General Updates and News

[RoshanMcG]

Amid all the COVID-19 related news, something positive for a change:

Passenger ferry service could visit Georges Island this summer (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/passenger-ferry-service-could-visit-georges-island-this-summer-1.5533241)

I could be wrong, but it seems like the island's pier got a little bit of an upgrade.

http://i.imgur.com/mNK5fbEh.jpg (https://imgur.com/mNK5fbE)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Hmmm... looks like relatively new pier posts?

I recall they have had sporadic events there over the past couple of years, maybe the upgrades had been done for those?

Either way, it will be nice to be able to explore the island once things get back to normal again. It's a piece of public real estate that has been unavailable to most residents pretty much forever. It's great that they are wanting to open it up to the public.

[Jonovision]

There has been a small crew working there for a few months now. There was a barge with a small crane on it most of the winter.

[OldDartmouthMark]

There has been a small crew working there for a few months now. There was a barge with a small crane on it most of the winter.

Ah, good info. Sounds like they have been planning for the opening for a while. Good stuff.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I haven't really dug into it but my first impression from reading so far is this is the wrong way to approach budgeting right now. This is a good time to spend on infrastructure and Cogswell in particular is somewhat disruptive, so this would have been an excellent time to begin work.

It's completely backward to put off a public works project when there's little traffic and growing unemployment and then restart it when the economic picks up again and there's more traffic and demand for labour.

Then on top of this there's the general fact that every little thing HRM does seems to take 20 years. According to LinkedIn the project director for Cogswell was hired nearly 5 years ago.

Right on point. Looks like the province is looking to spend some money on shovel-ready infrastructure projects to help get the economy going again. I'm thinking the city would have done well to have put this same kind of thinking behind Cogswell - it has to be done anyhow, so why not get it going when people are really needing to get back to work.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/covid-19-case-nova-scotia-may-27-1.5586619

$230M in infrastructure spending
McNeil announced new infrastructure spending of $230 million.

He said this money will go toward more than 200 shovel-ready projects, including highways, expansion of the gravel road program, expansion of bridges, green energy projects, school repairs, waterfronts, small option homes and provincial museum upgrades.

"These projects will support small and medium-sized construction companies across our province who will hire Nova Scotians to do that work," McNeil said.

McNeil said the investment would create "some 2,000 jobs this fiscal year." He said tenders are being issued immediately.

McNeil said the $230 million is in addition to the $1-billion capital plan that was announced in February.

[someone123]

Here's a map of developments in the North End:

https://i.imgur.com/ABRvPeS.jpg

I'll keep adding to it as I have time; I have probably missed or messed up a few sites. Yellow means in the planning stages somewhere while orange means under construction. My plan is to eventually add the names/projects for all of these sites plus select renderings.

Some of the numbers:

1 - Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre (Proposed)
2 - 5415 Cogswell (Excavation)
3 - 5426 Portland Place (Exterior Cladding) (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=234143)
4 - 2050 Gottingen (U/C - Floor 1) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2050Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2050gottingen))
5 - 2165 Gottingen (Exterior Cladding) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2165Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2165gottingen))
6 - 2172 Gottingen (Exterior Cladding) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2172Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2172gottingen))
7 - NS Housing Trust development (Approved)
8 - 2267 Brunswick (Proposed)
9 - St. Pat's-Alexandra redevelopment area (Recently Sold by city to Jono Developments)
10 - NS Housing Trust development (Approved)
11 - Velo 2 (U/C - Floor 1)
12 - 2444 Agricola (Recently Demolished)
13 - Roberts & Maynard (Excavated but stalled since 2019)
14 - Victoria Hall redevelopment (Proposed)
15 - 2710 Agricola (Demolition Underway)
16 - Richmond Yards (Excavation but not approved)
17 - Halifax Streetcar District / Bloomfield School (Proposed)
18 - The Stackhouse (Approved)
19 - 5558 Bilby (U/C - Stalled since 2019)
20 - Camille Suites (Exterior Cladding)
21 - Agricola & Bilby (Phase 1 Completed) (Halifax Developments Blog - AgricolaBilby (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/agricolabilby))
22 - The Elevation on Robie (Excavation)
23 - Lion's Head tavern redevelopment (Proposed)

[alps]

Thanks! It's good to see the big picture like this.

I wonder whatever happened to "The Drum" development (https://www.skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=188807) at Cogswell & Rainnie Drive.

Also, I recall that "Spice (http://www.downtownhalifaxcondos.com/spice)" was supposed to have a twin building, but I haven't heard anything about that in a long time.

[someone123]

I wondered about the Drum too. I didn't include it because it seems inactive.

The Polycorp development is called Jazz. Last post about it was 2014: https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=179602&page=11

[alps]

Thanks! I'm curious what kind of impact all the ongoing developments will have on the population of the peninsula (63,210 in 2016).

[Dmajackson]

Here's a map of developments in the North End:

https://i.imgur.com/ABRvPeS.jpg

I'll keep adding to it as I have time; I have probably missed or messed up a few sites. Yellow means in the planning stages somewhere while orange means under construction. My plan is to eventually add the names/projects for all of these sites plus select renderings.

Some of the numbers:

1 - Mi'kmaq Friendship Centre (Proposed)
2 - 5415 Cogswell (Excavation)
3 - 5426 Portland Place (Exterior Cladding) (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=234143)
4 - 2050 Gottingen (U/C - Floor 1) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2050Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2050gottingen))
5 - 2165 Gottingen (Exterior Cladding) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2165Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2165gottingen))
6 - 2172 Gottingen (Exterior Cladding) (Halifax Developments Blog - #2172Gottingen (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/2172gottingen))
7 - NS Housing Trust development (Approved)
8 - 2267 Brunswick (Proposed)
9 - St. Pat's-Alexandra redevelopment area (Recently Sold by city to Jono Developments)
10 - NS Housing Trust development (Approved)
11 - Velo 2 (U/C - Floor 1)
12 - 2444 Agricola (Recently Demolished)
13 - Roberts & Maynard (Excavated but stalled since 2019)
14 - Victoria Hall redevelopment (Proposed)
15 - 2710 Agricola (Demolition Underway)
16 - Richmond Yards (Excavation but not approved)
17 - Halifax Streetcar District / Bloomfield School (Proposed)
18 - The Stackhouse (Approved)
19 - 5558 Bilby (U/C - Stalled since 2019)
20 - Camille Suites (Exterior Cladding)
21 - Agricola & Bilby (Phase 1 Completed) (Halifax Developments Blog - AgricolaBilby (https://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/agricolabilby))
22 - The Elevation on Robie (Excavation)
23 - Lion's Head tavern redevelopment (Proposed)

I hope you don't mind I finished the list for you.

[someone123]

I hope you don't mind I finished the list for you.

