General Updates and News

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

The Heritage Trust, at both the Provincial and National level have offered to have heritage experts assess the building and give recommendations; the province refuses, they've made up their mind, and stubbornly refuse to listen to alternatives. Nice leadership.

Those "experts" would have no credibility, like the convention "experts" the HT shuffled in to harangue us.

The problem here is far simpler than many would think. The province needs new office space near Province House. They own the property upon which the useless Dennis Bldg sits. They want to convert that property into provincial offices. It really is that simple.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Those "experts" would have no credibility, like the convention "experts" the HT shuffled in to harangue us.

The problem here is far simpler than many would think. The province needs new office space near Province House. They own the property upon which the useless Dennis Bldg sits. They want to convert that property into provincial offices. It really is that simple.

Why don't they make it simpler and rip down Province House to make better use of that land? I'm sure a new building would be much more efficient than that old stone mausoleum...

[Empire]

So gut the Dennis and renovate with the latest amenities. Perhaps someone will have to suffer with 8' ceilings. The air conditioning could be run in vertical columns in office corners. The building is far to important to demolish and replace with something that looks like One Government Place. The rest of the lot can be built to the viewplane max and tied in to the Dennis on the ground, fifth floor and roof.

One Government Place:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6474619,...3m4!1e1!3m2!1snjVOHnvquKWXhA720szFSQ!2e0

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Empire

So gut the Dennis and renovate with the latest amenities. Perhaps someone will have to suffer with 8' ceilings. The air conditioning could be run in vertical columns in office corners. The building is far to important to demolish and replace with something that looks like One Government Place. The rest of the lot can be built to the viewplane max and tied in to the Dennis on the ground, fifth floor and roof.

One Government Place:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6474619,...3m4!1e1!3m2!1snjVOHnvquKWXhA720szFSQ!2e0

I think I mentioned before seeing a rendering of having the Dennis site and the adjacent parking lot redeveloped with an extension of One Govt Place, with an integral "bridge" section connecting the existing one to the new one. It looked quite good. No reason to have to live with low ceilings or other compromises in a new building. It is easy to do impractical things when you are spending someone else's money. But if I am the custodian of the taxpayer dollar I want the best, most functional building possible for the dollars spent.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Those "experts" would have no credibility, like the convention "experts" the HT shuffled in to harangue us.

The problem here is far simpler than many would think. The province needs new office space near Province House. They own the property upon which the useless Dennis Bldg sits. They want to convert that property into provincial offices. It really is that simple.

The offices don't need to be downtown.
Ease congestion and have them in Dartmouth or Bedford and more yuppies can live in small apartments in DT Halifax.

[hokus83]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The offices don't need to be downtown.
Ease congestion and have them in Dartmouth or Bedford and more yuppies can live in small apartments in DT Halifax.

Wrong

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I think I mentioned before seeing a rendering of having the Dennis site and the adjacent parking lot redeveloped with an extension of One Govt Place, with an integral "bridge" section connecting the existing one to the new one. It looked quite good. No reason to have to live with low ceilings or other compromises in a new building. It is easy to do impractical things when you are spending someone else's money. But if I am the custodian of the taxpayer dollar I want the best, most functional building possible for the dollars spent.

The Dennis building could be residential..."Dennis Hall" or a Boutique hotel "Dennis Hall" and 8' ceilings would be fine.

Keep the Dennis Building and repurpose:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6484444,...3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFlOAmR2IFnKke-X3BkZ2Og!2e0

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Empire

The Dennis building could be residential..."Dennis Hall" or a Boutique hotel "Dennis Hall" and 8' ceilings would be fine.

Keep the Dennis Building and repurpose:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6484444,...3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFlOAmR2IFnKke-X3BkZ2Og!2e0

The govt is not in the apartment or hotel business. They want offices.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The govt is not in the apartment or hotel business. They want offices.

Maybe it could be a residence for the Premier "Premier Suites" or "Premier's Suite"

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by hokus83

Wrong

Your response is terse and without substance. Try to explain yourself.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I think I mentioned before seeing a rendering of having the Dennis site and the adjacent parking lot redeveloped with an extension of One Govt Place, with an integral "bridge" section connecting the existing one to the new one. It looked quite good. No reason to have to live with low ceilings or other compromises in a new building. It is easy to do impractical things when you are spending someone else's money. But if I am the custodian of the taxpayer dollar I want the best, most functional building possible for the dollars spent.

