nature.

for more on horses - see the Urban horses of Halifax (http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2015/03/the-urban-horses-of-halifax/).

Interesting read. Thanks for that.

It seems that the optimism for the automobile at the time was perhaps a little idealized but not outrageous. In the early 1900s, I think parts of Europe were somewhat ahead of us in that thinking. However, with automobiles still in their infancy I don't think they thought ahead enough to imagine what might happen when there were too many of them on the road. It seems at the time that they could not imagine issues such as traffic congestion, pollution, infrastructure maintenance costs, etc., but maybe they figured that if the roads were big and well-built enough the problems would be taken care of.

That said, in this area they still remain the most convenient form of transportation, in my opinion, despite their negatives (I could be persuaded to adjust that opinion should we ever adapt a modern, efficient system of transit around here).

[Colin May]

And asking for a precise definition of "suburban" is silly, because it's going to evolve over time. As people have pointed out, the Hydrostones were once arguably a suburb, but wouldn't be considered so today.

Rough definition: Everything on the peninsula is urban. Old downtown Dartmouth is urban, stretching to some of the lakes. The rest is getting into suburbs. And beyond that exurbs.

If you want precise latitude coordinates, or precise streets, seriously, go find it yourself.
What were once labelled 'suburbs' are now regarded as just another part of the city. No point railing about 'suburbs' if we don't know where they are.

It is always enlightening to read history. Consider this excerpt from the June 1957 'Redevelopment of Halifax' by Gordon Stephenson
" The financial prosperity resulting from the Napoleonic wars and the war of 1812 greatly increased building. The total number of houses was doubled in a relatively short time, and there was speculation in land. Southward the City was extended to South Street, northward beyond Cogswell Street. In effect the first suburbs were begun and they form part of the area studied in detail in the Report "
and referring to post WWII : " By the end of the War the City occupied most of the peninsula, and suburbs stretched along Bedford basin and the North West Arm ".
source : http://www.halifax.ca/archives/documents/711.45.S8ARedevelopmentStudyofHalifaxNovaScotia1957.pdf

I encourage all posters to read the document. Mr Stephenson was well known for his thorough study of planning issues and the report is free of the usual bureaucratese; the photos and maps are very useful.
I have read his report in conjunction with the 1974 Clairmont book about Africville, and also council minutes of the late 1950s and the 1960s, and Clairmont was exhaustive in his research but in my opinion never fully explored the clear relationship of Africville to what was planned elsewhere in peninsula Halifax.
Who knew that in the 1950s an MLA could also be a Mayor or councillor ?

[Ziobrop]

What were once labelled 'suburbs' are now regarded as just another part of the city. No point railing about 'suburbs' if we don't know where they are.

It is always enlightening to read history. Consider this excerpt from the June 1957 'Redevelopment of Halifax' by Gordon Stephenson
" The financial prosperity resulting from the Napoleonic wars and the war of 1812 greatly increased building. The total number of houses was doubled in a relatively short time, and there was speculation in land. Southward the City was extended to South Street, northward beyond Cogswell Street. In effect the first suburbs were begun and they form part of the area studied in detail in the Report "
and referring to post WWII : " By the end of the War the City occupied most of the peninsula, and suburbs stretched along Bedford basin and the North West Arm ".
source : http://www.halifax.ca/archives/documents/711.45.S8ARedevelopmentStudyofHalifaxNovaScotia1957.pdf

I encourage all posters to read the document. Mr Stephenson was well known for his thorough study of planning issues and the report is free of the usual bureaucratese; the photos and maps are very useful.
I have read his report in conjunction with the 1974 Clairmont book about Africville, and also council minutes of the late 1950s and the 1960s, and Clairmont was exhaustive in his research but in my opinion never fully explored the clear relationship of Africville to what was planned elsewhere in peninsula Halifax.
Who knew that in the 1950s an MLA could also be a Mayor or councillor ?
What! That's crazy that you could hold two offices at once. I have read most of the Halifax minutes from the 60's - it's interesting how sidewalk snow clearing and pedestrian safety were still issues back then. As well as the substantial building boom.

Let's not forget the proposed north west arm bridge, the briefly discussed nw arm causeway, centenial aquarium etc..

[Colin May]

What! That's crazy that you could hold two offices at once. I have read most of the Halifax minutes from the 60's - it's interesting how sidewalk snow clearing and pedestrian safety were still issues back then. As well as the substantial building boom.