Not at all. Thanks. I will do a new round of updates soon. Do you think there are any missing projects? It is particularly arbitrary in what proposed/planned projects are or aren't included (e.g. Jazz and the Drum didn't make the cut, but maybe they should).

I might post the SVG too so it can be updated by anybody.

[Dmajackson]

Not at all. Thanks. I will do a new round of updates soon. Do you think there are any missing projects? It is particularly arbitrary in what proposed/planned projects are or aren't included (e.g. Jazz and the Drum didn't make the cut, but maybe they should).

I might post the SVG too so it can be updated by anybody.

I only spot three if you want to add them;

Gottingen & Bilby (Halifax Case #22523) (https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-22523-bilby-gottingen-macara-streets-halifax) - this is to the right and just below #18. Covers the parking lot, commercial building on Gottingen and a vacant house on Bilby.

Macara Presidio (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219938) - This is to the immediate right of the project above. It has frontage on Gottingen and Macara Street. Approved but no recent updates.

5555 Almon Street (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217064) - This is to the immediate left of #19. I think it is approved but there hasn't been any news in years.

[IanWatson]

Was Jazz supposed to be on that vacant lot next to Spice? If so, I'm pretty sure it got scuttled when it was discovered the lot is actually parkland.

[Northend Guy]

I only spot three if you want to add them;

Gottingen & Bilby (Halifax Case #22523) (https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-22523-bilby-gottingen-macara-streets-halifax) - this is to the right and just below #18. Covers the parking lot, commercial building on Gottingen and a vacant house on Bilby.

Macara Presidio (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219938) - This is to the immediate right of the project above. It has frontage on Gottingen and Macara Street. Approved but no recent updates.

5555 Almon Street (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217064) - This is to the immediate left of #19. I think it is approved but there hasn't been any news in years.

Just a follow up on 5555 Almon, I believe a permit application just went in for it.

[bluenoser]

Here's a map of developments in the North End:


Excellent map; thanks for putting this together!

[mleblanc]

Was Jazz supposed to be on that vacant lot next to Spice? If so, I'm pretty sure it got scuttled when it was discovered the lot is actually parkland.

Yes! That is true. From the Jazz thread:

"This one is being delayed for about a year because of a conflict between HRM and Polycorp. According to the allnovascotia.com, Polycorp bought the land with the understanding that the city would allow construction but now the city is saying that it must remain as green space. However, Polycorp has a letter from the HRM Development Services office stating that the land was clear for development. Polycorp has filed an appeal with the NS Utility and Review Board. Apparently Polycorp is so confident of winning the appeal that they plan to start preselling units in the 5 storey, 62 unit Jazz condo, without a building permit.

It also states that all but one unit in the Spice condo has been sold.
-fenwick16 (RIP)

Later on, the city decided against it:

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ View Post
City nixes condo project
Developer paid $1 million for lot, only to learn it’s for a playground
By CHRIS LAMBIE Business Editor
Tue. Mar 30 - 4:53 AM

Peter Polley is sitting on a very expensive Halifax playground but he’s not having any fun.

The developer wants to build a $15-million, 63-unit condominium project on Barrington Street. He paid more than $1 million for the lot last April after performing several checks to make sure it was zoned for high-density development.

"One of the fundamental rules in real estate is that important agreements must be registered so that new property owners are made aware of them," said Polley, president of Polycorp Properties Inc.

But he said a development officer with the city recently ruled the project, dubbed Jazz Condominiums, could not go ahead because the land is supposed to be a playground for the adjacent Ocean Towers highrise on Brunswick Street.

"This is something you would literally see in some banana republic where they have no respect for property rights," Polley said Monday.

He believes the old documents in question that stipulate the land must be a playground didn’t come to light until after he bought the vacant lot.

"It just got buried in the archives and they lost track of it," Polley said of the city.

He’s now appealing the Halifax Regional Municipality’s decision refusing his condo development to the Utility and Review Board.

"HRM confirmed by letter dated Feb. 19, 2009, that the property is zoned multiple dwelling zone (R-3) and that HRM had no records on file respecting the authorized (legal) use of the property. Polycorp Properties Inc. relied upon this letter in completing the transaction to acquire the property," say documents the developer filed with the board.

Mary Ellen Donovan, director of legal services for the municipality, refused to discuss the case Monday.

"The normal position of the city with respect to any litigation is that the matter is before the courts and it’s not appropriate for us to comment," Donovan said. "The UARB falls into that same category."

Polley’s expecting a "no-holds-barred battle" from the city that will be expensive for him to fight.

"Based on the aggressive position that we’ve seen so far, we could chew through $100,000 here relatively quickly," he said.

"But the main thing is it’s more the delay in getting in the ground than the cost. I’m more concerned about the delay."

He also intends to take the Jazz Condos case to Nova Scotia Supreme Court this week.

"We’re looking for a court order to say that the old agreement is not binding on us and that the city cannot try to enforce it using their zoning power," he said.

Polley bought the empty lot from DDP-Brunswick Ltd. That company is related to Mississ-auga, Ont.-based TransGlobe Property Management Services Ltd., which owns the adjacent Ocean Towers.

But TransGlobe didn’t build the towers and they’ve been owned by several entities since they went up 40 years ago.

"For all I know, they didn’t know," Polley said of the playground stipulation.

"We don’t want to sue anybody. We just want to be able to build our building."

Polycorp built the nearby 85-unit Spice Condominiums and the Mont Blanc, which consists of almost 200 apartments and townhouses on Mont Blanc Terrace. It is also working on a 76-house development called Ravenscraig at Fleming Park.

"I’m just frustrated from the point of view of nobody at the city is looking at this saying, ‘How can we make this happen? This is a good developer. Let’s solve the problem here,’ " Polley said.

( clambie@herald.ca )

[Dmajackson]

^You know the post is old when it has my old name attached to it. :haha:

[Colin May]

^You know the post is old when it has my old name attached to it. :haha:
You know it is old when the article refers to Mary Ellen Donovan as HRM director of legal services solicitor; she has been gone at least 5 years.

[alps]

Thanks for the reminder re. Jazz. I emailed Polycorp to ask about the current status. They replied:

This project is still in the works. It took 26 months to get the permit, but we ultimately received it. However, that caused us to miss the time slot scheduled to complete this project and we had to adjust our plans and move on to other projects which has kept us very busy since then. Unfortunately, we lost that production time and can never get that time back.

Sounds like it's still in the pipeline, but they have been kept busy with the Q Lofts and Long Lake Village projects.

[Keith P.]

A sad example of HRM's runaway planning dept. bureaucracy doing harm while being unchecked by senior management or Council.

[someone123]

1 Rosedale Ave (Dutch Village Road):

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106172372_2498070090296575_4488936646357805071_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_oc=AQlBghRhso4JVyf85lII6yoAk_qy7k-FdzrN0XTv1Tc3EKcQ9t3JlBT8tv0fUCGkKpc&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=e4bbceb92a15539d9b576cf6301849f8&oe=5F1E0465
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225)

Footings are also in for a building at 3488 Dutch Village Road.

