General Updates and News

[Querce]

[teddifax]

I hope there will be ground floor commercial on both streets with this development.

[Jonovision]

This is a very big and sad loss for the area. While it is nice to get all the new residential density the unique character of Spring Garden is getting eroded away.

[Dmajackson]

I'm all for density are rebuilding of SGR district but it will be sad to see that unique block get demolished.

On another note here is an update for East West Street. That is real stonework going up. I'm quite optimistic for this project now.


Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)

[Undreamt]

Brewery Park and the fantastic facade preserving re-developments have really denied the argument that for increased density, one must destroy character. It's clear that the buildings are obviously in a dilapidated state and the location is ideal for re-development, but why not try and use the existing structures as inspiration? The Armoury Square townhouses would be a great example.

If the developers could be incentivized to do... I would love to see it.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

This is a very big and sad loss for the area. While it is nice to get all the new residential density the unique character of Spring Garden is getting eroded away.

From Maritime Life to the old Duggar’s block to this, the destruction of SGR’s most significant historic stretches in just a few years is pretty impressive. I don’t hold out hope this will be any different—there should have been a heritage district here years ago to help ensure development didn’t sacrifice this character (because it didn’t need to, for the most part).

I hope at least that this new building has substantial commercial frontage on both sides. This rendering doesn’t seem to show much. The commercial density of the side streets off of SGR are as important to the area’s vitality as SGR itself.

[Kittle]

The seemingly recurring theme of razing entire blocks on Spring Garden to replace them with 7-10 floor low rises that take up entire blocks is really going to ruin that area IMO. I'm all for development, but let's allow some more height and keep some of the historic buildings.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Kittle

The seemingly recurring theme of razing entire blocks on Spring Garden to replace them with 7-10 floor low rises that take up entire blocks is really going to ruin that area IMO. I'm all for development, but let's allow some more height and keep some of the historic buildings.

I’m optimistic that we may see this process slow down now, and that these blocks were sole of the easy/low-hanging block consolidation. We’ve also seen some good new developments on and around SGR occupying narrower frontages and being built to a less blockbusting scale.

But yeah, it is something I think the area councillor should be trying to address.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

But yeah, it is something I think the area councillor should be trying to address.

Oddly he has been silent on this so far which is very curious considering he has been staunchly anti-development against anything taller than 4 floors most of his public life.

Perhaps the developer accidentally dropped a sack of cash and it somehow ended up in the war chest for his campaign for mayor.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by coastalkid

AllNS reported on Wednesday that Rob Steele and John Ghosn have finished land-banking and are set to re-develop the Queen/Birmingham block. Over the past year, they've purchased the colourful buildings on vintage row as well as the buildings behind them on Birmingham for a combined $7.6M. I'm personally sad to be losing this block to redevelopment, the Spring Garden area has lost a lot of character properties/streetscapes over the past few years.

Too bad, but not surprising. This has become so common it's hardly worth mentioning anymore. I'm going to spare everybody my usual negative comments about heritage structures being eliminated for lackluster developments, especially blockbuster-style developments. If this is what the people want, it's what they will get.

The beat goes on...

[Empire]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Too bad, but not surprising. This has become so common it's hardly worth mentioning anymore. I'm going to spare everybody my usual negative comments about heritage structures being eliminated for lackluster developments, especially blockbuster-style developments. If this is what the people want, it's what they will get.

The beat goes on...

It is appalling that this type of architecture can be destroyed. Worse yet, to allow multiple structures at once in a Robie St. car lot demo to be eliminated. Then top off this unfortunate oversight with a new cookie cutter mundane building. If we're even unluckier we may get a blank wall out of this. We just had two entire blocks demolished on Spring Garden Rd. and somehow that was ok. Where is a real planning department or Design Review Committee? I guess everyone feels left out that they weren't part of the Scotia Sq. mass demolition. The Agricola area has seen some fantastic renos. of this type of architecture recently but it is hard to keep ahead of the wrecking ball. This by no measure has good planning stamped on it.

Great architecture....prime for restoration for high end shops, restaurants living space including a couple affordable housing units.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6437383,...ndtInWn5YDS-K7jH5_zzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Beauty across the street...
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6436512,...NB7HTUBR3IGoN0forr6aw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I’m optimistic that we may see this process slow down now, and that these blocks were sole of the easy/low-hanging block consolidation. We’ve also seen some good new developments on and around SGR occupying narrower frontages and being built to a less blockbusting scale.

But yeah, it is something I think the area councillor should be trying to address.

