General Updates and News

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

In any event the item that I saw on the TV news last night cast this in a new and curious light. Turns out this isn't a Dalhousie proposal after all, which explains why they have not committed to anything on the revenue side. It is a Frank Palermo "scheme" (his words I believe) dreamed up by him and his students in the school of architecture. So basically a class project. He sent it to HRM and to his surprise they bit. Seems quite remarkable that this would suddenly become a viable use for the property when all other ideas in the past were rejected.

That's interesting.

I still like the proposal though, and can understand why it intrigues city hall.

Palermo may have stepped on some toes with his stunt, but it certainly has generated interest. Hopefully this will not auger badly for his proposal.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If you are seeking a building permit you are not taking the bus. That's first.

Second, parkades like Scotia Square and MetroPark are not exactly in the vicinity. They are on the penisula and that's about it. There is also ample parking at the HSC if you are casting that broad of a net I suppose.

From Google Maps, walking distance and time from various parkades to the old library building:

Halifax Central Library Parkade - 160m, 2 minutes
Nova Centre - 270m, 3 minutes
Spring Garden Place - 350m, 4 minutes
The Mary Ann parkade - 350m, 4 minutes
City Centre Atlantic - 400m, 5 minutes
MetroPark - 400m, 6 minutes
Prince George Hotel - 450m, 6 minutes
Park Lane Parkade - 500m, 6 minutes
The Lord Nelson parkade - 500m, 7 minutes
Scotia Square Parkade - 900m, 12 minutes
Halifax Shopping Centre - 4.1 km, 52 minutes

Hmmm... HSC might be a bit of a stretch...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

That's interesting.

I still like the proposal though, and can understand why it intrigues city hall.

Palermo may have stepped on some toes with his stunt, but it certainly has generated interest. Hopefully this will not auger badly for his proposal.

Yes, it's probably not a bad idea to have a fresh perspective on it, actually.

But, Keith is most likely on point in that they will take the easy way out and demolish it...

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

In any event the item that I saw on the TV news last night cast this in a new and curious light. Turns out this isn't a Dalhousie proposal after all, which explains why they have not committed to anything on the revenue side. It is a Frank Palermo "scheme" (his words I believe) dreamed up by him and his students in the school of architecture. So basically a class project. He sent it to HRM and to his surprise they bit. Seems quite remarkable that this would suddenly become a viable use for the property when all other ideas in the past were rejected.

Do you have a link to the news item? I'm curious to see what the idea is.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Hali87

Do you have a link to the news item? I'm curious to see what the idea is.

Not sure if this is the same thing that Keith saw, but there are some videos in the Global story at the following link, as well as an embedded link to the report that Council has made public now.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4659261/halifax-revitalization-memorial-library/

[eastcoastal]

I'd actually like to know what happened to the building's designation as a war memorial. Is that something that can just go away? Is the building considered a memorial, or did the memorial status move with the location of the institution?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

Not sure if this is the same thing that Keith saw, but there are some videos in the Global story at the following link, as well as an embedded link to the report that Council has made public now.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4659261/halifax-revitalization-memorial-library/

Yep, that's it. I looked for it yesterday and couldn't find it. Thanks for posting it.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

I'd actually like to know what happened to the building's designation as a war memorial. Is that something that can just go away? Is the building considered a memorial, or did the memorial status move with the location of the institution?

No, it still is. the new glass box is not a memorial (except to the tax dollars that were spent on it). I think the memorial aspect is why someone on Council stated that they can't tear the old building down. I don't think that's accurate, but there seems to be considerable confusion.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Not much information presented in the article/news item, but it seems a little sad that the province just appears to be passing the buck to the city with no semblance of responsibility for the site's revitalization. Plenty of requirements, but no support or assistance.

Also a little sad that it seems the only idea the city has been able to come up with is a class project from the architecture school (although it looks like a good proposal).

I personally hope they do something positive with the building. I'm sure the fact that the burial grounds below it would limit the scope of the project (i.e. height and underground parking), but any development would be better than no development, IMHO.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Not much information presented in the article/news item, but it seems a little sad that the province just appears to be passing the buck to the city with no semblance of responsibility for the site's revitalization. Plenty of requirements, but no support or assistance.

Well, the city let things get to this state. And besides, HRM is loaded with excess cash while the province is broke, so I get why they said HRM needs to clean up this mess. The province is not very happy with HRM these days on a number of fronts, so as the senior level of government they are sending junior to his room without any supper.

I personally hope they do something positive with the building. I'm sure the fact that the burial grounds below it would limit the scope of the project (i.e. height and underground parking), but any development would be better than no development, IMHO.

All the more reason just to knock it down and transform the site into a park.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Well, the city let things get to this state. And besides, HRM is loaded with excess cash while the province is broke, so I get why they said HRM needs to clean up this mess. The province is not very happy with HRM these days on a number of fronts, so as the senior level of government they are sending junior to his room without any supper.

Not that the province has been particularly successful at spending its (our) money wisely. I'd rather see a nice building project in the heart of downtown with funding assistance by the province than see them throwing millions upon millions to prop up dying industries. Etc.