[RoshanMcG]

http://i.imgur.com/p59ByInh.jpg (https://imgur.com/p59ByIn)

[someone123]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGdujJlWoAME87r?format=jpg&name=900x900
Source (https://twitter.com/HalifaxReTales/status/1181569881155805185)

[IanWatson]

I bet whoever proposed the Atrium Decks project is patting themselves on the back right now.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Huge improvement over what it looked like before!

https://goo.gl/maps/hHqZjZJJMUBGpWsf7

[Colin May]

Great news ....more steps for drunks to fall down !!!

[Keith P.]

Deleted, saw the pic on the previous page.

[Keith P.]

why has nothing been built at the corner of Rodney and Portland? Why is it still an overgrown parking lot, even after all these years?

The public hearing for this is tomorrow apparently, supposedly to be done virtually. I can imagine it will be a gong show. Many of the neighbors are very upset. I think the 2 buildings fronting on Portland St are OK, but I do question the one buried in the landlocked lot near the backyards of the residents on Rodney Rd.

https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-21880-358-364-portland-st-36a-rodney-rd-dartmouth

[IanWatson]

Dongdu International has finally thrown in the towel and offloaded the Pacific Building! Hopefully it will now actually get the investment it deserves.

[atbw]

The public hearing for this is tomorrow apparently, supposedly to be done virtually. I can imagine it will be a gong show. Many of the neighbors are very upset. I think the 2 buildings fronting on Portland St are OK, but I do question the one buried in the landlocked lot near the backyards of the residents on Rodney Rd.

https://www.halifax.ca/business/planning-development/applications/case-21880-358-364-portland-st-36a-rodney-rd-dartmouth

That project is actually up the street a bit, not on that parking lot in question. Looks like it's between that very sad yellow brick apartment and the next house up the street. https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/business/planning-development/applications/21880-SitePlan-18Nov14.pdf

[eastcoastal]

Dongdu International has finally thrown in the towel and offloaded the Pacific Building! Hopefully it will now actually get the investment it deserves.

Oh, I certainly hope so. It has such potential to be a great part of the streetscape once all the protective barriers come down. It's a unique building I think... I've been told the cladding is some sort of white terracotta tile system.

[mleblanc]

Oh, I certainly hope so. It has such potential to be a great part of the streetscape once all the protective barriers come down. It's a unique building I think... I've been told the cladding is some sort of white terracotta tile system.

I'm very familiar with this building. City councillors have had to been called multiple times due to sewage backing up into the basement with little done from management. Worth noting is that the only accessible entrance to the building is through this basement. German cockroaches, bedbugs, and mice were also throughout the building.

I think the only way this building will come back to life is a full gutting like the Green Lantern and possibility built with the surrounding block. They did just take down the building next to it and the Old Apothecary has cleared out the retail space on the corner, so I wonder if this is a possibility :shrug:

Don't get me wrong - the bones of the Pacific Building are beautiful and the old pictures make sad to see what it has turned into. I hope someone call pull this off.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I think this is good news overall because we all know that the Pacific building was never going to improve as long as Dongdu was in possession of it.

What happens next is anybody's guess, but my money would be on a stripped out facade vs a restoration, given how things usually go in Halifax.

[someone123]

I wonder if a redevelopment retaining only the facade would be permitted since this is a heritage conservation district. Hopefully not.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I would say that it is permitted, given the precedents that have already been set: Espace, Zellers bldg, The Roy. The Green Lantern is more of a hybrid, but it's almost a facade.

The NFB is a special case as it was made a facade through fire - I'm still amazed that somebody had the foresight to preserve it for all these years.

[someone123]

I would say that it is permitted, given the precedents that have already been set: Espace, Zellers bldg, The Roy. The Green Lantern is more of a hybrid, but it's almost a facade.

The NFB is a special case as it was made a facade through fire - I'm still amazed that somebody had the foresight to preserve it for all these years.

Most or all of those were grandfathered development agreements started before the heritage conservation district rules came into effect.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Most or all of those were grandfathered development agreements started before the heritage conservation district rules came into effect.

Then there is hope! :)

[Keith P.]

That project is actually up the street a bit, not on that parking lot in question. Looks like it's between that very sad yellow brick apartment and the next house up the street. https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/business/planning-development/applications/21880-SitePlan-18Nov14.pdf

This was apparently approved unanimously, meaning Austin lost a few more voters this fall.

[spaustin]

This was apparently approved unanimously, meaning Austin lost a few more voters this fall.

Doing the right thing to make a better community sometimes requires that. I would rather lose doing what's right than win by caving in all the time to every bit of pressure that comes my way. My rundown of this one in the link below.

https://samaustin.ca/council-update-portland-rodney-development/

[Jonovision]

I was surprised to see the old BMO tower on George St getting a reclad when I walked by yesterday. All the windows are being replaced and what was a stone piece of cladding separating window between floors is being replaced with a spandral with a retro bronze colour to it. The middle section facing George St has already been completed.

Makes me wonder if this is actually happening?

https://breakhouse.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/geoerge-2up-01-1140x760.jpg

Nothing has come to the Design Review Committee for approval on this site so not sure exactly how this is working.

[kph06]

I had heard a while ago it was slated for a residential conversion. However, a decent commercial tenant could change that.

[someone123]

Atlantica Hotel renovations:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106479354_2513676665402584_3164377953820342440_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_oc=AQkNrikfvstlGahXFSEeTwbgWaHINMKvQ1FpIy8r1_e9YmvqerUYzkZYKvF948JKf7g&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=fa88bd09a00868405b754b1b06b49000&oe=5F282C85
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/)

[hoser111]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGdujJlWoAME87r?format=jpg&name=900x900
Source (https://twitter.com/HalifaxReTales/status/1181569881155805185)

Council votes on decks proposed for 2 downtown Halifax businesses

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/downtown-decks-halifax-council-1.5641153

".....But an application from the Atrium bar along Argyle Street did not get the go-ahead from council. The owners are renovating the building and proposed four levels of decks. One of them would have hung over two-thirds of the sidewalk.

Mason was concerned about how much that would block the sun."

[someone123]

I hadn't heard of the Maritime Centre one before. That one was allowed to go ahead.

I think these things tend to make streetscapes livelier and more interesting. I am not sure I agree about the Argyle one being worse because it's near the Grand Parade. There's tons of outdoor space in that area and little traffic so if anything it makes it a better spot for a deck. Also note that there's already a seasonal patio here where the deck would overhang. The city should permanently expand the sidewalk out to where the seasonal patio walkway is now.

[Keith P.]

Perhaps one applicant greased the skids more than the other, or there is a grudge against the one denied.

