General Updates and News

[Jonovision]

Cladding finally going up.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7826/46224612195_9f8f854d41_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2dqHdLk)20190217_162953 (https://flic.kr/p/2dqHdLk) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[Jonovision]

This one on the corner of Kaye and Gottingen is slowly getting a welcomed facelift. Glad to see that faux Arts and Crafts pattern go.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7824/40174027913_7c729d27bf_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/24d3oRF)20190217_135628 (https://flic.kr/p/24d3oRF) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[Jonovision]

The small building at Stadaconna is nearly done now.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7905/47139026791_40a5b27de1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne)20190217_134304 (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[eastcoastal]

The small building at Stadaconna is nearly done now.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7905/47139026791_40a5b27de1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne)20190217_134304 (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

What a lovely street presence. LOL.

[steve61]

The small building at Stadaconna is nearly done now.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7905/47139026791_40a5b27de1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne)20190217_134304 (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

I drive by this thing every day and keep waiting for the start of whatever is supposed to go over that exterior.

Is this really the final product??

[Keith P.]

I drive by this thing every day and keep waiting for the start of whatever is supposed to go over that exterior.

Is this really the final product??

The parts facing the gatehouse appear to have been painted gray. Perhaps they are waiting for milder weather to paint the bare panels on the street side?

Regardless, it will be a very spartan-looking structure, especially compared to what was there before.

[Dartguard]

The parts facing the gatehouse appear to have been painted gray. Perhaps they are waiting for milder weather to paint the bare panels on the street side?

Regardless, it will be a very spartan-looking structure, especially compared to what was there before.

It is Spartan looking but then again part of the buildings purpose is to train Spartans. The building will house a three deck Mockup of a commercial ship
to train Naval boarding Party's in how to assault a suspected vessel.

The other half of the building will train Sailors on the RAS procedures. RAS stands for Replenishment At Sea. Better to practice on dry land than spill at Sea.

[JET]

It is Spartan looking but then again part of the buildings purpose is to train Spartans. The building will house a three deck Mockup of a commercial ship
to train Naval boarding Party's in how to assault a suspected vessel.

The other half of the building will train Sailors on the RAS procedures. RAS stands for Replenishment At Sea. Better to practice on dry land than spill at Sea.

Thanks for that, very interesting

[someone123]

Not sure if this has been posted yet but here's the HRM page for 2165 Gottingen: https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-21979-2165-gottingen-street-halifax

I thought it would be a 3 storey building like the others built recently along that stretch but it'll be 5-6. Looks like it's the same builder that did Compass Distillers.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Not sure if this has been posted yet but here's the HRM page for 2165 Gottingen: https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-21979-2165-gottingen-street-halifax

I thought it would be a 3 storey building like the others built recently along that stretch but it'll be 5-6. Looks like it's the same builder that did Compass Distillers.

Looks like a nice fill-in project!

Empty lot at 2165 Gottingen (https://goo.gl/maps/N9U5YNnBbBy)

[worldlyhaligonian]

I drive by this thing every day and keep waiting for the start of whatever is supposed to go over that exterior.

Is this really the final product??

It would be nice if they could grow some ivy on it or something. That looks pretty bad!

[Jonovision]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7914/40317996713_eacb66a7cb_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/24qLgLn)20190303_131802 (https://flic.kr/p/24qLgLn) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[Jonovision]

The new building going up in Dartmouth on Prince street is only taking up half of the empty street frontage. This still leaves an entire lot that runs through to Alderney Dr. Hopefully that produces a nice building than this one.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7873/46586420804_caecf3611e_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2dYFzRN)20190306_133546 (https://flic.kr/p/2dYFzRN) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[hoser111]

W.M. Fares is proposing an 8 story unit for 6160 Almon @ Gladstone...

https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-22177-almon-street-gladstone-street-halifax

[Jonovision]

The grand re-opening of the Alderney Pedway was yesterday. They also announced phase 2 where they will be redoing the main entrance area in front of the Library.

[terrynorthend]

W.M. Fares is proposing an 8 story unit for 6160 Almon @ Gladstone...

https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-22177-almon-street-gladstone-street-halifax

Is this the lot that the legion is on currently?

[Keith P.]

Is this the lot that the legion is on currently?

Would appear so. It was a Shell gas station before that.

[hoser111]

Is this the lot that the legion is on currently?

Indeed. If you look at the Traffic Impact statement, it's clearly called out in the photos....

[Colin May]

The new federal budget increases Infrastructure spending. An additional $25-26 million for HRM.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/municipalities-funds-federal-budget-2019-local-priorities-1.5062228

[ILoveHalifax]

The new federal budget increases Infrastructure spending. An additional $25-26 million for HRM.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/municipalities-funds-federal-budget-2019-local-priorities-1.5062228

Great! Put that towards a stadium

[Colin May]

Savage said this extra money would help pay for projects the municipality was willing to dip into reserve funds to finance.

"We have a strategic capital list that goes into the hundreds of millions of dollars," said Savage. "It won't be hard to identify things that it should go on."

But Savage doesn't expect council to go on a spending spree.

"It doesn't mean that we're all of a sudden going to be profligate with our spending," he said. "It doesn't mean that we can go out and necessarily spend what we weren't going to spend."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ottawa-budget-gas-tax-fund-halifax-municipal-politics-1.5063540

[Keith P.]

HRM will almost certainly piss it all away. Drunken sailors, etc. :cheers:

[Dmajackson]

While searching for a rendering of another project I stumbled across Root Architecture (http://rootarchitecture.ca/)

Mied-Use Residential #1 appears to be a redevelopment of Inglis Manor at Inglis & Brussels Street.

http://rootarchitecture.ca/cms/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/scene-5-v4_flat2-800x600.jpg

This is listed as Mainland Halifax;

http://rootarchitecture.ca/cms/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Spryfield_24x16-800x600.jpg

[Keith P.]

I had occasion today to drive up Kempt Rd for the first time in months and was surprised to see two big changes. The former used car lot at Livingstone St owned by Steele was getting construction fencing installed around its perimeter all the way up to Robie/Massachusetts Ave. When I was much younger I used to live not far from there when that was Tanner Chrysler-Plymouth and would often browse that lot. There were still vehicles parked there today but I imagine they will be relocated soon. Assume it is a development for one of Steele's enterprises but not sure which.

The bigger surprise and bigger project was the large O'Regans lot on the other side of Kempt, between their BMW and Kia dealerships. It is totally dug up with a huge pile of dirt relocated to the rear of the lot and a large foundation is being put in place. I can only assume it is a new home for either the former Hillcrest VW which they bought a few years ago, or perhaps their GM dealership on Robie. They both need new homes, especially the GM location, but it can only be one or the other.

Anyone have further info on either of these projects?

[Keith P.]

I forgot to add that I also noticed today that the house on the west side of Robie St next to the Shell station at Robie and North had been demolished a while ago. The lot was paved over and is now additional display space for City Mazda. Surprised that there wasn't a peep from the usual suspects this time after the huge cause celebre that erupted a few years ago when Steele did the same across the street.

I was always curious about that house, who lived there, etc. I never saw anyone around it and it looked unoccupied for a long time but I have no idea if that was actually the case.

https://goo.gl/maps/U4GK8HoJyaP2

[kph06]

I had occasion today to drive up Kempt Rd for the first time in months and was surprised to see two big changes. The former used car lot at Livingstone St owned by Steele was getting construction fencing installed around its perimeter all the way up to Robie/Massachusetts Ave. When I was much younger I used to live not far from there when that was Tanner Chrysler-Plymouth and would often browse that lot. There were still vehicles parked there today but I imagine they will be relocated soon. Assume it is a development for one of Steele's enterprises but not sure which.

The bigger surprise and bigger project was the large O'Regans lot on the other side of Kempt, between their BMW and Kia dealerships. It is totally dug up with a huge pile of dirt relocated to the rear of the lot and a large foundation is being put in place. I can only assume it is a new home for either the former Hillcrest VW which they bought a few years ago, or perhaps their GM dealership on Robie. They both need new homes, especially the GM location, but it can only be one or the other.

Anyone have further info on either of these projects?

Under construction is the new VW. I had heard a luxury brand (Jaguar/Land Rover I think) was relocating to the lot where you are seeing fencing.

[Keith P.]

Under construction is the new VW. I had heard a luxury brand (Jaguar/Land Rover I think) was relocating to the lot where you are seeing fencing.

Thanks for the updates!

I wonder when O'Regans will do something with the GM dealership on Robie. They did a big reno there 20 years ago which IMO was a mistake as they are confined by the lot size, the building is already too small and outdated, and it is not a good location for a car dealer. The land would be valuable in a development.

