General Updates and News

[someone123]

I don't think Blumenthal will be running this year.

Heritage buildings are really a matter of priorities. It's always easy for owners to come up with reasons why it's not financially feasible to save them, but the larger social value should be taken into account. The cost is not actually very high in a growing city because the stock of heritage buildings is relatively small.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I know that these photos aren't from Halifax, but I thought that you guys may be interested in seeing them. These are photos I took over the past week down in Dunedin, New Zealand (I'm here doing a study exchange). One of the things that has impressed me about this city is its impeccable ability to preserve its heritage buildings. Many of the buildings in downtown Dunedin were built prior to 1900 and continue to be occupied to their full potential, as well as remain aesthetically pleasing on the outside.

Dunedin has many features similar to Halifax:
- City is on the ocean
- Its a university/student city
- One of the main drivers of the economy aside from the university is the tourism industry
- The downtown is compact and the majority of the people live in the "burbs"

If a city of 130,000 like this one can take such care of its heritage buildings, I don't see why a bigger (and much busier) city like Halifax has to let its few heritage treasures waste away.

Thanks for the pictures. I think if those buildings existed in Halifax then they would be protected - there are many significant heritage buildings in Halifax that are being protected.

Many of the old buildings in Halifax that were torn down look like the ones below or worse (posted by kph06 in the Found Photos thread - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=147357&page=15). Other heritage buildings burnt to the ground because fire was a major threat in the 1800's and early 1900's because of non-existent fire safety building codes. Many Northend heritage buildings were destroyed by the Halifax Explosion.

Should buildings like the old Chronicle Herald Building have been saved; or should the Roy Building be saved?

I wish Scotia Square was built differently to maintain more of the original street structure but many of the buildings were just wooden tenements. Most of those buildings weren't worth keeping, but there might have been a few.

Honestly speaking, I don't see many heritage buildings being destroyed in Halifax. One that should be protected, in my opinion, is the old Halifax Forum; it will be 100 years old in another 18 years.

Originally Posted by kph06

I have been looking through the HRM online archives and have found many interesting photos, here are a few:

[Empire]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I know that these photos aren't from Halifax, but I thought that you guys may be interested in seeing them. These are photos I took over the past week down in Dunedin, New Zealand (I'm here doing a study exchange). One of the things that has impressed me about this city is its impeccable ability to preserve its heritage buildings. Many of the buildings in downtown Dunedin were built prior to 1900 and continue to be occupied to their full potential, as well as remain aesthetically pleasing on the outside.

Dunedin has many features similar to Halifax:
- City is on the ocean
- Its a university/student city
- One of the main drivers of the economy aside from the university is the tourism industry
- The downtown is compact and the majority of the people live in the "burbs"

If a city of 130,000 like this one can take such care of its heritage buildings, I don't see why a bigger (and much busier) city like Halifax has to let its few heritage treasures waste away.

Thanks for the photos, it's always nice to see a city proud of its heritage. I think these are similar to what you see in Halifax. Hopefully our remaining heritage buildings can be preserved. The problem in Halifax is that there are a number of buildings with significance historic and architectural merit that are not protected at all. Unless a building is a registered heritage property it can be altered or demolished as soon as the permit is issued. The registered heritage buildings are not completely protected either. A registered heritage building can be demolished.

The heritage stock in Halifax is now low enough that major tax breaks should be implemented for owners of registered heritage properties.
(I would suggest that the tax rate for a registered heritage building be at least 50% less than the current rate) These tax breaks would come with conditions to ensure the properties are maintained and kept authentic and of course no demolition would be possible.

Many buildings fall through the cracks like the brick row houses on South St. that were demolished with little or no pushback. The block that houses the BMO building on Spring Garden Rd. is of immediate concern. If it too slips through the cracks the whole block could disappear.

South St. row houses demolished Nov. 2011: Photo by Empire

[Keith P.]

Actually those Dunedin buildings look far more interesting in terms of design than most of the old structures in Halifax. There are some that are similar to St. Mary's, and to some of the old Victorian houses in the south end, but some of the other large buildings in the pics have no equivalent in Halifax. Most old Halifax buildings are wooden, 2-story structures of minimal interest that have no reason to remain. If Halifax had any number of architecturally interesting large stone buildings like those in Dunedin I would agree they should stay. But those are not what the argument usually involves.

[q12]

Has anyone seen this new Google maps app called History Pin?

http://www.historypin.com/

It's pretty cool you can blend google streetviews from today with old pictures of Halifax. Here is one of Argyle Street in 1892 with today.





http://www.historypin.com/photos/#/geo:4...334.59750/pitch:8.75750/sv_zoom:0.00000/

[Jstaleness]

Just a bit of personal news. I'm going back to work after I took parental leave for the last 9mos. Looking forward to bringing as many site photos as I can grab each day.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

I really hope Watts battles Blumenthal and Sloane moves south to fight for the downtown district. Seeing Uteck and Watts beating anti-everything Sloane and Blumenthal would be awesome!

Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

Nothing specific. A few years ago we taxpayers paid to send her on a trip to Sweden and she came back all enthused about the 6-storey wood-frame structures she saw there. That is the only thing of any size I have ever heard her speak favorably about.

[Wishblade]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Wouldn't Councillor Watts be the most anti-development Councillor - can you think of one development that she was in favour of?

She is definately anti development but especially for her district which unfortunately resides on the penninsula. She's far worse than Sloane in this regard in my opinion. Maybe she'd be better suited to being the councillor for the eastern shore or something.

[someone123]

There are different levels of heritage buildings.