[someone123]

I think Halifax if anything tends to have boring and denuded looking streetscapes. Complaints about encroachment to me usually don't see the forest for the trees. There are concerns around accessibility and snow removal but those aren't unsolvable problems and the existing infrastructure often isn't optimal.

It's the same with the safety brigade that comes out and complains about every little thing people might slip on or fall off of. Meanwhile our normal standard for pedestrians, which the vast majority manage to operate under just fine, is a narrow sidewalk a couple feet away from vehicles that move at 50 km/h. What's the body count from the wave statue? 0? People have "known" for decades that it is deadly and will get the city sued.

[Keith P.]

Well, the Dome overhang troubled me when I saw the rendering. I can just imagine a bunch on liquored-up/stoned 20 year-olds up there lobbing things at or dropping them on people passing by. Even without the overhang I'm not sure that structure is a good idea.

[mleblanc]

Well, the Dome overhang troubled me when I saw the rendering. I can just imagine a bunch on liquored-up/stoned 20 year-olds up there lobbing things at or dropping them on people passing by. Even without the overhang I'm not sure that structure is a good idea.

Except every other rooftop patio that currently exists in the city where I've never seen this happen. They both look great - I agree with the streetscapes of Halifax needing stuff like this

[planarchy]

Yes! That is true. From the Jazz thread:
-fenwick16 (RIP)

Later on, the city decided against it:

I believe Polycorp actually won on this issue in the SCNS in 2011:

http://canlii.ca/t/flxc3

"Part VI: Conclusion

[206] In the First Application, the Court declares that the Applicant’s development rights with respect to the Property are not affected by any purported development agreements, site plans or authorizations made by HRM pursuant to s. 538A of the former Halifax City Charter. Any decision respecting a development permit application in respect of the Property shall be solely governed by the terms of the Land Use Bylaw.

[207] HRM’s Second Application is dismissed on the basis that HRM has no standing to bring the application. If I am wrong, I would have dismissed it on the basis set out in this decision.

[208] Costs are awarded to the successful parties in accordance with the terms of this decision."

[Keith P.]

So I guess despite the smackdown of the HRM Planning Dept., Peter Polley must have decided to move on to other things. Unfortunate.

[mleblanc]

Atlantica Hotel renovations:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/106479354_2513676665402584_3164377953820342440_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_oc=AQkNrikfvstlGahXFSEeTwbgWaHINMKvQ1FpIy8r1_e9YmvqerUYzkZYKvF948JKf7g&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=fa88bd09a00868405b754b1b06b49000&oe=5F282C85
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/)

Drove past the Robie St. side today and was surprised to see these nice white panels going up. If I'm back in the area soon I'll snap a picture!

[Jonovision]

^^ I wonder if any treatement is going to be given to the windows or that side of the building?

[TheNovaScotian]

Doing the right thing to make a better community sometimes requires that. I would rather lose doing what's right than win by caving in all the time to every bit of pressure that comes my way. My rundown of this one in the link below.

https://samaustin.ca/council-update-portland-rodney-development/

Liked your take on it, I agree this building should be built. Though I find it odd that the great and powerful Centre Plan needs to be re-aligned before it is fully implemented in the first place. Isn't it supposed to encompass the variances and get rid of the constant whining of private land owners trying to shoot down developments. Or is it just another club to hit people with when trying to get something built in Halifax?

Honestly, I don't get a sense of urgency at all from council about the affordability catastrophe consecutive councils have created. Even in your write up tall equates to bad and short seem to be acceptable. 1 floor added to this building is potentially 4-5 more families that could move into an already established area, that the city doesn't have to sink a dime into. This is consistent losing battle for the city that would rather placate property owners over new residents, and one thing to remember people that rent vote too.
I feel most Council members don't care or understand due to owning their own homes and not having to feel the pain when rents have soared for squalid half century old apartment buildings with so little supply coming on line compared to people coming in, the owners don't even hesitates to increase rents every year. Want a great investment opportunity? REITS are the safest bet in town. Capreit has almost cornered the market in that department buying up everything they can. Remember when Halifax was an affordable place to live? When that was one of the selling features of moving here? What happens when we lose that moniker and don't have half the services needed compared to similarly priced jurisdictions?

[Colin May]

Liked your take on it, I agree this building should be built. Though I find it odd that the great and powerful Centre Plan needs to be re-aligned before it is fully implemented in the first place. Isn't it supposed to encompass the variances and get rid of the constant whining of private land owners trying to shoot down developments. Or is it just another club to hit people with when trying to get something built in Halifax?
Families want to own a home, not a condo in a tall or medium size building.
They want their kids to go to 'a nice school' so they carefully pick a place that is in an area that does not have poor people or Black people or people on welfare.
The potential buyers look very carefully at school boundaries. They also look at which schools feed into 'a nice junior high'; that means the precious offspring will not meet the 'ordinary people' or the 'poor people' until high school. Or they pick a private school. Or if they live in Dartmouth the 'precious one' gets on a bus to go to French immersion and the parents pray the child does not have a learning disability, which sometimes shows up in Grade 2 or 3, and then the child is sent back to the regular system. DND parents living at Shannon Park used to ensure their kids did not go to John Martin Jnr High - they sent them on transit to Bicentennial .
There is a reason that 3 new schools are being built in Bedford and the message from this decision has not been heard/understood by the Centre Plan councillors.

[FuzzyWuz]

Families want to own a home, not a condo in a tall or medium size building.
They want their kids to go to 'a nice school' so they carefully pick a place that is in an area that does not have poor people or Black people or people on welfare....

I do assume you're being ironic. Nevertheless seeing the distinction between 'people' and 'black people' is pretty disturbing. Especially since it's probably on point.

[IanWatson]

Though I find it odd that the great and powerful Centre Plan needs to be re-aligned before it is fully implemented in the first place. Isn't it supposed to encompass the variances and get rid of the constant whining of private land owners trying to shoot down developments. Or is it just another club to hit people with when trying to get something built in Halifax?

The front half of this project is in the Package A area but they had an application in before Package A was adopted, so it went by the old process (development agreement). The back half is in the Package B area, which has not yet been adopted, so is still under the old planning rules.

Centre Plan is indeed massively streamlining approvals. In the Package A area there are already a number of medium and large projects that have been approved with little fuss.

