General Updates and News

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Good news, clock is ticking.

It is for all of us, my friend. One certainty about life is that nobody gets out alive...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

Fwiw the minister told me that he's commited to preserving the facade. He feels the building is important to the area, but the interior is 60's dated. The interior gut should be a good first step in preserving the building.

That in itself is good news. As far as the interior goes, it sounds like the damage had already been done 40 - 50 years ago, but at least the exterior should be salvageable.

FWIW, if they do find any decorative elements from the original era during the gutting, I hope they save them and find some way to incorporate some of it into the final product.

I'm just happy to hear that there may be some hope in saving what's left of the building, that's much better than what we were hearing just 6 months ago.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It is for all of us, my friend. One certainty about life is that nobody gets out alive...

True. I'm just hoping the legacy of obstructionism doesn't live on.

Halifax has been held back for too long... sure, there were some good decisions, like not to build a highway through the downtown, but its not the 1970s anymore and its time to move on.

Height / density could be the new legacy, which will create an even more vibrant and walkable city as opposed to the generic, sprawl mess that Halifax has become outside of its core.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

True. I'm just hoping the legacy of obstructionism doesn't live on.

Halifax has been held back for too long... sure, there were some good decisions, like not to build a highway through the downtown, but its not the 1970s anymore and its time to move on.

Height / density could be the new legacy, which will create an even more vibrant and walkable city as opposed to the generic, sprawl mess that Halifax has become outside of its core.

I agree mostly, but the question is, unless some younger members step up to the plate with more reasonable ideas of integrating heritage structures with modern buildings where will we be?

If the HT just fizzles out due to attrition who will be there to provide balance?

The question to ask is why are the younger citizens leaving heritage structure preservation to the same people who have been doing it since the sixties? Is it that they just don't care about our history?

I really don't have a good answer to this, but I hear lots of complaints about the HT but nobody stepping up to do a better job than they are....

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

True. I'm just hoping the legacy of obstructionism doesn't live on.

Halifax has been held back for too long... sure, there were some good decisions, like not to build a highway through the downtown, but its not the 1970s anymore and its time to move on.

Height / density could be the new legacy, which will create an even more vibrant and walkable city as opposed to the generic, sprawl mess that Halifax has become outside of its core.

The problem is, that decision was made after they built a container pier at the end of the downtown, meaning we have been condemnned to 40 years of tractor-trailers crashing through downtown.

We would have been better off with the highway than the Disney-fied faux-historic waterfront we have now.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The problem is, that decision was made after they built a container pier at the end of the downtown, meaning we have been condemnned to 40 years of tractor-trailers crashing through downtown.

We would have been better off with the highway than the Disney-fied faux-historic waterfront we have now.

I don't think that's the case - but the solution won't be cheap. The solution in my mind is to build the 3rd harbour connection (as a tunnel) with a connection onward through the arm (tunnel). I know that's not exactly a smart thing to do from a planning perspective, but my rationale (to me) seems to make sense.

You only build these tunnels if we put into them a 3rd tunnel with the purpose of transit (think the Seattle transit tunnel) so that buses and eventually an LRT can use it but separately. The other thing is that the main traffic tunnels have a dedicated lane for the big trucks for goods movement and you negotiate with the port to build direct exits onto and off of their property into the tunnel providing better access. This takes the trucks out of downtown, prepares the City for future transit needs by ensuring at least one connection off the peninsula to Dartmouth and you build a transit tunnel to the mainland.

This way - the new communities you end up building along the new road that eventually links up with North West Arm drive can have access to BRT/LRT and thus be planned out with much higher densities than typical suburban communities. This is also an opportunity to have a conversation with CN to see if they would be interested in putting some skin in the game to get their own train tunnel as well, so that they can have a direct link back to the rail cut via the harbour. It might allow for them to shut down the line running through DT Dartmouth at around Shannon Park (so that all the industrial is still serviced) and then just route the car traffic from the autoport via this new harbour crossing and out the rail cut. If they aren't willing to put $ into it - then perhaps a land swap so that HRM can take over the land that is the railyards in DT Dartmouth and sell the land to be redeveloped.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The problem is, that decision was made after they built a container pier at the end of the downtown, meaning we have been condemnned to 40 years of tractor-trailers crashing through downtown.

We would have been better off with the highway than the Disney-fied faux-historic waterfront we have now.

Seriously? Our waterfront is imperfect (the retail mix in Historic Properties in particular isn't living up to its potential, and the way the site is managed IS pretty Disneyfied) but that's a pretty extreme blanket condemnation. People--locals and visitors alike--love the waterfront, and I'd go as far as to say it's one of the most successful outdoor urban public attractions in the country. And it keeps getting better. A strip of asphalt hugging the harbour would be...less good, to say the very least.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I agree mostly, but the question is, unless some younger members step up to the plate with more reasonable ideas of integrating heritage structures with modern buildings where will we be?

