[Halifax] The Sister Sites | 2X29 m | 2X9 floors | Completed

[hokus83]

I'm more concerned over what's the best planing for that street. Mixed residential and commercial is the only thing that should be being added to Queen street. There is a shit tone of room off set back from it for Dal to expand around the Electrical Engineering building without putting anything along Queen street which is what the original plan was before they had this parcel of land. There was going to be a new building like one of the sister sites and a small park between it and the library leading to a new buildings attached to the Electrical Engineering area. I'd be fine with the Corner of Queen and morris having some Dal building though taking up that parking lot. The parcel were talking about really needs to add more to area with underground parking for both the library, residential.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

I've never really understood the "public sector should stay out of the X business!" stuff.

Is it okay for Dalhousie to sell food on their campus? What's the alternative? Technically, this is Dal competing as a landlord or competing with private food vendors. There are private colleges too. Dal is competing with those.

Let me help you understand then.

There are any number of reasons why. The first is what Jet mentioned above. Using public funds to build a real estate portfolio and amass land in the south end of Halifax is not the optimal use of funding for an educational institution. First and foremost, Dal exists to provide students with a university education. Sprawling, excessive buildings cost lots of money, raise the cost of education, and do little to nothing to improve the quality of that experience. Priorities.

I would be happy to see all our universities become private because they would be managed much, much more efficiently and not be such a burden on our provincial budget. But to your specific example, it is clearly a straw man. Students live on campus and need food. Dal contracts the provision of that necessity out. You and I do not go there to eat. It is different from them opening up a space on Queen St called "Tom Traves' South End" to compete with Tom's Little Havana or "La Florizone" to compete with La Frasca. Nor should they be opening up commercial space for lease to compete with Fares and Halif and Chedrawe. They are using public funds in part to do that, clearly unfair. We do not see the province building shopping malls. This is the same reason why the cafe spaces in the palatial library were a bad idea. That was not a necessity and drove up the cost (not that anyone seemed to ever worry about that in that example).

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Let me help you understand then.

There are any number of reasons why. The first is what Jet mentioned above. Using public funds to build a real estate portfolio and amass land in the south end of Halifax is not the optimal use of funding for an educational institution. First and foremost, Dal exists to provide students with a university education. Sprawling, excessive buildings cost lots of money, raise the cost of education, and do little to nothing to improve the quality of that experience. Priorities.

I would be happy to see all our universities become private because they would be managed much, much more efficiently and not be such a burden on our provincial budget. But to your specific example, it is clearly a straw man. Students live on campus and need food. Dal contracts the provision of that necessity out. You and I do not go there to eat. It is different from them opening up a space on Queen St called "Tom Traves' South End" to compete with Tom's Little Havana or "La Florizone" to compete with La Frasca. Nor should they be opening up commercial space for lease to compete with Fares and Halif and Chedrawe. They are using public funds in part to do that, clearly unfair. We do not see the province building shopping malls. This is the same reason why the cafe spaces in the palatial library were a bad idea. That was not a necessity and drove up the cost (not that anyone seemed to ever worry about that in that example).

The university has limited real estate on the traditional Studley campus.

So, if it needs to expand, to provide students with, you know, appropriate facilities in its educational mission, then what should it do, Keith?

Lease out office space downtown? Because that would be a really efficient use of public funds.

The university is expanding to an area that has land available, close to its main campus, which it acquired to do the expansion.

No one is competing with any commercial enterprise, unless Tom's Little Havana plans to offer degrees in health administration. There will be ground level space for commercial enterprise that will provide services to students, like typical services in the Student Union Building. Those offerings will also be offered to the public, the same way anyone can walk into the Student Union Building and buy a Tim's coffee or a Pete's bagel.

But yes, go on. Let's hand wring more about this great, brooding, sputtering tempest in a teapot.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The first is what Jet mentioned above. Using public funds to build a real estate portfolio and amass land in the south end of Halifax is not the optimal use of funding for an educational institution. First and foremost, Dal exists to provide students with a university education. Sprawling, excessive buildings cost lots of money, raise the cost of education, and do little to nothing to improve the quality of that experience. Priorities.