[Colin May]

I do assume you're being ironic. Nevertheless seeing the distinction between 'people' and 'black people' is pretty disturbing. Especially since it's probably on point.
No. When a home in this area is for sale real estate agents tell potential buyers they can put their kids on the bus to French Immersion at Shannon park, they never mention Bicentennial which is a P-8 school and a 2 block walk from our house. The bus stops on Pine which is one block from the school. The Black kids are usually from public housing and other rental properties;and we also have immigrants and refugees of colour; in other words, it is much like other inner city schools in HRM and across the Canada. Our 3 kids went to Bicentennial and I have always believed school boundaries should be enforced; if you move into an area your kids should go to the local school. The racism of parents is quiet. The former principal of Joe Howe told CBC how a family moved into her area and immediately asked for a transfer for their child. She asked them if she could show them the school before signing a transfer request. The parents refused her offer and subsequently complained to the school board about the offer from the principal. The board told the principal that any future requests for a transfer should immediately be forwarded to the board office. The school has many non-white students, students from low income homes and students who are refugees.

[Dmajackson]

Just a follow up on 5555 Almon, I believe a permit application just went in for it.

Demolition permits were issued in May for this project. As of this week all of the buildings are still standing. Any actual updates I'll post in the project's thread.

[someone123]

Rendering for 3488 Dutch Village Road (corner of Rosedale):

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/107714275_2529788673791383_3339650147300133162_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_oc=AQlEolCEODSt5rR-GeXnR9GdZaGRvbudU6GKLxuE-yMNiJZxatKIC_xc5W-FzAQOQwk&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=09051c59b5cb7fb14ca412838496c1c2&oe=5F31370F
Source (https://www.facebook.com/Developments-HFX-1613177012119225/)

[Colin May]

This will upset a lot of people on this forum and the majority of our very woke HRM councillors.
Heresy.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/11/skyscrapers-wasteful-damaging-outmoded-time-to-stop-tall-buildings

[Querce]

Yeah, that's why I'm more worried about allowing duplexes and triplexes in residential zones than having another very tall building go up (both in terms of environmental impact and in terms of housing availability)

[Keith P.]

The article doesn't really apply to HRM, as it decries skyscrapers in favor of 10-storey buildings instead. Here, a 10-storey building is considered a skyscraper and is felt to be "TOO TALL!!!" by many.

[Citizen_Bane]

The article is an interesting opinion piece which illustrates once again that you can find an 'expert' to say pretty much anything. The article mentions one city with more than 500 tall buildings in the works. Imagine instead the future occupants of these building living in single family homes with yards and garages and driveways all built over farmland. And there's probably not a building style on the planet that couldn't be improved. Big percentages and scary adjectives is what it takes to be published in today's media.

[someone123]

The article doesn't really apply to HRM, as it decries skyscrapers in favor of 10-storey buildings instead. Here, a 10-storey building is considered a skyscraper and is felt to be "TOO TALL!!!" by many.

Yeah, they actually present 10-12 storeys as an alternative to "tall" buildings in that article.

Their argument is that tall buildings cost more to build per square foot of space. This is true both for money and environmental impact. However they also concede that this doesn't account for the transportation costs inherent to spreading development out over more land. Nor does it take the land costs into consideration. I'd also say considerations like the longevity of the building matter a lot; is the embodied energy cost amortized over 30 years? 100 years? A lot of the cheaper construction methods don't last as long, and the longevity of the building matters when you are talking about the trade-off with transportation costs that you are paying every single day.

They don't mention different construction technologies either. It has become possible to build taller and taller with engineered wood, which has a lower carbon footprint than steel and concrete. The environmental costs are particular to the technologies used at the time, not height per se. Even a factor like elevator cost may change in the future (e.g. imagine if we start to use drone deliveries more).

Overall the article just presents a small part of the puzzle and I'd imagine it's something most construction enthusiasts already knew about.

[Jonovision]

Demolition permits were issued in May for this project. As of this week all of the buildings are still standing. Any actual updates I'll post in the project's thread.

I hope this is happening. This was one of the more interesting projects in the area.

https://x4g7z5e6.stackpathcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/https:__developmentduffett.files.wordpress.com_2015_05_screen-shot-2015-05-20-at-2-06-20-pm.png

[Dmajackson]

^There is interior demolition going on in the corner unit at least so there's signs of life. The renderings are five years old though so I guess we'll see if they are still accurate.

[Jonovision]

I saw on instagram that 5220 Blowers is coming down. That is the building that housed the offices for the Nova Centre Construction.

[teddifax]

Atlantica Hotel picture after nenovations is in this article. http://canadianlodgingnews.com/openings-sales-and-renos/manga-benefits-from-the-atlantic-bubble/

[someone123]

The rendering:

http://canadianlodgingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Atlantica-Hotel-New.jpg

[someone123]

South and Harvey development behind Stairs House going through the development process: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/proposed-development-stairs-house-south-end-1.5644983

Some good density for the area.

[atbw]

I saw on instagram that 5220 Blowers is coming down. That is the building that housed the offices for the Nova Centre Construction.

Saw a video of it coming down on Reddit. Any word on what goes in there? It would be really unfortunate to have one end of Argyle be a gravel lot for the foreseeable future.

[someone123]

Saw a video of it coming down on Reddit. Any word on what goes in there? It would be really unfortunate to have one end of Argyle be a gravel lot for the foreseeable future.

That's disappointing but it's the fate I expected for that building given the years of neglect. A while ago there was a proposal for this block that incorporated a few different buildings. I'd guess that the old school buildings on Brunswick are at risk of demolition or facadectomy. Not sure if they are registered heritage buildings.

Halifax does a poor job of preserving its smaller character buildings. Eventually I guess the problem will solve itself because there won't be any left that aren't registered already...

[atbw]

That's disappointing but it's the fate I expected for that building given the years of neglect. A while ago there was a proposal for this block that incorporated a few different buildings. I'd guess that the old school buildings on Brunswick are at risk of demolition or facadectomy. Not sure if they are registered heritage buildings.

Halifax does a poor job of preserving its smaller character buildings. Eventually I guess the problem will solve itself because there won't be any left that aren't registered already...

I do fear that a lot of that bock might get razed. There's some really mishmashes buildings on Blowers but that's part of its appeal. Hopefully whatever happens is infill and not a block-sized development.

[someone123]

I do fear that a lot of that bock might get razed. There's some really mishmashes buildings on Blowers but that's part of its appeal. Hopefully whatever happens is infill and not a block-sized development.

It's hard to emphasize how out of step Halifax is with other similar cities in the developed world that have successful economies. I understand Detroit or Buffalo, although I think they might have a better heritage track record than Halifax. I have a hard time imagining most places that would demolish half of these buildings and then decades later continue to slowly let them waste away. In most cities, these 3 storey masonry structures would be kept in much nicer shape. Argyle could have been a great heritage streetscape fairly recently, and it's still possible, although those possibilities dwindle with each new demolition.

The notion that these buildings aren't economically viable in the sense that nobody can afford to maintain them is absurd on its face. How could a place like Paris exist in a world where Halifax couldn't conceivably maintain its modest stock of heritage buildings? There may be problems with planning and incentives, but not with a lack of overall resources in the city. Halifax could have a gleaming, perfectly-preserved downtown with investment amounting to a tiny portion of the city's $20B economy.