[kph06]

This is a rendering for the building on Prince Street:

http://www.marcogroup.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Urchin-twit.jpg

Source: Marco Group (http://www.marcogroup.ca/projects/14-prince-street-renovations/)

[Keith P.]

Holy corrugated metal siding, Batman!

[Jonovision]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7808/47433499782_fa4b7a89b0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2fgx5VL)20190327_175007 (https://flic.kr/p/2fgx5VL) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[Wolkenkratzerliebhab]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7808/47433499782_fa4b7a89b0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2fgx5VL)20190327_175007 (https://flic.kr/p/2fgx5VL) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

I hate to say it, but this building is butt-ugly!

[IanWatson]

I hate to say it, but this building is butt-ugly!

It's pretty decent in person. And the beige building is not part of the development.

[Keith P.]

I hate to say it, but this building is butt-ugly!

But per the picture, it's BUILT BOLD! :haha:

[eastcoastal]

I hate to say it, but this building is butt-ugly!

I don't hate it... but, I haven't seen it in person yet.

[JET]

I don't hate it... but, I haven't seen it in person yet.
I live two blocks away, I quite like it, it does stand out, the two balconies facing the harbor are neat.

:tup:

[Keith P.]

The small building at Stadaconna is nearly done now.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7905/47139026791_40a5b27de1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne)20190217_134304 (https://flic.kr/p/2ePvQne) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr


A story in the Herald about the reaction to this structure:

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/halifax-residents-shoot-down-hideous-dnd-drill-shed-296242/


Some residents say the new Stadacona drill shed on at the Halifax military base on Admiral Way is a sight for sore eyes.

“I was walking by a few days ago and it felt like a place to put your head down and hustle through as fast as possible,” said Matthew Halliday, who lives nearby and walks by it often.

“It feels like a generic, by-the-numbers building that could be plunked into an industrial park and doesn’t really belong on Gottingen Street,” he said.

The new building, officially known as the consolidated seamanship training facility, borders the gate on Gottingen Street. Concrete panels line its 13.5 metre-high walls, with only two windows facing the street.

The facility will have two special training areas, a drill hall, offices and classrooms.

Three floors of the building replicate the a ship’s interior, said Todd Osmond, co-ordinator of construction services in Halifax for Department Construction Canada.

“This will be a flagship training facility for the Navy, since it enables them to train on land and with inside conditions,” Osmond said in a recent article on DCC’s website.

Halliday took to Twitter to voice his complaints, where many replied with similar thoughts.

“A bigger middle finger to the neighbourhood is hard to imagine,” tweeted Kyle Miller.

“So, it’s entity hideous, I agree,” wrote Danielle Edsall, “But this building will be used for training and will likely have secret material in it, and there are rules with regards to how it is housed and processed. And the lack of windows in that side is likely because of that.”

Halliday said although he understands the building is most likely designed to fit specific security measures, he hopes the outside can be modified.

“If they’re interested in being good neighbours, maybe soften the impact of it with art ... murals or vegetation,” he suggested.

“There’s houses on the other side, there’s businesses, there’s all kinds of stuff there and this creates a bleak, barren sort of feeling,” said Halliday.

The Department of National Defence couldn’t respond by deadline on whether they would consider adding a mural.

The training facility is to be completed in January 2020.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Stephen Archibald did a blog on this...

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/2019/03/an-extraordinary-new-building-on-gottingen-street/

A few excerpts below:

So what is there to amuse the poor pedestrians as they trek along the sidewalk past the grim rectangle? Why, that would be the 160-year-old gates that have been preserved, but have not led anywhere for 70 years or so.

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2019/03/IMG_3355.jpg

Finally the big reveal. The gates were built as the entrance to the Wellington Barracks, the largest buildings in Nova Scotia in the 1860s. Through a passageway in the soldier’s barracks, you catch a glimpse of the officers’ barracks on the other side of the large Parade Square. All very grand, don’t you think?

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2019/03/Scan.jpg

So where does that leave us? The gates, that are now considered a monument to the Royal Canadian Regiment, might suggest a path forward. Maybe tableaux, like the gates, that tell stories about the base, could be inserted into the wall. And if nothing else, remember that before the present concrete wall, the stone wall was far taller and rather wacky. A little of that goes a long way.

https://halifaxbloggers.ca/noticedinnovascotia/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2019/03/Stad-1975-001.jpg

In my opinion, yeah the new building is bleak, and the new wall even more bleak, but sometimes buildings just have to be functional. Not everything can be built with streetside cafes. This building will have great function to provide training for our military, who have the job of providing protection for our country, so in this case function is a higher priority over form. FWIW, it's no less bleak and imaginative than the ubiquitous glass box that everybody coos over because it's tall and shiny, but they are still just featureless boxes.

Another function over form building that comes to mind is the Irving Shipbuilding/Halifax Shipyard structure. It is basically a series of big white boxes, but what happens inside is necessary and extraordinary. Function over form has to happen sometime...

[Colin May]

It needs what the famous song refers to as 'the muriel on the wall'.
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+muriel+on+the+wall&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijy4KRkKrhAhVDnuAKHbPpAVgQ_AUIDigB&biw=1422&bih=978

[terrynorthend]

"Some residents say the new Stadacona drill shed on at the Halifax military base on Admiral Way is a sight for sore eyes."

Given the tenor of the article, I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean what they think it does. It's good to see the editorial standards at the 'ol CH haven't slipped an iota.

[OldDartmouthMark]

LOL... that's exactly what I thought when I read it...

a sight for sore eyes
informal
​
a way of saying that you are very pleased to see someone or that you think someone is very attractive:
You're a sight for sore eyes!

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/a-sight-for-sore-eyes

[Jonovision]

Restoration work is progressing on the Durty Nellys building.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7824/46794198214_d57791fbc0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ei3uQW)20190331_141703 (https://flic.kr/p/2ei3uQW) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[Jonovision]

This one has changed names. It's now Tell Lofts. I'm guessing there were some naming right issues with Bell.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7807/46850631244_4347803e7c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2eo2Jqd)20190405_170332 (https://flic.kr/p/2eo2Jqd) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[OldDartmouthMark]

Restoration work is progressing on the Durty Nellys building.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7824/46794198214_d57791fbc0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ei3uQW)20190331_141703 (https://flic.kr/p/2ei3uQW) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

What is the scope of the restoration being done on it?

[Keith P.]

What is the scope of the restoration being done on it?

I think they are removing the gold paint added to the stainless or aluminum parts. I'm not sure if the metal panels surrounding the windows are being stripped of paint or not. If this link still works, you can see it here in its original form. One of the losses that we will probably not see restored back is the extruded aluminum "screening", really some subtantial decorative aluminum panels, that were in front of the windows on the Sackville St side at sidewalk level.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/791/27413232558_1ed0aec2f6_k.jpg

[OldDartmouthMark]

Thanks Keith, that should improve the appearance greatly. It's a neat building but was starting to look a little shabby.

I know the aluminum screening you are talking about. Here's a glimpse of it in a photo from the Halifax Municipal Archives (http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/request/DoMenuRequest?SystemName=Halifax+Regional+Municipality+Archives&UserName=WA+Public&Password=&TemplateProcessID=6000_20185_20185&CMD_(SearchRequest)[11]=&PromptID=&ParamID=&RequesterType=SearchTemplate&browseData=1&Keyword=0&SearchLogic=%26Logic%3D%26S1%3DPOI1_1225%261POI1_1225%3D827) taken during sidewalk replacement in the late 1960s:

http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5014895_102-39-1-492.4.jpgplu_p1b1kj3plu16sv13sr183i1uol8bo4.jpg

http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5014895_102-39-1-492.3.jpgplu_p1b1kj3plua3b12e51rsgk9m1shc3.jpg

Also, it's been on here before but I would be remiss if I didn't mention Ziobrop's blog post on the building:
https://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2013/06/canada-permanent-building/

[Jonovision]

It looks like the black panels below the windows are either being replaced or repainted. Hopefully some lighting will come with the restoration too.

[JET]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/khyber-building-barrington-preservation-society-historic-arts-community-the-turret-1.5095488

I mostly knew it as the Bean Sprout Building, and never really caught on to calling it the Khyber. The Turret makes sense as a name.

[HalifaxRetales]

The Garden View on Main St now had a for sale sign on it and windows boarded up

[Keith P.]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/khyber-building-barrington-preservation-society-historic-arts-community-the-turret-1.5095488

I mostly knew it as the Bean Sprout Building, and never really caught on to calling it the Khyber. The Turret makes sense as a name.