If the HT just fizzles out due to attrition who will be there to provide balance?

The question to ask is why are the younger citizens leaving heritage structure preservation to the same people who have been doing it since the sixties? Is it that they just don't care about our history?

I really don't have a good answer to this, but I hear lots of complaints about the HT but nobody stepping up to do a better job than they are....

I think they have actually (Fusion-types), and the HT groups just completely shut down the concept. Look at alot of the restorations done by young people in the north end.

Does the HT provide balance or is it just a bunch of BANANAs. I'd go with the latter.

[scooby074]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Seriously? Our waterfront is imperfect (the retail mix in Historic Properties in particular isn't living up to its potential, and the way the site is managed IS pretty Disneyfied) but that's a pretty extreme blanket condemnation. People--locals and visitors alike--love the waterfront, and I'd go as far as to say it's one of the most successful outdoor urban public attractions in the country. And it keeps getting better. A strip of asphalt hugging the harbour would be...less good, to say the very least.

I have to agree with this assessment. Hard to argue the success of Historic Properties and the Boardwalk. Arguably one of the most popular tourist attractions in the city.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I think they have actually (Fusion-types), and the HT groups just completely shut down the concept. Look at alot of the restorations done by young people in the north end.

Does the HT provide balance or is it just a bunch of BANANAs. I'd go with the latter.

I'd go with the latter too.

I think young people investing in the city centre tend to value heritage quite a bit (as you point out, the old house restorations, etc.) I actually know that some of the people in Fusion are quite pro heritage. (I went to a meeting about the Dennis Building with one of them.)

I feel like the HTNS brand, such as it is, is a bit poisoned and no one wants to get involved with them because of the negative associations. If they disappeared entirely, something new would step into the void.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by scooby074

I have to agree with this assessment. Hard to argue the success of Historic Properties and the Boardwalk. Arguably one of the most popular tourist attractions in the city.

The only success at Historic Properties has been the Lower Deck pub. Everything else has been a revolving door of openings and closings. Even the food court there turned sour. As for the Boardwalk, that is the Disneyfied part I was referring to. And it is massively supported by govt funding thru the WDC. It could be so much better than what it is. Harbour Drive could have been built and something else could go on infill at the waters edge. We only think what we have is good because we can't imagine anything else.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The only success at Historic Properties has been the Lower Deck pub. Everything else has been a revolving door of openings and closings. Even the food court there turned sour. As for the Boardwalk, that is the Disneyfied part I was referring to. And it is massively supported by govt funding thru the WDC. It could be so much better than what it is. Harbour Drive could have been built and something else could go on infill at the waters edge. We only think what we have is good because we can't imagine anything else.

I think Halifax has a great Harbour Waterfront and it seems to be appreciated by locals and tourists as shown by the opinions on Tripadvisor - http://www.tripadvisor.ca/Attraction_Rev...x_Regional_Municipality_Nova_Scotia.html

I think that if the Harbour Drive was built as a freeway it would have been just as bad as the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto. I think the real mistake was in also eliminating the planned Northwest Arm Drive and bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Arm_Drive), which would have provided a direct route for trucks and cars to the 102 highway without requiring them to go through the downtown area. This could have been built without the Harbour Drive/Cogswell Interchange and would have saved interesting heritage buildings such as the Pentagon building - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=143037&page=7

[scooby074]

I agree with Fenwick 100%.

Without Historic Properties (yes they've had some vacancy issues) and the Boardwalk, there'd be no Casino, no Marriot Casino Hotel, no Murphys (including the Harbour Hopper), no Gahan House, no Bluenose good or bad, no Saltys, no Lower Deck, no Bishops Landing, with its restaurants etc. etc.

Maybe you forget how gritty the waterfront was? The days of loading frozen fish are long gone. Todays Boardwalk and Historic Properties is the new cash cow. Id argue that more money, motel stays and jobs are created by HP and the Boardwalk than the Citadel and Metro Centre combined.

[Keith P.]

If you think what is on the waterfront now is the best we could do, you haven't seen many other places with far better shoreline spaces. The Casino, hotel, restos, etc would not only still be there but likely would be better. And if you claim that Murphy's is in any way an asset then I must question your judgement. That place has always epitomized everything that is wrong with how we treat tourists.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I think they have actually (Fusion-types), and the HT groups just completely shut down the concept. Look at alot of the restorations done by young people in the north end.

Does the HT provide balance or is it just a bunch of BANANAs. I'd go with the latter.

I wasn't aware of the Fusion group, so I just looked them up. I could see how they possibly could include heritage structures in their mandates, but there wasn't anything on their website to allude to any kind of focus on that issue. However, their website wasn't all that comprehensive so it's quite possible that a lot more is going on behind the scenes. It is very encouraging, however, that they are taking a serious interest in their community and are stepping up to deal with issues important to them.