Let's not forget the proposed north west arm bridge, the briefly discussed nw arm causeway, centenial aquarium etc..
Richard Donahoe - in the minutes as Mayor and MLA.
I read some minutes, can't remember which ones, where councillors were discussing the issue. Some were in favour, improved access to the ruling party, and others were opposed.
The minutes where they discuss hiring a new city manager are fascinating. The minutes are verbatim. And they discuss the issue of salary $20,000 or more. Alan O'Brien was mayor at the time. Eventually O'Brien makes an offer to someone who takes a pass. When they do make an appointment it is obvious that the Board of Trade had exercised its influence. A staffer,Mr West, wanted the job and that drags on for several meetings and eventually O'Brien convinces him to withdraw. Seems that all of this is discussed in front of Mr West and other senior staff.

The funniest minutes refer to a decision to move the press from inside the oval of the council members and away from the staff.
And the incinerator discussion on November 15 1956 is VERY interesting, page 739 et seq. I won't spoil it for you.

And now for something completely different : I have a couple of slides of the maiden voyage of a SeaLand container ship transiting Lago Gatun westbound (Panama Canal) in June 1966 - loaded and stacked with lovely new shiny containers. I can scan and email them if you want a copy. ( I don't post my photos to the web, copyright is too important)

[counterfactual]

What were once labelled 'suburbs' are now regarded as just another part of the city. No point railing about 'suburbs' if we don't know where they are.

It is always enlightening to read history. Consider this excerpt from the June 1957 'Redevelopment of Halifax' by Gordon Stephenson
" The financial prosperity resulting from the Napoleonic wars and the war of 1812 greatly increased building. The total number of houses was doubled in a relatively short time, and there was speculation in land. Southward the City was extended to South Street, northward beyond Cogswell Street. In effect the first suburbs were begun and they form part of the area studied in detail in the Report "
and referring to post WWII : " By the end of the War the City occupied most of the peninsula, and suburbs stretched along Bedford basin and the North West Arm ".
source : http://www.halifax.ca/archives/documents/711.45.S8ARedevelopmentStudyofHalifaxNovaScotia1957.pdf

I encourage all posters to read the document. Mr Stephenson was well known for his thorough study of planning issues and the report is free of the usual bureaucratese; the photos and maps are very useful.
I have read his report in conjunction with the 1974 Clairmont book about Africville, and also council minutes of the late 1950s and the 1960s, and Clairmont was exhaustive in his research but in my opinion never fully explored the clear relationship of Africville to what was planned elsewhere in peninsula Halifax.
Who knew that in the 1950s an MLA could also be a Mayor or councillor ?

Will give it a read. Thanks for the interesting link.

[Jonovision]

Articles this week in both the Metro and Chronicle stating that the Barrington Street Addition to Scotia Square will begin construction next month.

The large bus shelter for the LINK buses has already been removed.

This should do a lot for this wasteland of an area.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/ch_article_main_image/articles/B97168020Z.120130408193654000GEB2MAQ0.11.jpg

http://www.dsra.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_project_images/public/projects/scotia_square_perspective_1.jpg?itok=4WMcVaDV

[counterfactual]

Articles this week in both the Metro and Chronicle stating that the Barrington Street Addition to Scotia Square will begin construction next month.

The large bus shelter for the LINK buses has already been removed.

This should do a lot for this wasteland of an area.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/ch_article_main_image/articles/B97168020Z.120130408193654000GEB2MAQ0.11.jpg

http://www.dsra.ca/sites/default/files/styles/large_project_images/public/projects/scotia_square_perspective_1.jpg?itok=4WMcVaDV

This will be an incredible improvement, especially having indoor waiting area for buses. What a brutal wasteland for riders right now...

[JET]

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/edmonton-towers

[Drybrain]

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/edmonton-towers

Edmonton has had a real spate of downtown development lately (similar to Halifax) after years of stagnation (ditto).

Unfortunately, most of the development has been half-baked in the design phase, and even moreso in the execution. The Quarters redevelopment, the "Brewery District", the "Ice District," and this kind of thing posted above. It's a bit of a shit show. Halifax's developments are generally smaller, but better, and that's a direct result of superior planning.

[Nouvellecosse]

Can anyone tell me what's happening with this?


http://i.imgur.com/WJ2Rr9m.jpg

[fenwick16]

Can anyone tell me what's happening with this?


http://i.imgur.com/WJ2Rr9m.jpg


(source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/halifax-s-historic-dennis-building-could-be-redeveloped-1.3074575 )
Crews are gutting the 152-year-old Dennis Building to remove mould and asbestos. The exterior is so deteriorated, officials have put up scaffolding around the downtown Halifax building to protect pedestrians in case a brick or stone breaks loose and falls.