All they need is a few million dollars. Good luck with that.

[Dmajackson]

2172 Gottingen Street has been demolished; Google Street View (https://www.google.com/maps/place/2172+Gottingen+St,+Halifax,+NS+B3K+3B4/@44.6527589,-63.5844683,3a,75y,236h,101.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ5lwdCBzEMJTHBNaivrufQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x4b5a23d434620d49:0x83db79b3f90cdb51!8m2!3d44.6526659!4d-63.5845125)

Around the corner at 5457 Cornwallis Street there is an "Add to Institutional Building" construction permit issued and site work has commenced. It appears to the be the start of HRM Case #H00453 (https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/city-hall/regional-council/170815rc1451.pdf).

Add in the construction underway at 2165 Gottingen and The Velo II, new retail at Velo and the new transit lane, Gottingen Street Commercial Corridor is quite the hive of activity.

[RoshanMcG]

New signage on Argyle

http://i.imgur.com/i8DRyJPh.jpg (https://imgur.com/i8DRyJP)

[Keith P.]

What's that all about? Surely not wayfinding, it is barely readable. Just more prettification without purpose?

[Hali87]

My guess is that they light up and would be way more readable at night

[ns_kid]

https://live.staticflickr.com/7844/46874224864_0567498e71_b.jpg
Latest rendering for the as yet un-renamed WTCC. Source: TheStar Halifax (https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/04/11/passport-office-will-be-housed-in-old-convention-centre-on-argyle-st-rather-than-shops-and-bars.html)

As others will have seen in the Star (https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/04/11/passport-office-will-be-housed-in-old-convention-centre-on-argyle-st-rather-than-shops-and-bars.html), HRM's design review committee this week approved plans for the renovation of the former WTCC on Argyle Street. As discussed in this thread back in January, Passport Canada will occupy the ground floor of the building. There's no doubt for them and their clients this will be much more accessible than their current location on the 15th floor of the Maritime Centre. But it is such a lost opportunity to transform that block, connecting the commercial, hospitality and entertainment spaces on the rest of Argyle Street with Scotia Square. (Lost for at least ten years, because that's the lease Passport Canada is signing.)

You may recall that back in January, Harvey Architecture made its preliminary approach (https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/01/10/addition-proposed-for-old-halifax-convention-centre-future-site-of-performing-arts-centre.html) to the design review committee, proposing a new streetwall along Argyle that would feature six commercial units totalling 10,000 square feet. Designer Steven Addison said they hoped the city would continue its transformation of Argyle from Prince Street down to Duke so that there'd be room for more lovely patios for the many patrons of those businesses. But that vision's long gone.

According to the recent Star story, the committee didn't like Armco's plan to lower the floor at the north end of the structure, which is now at grade at the corner of Duke and Argyle. Apparently Passport Canada insists on their space being on one level. Armco apparently said they wold not proceed with the exterior improvements without that and the committee went along. I rarely agree with Tim Bousquet but find it hard to discount his view that George Armoyan plays the municipality "like a fiddle (https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/?s=armoyan+fiddle)".

The pedway that links Scotia Square with Scotiabank Centre (but no further, god forbid) will remain but will retreat further into the interior of the building.

The existing structure:

https://live.staticflickr.com/7910/40632177713_2b02df81b9_b.jpg

[Keith P.]

When planning theory crashes head-on into economic and market reality, those in the planning vehicle seldom come out on top.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I've said it in the past that this strip had great potential to continue the Argyle Street vibe right to Scotia Square.

It also would have been nice for patrons of the Metro errr... Scotiabank Centre to have an option within the building for dining on something other than popcorn or Subway, especially during bad weather days.

The people benefiting the most from the passport office being located there will be the employees of the office - a big win for them IMHO. For the rest of us it will be a dead wall, especially dead at night when the rest of Argyle comes alive. Most of us will get to see the inside of it every 5 years, while the employees at least will have a great spot to spend their lunch hours on nice days (The Grand Parade), and some nice spots to meet for dinner after work, perhaps.

However, as Keith says, the business case always wins over the planning case, for better or for worse (worse in this case)...

[Querce]

from the staff presentation about the centre plan

https://i.imgur.com/RdLK48c.png

[eastcoastal]

What's that all about? Surely not wayfinding, it is barely readable. Just more prettification without purpose?

I saw this sign over the weekend - it's some historic information about the area... and hard to read. Transparency isn't great for readability.

[Jonovision]

The Nova Scotia Government has finally made a deal with Dexel to redevelop the Dennis Building and parking lot.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/development-dennis-building-truscan-site-hansard-dexel-agreement-1.5112138

[IanWatson]

The Nova Scotia Government has finally made a deal with Dexel to redevelop the Dennis Building and parking lot.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/development-dennis-building-truscan-site-hansard-dexel-agreement-1.5112138

Wooooooo! Good choice on their part. Hopefully Dexel keeps the upper masonry and not just the required granite lower floors.

[someone123]

Wooooooo! Good choice on their part. Hopefully Dexel keeps the upper masonry and not just the required granite lower floors.

The potential of lopping off the upper floors of registered heritage buildings is something I've only heard of in Halifax. It was contemplated for the Bluenose II building as well. These upper floor additions are older than many heritage buildings in other North American cities.

In many (most?) cities in the developed world the Dennis Building would be fully preserved. Nothing else would be allowed.

Halifax needs to hugely bump up its level of heritage preservation. Loss of prewar masonry buildings should not really be tolerated at all, and a lot more effort should go into keeping wooden buildings in a presentable state. Even the smaller towns around the region do a better job of preservation than Halifax does. There is way more money to support preservation in Halifax, and a bigger potential value payoff. The Province House area for example should be seen as a national gem and tourist attraction. Instead it's managed in an incredibly parochial way; concern #1 is to spend as little money as possible on this area and concern #2 seems to be to make MLA parking as convenient as possible.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I think in general it's good news, much better than when it appeared that they were just going to level it all. At least the empty lot on Granville, and I assume Barrington (though the article doesn't mention it), will be filled in after decades of these empty lots looking more like an NHL player's smile than a streetscape.

The provincial restrictions for the site are very loose:

• maintain the granite facade of the Dennis building and facade of the Hansard building

• no commercial or retail space on Granville Street

• no balconies facing Granville Street

But I would hope that Dexel keeps the entire facade of the Dennis Bldg, as the upper floors add so much character to the building - the height and contrasting stone really gives the impression of a looming historic structure. Makes sense for a 9-storey structure anyhow - to have the first 7 in original stone, and step back the upper 2 with glass, much like the Espace project up on Barrington.

It would be even better if more than just the facade was kept. Here's hoping for the best!

[OldDartmouthMark]

For sake of interest, a few historical photos of the project area:

https://novascotia.ca/archives/images/Notman/200714890.jpg
Source (https://novascotia.ca/archives/Notman/archives.asp?ID=398)

https://novascotia.ca/archives/images/Notman/200714434.jpg
Source (https://novascotia.ca/archives/Notman/archives.asp?ID=323)

https://novascotia.ca/archives/images/MacAskill/200312085.jpg
Source (https://novascotia.ca/archives/MacAskill/archives.asp?ID=4215)

https://novascotia.ca/archives/images/EastCoastPort/200904851.jpg
Source (https://novascotia.ca/archives/EastCoastPort/archives.asp?ID=13)

http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5016821_102-111-4-5.64.jpgplu_p1bopp0bbk1dcba3u17jv1g7pudn2.jpg
96-98 Granville St., Canadian Press Building [fire]
Retrieval code: 102-111-4-5.64
[194-?] (http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/request/DoMenuRequest?SystemName=Halifax+Regional+Municipality+Archives&UserName=WA+Public&Password=&TemplateProcessID=6000_20185_20185&CMD_(SearchRequest)[11]=&PromptID=&ParamID=&RequesterType=SearchTemplate&browseData=1&Keyword=0&SearchLogic=%26Logic%3D%26S1%3DPOI1_1225%261POI1_1225%3D827)

http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5019907_cr25.24%20-%20downtown%20halifax,%20george%20st..jpgplu_p1d34ip1mg1q7j1hh21ih3skm1ndn4.jpg
Ernie Reksten's business trip photographs of Halifax and Dartmouth
Halifax - Near Waterfront
Retrieval code: CR25-24
15 Apr. 1956 (http://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/request/DoMenuRequest?SystemName=Halifax+Regional+Municipality+Archives&UserName=WA+Public&Password=&TemplateProcessID=6000_20185_20185&CMD_(SearchRequest)[11]=&PromptID=&ParamID=&RequesterType=SearchTemplate&browseData=1&Keyword=0&SearchLogic=%26Logic%3D%26S1%3DPOI1_1225%261POI1_1225%3D827)

[someone123]

Here's a view of the Massachusetts State House:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3583286,-71.0637014,287m/data=!3m1!1e3

I realize that Boston's a bigger city and Massachusetts is a bigger state, but boy does this ever make the Province House area look dumpy. Theoretically Boston should have fewer small heritage buildings near the state house because land values are much higher there. In Halifax that all would have been declared uneconomical and torn down in the 60's.