In an ideal world, the HT would provide balance, however at least in recent years it appears they have just dug a hole for themselves and unfortunately nobody seems to take them seriously anymore. I am curious on why they are considered the authority on heritage structures, given the above.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't believe anybody voted them to be the authority, they just positioned themselves as such - so what would keep a more focused, level-headed group from moving in and providing the balance and guidance needed to successfully preserve heritage structures while integrating them with modern buildings? Why wait for attrition to create a gap? Just curious as I'm admittedly not an expert on politics/planning protocol/etc.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If you think what is on the waterfront now is the best we could do, you haven't seen many other places with far better shoreline spaces. The Casino, hotel, restos, etc would not only still be there but likely would be better. And if you claim that Murphy's is in any way an asset then I must question your judgement. That place has always epitomized everything that is wrong with how we treat tourists.

I agree with Scooby and Fenwick in that the waterfront is not all that bad, and is enjoyed by many. I am old enough to have childhood memories of when the waterfront was more industrial, and though I have a certain fondness for that kind of busy, working waterfront, it would not have been an attractive place for tourists to enjoy what our city has to offer.

However, I also agree with you in that it could be a lot better than it is now, and if you consider some of the potential projects that look to be coming up, it will be a lot better. As everything, it is in a state of evolution and we are not witnessing the finished product currently.

I don't think that Harbour drive would have allowed for a very good waterfront experience, though, even with the infill you are suggesting. I think the Northwest Arm crossing that Fenwick suggested would have been the best solution to get traffic out of the downtown, rather than create a situation for more automotive traffic in an area that is perhaps best suited to transit and pedestrian traffic.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If you think what is on the waterfront now is the best we could do, you haven't seen many other places with far better shoreline spaces. The Casino, hotel, restos, etc would not only still be there but likely would be better. And if you claim that Murphy's is in any way an asset then I must question your judgement. That place has always epitomized everything that is wrong with how we treat tourists.

There are definitely too many overpriced, lame restaurants like Murphy's et. al. (I don't think the Lower Deck is much to write home about either--great building, terrible pub. There's not even a single local beer available in there besides Keith's and Olands). But bad dining and tourist trap junk is normal for areas like this. It's starting to get a bit different, as the retail mix in Historic Properties has turned around (a little) in the past few years, and some of the boardwalk shacks are actually bringing some decent food options to the area.

It gets better and better as you head south too, toward Bishop's Landing and the Seaport Market. Great public art, views, and some decent food and retail options.

I still enjoy the waterfront, and I've never brought a visitor there and seen them come away disappointed. Obviously it can be improved, but it is already very successful.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

There are definitely too many overpriced, lame restaurants like Murphy's et. al. (I don't think the Lower Deck is much to write home about either--great building, terrible pub. There's not even a single local beer available in there besides Keith's and Olands). But bad dining and tourist trap junk is normal for areas like this. It's starting to get a bit different, as the retail mix in Historic Properties has turned around (a little) in the past few years, and some of the boardwalk shacks are actually bringing some decent food options to the area.

It gets better and better as you head south too, toward Bishop's Landing and the Seaport Market. Great public art, views, and some decent food and retail options.

I still enjoy the waterfront, and I've never brought a visitor there and seen them come away disappointed. Obviously it can be improved, but it is already very successful.

Agree, and amen to the LD poor beer choices. It actually was a much better pub 20 years ago (or maybe I had lower standards 20 years ago... lol) but I digress.

I think Historic Properties hasn't seen its potential yet. With increasing residential downtown bringing with it the potential for more and regular pedestrian traffic, I think there will be many more opportunities for restaurants/retail to remain viable out of tourist season in that complex.

However, first the city has to do something about the "crosswalk of death" at the Morses' Tea building in order to allow people to actually get there.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

However, first the city has to do something about the "crosswalk of death" at the Morses' Tea building in order to allow people to actually get there.

What an embarrassment. I used to cross there every day on the way to work. It just screams "Screw you, pedestrians."

But of course, if we had never razed a whole neighbourhood's worth of buildings and streets in order to build that atrocity called the Cogswell Interchange, we'd have a normal street crossing there, the Historic Properties and the Granville Mall wouldn't be orphaned at the north edge of downtown, and the whole area would probably be a whole lot healthier.

The quick fix will be to put in a proper walk signal there. The real fix will be the Cogswell redevelopment.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

What an embarrassment. I used to cross there every day on the way to work. It just screams "Screw you, pedestrians."

But of course, if we had never razed a whole neighbourhood's worth of buildings and streets in order to build that atrocity called the Cogswell Interchange, we'd have a normal street crossing there, the Historic Properties and the Granville Mall wouldn't be orphaned at the north edge of downtown, and the whole area would probably be a whole lot healthier.

The quick fix will be to put in a proper walk signal there. The real fix will be the Cogswell redevelopment.

Yes, that's right! And, the Cogswell redevelopment will likely help the situation at Historic Properties as well.