I respect that. And I, as a taxpayer, want our various levels of government to build the best (and most beautiful) city and province possible. Tearing down the Dennis doesn't square with that goal.

As well, given that the government has been kicking office to the suburbs for years, it feels pretty odd that they're so attached to this site as office space, thereby negating any other use for the building.

[JET]

"But if I am the custodian of the taxpayer dollar I want the best, most functional building possible for the dollars spent." Keith, I might have missed that, probably happened when I was out of town on vacation. I had always thought that we are all custodians of the taxpayer dollar, and we all had input to how our tax dollars are spent; but I've been wrong before.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

"But if I am the custodian of the taxpayer dollar I want the best, most functional building possible for the dollars spent." Keith, I might have missed that, probably happened when I was out of town on vacation. I had always thought that we are all custodians of the taxpayer dollar, and we all had input to how our tax dollars are spent; but I've been wrong before.

As individual citizens you get to have your say every 4 years during elections. In between that cycle you may or may not get listened to on individual spending decisions. You should not have any expectation that will occur. That is why we elect representatives.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Tearing down the Dennis doesn't square with that goal.

In your opinion. Many people find it ugly and unremarkable and think something better could replace it. We cannot be held hostage to the past. Look at how that attitude has stifled development downtown for decades.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

In your opinion. Many people find it ugly and unremarkable and think something better could replace it. We cannot be held hostage to the past. Look at how that attitude has stifled development downtown for decades.

A: The economy and wonky planning rules stifled downtown development. We've torn down loads of buildings in the past 30 years, including the buildings that faced Barrington directly to the west of the Dennis. Halifax has totally played fast and loose with its heritage, so I aggressively reject the idea that we're "held hostage" by history, or that it's "stifled" anything,

That's just a popular but totally fake narrative that has no traction in fact.

B: I think, Keith, you have to accept that your perception of what's ugly vs. what's attractive, architecturally, isn't reflective the majority opinion.

[Ziobrop]

spreading the government around town is a huge cost, to government and needs to be stopped.

There are many reasons why the province needs to put things in regions - so that cant be avoided, but all Halifax based workers should be downtown. it will save on transportation costs, require less infrastructure and in some cases possibly fewer fte's

the province also needs to do away with paper records. there is significant square footage devoted to storing paper in very expensive real-estate.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

As individual citizens you get to have your say every 4 years during elections. In between that cycle you may or may not get listened to on individual spending decisions. You should not have any expectation that will occur. That is why we elect representatives.

My expectation is that elected representatives have phones and email adresses so that they can be contacted about my concerns; it worked very well regarding the Khyber being revisited.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

In your opinion. Many people find it ugly and unremarkable and think something better could replace it. We cannot be held hostage to the past. Look at how that attitude has stifled development downtown for decades.

Maybe we can have something like this piece of work as "new"?

Piece of work:
https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl...uhARK52jycXqdQUig&cbp=12,320.29,,0,-22.5

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

My expectation is that elected representatives have phones and email adresses so that they can be contacted about my concerns; it worked very well regarding the Khyber being revisited.

That issue is not dead yet, and many fiscal realists are working behind the scenes to unload it from the backs of HRM's overburdened ratepayers. The KAS does not have support within City Hall beyond Mason, so if he can be isolated there is considerable hope it can be cut loose.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Empire

Maybe we can have something like this piece of work as "new"?

Piece of work:
https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl...uhARK52jycXqdQUig&cbp=12,320.29,,0,-22.5

I spent considerable time in there when it was new and it is a good building. The angle you show was a compromise forced upon the designer by an expectation at the time that the lots adjacent would be developed. Of course no such development occurred thanks to Halifax's virulent anti-development climate in the early '90s and beyond. You may also remember that the designers were forced to incorporate the facade of the old church that once occupied the lot as an interior feature behind the front curtain wall in an attempt to appease the HT, then at the height of their influence. It looks ridiculous but that is what you get when you allow heritage advocates to call the shots.