Another big difference I noticed is how much more detail there is on the buildings. Halifax streetscapes look denuded in comparison. So many buildings are missing their old iron detailing, awnings, cornices, etc.

The differences aren't due to "homo economicus" type decisions alone, they've got to come down to culture and priorities too. Nova Scotia is incredibly utilitarian and doesn't really value its past much aside from the folksy stuff.

[Drybrain]

A big part of me wonders if there's not simply a difference in the quality of architecture. I remember being similarly struck when travelling from Toronto to New York for the first time--Toronto's historic building stock, with some exceptions, is far less ornamented and impressive and more in line with Halifax's.

Fully agree re: the generally utilitarian nature of things. Again, partly a Canadian trait, I think, but the east coast also seems to have a sort of austerity mentality. No frills, etc.

I hope Dexel retains the brick; I know a couple of years ago the province declared it unsalvageable, but they also declared the entire building unsalvageable at one point, when clearly seeking to make the case for demolition. Agreed that it should be a no-brainer to preserve and it doesn't speak well of our civic priorities that its' been such a slog to get even to this point, though I'm optimistic.

[someone123]

A big part of me wonders if there's not simply a difference in the quality of architecture. I remember being similarly struck when travelling from Toronto to New York for the first time--Toronto's historic building stock, with some exceptions, is far less ornamented and impressive and more in line with Halifax's.

I'm sure that is part of it but a lot of historic photos show that many, many buildings in Halifax have been stripped down. The buildings in their original state look very similar to well-preserved buildings that exist today in Boston, e.g.:

http://www.halifaxhistory.ca/HCA01.jpg
Source (http://www.halifaxhistory.ca/Old-School.htm)

I could repeat this probably 30 times. For example think of the Pacific Building. The Dennis Building situation is something out of Detroit more or less. But Detroit isn't growing by 2% a year with construction cranes all over the place. Then there's the Tramway Building, Province House with its parking lot (which probably stands up just fine against Boston buildings from the 1810's), and on and on.

On the flip side I think Halifax gets more urban infill than most similar American cities and consequently has better affordability and is improving faster. Boston has a bit of a preserved-in-1991 feel. But there's no reason why that's incompatible with keeping heritage buildings in good shape. It probably wouldn't have been much of a sacrifice to permit development on the parking lot around the Dennis Building while insisting that its exterior be carefully restored.

[Drybrain]

For example think of the Pacific Building. I kind of doubt that Boston has steel structures in its downtown designed to catch falling masonry.



That's absolutely true. what an absolute embarrassment to construct a permanent structure for such a purpose. (On the upside, at least there are restoration plans for the Tramway in the offing.)

[someone123]

I really think it is cultural. There is a lingering sense that Nova Scotia is poor and Halifax is a small town and so it's futile to try to have nice things. The economy will fall apart unless developers are allowed to do absolutely whatever they want, and the province will go bankrupt if it spends money on frills.

On a deeper level there's a lack of appreciation that a good quality public realm will have a significant positive impact on the people in it. And provincially there's always some hesitation to spend money on things in the capital that seem like they're on a higher level than what you'd get in Truro or Glace Bay.

Then with infrastructure there's the sense that the city isn't growing that much so little adjustments here and there are enough to make everything work out. No new bridges needed, no trains needed, no new roads. The infrastructure that was built for 250,000 people will essentially be fine forever (is the nearly 50 year old MacKay still called the "new bridge"?).

This is all very noticeable looking at NS from afar.

[teddifax]

Is there a schedule for this work, hopefully, it will start soon and take into consideration the heritage of the adjoining buildings and keep the existing buildings as intact as possible....

[worldlyhaligonian]

I really think it is cultural. There is a lingering sense that Nova Scotia is poor and Halifax is a small town and so it's futile to try to have nice things. The economy will fall apart unless developers are allowed to do absolutely whatever they want, and the province will go bankrupt if it spends money on frills.

On a deeper level there's a lack of appreciation that a good quality public realm will have a significant positive impact on the people in it. And provincially there's always some hesitation to spend money on things in the capital that seem like they're on a higher level than what you'd get in Truro or Glace Bay.

Then with infrastructure there's the sense that the city isn't growing that much so little adjustments here and there are enough to make everything work out. No new bridges needed, no trains needed, no new roads. The infrastructure that was built for 250,000 people will essentially be fine forever (is the nearly 50 year old MacKay still called the "new bridge"?).

This is all very noticeable looking at NS from afar.

Once again, great analysis!

I think the problem is that Halifax once had a history of having very "worldly" people. Now, many of the critics are people that have never really lived anywhere else... or seen what is possible. It is culturally a shame when comparing ourselves to similar sized cities in North America and elsewhere. We have the same access to resources, but we squander them or shoot down good ideas.

Trips don't count. People need to actually live in different places for EXTENDED periods of time to see how things can be done. We deserve more than the bar that is set and those put in charge of making the difference.

What is most disturbing is the folks that move from cities like Toronto (not necessarily worldly people just because they come from a bigger Canadian city) and don't want to see change.

Then we paint some people who resist the stupid ideas. For example, the Arm bridge is just a bad idea. I'm not anti-development at all for being against a bad idea.

[OldDartmouthMark]

A big part of me wonders if there's not simply a difference in the quality of architecture. I remember being similarly struck when travelling from Toronto to New York for the first time--Toronto's historic building stock, with some exceptions, is far less ornamented and impressive and more in line with Halifax's.

I think that is at least part of the situation. For example, check out the historical photos of Boston linked below. Most of these photos were taken in the late 1950s, and from my understanding many of these buildings were razed for urban renewal. I think the photos illustrate your point. The sheer volume of ornamented stone/masonry buildings that they had was astounding, and far greater than Halifax.

MIT - Perceptual Form Of The City Introduction (https://dome.mit.edu/handle/1721.3/33656)

https://dome.mit.edu/handle/1721.3/33656/discover?rpp=10&page=6&group_by=none&etal=0

[someone123]

The Dennis Building is actually nicer and more imposing than a bunch of the heritage buildings around the Massachusetts State House. They are three and four storey brick while the Dennis has a granite facade. But they are well maintained and the Dennis Building is falling apart.

The Pacific Building is the same. If it were nicely restored and transported to Boston it would look great next to the architecture there. It was not built to a lower standard than contemporary buildings there. It is falling apart now due to lack of maintenance.

The fact that Boston has more masonry buildings is an argument for better maintenance of the relatively small collection that has survived in Halifax. HRM could spend a tiny fraction of its budget to keep that inventory of buildings in great shape.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I think you know that we both agree that Halifax needs to do a better job of looking after its heritage buildings. I've long argued that on this board.

Yes, I agree that the treatment of the Dennis building is shameful, considering that it was very close to being razed completely, and now the requirements for maintaining its heritage elements seem to be almost nothing more than keeping part of its facade.

Yes, I agree that the city allowing Dongdu to construct a permanent structure to allow the Pacific building to continue to crumble without requirement for repair and restoration is disgusting.

Boston certainly appears to be doing a better job than most cities in protecting its heritage building. My point is, spend a few hours going through the MIT photos and you will see that the scale of the buildings in Boston was/is much greater than Halifax ever had.

The continual negativity towards Halifax and Haligonians is getting a little old, though. If Halifax wasn't such a great place to live I suspect our more 'worldly' members wouldn't bother to populate this forum....

[Keith P.]

I think you know that we both agree that Halifax needs to do a better job of looking after its heritage buildings. I've long argued that on this board.

Yes, I agree that the treatment of the Dennis building is shameful, considering that it was very close to being razed completely, and now the requirements for maintaining its heritage elements seem to be almost nothing more than keeping part of its facade.


Well, considering that it burned to the ground 100 years ago and was rebuilt, just keeping the facade at that time, perhaps it is just history repeating itself and thus historically accurate, not shameful.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Well, considering that it burned to the ground 100 years ago and was rebuilt, just keeping the facade at that time, perhaps it is just history repeating itself and thus historically accurate, not shameful.

That rebuild and the adding of extra storeys on top is part of its history. A fire is an accident, but neglect is intentional.

