Quote:
Originally Posted by counterfactual
Halifax's problem is that about 80+% of the peninsula are neighbourhoods much like the one we're talking about, where we have low level, low density single unit residential, with no ability to sustain walkable & vibrant mixed-use communities.
|
You think? The neighbourhood under discussion here is the densest in Atlantic Canada, with 7,000 people per square kilometre--nearly equal to Toronto's Trinity-Spadina.
And population density on the peninsula is about 3,000 people per square kilometer--not exactly Manhattan, but urban. And since there's so much open space like the Commons, Citadel, and Point Pleasant, etc., the effective density is higher. Outside of the northwest extremities, is there anywhere on the peninsula not walkable to a commercial artery?
Quote:
Originally Posted by counterfactual
Your second planning rule doesn't make sense to me. In fact, most of the great cities in north america, and the world, do quite the opposite: a central planning aim is increasing density, and typically that leads to a rule the move increasingly from low-density low-rise single unit residential to mid-rise high density residential. Sometimes intense densification requires high rise, but not always.
|
I kind've agree and disagree with this--densification has definitely become the watchword, but most planning regimes on this continent, and Western Europe, have tried to balance densification with stable neighbourhoods. Not everything is fair game for redevelopment. This has its pluses and minuses, and definitely sometimes there's too much insistence on stability over change. (i.e., in this situation--I'm supportive of this proposal.) But the "natural" densification of housing stock has slowed enormously as urbanization has also slowed in the western world. If you look at growth rates for North American cities, they were growing at 20, 30%, 40% per decade in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Most cities, even our prairie boomtowns, are now growing much slower than that, and the housing stock turnover has also slowed.
I've argued this before on this board, but the notion that the peninsula's houses will or should disappear and be replaced by mid-rise is contrary to economic and planning trends, not just in Halifax, but all over. Again, it's why those brownstones in Brooklyn that I keep referring to are stubbornly sticking around instead of being replaced by avenues of multi-unit buildings, which would technically be more "efficient." People really value the old vernacular housing in North America's urban cores. Gentrification has turned inner-urban neighbourhoods owner-occupied communities, rather than landlord-driven ones, and therefore much less prone to large-scale redevelopment.
This has its pluses: retaining the old architecture and sense of place, an urban intangible which I think is just as important as density. And it has negatives: the housing in question will become more exclusive and pricey.
But it doesn't mean sacrificing density. Instead, intensification is moving away from existing housing stock and being targeted to brownfield sites, under-developed commercial lots, major arterials, etc. There's room for tens of thousands of new peninsular residents just by developing these sites. One day, no doubt, we'll need to look at how to redevelop some of the existing R1 and R2 areas. But that's a long, long, looonng way off.