General Updates and News

[IanWatson]

That strip was one of the ones that was up for a city-initiated heritage designation. The owners complained to Council and the designation didn’t go through.

[Good Baklava]

I believe there was recently a Coast article talking about the landlord's refusal to implement heritage designation. I suppose it was only a matter of time before these structures met their end. If there's one advantage I could point out about wooden siding, it would be the near unlimited possibilities for adding vivid colours to the streetscape. This may be highly unlikely to materialize, but it would be neat if parts of the new shopfronts could each have a section of wooden siding that could be repainted to whatever colour pleases the tenant.

[someone123]

It's a tough one. It's hard to see what you'd do to preserve that row other than just keeping it as it's always been, which probably amounts to the owner losing out on a huge amount of potential income since this area has become so expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if the municipality has also contributed to this through tax rates. Maybe the owner would have been more receptive to the heritage designation deals if it involved adjusting the tax rates to suit the lowered development potential? I don't know the details.

I'm not sure the wooden boxes are that incredibly architecturally but they provide texture and colour that the glassy (often simple and generic without much ornamentation or detail) new developments do not. In principle there's no reason why a new development couldn't be just as nice or nicer.

I will also miss the Birmingham side if that streetscape goes.

[Dmajackson]

This probably won't amount to anything major but 5047 Salter Street is being demolished. It is one the few leftover waterfront industrial buildings and its been in rugged shape for as long as I can remember. At least it will provide a better view coming out of the Salt Yard and up onto the Salter Street boardwalk.

Also the Volvo dealership at 3363 Kempt Road is being demolished. Safe to assume this is part of the never ending list of dealerships rebuilding and rebranding along that strip.

[atbw]

Originally Posted by someone123

I will also miss the Birmingham side if that streetscape goes.

I always find that little end of the Spring Garden area so nice. The mishmash of buildings is so much more interesting than some of the block-sized developments we've gotten. I think there is a level of loss we have to accept, but it's sad to see these three iconic buildings go up with no protection.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by atbw

I always find that little end of the Spring Garden area so nice. The mishmash of buildings is so much more interesting than some of the block-sized developments we've gotten. I think there is a level of loss we have to accept, but it's sad to see these three iconic buildings go up with no protection.

Seems like we're not the only ones who feel this way:
https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/l...axs-fabled-vintage-row-be-around-495193/

I think it's sad that so many people seem to see the charm in these structures, yet we are all resigned to accept that they will likely be torn down and replaced by a building that will be functional, but probably possess very little character in return, and that the streetscape will probably suffer from it.

But this is Halifax, one of the more historic cities in the country, but one that doesn't really value its heritage. Sigh...

[Keith P.]

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

I agree entirely with your sentiment.

I abhor this whole “give your head a shake” expression that has become so popular. My opinion remains unchanged even after a good shake, and I bet it’s the same for anyone else.

[someone123]

I suspect the negative sentiment has as much to do with the imagined replacement as it does with the old buildings. There is a tendency to go from finer-grained, more detailed buildings with more street-level interest to larger buildings with long, plain facades. Many new buildings use a grey or beige colour palette and frankly look pretty dull. They remind me of shopping malls. If they had a bit more texture and colour or maybe even ornamentation I think they'd be a net win compared to most wooden box type houses.

Another simple fact is that Halifax is not a very big city so these older areas are not very extensive. Once they're gone they're gone. There are some preserved residential areas like Schmidtville but there not much preserved commercial of this type.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Tbh, the Birmingham side is a much bigger loss... why is nobody talking about that?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Gave my head a shake, but my ideas haven't changed...

At least I can gain comfort from the fact that I can always count on Keith to pass judgement on any thoughts and opinions that I post here.

Fully agree with someone123's post.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I know what kind of response this is going to get, but I have to say it anyway.

Give your collective heads a shake if you think that these rundown ramshackle old wooden buildings are in any way worthy of preservation. They are utterly unremarkable except for the bright paint colors they are sporting these days.They are located on some of the most valuable real estate in Halifax and are a prime site for new development. We talk on here a lot about the low vacancy rate in Halifax, yet something like this comes along and the voices are crying out about losing these things.

Are they cute? Perhaps to some, but a lot of other similar buildings could be just as cute after a visit to Home Depot to pick up some mistints on sale in the paint dept. Are they unique? Not really. Do they have heritage or architectural value? Not so much. They are just old. It's time to say goodbye.

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

Well said. While they may appear unremarkable to some, they add architectural variance to an area where it's needed, as well as some evidence of the type of building that was once very common in the area - like a small window to the past.

I know it's hard to explain cultural value to folks for whom property values are the only values that are important, but small sections like this are important to providing character and interest to neighbourhoods like this.