[someone123]

To me there really seem to be two separate issues. There's the question of which city has more heritage buildings, Boston or Halifax. Boston obviously does. But then there's also the question of which city has done a better job of taking care of what's survived in the modern day. Boston has. Boston is a good example because for any given heritage building in Halifax you can usually find something similar in Boston.

Aside from being larger Boston also followed a different historic arc of development, and has a lot more construction from the 1890-1930 period when Halifax was barely growing. If you subtract those buildings from the mix the two cities start to look pretty similar. Have a look at Charlestown and you will see something eerily similar to the North End or Schmidtville, but more intact and in a better state of repair. The Falkland area could still look like that or better.

I don't think it's negative to point out that Halifax does a relatively poor job of maintaining its heritage buildings. In a way that outlook is actually much more positive than the defeatist attitude that nothing can or should be done and the city will slowly crumble. Halifax is a provincial and regional economic capital with a successful economy and it's on its way to having half a million people. It can and should have an extensive inventory of heritage buildings kept in great shape.

To take another example, I posted a picture of the newly-restored St. Paul's Building in the Canada section. Somebody immediately pointed out how incomplete the restoration looked because the cornice was still missing and the original sache windows were replaced by featureless oversized panes of glass. The good news is that if more investment happens in this building in the future it can still be restored to a higher standard. The bad news is that this barely seems to register in Halifax right now; the result that looks shoddy someplace else was created by newly increased heritage preservation grants (which are still inadequate, but a step in the right direction).

[Drybrain]

I think both Someone123 and OldDartmouthMark have good points. Obviously Boston, being an even older city than Halifax, and considerably larger in the 19th century, has more imposing and impressive buildings from the era. (Boston had 400,000 people in the 1880s, while Halifax was only at 70,000 at the same time).

I think it's also true, though, that there's a level of care and reverence for the urban history in Boston that isn't really found in Halifax. It's not really a Canadian trait in general, except I suppose Montreal and increasingly Toronto. But Halifax definitely suffers from being parochially governed, despite its many other great strengths. I think this is changing from the ground up--the citizenry here feels just about as worldly as any other major Canadian city I'm familiar with. The provincial/municipal government, not so much. (Then again, Doug Ford...)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Well said, Drybrain. Thank you.

[someone123]

But Halifax definitely suffers from being parochially governed, despite its many other great strengths. I think this is changing from the ground up--the citizenry here feels just about as worldly as any other major Canadian city I'm familiar with. The provincial/municipal government, not so much. (Then again, Doug Ford...)

It was a while ago but I remember when the former Kelly's building on Granville was demolished. There was some discussion in HRM council and a bunch of the councillors shrugged and said something about how the building was at the end of its life and was uneconomical. This explanation at the time was enough to pass muster in Halifax. Most people accepted that logic at face value as a kind of wise tough truth about impermanence that we all have to accept. According to HRM council logic, the economics of pretty much every European city, most of which are poorer than Halifax, don't work out.

It was here: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6486357,-63.5740564,3a,75y,238.51h,108.91t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDd74u8JLMcV1QuxU1QNbig!2e0!5s20120601T000000!7i13312!8i6656

It looked like this:

http://www.halifaxhistory.ca/kellys01.jpg
Source (http://www.halifaxhistory.ca)

Not exactly Notre-Dame de Paris but for relatively little effort it could have been incorporated into the TD redevelopment and the city would have ended up with a little more character as a result.

Part of what is frustrating about this to me is that a lot of people don't even see what is going on economically. What is happening is land prices are going up so it is more profitable for developers to tear down heritage buildings. It's not about a lack of money to maintain the old heritage buildings, it's about profit maximization. The lack of maintenance is a way to justify demolition, which then opens up larger scale redevelopment.

HRM has to step in to fix this because of how the tax system works. Land is taxed at a low rate and private landowners capture the value of increases in desirability in a neighbourhood even when their own properties are a drag on the area. The tax system rewards lazy landlords because poor maintenance reduces the tax bill that owners pay while they wait to flip the land. This is also why most new land use downtown is either highrise or parking lot. The incentives of property owners are not aligned with what is good for the city.

The Heritage Trust et al. sort of understood this and wanted a 4 storey height limit to make heritage buildings relatively attractive by reducing the profitability of demolishing them. But this is a terrible hamfisted solution in a city full of empty lots or modern characterless buildings. The heritage buildings should be preserved, not the parking lots.

Another factor is that the city and province are poor stewards of the heritage buildings that they maintain. Case in point: the city still has no idea what to do with the old library, years after the new one was built. This is the city that declared a climate change emergency a little while ago.

[OldDartmouthMark]

To me there really seem to be two separate issues. There's the question of which city has more heritage buildings, Boston or Halifax. Boston obviously does. But then there's also the question of which city has done a better job of taking care of what's survived in the modern day. Boston has. Boston is a good example because for any given heritage building in Halifax you can usually find something similar in Boston.

Aside from being larger Boston also followed a different historic arc of development, and has a lot more construction from the 1890-1930 period when Halifax was barely growing. If you subtract those buildings from the mix the two cities start to look pretty similar. Have a look at Charlestown and you will see something eerily similar to the North End or Schmidtville, but more intact and in a better state of repair. The Falkland area could still look like that or better.

I don't think it's negative to point out that Halifax does a relatively poor job of maintaining its heritage buildings. In a way that outlook is actually much more positive than the defeatist attitude that nothing can or should be done and the city will slowly crumble. Halifax is a provincial and regional economic capital with a successful economy and it's on its way to having half a million people. It can and should have an extensive inventory of heritage buildings kept in great shape.

To take another example, I posted a picture of the newly-restored St. Paul's Building in the Canada section. Somebody immediately pointed out how incomplete the restoration looked because the cornice was still missing and the original sache windows were replaced by featureless oversized panes of glass. The good news is that if more investment happens in this building in the future it can still be restored to a higher standard. The bad news is that this barely seems to register in Halifax right now; the result that looks shoddy someplace else was created by newly increased heritage preservation grants (which are still inadequate, but a step in the right direction).

It's interesting that you use the St. Paul's Building example, as I posted a photo in that very thread which showed that the cornice had been removed sometime before the photo was taken in 1951, when the building would have been just over half a century old. We both speculated on the possible reasons for its removal, but of course we won't know unless somebody finds documentation about it. Regardless, at the time it would have been considered just an old building, and it had some features changed (maybe due to structural integrity, maybe due to 'modernization', we don't know).

Here's that page in the thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=203463&page=17

To put it in perspective, the Ralston building, a federal government property, had steel reinforcements stuck in over the stone cladding to prevent it from falling on pedestrians when it was similar in age as the St. Paul's bldg in the photo I posted in said thread. Now, it's about 10 years older than that and it's being torn down, despite having a heritage designation on it. But it's a federal building... is that a Halifax or Nova Scotia failing as well? Is it because of Haligonians' "defeatist" attitude?

How about the fact that nobody except rich real estate investors can afford to buy a house in Vancouver? Is that because Vancouverites have a "defeatist" attitude? How come the citizens of Vancouver didn't step in and prevent this from happening? C'mon, you talk like Halifax is the worst of the worst, but every city has its issues.

The irony here is that we agree on most points, and the buildings you've mentioned were discussed on this forum many times and again I've agreed with your points, but am tiring of this continual denigration of Halifax and Haligonians as if these issues don't happen in any other cities.

I agree it needs to be better, the Heritage Trust has tried very hard to make it better, but even they are called idiots on this forum, because of some mistakes they have made in their philosophy/game plan. IIRC, there are other organizations trying to advocate for saving old architecture in Halifax as well. It's not like nobody cares or nobody tries, as has been alluded to.

[Hali87]

To put it in perspective, the Ralston building, a federal government property, had steel reinforcements stuck in over the stone cladding to prevent it from falling on pedestrians when it was similar in age as the St. Paul's bldg in the photo I posted in said thread. Now, it's about 10 years older than that and it's being torn down, despite having a heritage designation on it. But it's a federal building... is that a Halifax or Nova Scotia failing as well? Is it because of Haligonians' "defeatist" attitude?

...It's not like nobody cares or nobody tries, as has been alluded to.

