[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

It's generic but not terrible and nothing much is being lost.

Just expanding the housing supply in the right parts of the city is very important. The city's apartment vacancy rate is low. It is worth approving these proposals while pushing for a bit more architectural merit in the long run.

It's slightly ironic that I was thinking about a previous post of yours when I was typing my above comment - your post stating that one of the reasons that people feel a loss when heritage properties are torn down is that they are not replaced with good architecture had hit home with me - and I was thinking "yeah, why can't we have better architecture here".

So here we have poorly-maintained Victorians that are being torn down to be replaced with poor (IMHO), or at least mediocre, architecture. As Keith will point out, they have been neglected for years and probably there are not many original elements left on the inside, and I would not argue against that, as this is the usual path that is followed (neglect to the point that nobody minds when they are torn down).

OK, I have resigned myself to the idea that these Victorians are probably dumps now (though likely still have good bones), but still think that a prominent corner next to the Commons should be held to a higher standard architecturally. If this was being built in Clayton Park West, I would think it's fine, for example.

But it still resonates with me how we all seem to think it's great, as long as it's better than the long-neglected buildings that it's replacing (that should not have been allowed by the city to be neglected, as mentioned in a recent thread).

Maybe if it were allowed to be taller it wouldn't look so bad, but I'm sorry to say this one just doesn't do much for me. I wish 'the city' had some will to improve standards in our more prominent/interesting areas.



https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019...een-light.html