[macgregor]

Councillor Mason's newsletter told us the good news that a tender was awarded for the demolition of Eliza Ritchie Hall starting this month. An information session was held Sept 24.

http://www.dal.ca/dept/facilities/news-events/current-notices/2015/09/18/fitness_centre__construction_update_no__2.html

[Nouvellecosse]

(source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/halifax-s-historic-dennis-building-could-be-redeveloped-1.3074575 )
Crews are gutting the 152-year-old Dennis Building to remove mould and asbestos. The exterior is so deteriorated, officials have put up scaffolding around the downtown Halifax building to protect pedestrians in case a brick or stone breaks loose and falls.

"The province is especially interested in parking for provincial politicians and staff at Province House across from the Dennis Building."

I wish there was some way I could strangle them. Legally, of course. I don't want to go to jail or anything. :hell:

[Nouvellecosse]

What we really need is for the facade to be incorporated into a nice 12 story office tower. That parking space that's fronting Barrington has been bothering me for over 15 years.

[fenwick16]

"The province is especially interested in parking for provincial politicians and staff at Province House across from the Dennis Building."

I wish there was some way I could strangle them. Legally, of course. I don't want to go to jail or anything. :hell:


I guess they think that tax-payers should spend millions in construction costs for free parking spots instead of them paying for a parking spot like other downtown office workers :(.

[Keith P.]

I guess they think that tax-payers should spend millions in construction costs for free parking spots instead of them paying for a parking spot like other downtown office workers :(.

This will really grind your gears: unless it has changed, traditionally a Minister would have 3 or more parking spots, all paid for by the taxpayer: one at the location of the Department for which they are responsible (or at each department if they had more than one portfolio); one at Province House; and one at their constituency office. Plus of course a Ministerial car, also provided by their department.

[counterfactual]

This will really grind your gears: unless it has changed, traditionally a Minister would have 3 or more parking spots, all paid for by the taxpayer: one at the location of the Department for which they are responsible (or at each department if they had more than one portfolio); one at Province House; and one at their constituency office. Plus of course a Ministerial car, also provided by their department.

"The province is especially interested in parking for provincial politicians and staff at Province House across from the Dennis Building."

I wish there was some way I could strangle them. Legally, of course. I don't want to go to jail or anything. :hell:

I guess they think that tax-payers should spend millions in construction costs for free parking spots instead of them paying for a parking spot like other downtown office workers :(.

Incredibly annoying, useless, and yet, so predictable. Did I mention how much I loathe Nova Scotia provincial governments? Of all stripes?

Ignorant, lazy, corrupt, cheap, dumb, low-brow, entitled, anti-Halifax, anti-youth, anti-creativity, anti-innovation, anti-change, anti-downtown, anti-any-useful-idea, and pro-anything-to-help-themselves. Literally, all the same too. Every party.

Did I miss anything?

[someone123]

"The province is especially interested in parking for provincial politicians and staff at Province House across from the Dennis Building."

I wish there was some way I could strangle them. Legally, of course. I don't want to go to jail or anything. :hell:

They are talking about including parking in a redevelopment, not surface parking. Presumably this would also replace the parking spots just north of Province House.

We could debate whether or not politicians should be getting so many free spots but I think a redevelopment of this site with buildings and underground parking is clearly much better for the area than the status quo. I'm also happy that they're talking about saving at least the Dennis facade and partnering with a developer to do a mixed-use development. It would be a big mistake to develop this as a government office block and have the building rear or lobby fronting onto Barrington.

[counterfactual]

They are talking about including parking in a redevelopment, not surface parking. Presumably this would also replace the parking spots just north of Province House.

We could debate whether or not politicians should be getting so many free spots but I think a redevelopment of this site with buildings and underground parking is clearly much better for the area than the status quo. I'm also happy that they're talking about saving at least the Dennis facade and partnering with a developer to do a mixed-use development. It would be a big mistake to develop this as a government office block and have the building rear or lobby fronting onto Barrington.

I certainly agree a re-development is preferable to the status quo. But why are you so sure they're *not* talking about surface parking? Here's the direct quote:

The province is especially interested in parking for provincial politicians and staff at Province House across from the Dennis Building.

They're interested in parking "...across from the Dennis Building..."