The Ralston situation though, is that normal? Would this fly in any other major Canadian city - the federal government allowing one of their (heritage-designated!) office buildings to deteriorate to the point that they were forced to essentially staple it back together and making no effort to even sugar-coat this? There was 0 dignity to any of this, and I have a hard time picturing the same situation playing out in say, Ottawa, or QC, or Victoria, but maybe it does. At no point did the public here demand better AFAIK. It's not hard to picture an alternate scenario where there would have been a huge public backlash and the situation was spun into a national scandal. The problem is that people (if they cared at all) found the situation unfortunate but not really noteworthy. We are not in control. :shrug:

Yes all cities have their problems and Someone123 is pretty quick to recognize these (and when he does, often other SSPers will say that he's being too critical of Vancouver or that he idealizes Halifax :haha:). I do think that he makes good points here though. We have an advantage (a fairly extensive and unique stock of heritage architecture) and we do a relatively poor job of A - capitalizing on this and B - making sure that we don't lose it. We do an ok job at both but a lot of other cities even within Canada there is more effort given (or at least a better regulatory system in place) for way less real payoff (as in smaller and/or less interesting collections of heritage architecture are better protected).

Of course there are a lot of other things that we do well/better than other cities but taking advantage of and protecting our stock of heritage buildings isn't one of them. It's not necessarily a case of people not caring, not being resourceful, or what have you - mostly it's just that some laws need to be tweaked. But for laws to be tweaked it needs to be seen as important enough to the public.

[Drybrain]

The Ralston situation though, is that normal? Would this fly in any other major Canadian city - the federal government allowing one of their (heritage-designated!) office buildings to deteriorate to the point that they were forced to essentially staple it back together and making no effort to even sugar-coat this? There was 0 dignity to any of this, and I have a hard time picturing the same situation playing out in say, Ottawa, or QC, or Victoria, but maybe it does.

Gut feeling, but while it's hard to imagine it in Ottawa (seat of government) or Victoria (obsessed with its heritage) it's very easy to imagine it in, say, Edmonton or even Toronto. Part of the problem is that no one looks at the Ralston Building and thinks "heritage." If it was an ornate Victorian building, we'd probably have a much different conversation about it.

The other thing is that I think Haligonians by and large care about the city's heritage. I think the municipal government and city council are too afflicted by habitual timidity to take the kind of action needed, and I think most MLAs simply don't care, too wrapped up in the parochial concerns of their respective districts. This is where the tightfisted scarcity mentality comes in. There's no obvious, immediate economic benefit correlated with beautifying the capital city.

[someone123]

The problem is that people (if they cared at all) found the situation unfortunate but not really noteworthy. We are not in control.

It was remarkable how the media in Halifax matter-of-factly reported the slow trainwreck that was the Ralston Building situation, and how most people seemed to think it was normal for a heritage building to be neglected, eventually sit derelict for a few years, then be demolished. Had a significant portion of people in Halifax considered this unacceptable, the federal government easily could have been pressured enough for the outcome to be different. Halifax's MP is even an urban planner and belongs to the governing party.

It's not necessarily a case of people not caring, not being resourceful, or what have you - mostly it's just that some laws need to be tweaked. But for laws to be tweaked it needs to be seen as important enough to the public.

In Nova Scotia, heritage registration used to be mostly voluntary on the part of the property owner and all it did was prevent demolition for 3 years. Now it's 5 years. There's little incentive to register in most cases. In many other places, registration is not voluntary, the bar for what's considered historic is lower, demolition is banned for registered buildings, and there are "carrots" in the form of property tax rebates and the like to encourage registration. And by other places I just mean provinces like Newfoundland, I'm not talking about Venice here.

I hope that one day Halifax ends up with strong but fine-grained heritage protections that focus on maintaining and increasing heritage value while permitting as much development as possible. This means expanding the number of heritage buildings, raising minimum standards, and adding some more incentives to cover maintenance and restoration costs.

Under the improved system something like the DongDu Pacific Building scenario would have been completely different. Ideally the building would have already been well-maintained or the expanded incentives would have induced the owner to restore the building properly. Failing that, the city should still have declared the maintenance standard of the building and a proposed metal awning contraption unacceptable. Eventually the city should have hired a company to do the restoration work, billed DongDu, and placed a lien on the property.

This sounds extreme but in practice once the standards go up the preventable Pacific/Dennis/Armoury/Roy/Ralston/Bank of Canada/Kelly type crises stop happening in the first place.

[someone123]

Gut feeling, but while it's hard to imagine it in Ottawa (seat of government) or Victoria (obsessed with its heritage) it's very easy to imagine it in, say, Edmonton or even Toronto. Part of the problem is that no one looks at the Ralston Building and thinks "heritage." If it was an ornate Victorian building, we'd probably have a much different conversation about it.

Unfortunately most of the major 1950's-era buildings in Halifax are now gone, so there will be nothing left of that style to preserve once people start thinking of it as historic.

[Keith P.]

The real news story here is how the hell the Ralston Building ever got a heritage designation. It's not even a good example of the type of cookie-cutter pattern designs the Feds were building in the 1950s. In what bizarro world would that be considered worthy of saving?

[someone123]

The real news story here is how the hell the Ralston Building ever got a heritage designation. It's not even a good example of the type of cookie-cutter pattern designs the Feds were building in the 1950s. In what bizarro world would that be considered worthy of saving?

I don't really agree that it is cookie cutter. What other building in Halifax is like the Ralston?

Setting aside the question of architectural merit it still seems inefficient from an economic and environmental perspective to under-maintain this building, let it fall apart, then move the offices to the suburbs and rebuild something else in a city full of empty lots. Like I said, we have every level of government paying lip service to climate change but then they treat large buildings like they're to be disposed of every 30 years. I don't really see this notion that buildings have a 30 year "lifespan" in many places aside from Halifax. They have an indefinite lifespan as long as they are maintained, and actual maintenance costs paid tend to be small compared to actual construction costs, particularly if those construction costs will end up being amortized over such a short period.

[Colin May]

John Dobson, his designs for buildings and streetscapes have lasted for a long time.
I asked an HRM planner if he knew the name 'John Dobson' and after he replied in the positive we had a brief discussion of streetscapes.
Didn't ask him if he knew of Ian Nairn.

[Hali87]

Gut feeling, but while it's hard to imagine it in Ottawa (seat of government) or Victoria (obsessed with its heritage) it's very easy to imagine it in, say, Edmonton or even Toronto. Part of the problem is that no one looks at the Ralston Building and thinks "heritage." If it was an ornate Victorian building, we'd probably have a much different conversation about it.

I think that if this had played out the way it had in Edmonton, it would have been held up as an example of how much the Federal Government doesn't care about Western Canada. This is despite the fact that Edmonton has a very utilitarian, 9-to-5 downtown where aesthetic and tourist appeal are not priorities, and with all due respect to them, we should be aiming higher than "Edmonton might have been ok with it". But again I couldn't see this playing out easily in the West (particularly AB/SK) because of its potential to become "symbolic". Whether or not it's a heritage building it shouldn't have to be stapled together like that - the whole image of it just screams of neglect and austerity. If anything the fact that it's not even that old makes it even more outrageous.

It would actually make a good example of exactly how much the Federal Government cares about Atlantic Canada if those kinds of conversations were happening, but they're not, and that's a major cultural difference between here and the West. Another is that we seem to be weirdly ok with just letting things crumble until it's almost certain that something bad will happen - see the examples of not only the Ralston, and the Dennis, and the Pacific, and the Armouries, but also the Quinpool rail bridge that's finally getting replaced. It was in terrible condition - what about all the other ones? No one ever really talks about these things. See also the fenced-off areas and the Martello Tower at York Redoubt - a National Historic Site - they're not even trying anymore! Isn't it weird that this kind of thing is normal to us?

[Keith P.]

ItAnother is that we seem to be weirdly ok with just letting things crumble until it's almost certain that something bad will happen - see the examples of not only the Ralston, and the Dennis, and the Pacific, and the Armouries, but also the Quinpool rail bridge that's finally getting replaced. It was in terrible condition - what about all the other ones? No one ever really talks about these things. See also the fenced-off areas and the Martello Tower at York Redoubt - a National Historic Site - they're not even trying anymore! Isn't it weird that this kind of thing is normal to us?

It is a trait of government and quasi-government organizations to not maintain infrastructure. The Feds have plenty of money to waste on re-election fodder and squeaky-wheel new initiatives, but maintenance of fixed assets does not buy headlines on the CBC nor lead to photo opps for MPs **cough**AndyFillmore**cough** desperately tying to buy their re-election. The Province of NS is broke so their lack of maintenance is less surprising but in both cases maintenance budgets are easy to chop and are the first things to be cut. And HRM would rather spend millions on unused bike lanes and flyover ramps than repair streets, and prefers spending $50 million on palatial new libraries and 4-pad arenas to maintaining the existing ones. See the sorry state of our roads, bridges and hospitals and other public facilities. It is a fundamental flaw in our govt system.