There's an upside to all of the construction in Halifax. The city's more flexible and vibrant than normal. But I think there is a happy medium where lots of new construction is permitted while character is maintained. For this block that means developing the empty space in the interior while restoring the heritage buildings fronting Grafton and Blowers.

I wonder if the viewplanes played some role in dooming these buildings? They are aligned with the Maritime Centre. So it is possible that the logical place for a highrise, a point tower in the middle of the block, would not be permitted. And there is a perverse incentive to demolish buildings now then ask to develop an ugly lot rather than leave the building up and tie the development to the demolition.

[atbw]

It's hard to emphasize how out of step Halifax is with other similar cities in the developed world that have successful economies. I understand Detroit or Buffalo, although I think they might have a better heritage track record than Halifax. I have a hard time imagining most places that would demolish half of these buildings and then decades later continue to slowly let them waste away. In most cities, these 3 storey masonry structures would be kept in much nicer shape. Argyle could have been a great heritage streetscape fairly recently, and it's still possible, although those possibilities dwindle with each new demolition.

The notion that these buildings aren't economically viable in the sense that nobody can afford to maintain them is absurd on its face. How could a place like Paris exist in a world where Halifax couldn't conceivably maintain its modest stock of heritage buildings? There may be problems with planning and incentives, but not with a lack of overall resources in the city. Halifax could have a gleaming, perfectly-preserved downtown with investment amounting to a tiny portion of the city's $20B economy.

There's an upside to all of the construction in Halifax. The city's more flexible and vibrant than normal. But I think there is a happy medium where lots of new construction is permitted while character is maintained. For this block that means developing the empty space in the interior while restoring the heritage buildings fronting Grafton and Blowers.

I wonder if the viewplanes played some role in dooming these buildings? They are aligned with the Maritime Centre. So it is possible that the logical place for a highrise, a point tower in the middle of the block, would not be permitted. And there is a perverse incentive to demolish buildings now then ask to develop an ugly lot rather than leave the building up and tie the development to the demolition.
The way these demolitions happen is ghastly too — poor quality maintenance followed by no maintenance at all until it’s “beyond saving.”

As for the view planes, it only takes a couple visits to the hill to appreciate how unique it is that you can see cube harbour, bridge, and George’s island from the citadel. However I think the ramparts bylaw adds too much restriction on top of that.

[eastcoastal]

Saw a video of it coming down on Reddit. Any word on what goes in there? It would be really unfortunate to have one end of Argyle be a gravel lot for the foreseeable future.

I read somewhere online (maybe AllNS, but can't remember) that the developer has no specific plans for it currently.

[Drybrain]

I read somewhere online (maybe AllNS, but can't remember) that the developer has no specific plans for it currently.

So...surface parking? Ir just a vacant lot right in the middle of downtown? Unless a building is actively dangerous, it should be illegal to tear it down without a replacement lined up.

[Keith P.]

So...surface parking? Ir just a vacant lot right in the middle of downtown? Unless a building is actively dangerous, it should be illegal to tear it down without a replacement lined up.

Well, that seems a bit much. If a building is hazardous, or derelict enough that is has no reasonable future use and is likely to attract squatters, etc., then demolition is likely preferable. It may take some time for an adjacent property to be acquired to make a development feasible, or for resources to be freed up to allow for a development to occur. I know those who run HRM's planning dept these days would like to dictate much of what property owners and citizens can do, but property rights are not to be trifled with.

[someone123]

Well, that seems a bit much. If a building is hazardous, or derelict enough that is has no reasonable future use and is likely to attract squatters, etc., then demolition is likely preferable.

Tax assessments often provide an artificial incentive to demolish.

[IanWatson]

Surface parking isn't permitted, so I guess just a vacant lot?

[spaustin]

Not sure if they are registered heritage buildings

Neither of the two buildings that came down on Blowers over the last two months (the one across from MEC went first) were registered but both were under active consideration for potential heritage registration. Council directed staff to evaluate all the potential heritage buildings that were identified in the Downtown Plan. The first batch has come through the Heritage Advisory Committee. That doesn't mean that all of them will get registered, just that HRM will actually review each unregistered, but potentially important building Downtown. The owners of the two Blowers properties have effectively ended any discussion of their properties since they demolished before that process could reach a conclusion. Hard not to be cynical about the timing.

[planarchy]

I read somewhere online (maybe AllNS, but can't remember) that the developer has no specific plans for it currently.

Ramia owns it so I wouldn't expect anything of any sort of quality. In addition to the Nova Centre, which I recently heard is infested with rodents, he owns the really terrible Barrington Gate building next door (but for some reason is the first pick for MLAs looking for a rental unit while the legislature is sitting...).

[Keith P.]

The owners of the two Blowers properties have effectively ended any discussion of their properties since they demolished before that process could reach a conclusion. Hard not to be cynical about the timing.

Likely a smart move on their part to sidestep the iron grip of the HRM bureaucracy.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Likely a smart move on their part to sidestep the iron grip of the HRM bureaucracy.

In this case smart/sleazy are interchangeable.

I assume this is the building being discussed?

https://goo.gl/maps/kz6d4S91EEMLD7rB8

https://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/systems/halifax/resource/6000_1038_5014999_102-39-1-596.jpgplu_p1b1p90kphgomaogpks1ofi1urs1.jpg

Source (https://gencat1.eloquent-systems.com/webcat/request/DoMenuRequest?SystemName=Halifax+Regional+Municipality+Archives&UserName=wa+public&Password=&TemplateProcessID=6000_3355&bCachable=1&MenuName=Search+the+Archives)

[spaustin]

Likely a smart move on their part to sidestep the iron grip of the HRM bureaucracy.

Definitely was a smart move if you feel no social responsibility or see value in heritage. You're far better off to demolish before we can restrict your options. When it becomes a race, sadly HRM will always lose (Young Ave houses showed that). Need the power to enact a holding bylaw or just an amendment to the Heritage Act to allow for a freeze in demolitions so that buildings can be properly assessed. Council mightn't have registered either Blowers property, but we'll never know now.

[someone123]

Need the power to enact a holding bylaw or just an amendment to the Heritage Act to allow for a freeze in demolitions so that buildings can be properly assessed. Council mightn't have registered either Blowers property, but we'll never know now.

It's disappointing that these issues never seem to get fixed. The same pattern has repeated itself over and over in the city, with developers rushing to tear down or redevelop buildings before registration or before the creation of heritage conservation districts. This building on Blowers has been in a vulnerable state for many years.

And the conservation districts themselves are pretty weak, e.g. Pacific Building still crumbling years after the Barrington heritage district was created, and the Roy facade was not rebuilt to the same quality level of what existed before. So I wonder if they were even a net gain compared to having an elective pool of funding for heritage restoration.