This is more of an argument over how Dal should be spending their money rather than an argument about public vs. private spending. I agree that many public universities all around North America are spending too much on buildings and administration and that education is too expensive as a result.

I would be happy to see all our universities become private because they would be managed much, much more efficiently and not be such a burden on our provincial budget.

How would this be implemented? In BC there are privatized transit subcontractors paid by the region to provide specific services like buses. So, basically, you'd have something like Metro Transit and they'd pay out $100M a year to the bus company and $20M a year to the ferry company, or whatever the operating costs are. This system is almost completely opaque because the reporting requirements on the subcontractors are less stringent. It is the worst of both worlds because we still pay them with our property tax dollars. Costs have not gone down and there is no real competition. Really, we have replaced public companies with private black boxes that still perpetually ask for more money, potentially suffer from labour issues, etc. There has been no gain except to the operators themselves who now presumably have large slush funds to play with.

The BC Rail privatization was a full-blown scandal that resulted in the provincial legislature being raided and convictions for public officials. The whole thing was a PR campaign by a conservative government back in the day that argued that the public company was an inefficient burden. Their solution, apparently, was a fire sale of public assets to their cronies.

But to your specific example, it is clearly a straw man. Students live on campus and need food. Dal contracts the provision of that necessity out. You and I do not go there to eat. It is different from them opening up a space on Queen St called "Tom Traves' South End" to compete with Tom's Little Havana or "La Florizone" to compete with La Frasca.

Really? I bet lots of people who happen to be near Dal pop into Tim Horton's despite not being students. The same thing goes for the hospital; people go to the food court there. My point isn't that there's no simple cutoff beyond which food services become an obviously bad idea. You're presenting your value judgements about what is or isn't good for the university to be doing as clear-cut violations of some kind of principle. There is no clear line between Tim Horton's and La Florizone.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by someone123

You're presenting your value judgements about what is or isn't good for the university to be doing as clear-cut violations of some kind of principle.

Bingo.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

You're presenting your value judgements about what is or isn't good for the university to be doing as clear-cut violations of some kind of principle.

Yeah, because planners would never do such a thing.

[Jonovision]

The porthole windows have started to take shape.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

The porthole windows have started to take shape.

Ugh. I was hoping cooler heads would prevail and that unfortunate design choice would be eliminated.

One can only hope lighthouse art installations on the sidewalk are not also in the plans.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Ugh. I was hoping cooler heads would prevail and that unfortunate design choice would be eliminated.

One can only hope lighthouse art installations on the sidewalk are not also in the plans.

Ugh. Me too.

On both counts.

[JET]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...ture-1.3051094

Public art or questionable infrastructure?

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by JET

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...ture-1.3051094

Public art or questionable infrastructure?

I think public art is excellent. But let's be honest: there's a lot of ugly, aging, rusting brutalist art in there (kind of like brutalist architecture). The Ben's Bakery piece is particularly awful -- looks like a rusty junk yard. Had no idea that was commissioned art. Moreover, it's occupying an area that could be developed (street front) into something that actually contributes positively the area.

[Keith P.]

While the CBC intern seemed to concentrate mostly on brutalist stiff, the examples are pretty bad (I like the one in front of the Weldon and that's about all). The Ben's wall, the Needham bells, the Marine Venus, the library thing -whatever it is - and the Trillium saltshakers lighthouses are all offenders.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

I think public art is excellent. But let's be honest: there's a lot of ugly, aging, rusting brutalist art in there (kind of like brutalist architecture). The Ben's Bakery piece is particularly awful -- looks like a rusty junk yard. Had no idea that was commissioned art. Moreover, it's occupying an area that could be developed (street front) into something that actually contributes positively the area.

The CBC piece is kind've weird--it seems to assume readers will think public art is a waste of money, and just snarks on various well-known local artwork, some of which is quite good. (I like MArine Venus, and I don't understand at all why so many people hate the North is Freedom sculpture--I think it's great, though apparently it has some spelling mistakes, which is embarrassing.)