[eastcoastal]

It is a trait of government and quasi-government organizations to not maintain infrastructure... maintenance of fixed assets does not buy headlines on the CBC nor lead to photo opps for MPs...

This one thing increases costs soooo much. If we didn't have to replace things so goddamn often, I suspect we'd have a healthier stock of existing buildings and the new buildings could be free to be new, rather than try and replace neglect.

[Jonovision]

This small project in Dartmouth now has a name. The UPside.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47736848161_3ccf992802_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2fJkPQe)20190428_130952 (https://flic.kr/p/2fJkPQe) by Jonovision23 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229421@N02/), on Flickr

[OldDartmouthMark]

The Ralston situation though, is that normal? Would this fly in any other major Canadian city - the federal government allowing one of their (heritage-designated!) office buildings to deteriorate to the point that they were forced to essentially staple it back together and making no effort to even sugar-coat this? There was 0 dignity to any of this, and I have a hard time picturing the same situation playing out in say, Ottawa, or QC, or Victoria, but maybe it does. At no point did the public here demand better AFAIK. It's not hard to picture an alternate scenario where there would have been a huge public backlash and the situation was spun into a national scandal. The problem is that people (if they cared at all) found the situation unfortunate but not really noteworthy. We are not in control. :shrug:

Yes all cities have their problems and Someone123 is pretty quick to recognize these (and when he does, often other SSPers will say that he's being too critical of Vancouver or that he idealizes Halifax :haha:). I do think that he makes good points here though. We have an advantage (a fairly extensive and unique stock of heritage architecture) and we do a relatively poor job of A - capitalizing on this and B - making sure that we don't lose it. We do an ok job at both but a lot of other cities even within Canada there is more effort given (or at least a better regulatory system in place) for way less real payoff (as in smaller and/or less interesting collections of heritage architecture are better protected).

Of course there are a lot of other things that we do well/better than other cities but taking advantage of and protecting our stock of heritage buildings isn't one of them. It's not necessarily a case of people not caring, not being resourceful, or what have you - mostly it's just that some laws need to be tweaked. But for laws to be tweaked it needs to be seen as important enough to the public.

Sorry for the delay in my response, I've been going 24/7 for the past week or so.

Firstly, I want it to be clear (as I thought I was trying to be) that I agree with most of someone123's assertions regarding how the various levels of government deal with heritage properties. I always tend to find his posts informative, well researched and written, and well grounded. I most often agree with his points, and I tend to think that we both share a similar appreciation for heritage structures and history in general.

However, I also want to address my thoughts about the negativity expressed:
- Perhaps I should not have reacted so strongly to the negative comments about Halifax/Nova Scotia, but I have a strong passion for the area and have started to resent the typical media portrayal of Halifax as being ground zero for just about every socially unacceptable trait that exists. While there is definite truth and history associated with much of it, the degree to which it is portrayed seems to be exaggerated compared to the reality as observed.

Thus, I am disappointed when I read:
Nova Scotia is incredibly utilitarian and doesn't really value its past much aside from the folksy stuff.
...which I believe to be grossly inaccurate, and an unfair generalization.

There is a lingering sense that Nova Scotia is poor and Halifax is a small town and so it's futile to try to have nice things.
...disagree. I have not observed this as being the general feeling here.

there's a lack of appreciation that a good quality public realm will have a significant positive impact on the people in it.
...disagree. Most I talk to have the opposite viewpoint, in fact.

No new bridges needed, no trains needed, no new roads.
...I don't hear anybody saying that, except perhaps the hard-core cyclists that believe building new roads creates more car traffic.

is the nearly 50 year old MacKay still called the "new bridge"?
...not very often. Most call them by their assigned names, though some of the older people who were around when the MacKay was built are still in the habit of using those terms. Besides, I don't believe the use of colloquialisms is necessarily an accurate reflection of one's perception of the need for new infrastructure.

This is all very noticeable looking at NS from afar.
...perhaps living away from Halifax/NS gives one a different perspective, but it can also serve to detach oneself from the culture/vibe of living there. As time passes, it is a likely outcome to become less in tune with the vibe of the place while allowing old memories to intensify and become skewed to the point that they may no longer be accurate.

-------These two comments below from another poster---------

I think the problem is that Halifax once had a history of having very "worldly" people. Now, many of the critics are people that have never really lived anywhere else... or seen what is possible. It is culturally a shame when comparing ourselves to similar sized cities in North America and elsewhere.
...utter BS, and see my comment above.

People need to actually live in different places for EXTENDED periods of time to see how things can be done.
...as if living in another part of the world somehow makes you more qualified to determine how Halifax should progress, or the ideas that people who live there should have.
----> Nobody is more qualified to make Halifax the best HALIFAX it can be, than somebody who lives there and is intimately familiar with the customs, concerns and trends affecting the local people.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The bad news is that this barely seems to register in Halifax right now; the result that looks shoddy someplace else was created by newly increased heritage preservation grants (which are still inadequate, but a step in the right direction).
...I don't think this is an accurate statement, for reasons mentioned in a previous post. Additionally, one must also consider that the comments on messageboards like these are typically from somebody who is at "enthusiast" level and may not reflect the opinions of the average citizen in other cities, so it's not fair to say that this refurbishment would be unacceptable to people in other places.

On the subject of St. Paul's Building, and the reason I drew the Ralston into the conversation, is the idea that a historical disservice was done to the building when the cornice was changed and cupola removed. The pic I had posted in the other thread was dated 1951, but we don't know when it happened exactly. By the photo, though, we know it wouldn't have been any more than 60 years old when it was done.

The idea of preserving a 60 year old building for heritage purposes would not have been a very popular idea in most places in the 1940s-50s. In fact, most of us know that the general attitude was quite the opposite with the urban renewal trend that was just starting around then, in the shadow of WWII when the idea of new beginnings and stepping away from the shadows of the past were popular, and understandable, outlooks. The fifties was all about modernity - a new world with new styles and new technology, a brighter outlook as we move away from the dark years of the war.

So, as suggested, perhaps those elements were removed to modernize the look of the buildings, maybe they had deteriorated to the point of falling apart, maybe they were putting the aging building at risk due to the loading on the older structure. No matter the reason, preserving the history was not a popular attitude. These were considered old, dated buildings, an eyesore to many, and were judged on a practicality and economic scale -rather than an aesthetic one - by most.

Where does the Ralston fit in? Well it was being conceived around the same time. It was being styled in the new modern sense (https://www.historicplaces.ca/media/16183/1997-101(e)ralstonbuilding.pdf) that was becoming so popular at the time and that stood in stark contrast to the ornate Victorian buildings that were still lingering from the previous century.

It was, basically, a collection of boxes, clad in stone which was attached, apparently, in a manner that did not take into account the effect of Halifax's humid environment and thus apparently lead to early corrosion of the fastening system (an assumption, as I haven't seen a report on the failure mechanism of the cladding fasteners).

So today, we now have a 63-year-old building, that holds high value among enthusiasts of mid-century architecture, but to most casual observers doesn't hold the charm and design sense of earlier architectural styles (personally, I have never found it very appealing). Its version of ornamentation (the cladding) has been failing, but has been repaired 'by MacGyver' to keep the building functional.

Would this building be completely restored if it were in another city? I'm not sure that it would. Considering that 24 Sussex (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/07/14/the-sad-story-of-24-sussex-the-abandoned-asbestos-filled-residence-of-canadas-prime-minister/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a91a80167324) had been allowed to deteriorate to the point that our current Prime Minister did not want to move his family into it says something about the feds' will to maintain 'significant' buildings and the public's ability or will to make sure that it happens.

Going back to the St. Paul's Building, the recent refurbishing definitely does not qualify as a full restoration, but is it all that bad? The building still has eye appeal but is still devoid of some of its ornamentation that was removed approximately 70 years ago. Personally, I'd love to see some of those features reinstated. Is it practical? I'm not sure, as in today's world it is much more difficult to find craftsman who can duplicate the decorative elements, and custom-built features are mulitiple times more expensive than off the shelf stuff. For example, a family friend is restoring the curved windows in his Victorian-era home in NB, and has literally payed several thousands of dollars per pane of glass for those windows multiplied by however many windows he is replacing.

I'm not excusing an incomplete restoration, but as a realist I understand that businesses have to justify their expenses, and without sufficient government-supplied incentives (as mentioned), it would be difficult to make a business case for it.