It's sad because I think the costs of getting this right are small and the effect on the city could be major. There isn't much of a difference cost-wise to the city or developers (there is no way this little building was more than a rounding error to Ramia compared to the Nova Centre) between the status quo and having a really nice looking Barrington-Argyle area for example. It is purely bad planning and bad regulations. I suppose we could blame developers but the blame game solves nothing and good development should not depend on some kind of moral code above and beyond the rules that developers must follow. When it comes to developer behaviour the municipality should hope for the best but assume the worst.

[spaustin]

You're not wrong someone123 and HRM's hands are far from clean when it comes to the loss of historic buildings Downtown. After the Downtown Plan identified a list of potential heritage buildings, nothing was done to seriously look at them. Not until Councillor Mason moved a motion a year or two ago. In that time, 1/3 of the potential properties were demolished, the most significant of which was the old BMO branch at the corner of Spring Garden and Queen (a real loss).

I have to disagree with you about the Barrington Street District though. The incentives that were made available on Barrington have meant that most of the buildings along the street have seen work, including the old NFB shell and the beautiful work to save the very imperiled Green Lantern. The Pacific Building is the outlier. The Roy and old Zellers were facaded, but to be fair, they were proposals that came in before the District was finalized. I think Barrington has been fairly successful on the whole.

[someone123]

Part of what I find disappointing about Barrington is that it could be (or could have been) a real showcase but it still falls below the norm of a lot of other cities (I am not talking London or Paris but maybe Portland ME or perhaps St. John's). Maybe it'll look a bit better soon when the old Zeller's and Green Lantern plus NFB are done.

Examples of problems:

- Tramway Building stripped down for years along the Barrington facade
- DaVinci College Building is a blank corrugated metal box
- Multiple buildings that are in OK shape have missing or poorly maintained cornices. Examples are the Apothecary Building, Mezza, or Julep. Even restored heritage buildings in Halifax tend to be stripped down.
- Some buildings don't fit at all and could be renovated to fit in better. Examples are the weird One Government Place entry and Mary's
- The street itself and public realm is pretty lackluster
- Of course the Pacific Building looks terrible, which is particularly frustrating because it and that whole block could be a gem

The good thing is most of these improvements can happen whenever as long as the buildings are stabilized and nothing is torn down.

Part of what I can't get past is that Halifax has torn down so much, probably 2/3 or more of its historic masonry commercial buildings. There is very little left compared to the size of the city, and what is left would in principle be easy to keep in tip top shape. I think a big part of this not really economics but rather that other municipal governments were interventionist while Halifax maintained a laissez-faire attitude for a very long time. Even now, and with its modest conservation districts, it is nowhere near front of the pack in North America, and it's far behind what it should be as one of Canada's most historic cities.

[Keith P.]

Definitely was a smart move if you feel no social responsibility or see value in heritage. You're far better off to demolish before we can restrict your options. When it becomes a race, sadly HRM will always lose (Young Ave houses showed that). Need the power to enact a holding bylaw or just an amendment to the Heritage Act to allow for a freeze in demolitions so that buildings can be properly assessed. Council mightn't have registered either Blowers property, but we'll never know now.

The hand-wringing about this Blowers building is noteworthy because it is far from your own district and the building is in no way noteworthy. One suspects a personal connection to it for you in one of its past lives, just like Mason with the Khyber. Imagine if the millions of dollars that HRM has/will be sinking into that dump were spread around for preservation of actual heritage. One must also question the property valuation process if a largely derelict old building with little prospect of reuse is valued more than a cleared lot ready for development.

[OldDartmouthMark]

The hand-wringing about this Blowers building is noteworthy because it is far from your own district and the building is in no way noteworthy. One suspects a personal connection to it for you in one of its past lives, just like Mason with the Khyber. Imagine if the millions of dollars that HRM has/will be sinking into that dump were spread around for preservation of actual heritage. One must also question the property valuation process if a largely derelict old building with little prospect of reuse is valued more than a cleared lot ready for development.

Hey Keith, as usual I'm not surprised by your opinion. Same ol' same ol'.

However, I'm a little perplexed by your implication that the Kyber building doesn't qualify as having "actual heritage" (your words). Why do you say that, and what are, in your opinion, the requirements for a building to have "actual heritage"?

[Summerville]

Part of what I find disappointing about Barrington is that it could be (or could have been) a real showcase but it still falls below the norm of a lot of other cities (I am not talking London or Paris but maybe Portland ME or perhaps St. John's). Maybe it'll look a bit better soon when the old Zeller's and Green Lantern plus NFB are done.

Examples of problems:

- Tramway Building stripped down for years along the Barrington facade
- DaVinci College Building is a blank corrugated metal box
- Multiple buildings that are in OK shape have missing or poorly maintained cornices. Examples are the Apothecary Building, Mezza, or Julep. Even restored heritage buildings in Halifax tend to be stripped down.
- Some buildings don't fit at all and could be renovated to fit in better. Examples are the weird One Government Place entry and Mary's
- The street itself and public realm is pretty lackluster
- Of course the Pacific Building looks terrible, which is particularly frustrating because it and that whole block could be a gem

The good thing is most of these improvements can happen whenever as long as the buildings are stabilized and nothing is torn down.

Part of what I can't get past is that Halifax has torn down so much, probably 2/3 or more of its historic masonry commercial buildings. There is very little left compared to the size of the city, and what is left would in principle be easy to keep in tip top shape. I think a big part of this not really economics but rather that other municipal governments were interventionist while Halifax maintained a laissez-faire attitude for a very long time. Even now, and with its modest conservation districts, it is nowhere near front of the pack in North America, and it's far behind what it should be as one of Canada's most historic cities.


Totally correct. There are no incentives from the city or the province to maintain or keep historic buildings, many of which have already been gutted over time by renovations geared toward whatever commercial venture was going into the spot at the time.

I always found it funny that the Heritage Trust seemed to grapple onto the protection of the interiors of various buildings that were being incorporated into new structures...facadism as they called it. There really wasn't much inside that was left to save.

There are no tax breaks and until recently, no grants to update the exterior of the buildings which improvements require stone masons or fine carpenters with experience in restoration work.

Simply, property owners are better off to run their buildings into the ground, demolish them and build more efficient buildings with more commercial space or residential units.

City staff and council by extension are completely to blame. I don't really blame the owners or developers.

[RoshanMcG]

http://i.imgur.com/TczpZQUh.jpg (https://imgur.com/TczpZQU)

[OldDartmouthMark]

Part of what I find disappointing about Barrington is that it could be (or could have been) a real showcase but it still falls below the norm of a lot of other cities (I am not talking London or Paris but maybe Portland ME or perhaps St. John's). Maybe it'll look a bit better soon when the old Zeller's and Green Lantern plus NFB are done.