All the more reason just to knock it down and transform the site into a park.

I'm quite sure that this will be the actual outcome. Seems strange for you to be defending something so anti-development. I'll remember this the next time you use the term.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Seems strange for you to be defending something so anti-development. I'll remember this the next time you use the term.

I don't consider municipal projects to be development in the context we discuss it here. It is just more govt spending, often wasteful, no different than building a bike lane or whatever.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I don't consider municipal projects to be development in the context we discuss it here. It is just more govt spending, often wasteful, no different than building a bike lane or whatever.

I see, so opposing a new or upgraded building that is a privately-owned and funded project is anti-development, and opposing a new or upgraded building that is government-owned and funded is not anti-development.

Is that how you see it?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I see, so opposing a new or upgraded building that is a privately-owned and funded project is anti-development, and opposing a new or upgraded building that is government-owned and funded is not anti-development.

Is that how you see it?

Pretty much. One is investment that creates economic growth, while the other merely takes that money from the public.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Pretty much. One is investment that creates economic growth, while the other merely takes that money from the public.

I see where you're coming from. Thanks for providing your perspective.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Pretty much. One is investment that creates economic growth, while the other merely takes that money from the public.

It's important to look at the price tag and the value. Lots of infrastructure projects yield a surplus when you compare the economic activity they produce to their cost. This is probably particularly true now that there's so much opposition to larger public projects compared to past decades.

Projects like Argyle Street can work out the same way by increasing property values and bringing in businesses. Plus there is the value of the public space. It is not a zero sum game.

I don't know what the details are for the old library proposal but there is something to be said for maintaining the character of the city. I think Halifax generally goes too far in the direction of miserly utilitarianism. For years downtown in particular was ignored and it will take a lot of strategic investment to bring it in line with other cities of similar stature.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

It's important to look at the price tag and the value. Lots of infrastructure projects yield a surplus when you compare the economic activity they produce to their cost. This is probably particularly true now that there's so much opposition to larger public projects compared to past decades.

But building what will be offices for muncipal govt staff and university profs would not fall into that category.

Projects like Argyle Street can work out the same way by increasing property values and bringing in businesses. Plus there is the value of the public space. It is not a zero sum game.

We have yet to see how the businesses on Argyle are actually doing after making the street unfriendly for vehicles. I suspect they are benefiting when the convention center is busy but not doing as well at other times. I think turning the library property into public space would be worthwhile, but this proposal is not that.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

But building what will be offices for muncipal govt staff and university profs would not fall into that category.

Actually one of the provincial stipulations is:

At least 51% of total usable space, including all the usable space on the ground floor, remains open and accessible to the public/public space and is used for public purposes during regular open hours.

Check out the document:
https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/documents/city-hall/regional-council/181113rc162.pdf

After reading through it briefly, it seems like reverting it to parkland is the only way to truly follow the original intent of the agreement.

Additionally, despite city councillors' whining about the provincial stipulations, I think the stipulations are the only way to reasonably respect the land and the spirit of the agreement. But, yes... to turn it into offices is skewing the agreement somewhat by removing a portion of it for public use. They are getting around it, I suppose, by requiring the entire ground floor to be accessible to the public - a very reasonable requirement. And, the province is basically saying to the city: by the original agreement, it's supposed to be reverted to parkland if it's not going to be used as a library, but if you are going to do this, you have to pay for it. The media isn't spinning it this way, of course.

I'm also a little perplexed at the St. David's easement request. It makes me wonder why they did not include an easement as part of their current building project, instead relying on the city/province to grant them public land to make their private project work.

[Keith P.]

Yes, I agree. The province is unhappy with HRM for a number of reasons right now so they are not going to cut them much slack on this. Dalhousie has plenty of money to build their own planning & architecture building, as does HRM if they want to consolidate their massive planning department somewhere. I am more befuddled than ever as to why HRM did not exercise their option to purchase the WTCC building when it was available.

[Keith P.]

More on the pie-in-the-sky dream of using the old library for Dal and HRM offices.

In the Herald today an interview with Christine Macy, head of Dal's architecture school, which included this gem:

Most of the building’s “envelope,” which would increase from 40,000 to 85,000 square feet under the proposal, would be shared by the HRM’s planning department — now dispersed across metro — and the studios, classrooms and administration from Dalhousie’s faculty of architecture and planning, which is close to out-growing its existing space .

Downstairs, where people used to peruse the shelves and check out books, would be a public space, where all aspects of planning for the city’s future could be hashed out.

Macy says that public interest groups with a focus on Halifax’s future — heritage organizations, transportation coalitions, for example, along with, say, the Ecology Action Centre — could also share digs there.

Whaaaaat? No, no, no, no, no.

Why would we pay for facilities for outfits like the Heritage Trust, the EAC, and the Halifax Cycling Coalition, all of which advocate positions counter to those of many - likely a majority - of citizens? Jeezus! This is outrageous. No way would I support such a scheme.