On the topic of Boston, it does appear that they have a fairly robust and effective heritage-defending organization. Heck, they are even fighting to preserve the Citgo sign (http://www.bostonpreservation.org/advocacy-project/citgo-sign), which is much more than we were able to do about the Morse's Tea signage (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/debate-still-rages-over-restoration-of-morses-tea-building-in-halifax/article8768672/) that was unceremoniously painted over, and more than apparently Vancouver has been able to do about the BowMac sign (https://www.straight.com/life/1051491/homeless-vancouver-bowmac-sign-faces-demolition-when-west-broadway-toys-r-us-shuts-down) (though I haven't heard any updates about it recently).

Sorry for the wordy response, but I felt I had to comment about my own posts and the comments by others. I'm not sure if I've effectively made my points, but I'm sure I will soon learn whether I have... :runaway:

;) :cheers:

[Hali87]

Without really having the time or energy to give that post the response it deserves, I think that this discussion re: NS not valuing heritage, not thinking big, etc, is in the sense of NS-the-entity. I agree that many (most?) individual people here do care about these things but this does not seem to translate well to the institutional level. (Conversely I do encounter the “but we’re small and poor” mentality often enough at an individual level for me to consider this a significant “thing” - if this is not your experience then frankly I’m glad to hear it!)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Thanks! Long, detailed response not required or expected! ;)

I've said what I felt I had to say, and I'm now done with it and moving on. I appreciate your taking the time to read it through. :)

[OldDartmouthMark]

As condos rise, the cost of buying a parking spot in Halifax reaches $30K (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/halifax-parking-purchase-spot-1.5118111)

A real estate listing on Wellington Street in the city's south end posted on the website Viewpoint has a parking space listed for $29,900. That doesn't include the condo fees for the spot, which are $67 per month.

Across the street, realtor Larry Allen is selling condos in the Gorsebrook Park development, which is under construction. Parking spaces are sold separately for an additional $36,000. He said 80 per cent of the spots have been sold to condo purchasers.

[OldDartmouthMark]

After $1.1M refit, Province House's south garden sports new look (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/province-house-gate-garden-renovation-security-1.5116990)

https://i.cbc.ca/1.5117254.1556652397!/fileImage/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/16x9_780/south-garden-at-province-house-nova-scotia.JPG

Speaker Kevin Murphy has agreed to unlock the garden gate on Prince Street at Province House. It will allow the public direct access to the south garden, which last year underwent a $1.1-million overhaul.

The last time the garden gate was opened was the summer of 2014.

It will also mark the first time in at least five years, since the shooting on Parliament Hill sparked a security crackdown at legislatures across Canada, that the grounds to the Nova Scotia legislature will have public access, other than through the main vehicle gate on Hollis Street.

But...
The government has shelved plans to restore the north garden, currently a paved lot used by MLAs to park their vehicles.
:hell:

[OldDartmouthMark]

This story bolsters someone123's and Hali87's argument. Maybe I was wrong to dispute their claims, or maybe the media is looking for an angle to create a story... or both.

I have to admit, I'm a little disappointed that the people interviewed for the article can't seem to see the big picture. If this attitude continues, Halifax will stagnate, and the health care crisis will still not likely be fixed as that will require a complete rebuild of the management system, along with money.

Resistance to new art gallery on Halifax waterfront is growing (https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/resistance-to-new-art-gallery-on-halifax-waterfront-is-growing-1.4404297)

But in a province where some people say there's a healthcare crisis, there are also those who believe the gallery money could be better spent.

Even artist Liz Mac, whose first instinct two weeks ago was to be excited when she learned Nova Scotia was investing in a new art gallery.

“But then my second thought was, ‘why now?’” Mac said. “You know, we have a lot of other things that need to be taken care of.”

even passersby aren't entirely sure it's the best way to spend the money.

“I think they could use that $70 million to help early childhood education and the health care crisis,” one Halifax resident said.

“Money into the arts is wonderful, but we've got a very urgent crisis in the health care system, so that should be number one,” said another.

But Natalie Edinger also understands shortages in the healthcare system.

“I understand that different money gets allocated to different-things,” she said.

A diabetic since she was four, she took the extraordinary step of launching an online petition to convince the government to change course on the plan.

Thousands have already signed it.

“I'm hoping I'll get a lot more,” she said. “I'm hoping I'll have at least one signature for every person that's waiting for a doctor right now.”

“It's the wrong time, and I don't think we can afford it,” Mac said. “We can't afford to fix the healthcare problem, then why are we trying to fix the arts problem?”

:shrug:

[Keith P.]

Spending $80 mil on a new art gallery is absolutely the wrong move right now. The arguments in favor of spending that on a gallery are weak at best while the need for more spending to fix hot spots within the healthcare system is massive. We do not have unlimited funds and this is a very bad move in the eyes of most of the public.

[someone123]

Spending $80 mil on a new art gallery is absolutely the wrong move right now. The arguments in favor of spending that on a gallery are weak at best while the need for more spending to fix hot spots within the healthcare system is massive. We do not have unlimited funds and this is a very bad move in the eyes of most of the public.

But I think it is completely valid to point out that the provincial health care budget has already been growing rapidly and makes up almost half of the total. At some point you have to take a step back and reconsider if money is being spent efficiently, and find a way to address lesser priorities too.

I always assumed Nova Scotia was in a particularly weak fiscal position but I checked the data and it does not support this view: http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/canadian-fiscal/prov_fiscal.pdf

In terms of balanced-budget-to-GDP, NS is #2 in Canada. Ontario and Alberta are running 1.4% and 2% of GDP deficits. Nova Scotia is running a 0.5% of GDP surplus.

Debt to GDP peaked in 1999 in Nova Scotia and has been going down since then (plus interest rates have fallen). 5 other provinces have higher debt to GDP ratios now.

In my opinion, the mindset that Nova Scotia's provincial government is in crisis is not very accurate or helpful.

This chart is pretty interesting (the picture has improved since 2016 when this was made):

https://i.cbc.ca/1.3565724.1467132111!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_780/debt-per-capita-per-city-graphic.jpg
Source (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/national-debt-map-canada-1.3557745)

[someone123]

Going back to the St. Paul's Building, the recent refurbishing definitely does not qualify as a full restoration, but is it all that bad?

My point is that in many other cities, it would be considered unacceptable. Like in Montreal or Quebec City. I don't think there's any good reason for the standards along Barrington to be lower. Halifax actually should have a higher ability to pay for good quality restoration than Quebec City, because there are fewer buildings like this relative to the size of the economy. At this point, keeping buildings like this in good shape is a relatively small burden.

This ties in with what I meant about Nova Scotia being utilitarian. Day-to-day utility and property ownership are given a relatively high importance compared to what I see in other areas. So many brick Victorian buildings are "just another building" for property owners to do with as they see fit while in other cities their exteriors would be treated like public amenities. Halifax does this for some buildings like City Hall or the Citadel, but the line is drawn at a pretty extreme end of the spectrum and a lot of mid-range heritage buildings get left out.

If we're going to talk about Vancouver, almost nothing here would count as heritage in Halifax. A bunch of protected buildings are circa 1900 wooden houses. And Vancouver is considered to do relatively poorly when it comes to heritage preservation. Victoria or Portland for example are more historic (though their 19th century historic buildings are still modest compared to Halifax). Portland has a lot of historic neighbourhoods full of buildings that aren't particularly exceptional but come together to create a cohesive feel that you wouldn't get if you let property owners do whatever they felt like. Boston is like this too.

Personally, I'd love to see some of those features reinstated. Is it practical? I'm not sure, as in today's world it is much more difficult to find craftsman who can duplicate the decorative elements, and custom-built features are mulitiple times more expensive than off the shelf stuff. For example, a family friend is restoring the curved windows in his Victorian-era home in NB, and has literally payed several thousands of dollars per pane of glass for those windows multiplied by however many windows he is replacing.

But it's obviously practical. It happens on some buildings in Halifax but not others. And in many other cities it happens for all buildings deemed to have heritage value.

The disparity I see is that Halifax is a place where you see ambitious new developments like the Nova Centre or Queen's Marque, but where it's considered potentially economically infeasible to rebuild a cornice on one of the most prominent street corners in the city. Maybe the property owners don't want to pay for it, but the money and capability to do this obviously exist, and the municipality and province have the ability to manipulate incentives to get it to happen. Within certain bounds, they determine what is and isn't economical.

I think people who live in Halifax should be demanding more; government apathy reflects apathy of the citizens. Maybe I am out of touch and this is happening. But at the end of the day we should judge that by successful restoration and preservation and so far I'm not seeing it. I think 2009-2019 was actually worse than 1999-2009, probably because development pressure rose without a commensurate increase in heritage protection. Hopefully something will change in the next decade. Maybe it should start with people demanding that all of the Dennis Building facade be maintained, not just the lower half. :)