The thing I find somewhat amusing is that anytime somebody posts that an old building should be saved, the usual folks always step up and provide derision to their comments - as if the who like old buildings don't have a right to voice their views. However, in reality, the building is almost always torn down, so the anti-heritage folks almost always have a 'win'... yet they still can't stand anybody to post any views that don't align with theirs.

[bluenoser]

I'm not sure if this is any consolation but the parcel in question doesn't seem to include the entire row on Queen (4 out of the 7 older buildings) nor the two Woozles buildings and its two neighbours on Birmingham. Assuming the prospective buyer doesn't turn around and purchase the neighboring properties, that should at least mean more of these buildings intact for the time being, and a finer-grained development as opposed to a 'blockbuster'.

Having said that, it sounds like the entire row on Queen is in trouble:

According to the CEO of I.H. Mathers, the Queen Street row houses were in poor shape when they were acquired and an engineer has found them to be not structurally sound.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7327381/historic-buildings-for-sale-halifax-heritage/

Apparently, a number of the owners were open to heritage designations but not enough incentive was provided beyond fixing up facades.

I've always liked the 1525 Birmingham with its little underpass to the courtyard, and there's not a lot of mid-century stock downtown, but I could live with it being replaced if the quality were right.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

There's another strip like this on Agricola, which I'd imagine can be demolished at any time.

It seems like there's a disconnect between the popularity of this architecture and how the city develops or how buildings are maintained. I think this is a classic market failure or tragedy of the commons, where people like a certain look in the city but don't necessarily have a strong incentive to maintain their own buildings in that way. With the Birmingham and Queen houses most of the benefit of the appearance goes to the people walking by while the owners pay the bill.

The obvious fix is to make heritage incentives stronger, and it's good to see some discussion of that. Not just that the owners are Evil Developers but that they were offered compensation that amounted to just a tiny sliver of what they'd have to give up to preserve these buildings.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

On the one hand, you're right about their architectural importance. On the other hand, due to their prominent location and prominnence, these clearly have cultural value. People love this strip. It's featured in tourism promo materials as emblematic of the city's history. I often see people walking around the area snapping pictures of the row.

They're humble and minor buildings, but it's not as if the area is full of ramshackle old wooden houses. We're talking about four or five buildings that add a lot of character and colour to this street, and hearken to a history and civic character much larger than just these few buildings. They're an aesthetic anchor here, and there's every reason for any new development to pull back a bit on the lot and leave them in place. Will it? I doubt it.

But the widespread reaction in favour of preservation is understandable and I share it.

Sorry, but a lot of this is simple nonsense. You have all sorts of these kind of buildings throughout the area. They just aren't painted lime green and bright blue. Walk a block or two and there are plenty to choose from if you are looking for "cultural significance" (which to me sounds more like someone saying they stand out just because of how they are painted, like the similar ones we see in places like St. John's). There is no logical reason to leave them where they are. The issue is that they are on a busy street in a commercial district and so are likely to finally be redeveloped, just like the old Radio Shack that used to be on the corner of SGR and Queen was back in the '80s. It is more of a commentary on how sluggish HRM has been economically for the last 30 years or so until just recertly.

The "widespread reaction in favor of preservation" is not at all widespread from what I have been seeing elsewhere. I think it is more the typical HRM reaction to virtually any development that gets proposed pretty much anywhere. Yes, progress means you are probably losing something in just about any case. But we need to be able to see beyond the end of our noses at what gains it also brings, something Haligonians and even many members of this forum seem to have difficulty doing. Living in the past seldom works out well.

I have to think this is just the start. Assuming HRM's heavy-handed social experiments in eliminating vehicles from the DT and limiting deliveries and access to businesses in the area don't kill commercial activity on SGR entirely, I would expect many of the other old buildings on SGR to disappear in the near future. It's not like many of them look like they belong on Bond or Oxford Sts in London after all.

[pblaauw]

Gave my head a shake and now I feel like Sir John A. MacDonald.

Too soon?

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by bluenoser

... I've always liked the 1525 Birmingham with its little underpass to the courtyard, and there's not a lot of mid-century stock downtown...

This is possibly one of my favourite buildings in the area.

[Dmajackson]

Demolition permit has been issued for 5515-5527 Cogswell Street. These are the two brick commercial buildings on the Northwest corner of Cogswell and Gottingen formerly home to Family SOS and radio stations.

I haven't heard of any plans for redevelopment of the site. Whatever gets built there will be under CEN-2 zoning with a maximum F.A.R. of 7.5 so it will be substantial and on a prominent corner site at the edge of downtown.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Demolition permit has been issued for 5515-5527 Cogswell Street. These are the two brick commercial buildings on the Northwest corner of Cogswell and Gottingen formerly home to Family SOS and radio stations.

Good place for a new police station.