That doesn't sound like parking underneath a new development that includes the Dennis. That sounds to me like a surface parking lot "across" from the Dennis. As in, on surface land across from the Dennis building.

Surely, we can't expect these lazy idiots to actually climb a set of stairs or take an elevator to get to their personalized and taxpayer subsidized parking spots?! That would be a bridge (or parking spot?) too far.

[someone123]

I think it's just poorly worded. There is already surface parking on the northern grounds of Province House (around the Boer War statue) and around the Dennis Building itself.

I'm having trouble finding the document but there have been a few plans to improve the northern part of the Province House block, the Dennis Building site (which would have underground parking added), and Granville Street itself. It's a pretty nice concept; hopefully it will happen soon.

[Nouvellecosse]

What it sounded like to me was that they wanted to see the actual building redeveloped (they mentioned a boutique hotel possibility) and for the empty land around the building as government parking. Would be nice to be pleasantly surprised, but I'd day the safest option with the provincial government is to err on the side of assuming the worst.

[counterfactual]

I think it's just poorly worded. There is already surface parking on the northern grounds of Province House (around the Boer War statue) and around the Dennis Building itself.

I'm having trouble finding the document but there have been a few plans to improve the northern part of the Province House block, the Dennis Building site (which would have underground parking added), and Granville Street itself. It's a pretty nice concept; hopefully it will happen soon.

I think I know the document you're referring to-- the Joint-Public-Lands-Plan, for both SGR and the Province House / Granville / Grand Parade corridors.

Tim Bousquet references the Plan here, and actually uses a diagram from it:

http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/how-downtown-gets-planned-and-then-ignored/Content?oid=3601921

The Plan used to be available on the old HRM website, but then shortly after the link was posted on here, and discussed, the document seemed to disappear.

You can more easily find evidence of its existence on other sites:

http://www.apala.ca/grand-parade.php

The Plan actually won a national planning award:

http://www.csla-aapc.ca/awards-atlas/the-grande-paradeprovince-house-joint-public-lands-plan

Naturally, since it was something that involved investing in downtown Halifax, nothing was ever done on it.

And HRM planning staff have scrubbed the website to erase its existence, so people can't raise it. Because it only proposed bad things: new ideas and change.

[counterfactual]

What it sounded like to me was that they wanted to see the actual building redeveloped (they mentioned a boutique hotel possibility) and for the empty land around the building as government parking. Would be nice to be pleasantly surprised, but I'd day the safest option with the provincial government is to err on the side of assuming the worst.

That's where I am at. While we see the Dennis as merely being a component of a larger and density-adding development that would fill up the entire Birk/Dennis sit, including the parking lot, I got the sense from the article that they just want someone to re-development/re-use the shell that the Dennis has become under the lazy/cheap/shoddy maintenance of Provincial Governments, and then use the remaining lands for super-convenient parking for politicians.

It's not even a "safe" thing to do -- to assume the very worst of NS provincial governments. It's basically a matter of practical commonsense: assume corruption, laziness, stupidity. You will rarely be surprised.

[Keith P.]

I think I know the document you're referring to-- the Joint-Public-Lands-Plan, for both SGR and the Province House / Granville / Grand Parade corridors.

Tim Bousquet references the Plan here, and actually uses a diagram from it:

http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/how-downtown-gets-planned-and-then-ignored/Content?oid=3601921

The Plan used to be available on the old HRM website, but then shortly after the link was posted on here, and discussed, the document seemed to disappear.

You can more easily find evidence of its existence on other sites:

http://www.apala.ca/grand-parade.php

The Plan actually won a national planning award:

http://www.csla-aapc.ca/awards-atlas/the-grande-paradeprovince-house-joint-public-lands-plan

Naturally, since it was something that involved investing in downtown Halifax, nothing was ever done on it.

And HRM planning staff have scrubbed the website to erase its existence, so people can't raise it. Because it only proposed bad things: new ideas and change.


Now, now. :rant: It is still on HRM's website, you just need to know how to find it:

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/070227cow4.pdf

You might also find this of interest:

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/070227cow5ii.pdf

[counterfactual]

Now, now. :rant: It is still on HRM's website, you just need to know how to find it:

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/070227cow4.pdf

You might also find this of interest:

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/070227cow5ii.pdf

Yeah, there are Halifax Gov documents that reference the Joint Public Lands Plan. And that doc you link to has excerpts from it, but the actual Plan document, if I recall, was 20+ pages, full color, with multiple renderings. It was a pretty impressive document.