General Updates and News

[ILoveHalifax]

Tear down the VG and build a stadium on the site.
We could save a lot of money if we got rid of all the medical staff.
Just have a longer wait time for hospital

[Colin May]

Smells like a federal/provincial announcement of Infrastructure money and perhaps a significant private donor.
Perhaps a move to a renovated and expanded Dennis building is the announcement.
Seems obvious to me that AGNS wants to open the photo project with a 'BIG BANG' and getting all the BIG NAMES in one place at the same time is a logistical nightmare.
I think a $150,000,000 for the old navy boys project is a massive waste of money, a less expensive project would be acceptable.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Colin May

Smells like a federal/provincial announcement of Infrastructure money and perhaps a significant private donor.
Perhaps a move to a renovated and expanded Dennis building is the announcement.
Seems obvious to me that AGNS wants to open the photo project with a 'BIG BANG' and getting all the BIG NAMES in one place at the same time is a logistical nightmare.
I think a $150,000,000 for the old navy boys project is a massive waste of money, a less expensive project would be acceptable.

But that would burst the delusional bubble that we can afford all these frills.

Meanwhile the core role of government gets neglected.

People need to realize that we cannot afford all this fringe stuff.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Of course it was renovated into a gallery 20 years ago at considerable cost. If it leaks and floods and has uncontrolled humidity, that is an indictment of the Public Works people who approved the renovations.

It is strange that while construction technology itself is improving, and it is easier than ever to create a long-lasting building, the life expectancy of public buildings seems to be falling dramatically. I also wonder how so many other places, many of them less wealthy, manage to quietly use much older heritage buildings for centuries.

I am sceptical of reports that boil down to "oh well, I guess we're going to have to build a shiny new landmark building". There must be a big temptation to inflate projected renovation costs for a report while underestimating the cost of a new building.

[Drybrain]

The Gallery North building is a heritage property, and I'm pretty confident that there is no scenario possible in which it would ever be torn down. The Gallery South building is not heritage protected, but I'd imagine a petty huge fight over it if there were a proposal to knock it down. (as there should be, since it's the most architecturally harmonious and grand single city block in the entire province.)

It seems like this is a case of institutional edifice complex--I don't believe for a second that it'd cost $50 million to renovate the existing gallery buildings, which are far from "crumbling" (that just sounds like a stupid choice of words by the reporter.) I would be very surprised if this is not simply that the AGNS honchos want to make a splash with a big new modern gallery, probably on the waterfront, and are inflating both the problems of the existing buildings and the cost to renovate it in order to make the case.

The AGNS is a pretty great institution, but this all feels really rotten, and it's upsetting to see a public institution turn to the old "oh well, it's one and decayed" argument.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Of course it was renovated into a gallery 20 years ago at considerable cost. If it leaks and floods and has uncontrolled humidity, that is an indictment of the Public Works people who approved the renovations. I doubt they will tear it down though, they will just turn it into govt offices to hold the ever-expanding bureaucracy. Meanwhile we will spend another $50-$100 million for a new gallery for the intelligentsia. I would much rather have that sum of money spent on a replacement for the unusable parts of the VG Hospital. Why do we even have a provincial art gallery? We are broke.

$50-$100M wouldn't cut it for a renovation of the VG. Anything substantive would cost well north of a billion.

It's more likely that the VG will get blown up (no loss really) and the infirmary site will get expanded. Even that would probably cost at least $800M or so.

Regarding the AGNS, it would be sad to see the existing building torn down. Hopefully they can find some way to renovate the existing site, even if it means they have to temporarily relocate the art gallery during the renovation period.

Whatever happened to the Annie Liebovitz collection???

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

From the Herald:



http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/12949...ova-scotia-building-set-to-begin-in-fall

The article isn't very clear, but it sounds like they are either searching for a new venue or planning to tear the old one down (?!). Particularly troubling to me is:



It seems to me that this is one of the finer examples of this type of building remaining in Halifax, and it cannot be renovated at reasonable cost? What is "reasonable cost"?