The most important examples in Halifax are buildings like Province House or the Bank of NS. Those are protected and have been fairly well-preserved inside and outside. They are of national cultural and historic significance and stand out even compared to many other cities.

A step below are buildings like Morse's Teas, the nicer commercial buildings on Barrington, Keith Hall, etc. I think those should still mostly be preserved (at least on the outside), and there are enough of them that the cost to the city is reasonable. These buildings are still very exceptional within Canada, and in some cases they have a unique regional style you can't find anywhere else.

A step below that we have more run-of-the-mill brick buildings. There's a value to preserving these in order to maintain the integrity of old streetscapes, but I also think many are a great candidate for adaptive reuse. An example of this would be Barrington Espace, which is a great arrangement. The inner parts will be modern and useful but we will still have the outer facades, which were as far as I know 90% of the heritage value of those buildings.

South Street was in a range where you couldn't claim that the buildings were landmarks, but you could argue that they help establish the character of the city. It would have been better to reuse them in some way, but I don't think they needed to be perfectly preserved. It would have looked great to have the facades and some townhouses in front of a newer midrise or highrise building.

The modest wooden box type housing in a lot of the city is not really of much heritage value. I suspect they are loved mostly because people prefer them to some new building designs. There's no particular reason why they can't be replaced with higher-quality buildings.

[Empire]

A typical building that really defines Halifax is the brick building at SMU on the corner of Inglis and Tower Rd. This type of building doesn't seem to get much recognition in Halifax. This particular building might be torn down to make way for SMU redevelopment.

Brick buildiing should be saved:
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=...2OGvD4_iZ2aWImX4Q&cbp=12,282.48,,1,-5.56

There are many examples of single family residences that should be protected as well.

This Italianate design on Inglis is one that should be protected at all cost.
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=...3b6ZMKDYL0OZAEugw&cbp=12,178.82,,0,-22.5

The best example of Italianate architecture was on Tower Rd. near Inglis. The building was around 10,000 sq. ft. and was a teriffic estate until it was demolished so the Highfield Park garbage shown here could be built.
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=halifax&hl=...FINuV9l7nI9EXBHnABX4A&cbp=12,227.29,,0,0

[fenwick16]

There are many significant heritage buildings in Halifax. Here is a link to a photo tour by isaidso (there are 7 pages of pictures of heritage buildings): http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898

I think Halifax has done well at keeping many of its worthwhile heritage buildings. However, without destroying significant heritage buildings, I want to see more significant buildings in Halifax, including modern skyscrapers.

[coolmillion]

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors. I see her at all kinds of events and public meetings and she seems genuinely interested in connecting with her constituents and representing their perspectives at Council.
I believe she is supporting the proposed redevelopment of the strip mall on Young Street.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by coolmillion

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors.

For a smart person, she sure supports all sorts of dumb causes.

And while she may be "engaged" with her constituents (when are they getting married?), it would appear the majority are a bunch of NIMBYs who want nothing to ever change in their district or, for that matter, on the peninsula. That is a non-starter.

It would sure be refreshing to have councilors who ask the question "How can we make this project happen?" instead of "How can we stop this project?"

[Empire]

Originally Posted by coolmillion

Watts may not support many development proposals but she is very smart and much more engaged with her community than most of the other councillors. I see her at all kinds of events and public meetings and she seems genuinely interested in connecting with her constituents and representing their perspectives at Council.
I believe she is supporting the proposed redevelopment of the strip mall on Young Street.

Most of the facts that Watts recites are for the purposes of promoting anti-development. She doesn't want development over 4 storeys anywhere near her. She may connect with her constituents but it is for the same old anti-development campaign or more specifically NIMBY.

Watts made the comment that the additional 3 floors at the old Bay building would create traffic and parking issues. You can see from that statement that see doesn't think outside the anti-development in my backyard box.

How much traffic was generated by the Bay store and does she not know that there is a massive parking garage built into that building, not to mention parking behind it? This site is also footsteps from a major transit hub (Mumford Terminal) and has endless busses at the front door. This is exactly what she should be promoting.

She is also anti-stadium because her district needs new playgrounds.

[coolmillion]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

For a smart person, she sure supports all sorts of dumb causes.

And while she may be "engaged" with her constituents (when are they getting married?),

Engaged in the sense of "involved with", which I'm sure you know was what I meant...

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by coolmillion

Engaged in the sense of "involved with", which I'm sure you know was what I meant...

He does.

When one hasn't much fodder on-topic...

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Empire

How much traffic was generated by the Bay store and does she not know that there is a massive parking garage built into that building, not to mention parking behind it? This site is also footsteps from a major transit hub (Mumford Terminal) and has endless busses at the front door. This is exactly what she should be promoting.

I agree with your impression of her, especially with her stance on the Bay.

Going taller at this location should be an absolute given. Often, criticism of higher developments is based on a lack of public transportation.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

He does.

When one hasn't much fodder on-topic...

Well, we can always count on you to criticize, can't we? A real Johnny One-Note.

"Engaged" has become one of those trite, over-used bits of corporate-speak, like "accountability", "game-changer", and "team player".

Next, please.

[someone123]

Watts may personally be wonderful and she may attend an impressive number of tea parties and little league games but her stance on development issues is completely unreasonable.

I think that councillors should be removed from the case-by-case development approval process. They make it far too political and it is absurd to expect individual developers to have to go through years of negotiation for some of these proposals. It's also very unfair how these are always upwards battles, with NIMBY groups demanding excessive restrictions ahead of time.