This block of properties on Queen and Birmingham was actually considered for heritage registration in early 2020. Landowners all opposed and a majority of Council voted not to register. Warning at the time from staff and the Councillors who were in favour of registration was that not registering would mean piles of rubble, and that is very much proving to be true.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by spaustin

This block of properties on Queen and Birmingham was actually considered for heritage registration in early 2020. Landowners all opposed and a majority of Council voted not to register. Warning at the time from staff and the Councillors who were in favour of registration was that not registering would mean piles of rubble, and that is very much proving to be true.

Interesting, so no heritage designation is a clean slate for demolition. Why don't we rethink this just a little bit?

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by spaustin

This block of properties on Queen and Birmingham was actually considered for heritage registration in early 2020. Landowners all opposed and a majority of Council voted not to register. Warning at the time from staff and the Councillors who were in favour of registration was that not registering would mean piles of rubble, and that is very much proving to be true.

Honestly, there needs to be some kind of improved incentive for owners to not oppose, and some of those need to be brought back to council ASAP. The message needs to be urgent: not registering quite probably means demolition given our current land rush, and many of the protected buildings we already have stem from third-party registration in the past, which otherwise would quite possible be gone today.

The masonry ones on Grafton particularly, as well as Maxwell's Plum, which I'm worried is part of a Lawen super-block to be ripped down, despite being one of the oldest structures downtown (18th century).

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Honestly, there needs to be some kind of improved incentive for owners to not oppose, and some of those need to be brought back to council ASAP. The message needs to be urgent: not registering quite probably means demolition given our current land rush, and many of the protected buildings we already have stem from third-party registration in the past, which otherwise would quite possible be gone today.

The masonry ones on Grafton particularly, as well as Maxwell's Plum, which I'm worried is part of a Lawen super-block to be ripped down, despite being one of the oldest structures downtown (18th century).

We've asked for a report on improving incentives. Sadly, in the same meeting where Birmingham and Queen registrations were turned down, Council also rejected registering Maxwell's and the buildings around Pizza Corner. Their days are likely numbered since Council specifically rejected registration. The new Council, however, has actually voted to register two properties over the owners objections. Elections can sometimes shift things.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by spaustin

We've asked for a report on improving incentives. Sadly, in the same meeting where Birmingham and Queen registrations were turned down, Council also rejected registering Maxwell's and the buildings around Pizza Corner.

Yes, I'm wondering if these can be returned--new council, greater urgency, etc. If the owners can be brought on board, that would be ideal. (Of course if the owners' intention is to demolish or sell for maximum profit to a developer, that could be tougher).

It is absolutely nuts, of course, that a city that sells itself as historic would permit the loss of one of the few remaining 18th-century buildings (Maxwell's) or even something like the one Stubborn Goat is in. As I've said before, we don't see a lot of these kinds of demolitions in other cities anymore. The fact that they happen is supposedly historic Halifax is an extra kick in the teeth. It's not as if there are hundreds of Victorian masonry buildigns all over downtown, really.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

This is a very big and sad loss for the area. While it is nice to get all the new residential density the unique character of Spring Garden is getting eroded away.

With the loss of this block there really is nothing left to erode, all of the character of that area will be gone.

[JET]

I have a 1905 house that was built by a young carpenter who built many lovely homes in Dartmouth Downtown, repeatedly I have been denied when I have tried to have the house registered. 23 Pine
https://www.htns.ca/pdf_Griffin/2013/GRIFFIN.dec.2013.C3.pdf

[Kittle]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I’m optimistic that we may see this process slow down now, and that these blocks were sole of the easy/low-hanging block consolidation. We’ve also seen some good new developments on and around SGR occupying narrower frontages and being built to a less blockbusting scale.

But yeah, it is something I think the area councillor should be trying to address.

I really hope you're right! They could easily have the best of both worlds by allowing more height and saving these buildings. They don't really occupy a whole lot of space so with extra height, this would be easily solved.

That area aside from The Crane and Brenton Suites has been pretty much all blocky, low rise developments. The proposals closer to Robie thankfully seem to the opposite (though I believe that area is allowed considerably more height under the centre plan?)

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by JET

I have a 1905 house that was built by a young carpenter who built many lovely homes in Dartmouth Downtown, repeatedly I have been denied when I have tried to have the house registered. 23 Pine
https://www.htns.ca/pdf_Griffin/2013/GRIFFIN.dec.2013.C3.pdf

It might be worthwhile in the future asking again. One of the other things that is underway around heritage is a review of the scoring system. The scoring system is a bit wonky. It unduly favours Victorian stuff and older and doesn't fairly value newer buildings in the evaluation. Category for architect/building is also problematic where it, again, favours a specific type of structure. The old scoring system remains in place for now.