Examples of problems:

- Tramway Building stripped down for years along the Barrington facade
- DaVinci College Building is a blank corrugated metal box
- Multiple buildings that are in OK shape have missing or poorly maintained cornices. Examples are the Apothecary Building, Mezza, or Julep. Even restored heritage buildings in Halifax tend to be stripped down.
- Some buildings don't fit at all and could be renovated to fit in better. Examples are the weird One Government Place entry and Mary's
- The street itself and public realm is pretty lackluster
- Of course the Pacific Building looks terrible, which is particularly frustrating because it and that whole block could be a gem

The good thing is most of these improvements can happen whenever as long as the buildings are stabilized and nothing is torn down.

Part of what I can't get past is that Halifax has torn down so much, probably 2/3 or more of its historic masonry commercial buildings. There is very little left compared to the size of the city, and what is left would in principle be easy to keep in tip top shape. I think a big part of this not really economics but rather that other municipal governments were interventionist while Halifax maintained a laissez-faire attitude for a very long time. Even now, and with its modest conservation districts, it is nowhere near front of the pack in North America, and it's far behind what it should be as one of Canada's most historic cities.

Interesting statement.

I was musing tonight that if a person of average architectural knowledge were dropped in the middle of downtown Halifax without knowledge of its history or where they were, and you asked them when did they think the city was founded - what would they guess? 1890? 1910? 1920? I wonder...

They would not likely guess 1749. Just a thought.

[Keith P.]

Hey Keith, as usual I'm not surprised by your opinion. Same ol' same ol'.

However, I'm a little perplexed by your implication that the Kyber building doesn't qualify as having "actual heritage" (your words). Why do you say that, and what are, in your opinion, the requirements for a building to have "actual heritage"?

I was not saying that the Khyber lacks actual heritage. I perhaps worded it somewhat awkwardly but was referring to the now demolished building. Having The Green Bean as a hangout for NSCAD students in the '90s does not create a heritage designation.

Having said that, the millions that HRM is about to pour into the Khyber boondoggle would be better spent on helping out a number of other actual heritage buildings.

[MonctonRad]

http://i.imgur.com/TczpZQUh.jpg (https://imgur.com/TczpZQU)

Well, that's an ugly scar, and no active plans for imminent construction? :(

The owner should not have been allowed to demolish this building without cause. Tax implications could be the reason, but this is difficult to justify from an aesthetic point of view.

The only justifiable reasons IMHO is if the building was no longer structurally stable, was a fire risk or if it was being repeatedly inhabited by vagrants despite attempts to fortify the property.

Have they at least cleaned up the property to remove the rubble? They should also put up a decent fence to hide the view.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I was not saying that the Khyber lacks actual heritage. I perhaps worded it somewhat awkwardly but was referring to the now demolished building. Having The Green Bean as a hangout for NSCAD students in the '90s does not create a heritage designation.

Having said that, the millions that HRM is about to pour into the Khyber boondoggle would be better spent on helping out a number of other actual heritage buildings.

Thanks for the explanation, Keith. I now know what you were trying to say.

Regarding its heritage cred, the fact that it was built in 1888 with its Gothic Revival cues is enough. It's a very unique building and a fixture on Barrington Street. If the city has to put some money into it, so be it. There is value beyond dollars and cents in that it would be impossible to duplicate in today's world.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Well, that's an ugly scar, and no active plans for imminent construction? :(

The owner should not have been allowed to demolish this building without cause. Tax implications could be the reason, but this is difficult to justify from an aesthetic point of view.

The only justifiable reasons IMHO is if the building was no longer structurally stable, was a fire risk or if it was being repeatedly inhabited by vagrants despite attempts to fortify the property.

Have they at least cleaned up the property to remove the rubble? They should also put up a decent fence to hide the view.

That IS an ugly scar! Can't see how this is better for the area than just leaving the building standing.

For a while I had held out hope that somebody would strip the ugly layers of paint off the masonry and do something to improve the building, but obviously that wasn't to be. Instead, downtown Halifax will continue to be dotted with empty lots into the future, I suppose.

Wonder which one will be next?

[Keith P.]

Well, that's an ugly scar, and no active plans for imminent construction? :(

The owner should not have been allowed to demolish this building without cause. Tax implications could be the reason, but this is difficult to justify from an aesthetic point of view.

The only justifiable reasons IMHO is if the building was no longer structurally stable, was a fire risk or if it was being repeatedly inhabited by vagrants despite attempts to fortify the property.

Have they at least cleaned up the property to remove the rubble? They should also put up a decent fence to hide the view.

Removing the platform used by the graffiti vandals to deface the adjacent building should be reason enough. I gather it has the same owner as that of the now-empty lot so one presumes that repairs are imminent.

[Citizen_Bane]

I'm offended that the developer seems to have not taken into consideration my tax dollars (and everyone else's) that went in to the very recent beautifying and improvement of the street infrastructure in the immediate area. Removing the building is an ugly slap in the face. No fence or other temporary measure will likely compensate for a full building facade in the streetscape.

The city seems awfully slow on recognizing the value of the pubic realm to the developer and translating that value into some protection for the citizens of HRM through the development and enforcement of appropriate by-laws. Any argument that the value of the public realm exists is quickly quashed when comparing the value of two identically sized lots, one in city centre Halifax and, say, one in the village of Sheet Harbour. No sane developer is going to do an even switch-a-roo of lots.

There's little doubt that the developer made a sound business decision, but, if business decisions and profit are the ONLY focus of developer maybe the US would be a better home for them. .......ahhhhhhhh... my rant for the day.

[Keith P.]

I'm offended that the developer seems to have not taken into consideration my tax dollars (and everyone else's) that went in to the very recent beautifying and improvement of the street infrastructure in the immediate area. Removing the building is an ugly slap in the face. No fence or other temporary measure will likely compensate for a full building facade in the streetscape.

The city seems awfully slow on recognizing the value of the pubic realm to the developer and translating that value into some protection for the citizens of HRM through the development and enforcement of appropriate by-laws. Any argument that the value of the public realm exists is quickly quashed when comparing the value of two identically sized lots, one in city centre Halifax and, say, one in the village of Sheet Harbour. No sane developer is going to do an even switch-a-roo of lots.

There's little doubt that the developer made a sound business decision, but, if business decisions and profit are the ONLY focus of developer maybe the US would be a better home for them. .......ahhhhhhhh... my rant for the day.

I can think of a few (thankfully) Communist totalitarian states that might be a better home for those who believe govt should control property owners to such an extent, too.

What if this lot becomes a landscaped pocket park? Or a beer garden? Or some other thing in the absence of new construction? Maybe even HRM, with its deep pockets of taxpayer gold to spend waste, could be convinced to pitch in and aid the cause. The millions they spent to turn Argyle into a haven for the bar-going students and under-30s, and unwelcome to anyone else, offends me. Just so you know.