Would be a shame and embarrassment to lose this building IMHO.

Art Gallery on Google Streetview

speculating here, but I think the building can be fixed for people. though the mechanical required to control temperature and humidity for art would be quite a bit more cumbersome/expensive.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

$50-$100M wouldn't cut it for a renovation of the VG. Anything substantive would cost well north of a billion.

That's not what I said. I said a replacement for the unusable parts of the VGH, design work on which is already underway.

[Drybrain]

Guys, no one is talking about tearing down the AGNS buildings. They're planning to move to a whole new location. When they do that, the existing buildings will probably just be turned back into bureaucrat's offices or something. In any case, I'm not sure I buy the humidity issue--part of the problem, as I understand it, is that the Gallery South building is partly used as offices for government workers, and partly used by AGNS, which makes it really difficult to keep the air quality consistent throughout the structure. The obvious solution would seem to be to move the government workers to another building, which would help resolve the humidity/temperature issue, and also free up more potential gallery space.

Maybe they'd still need to do considerable work to improve the climate control, but $50 million? I completely admit I'm not an expert on this stuff, but it feels ridiculous. They spent $13 million ($24 million, inflation-adjusted) in 1988 to convert the Gallery South building, and millions more in '98 to convert Gallery North. There's since been regular maintenance work and restoration of the sandstone exterior. But now it's all "crumbling"? Come on.

I strongly suspect the current problems with the buildings, and the costs to repair them, are being significantly exaggerated in order to make the case for a new building. I've been in loads of art galleries that seem to do just fine with their older structures, including Vancouver's VAG, MOMA in NYC, etc.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

From the Herald:



http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/12949...ova-scotia-building-set-to-begin-in-fall

The article isn't very clear, but it sounds like they are either searching for a new venue or planning to tear the old one down (?!). Particularly troubling to me is:

It seems to me that this is one of the finer examples of this type of building remaining in Halifax, and it cannot be renovated at reasonable cost? What is "reasonable cost"?

Would be a shame and embarrassment to lose this building IMHO.

Art Gallery on Google Streetview

I think it would be a big mistake for them to move to a new building.

I think most art should be in an older, architecturally significant building, such as where they are right now. I visited the AGNS about 25 years ago and what attracted me to the art gallery was the old building. I think if it had been in a modern building then I wouldn't have been interested in going in, just to see the art.

Renovate the current building please! I love that old building.

[Haligonian88]

Andy Filmore had mentioned (during one of the Jane's Walks last month) the possibility of the AGNS constructing a new building on the waterfront in the Salter Street block, out by the water where the boardwalk was extended out around the perimeter of the site. He said it would become the prominent building on the waterfront, replacing Purdy's Towers. Would be great to see another hole in the waterfront filled in.

[counterfactual]

I have a solution:

How about the Nova Scotia government stop subsidizing dying ferries and polluting Pulp Mills and actually spend the necessary money to repair and maintain existing infrastructure in our capital city, which is growing, and is also the central engine for economic growth in the region?

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

...It seems to me that this is one of the finer examples of this type of building remaining in Halifax, and it cannot be renovated at reasonable cost? What is "reasonable cost"?

Would be a shame and embarrassment to lose this building IMHO.

Art Gallery on Google Streetview

It would be a shame to loose this building. I do not think that the default upon loosing the AGNS as a tenant will be to tear it down. I assumed (and I may be wrong) that the phrase meant it couldn't be renovated AS AN ART GALLERY at a reasonable cost (most likely due to perceived contradictions between old building and humidity and temperature control requirements for art).

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

It would be a shame to loose this building. I do not think that the default upon loosing the AGNS as a tenant will be to tear it down. I assumed (and I may be wrong) that the phrase meant it couldn't be renovated AS AN ART GALLERY at a reasonable cost (most likely due to perceived contradictions between old building and humidity and temperature control requirements for art).