That Ben's thing is NOT good, though. I didn't know it was art either, until a couple of weeks ago. But since then I've had a couple of conversations with people who have an emotional attachment to it and want it preserved, on that site, despite that it occupies enough space for probably four or five brand-new storefronts on Quinpool. (One of these guys also strongly advocates for the demolition of various historic buildings on the grounds that they're "obsolete," so there's no accounting for taste, I guess.)

I always just thought it was some kind of retaining wall to hide the bakery/empty lot from view. It's horrendous. If Keith wants to commission an errant bulldozer to take out the NFB facade, I'd like to do the same to this.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I always just thought it was some kind of retaining wall to hide the bakery/empty lot from view.

That's all I ever thought it was - never thought of it as art. Would be good to remove it and replace the parking lot with a nice mixed residential/retail project....

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

If Keith wants to commission an errant bulldozer to take out the NFB facade, I'd like to do the same to this.

Hey, maybe we can get a group rate!

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

That's all I ever thought it was - never thought of it as art. Would be good to remove it and replace the parking lot with a nice mixed residential/retail project....

Same here. I'm rather shocked to think this was actually something deliberate.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by JET

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...ture-1.3051094

Public art or questionable infrastructure?

I like most of that stuff... even the Ben's wall, to some extent.

I find the Daleks, I mean saltshakers, I mean lighthouses, a pat response to someone's perception of regional culture, and am not convinced they are art. Some kind of statement about intent and process might help me get there, but for now I find them an insult to the intellects of all who pass by.

[IanWatson]

I really like most of those installations. I don't think brutalist art or buildings get enough love.

I even kind of like the Ben's wall, though to be honest I always figured it was a project done by architecture undergrads or something. While I'll be a little sad to see it go, it's certainly not worth keeping if there's potential to fill in that block with new storefronts.

I don't really love or hate the lighthouses, but what really gets my goat is that Fares got bonus density for having them. Bonus density is supposed to be in exchange for a public good. Can anyone say with a straight face that those things provide any public good?

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I really like most of those installations. I don't think brutalist art or buildings get enough love.

I even kind of like the Ben's wall, though to be honest I always figured it was a project done by architecture undergrads or something. While I'll be a little sad to see it go, it's certainly not worth keeping if there's potential to fill in that block with new storefronts.

I don't really love or hate the lighthouses, but what really gets my goat is that Fares got bonus density for having them. Bonus density is supposed to be in exchange for a public good. Can anyone say with a straight face that those things provide any public good?

I'm happy to give bonus density for public art.

I actually don't mind the lighthouses so much. A bit regional and quaint, but, that's a lot of what Maritimer culture likes to pretend to be.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

The CBC piece is kind've weird--it seems to assume readers will think public art is a waste of money, and just snarks on various well-known local artwork, some of which is quite good. (I like MArine Venus, and I don't understand at all why so many people hate the North is Freedom sculpture--I think it's great, though apparently it has some spelling mistakes, which is embarrassing.)

That Ben's thing is NOT good, though. I didn't know it was art either, until a couple of weeks ago. But since then I've had a couple of conversations with people who have an emotional attachment to it and want it preserved, on that site, despite that it occupies enough space for probably four or five brand-new storefronts on Quinpool. (One of these guys also strongly advocates for the demolition of various historic buildings on the grounds that they're "obsolete," so there's no accounting for taste, I guess.)

I always just thought it was some kind of retaining wall to hide the bakery/empty lot from view. It's horrendous. If Keith wants to commission an errant bulldozer to take out the NFB facade, I'd like to do the same to this.

I actually don't mind Marine Venus. I think the intern got it wrong; it's not brutalist art, it's actually Inuit art. Hedrick is an Inuit who, in the 60s, engaged with what he called "figurative" art.

I don't at all understand wanting to preserve that horrid wall on Quinpool. I think the only people defending it are likely NIMBYs who actually care more about stopping some new development there, than preserving the eyesore itself.