As you and the other posters have pointed out, this sounds like the most reasonable scenario.

My brief moment of panic (lol) has passed....

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

As you and the other posters have pointed out, this sounds like the most reasonable scenario.

My brief moment of panic (lol) has passed....

Yes, they are both great buildings and I bet they could be easily converted to other uses.

I think part of the root problem here is how these things are presented in the media. Any time an institution wants a new building it's implied that the old one is falling down and about to be demolished. This isn't typically true unless there's been a lot of deferred maintenance. The solution there is to do the maintenance and properly account for its low amortized cost (the media just report "millions of dollars", but is that over 5 years? 20 years? A $10M maintenance bill for a major public building with 20 years of deferred maintenance is small). Very few buildings have unresolvable problems. Most can be shifted onto other uses. Having more affordable older buildings is a huge benefit for urban economies; young companies can't afford shiny new buildings so they need the older buildings. Volta Labs is one good example of this in Halifax. They are (or were) in the old TD building and they want to take over the old library, which no doubt some councillor said had to be demolished for a park because it didn't happen to be suitable for expansion.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it sometimes makes sense to build new buildings for these public institutions if it attracts major private donations from people who wouldn't otherwise be interested. Or even public dollars from the federal government that are only available for "sexy" projects.

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by someone123

Yes, they are both great buildings and I bet they could be easily converted to other uses.

I think part of the root problem here is how these things are presented in the media. Any time an institution wants a new building it's implied that the old one is falling down and about to be demolished. This isn't typically true unless there's been a lot of deferred maintenance. The solution there is to do the maintenance and properly account for its low amortized cost (the media just report "millions of dollars", but is that over 5 years? 20 years? A $10M maintenance bill for a major public building with 20 years of deferred maintenance is small). Very few buildings have unresolvable problems. Most can be shifted onto other uses. Having more affordable older buildings is a huge benefit for urban economies; young companies can't afford shiny new buildings so they need the older buildings. Volta Labs is one good example of this in Halifax. They are (or were) in the old TD building and they want to take over the old library, which no doubt some councillor said had to be demolished for a park because it didn't happen to be suitable for expansion.

re-development of the old library hosts a number of issues - the big one being that it is built on the Poor House and Jail burying Grounds. It is unlikely that that plot can be re-developed entirely as a result, so finding a re-use for the building is probably the best.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

re-development of the old library hosts a number of issues - the big one being that it is built on the Poor House and Jail burying Grounds. It is unlikely that that plot can be re-developed entirely as a result, so finding a re-use for the building is probably the best.

There also were stuctural issues at the old library due to the stress on the floor due to the weight of the books. Probably not an issue for other tenants who might take over the space.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by JET

There also were stuctural issues at the old library due to the stress on the floor due to the weight of the books. Probably not an issue for other tenants who might take over the space.

That seems like a funny problem for a library to have. One would imagine they'd have built it a bit more robustly to deal with that.

Originally Posted by Someone123

Any time an institution wants a new building it's implied that the old one is falling down and about to be demolished. This isn't typically true unless there's been a lot of deferred maintenance.

Same with the Khyber. In that case, there HAS been a lot of deferred maintenance, and the building no doubt is in rough shape. And I'm worried about the long-term future of the building if the current fundraising effort and Neptune partnership somehow falls through. But it's not like the city's going to bring in the dozers in six months and auction off the lot to the highest bidder or something.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

There also were stuctural issues at the old library due to the stress on the floor due to the weight of the books. Probably not an issue for other tenants who might take over the space.

One suspects that was in the same category of issue as those who say the Art Gallery is "crumbling" - just a justification for a shiny new building.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

One suspects that was in the same category of issue as those who say the Art Gallery is "crumbling" - just a justification for a shiny new building.

Probably also true for the Dennis Building then?