Halifax must protect historic clinic of first Black physician in N.S., group says

[Keith P.]

Everyone's favorite activist, Peggy Cameron, is at it again, and of course CBC is on the case to give her a podium:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...otia-1.6513426

For further clarity, this is on the south side of North St, one house east of the corner of Robie and North, near the MT&T/Aliant property.

I have multiple issues with this, even aside from the usual Peggy Cameron silliness.

As can be seen from the picture in the CBC piece, it was once a lovely building, actually a bigger duplex than it is at present. The left half of the original structure was demolished a long time ago apparently. From the present day pictures it still seems to be in decent repair but one suspects most of the interior finishes have been updated for the rental market, though I am not certain of that.

Ms. Cameron's alarm seems largely a disguise for her usual anti-development position, cloaking it this time in a guise of a black doctor who used the site to treat victims of the Halifax Explosion. Even she admits that it is not under risk of demolition at present but that it could be the site of (gasp!) a tall apartment building, oh the horror.

One suspects few Haligonians have ever heard of the good doctor and using that as justification seems flimsy at best. This is a very busy corner and one suspects that at some point even HRM will sit up and take notice that the roadways in both directions need improvement, so that is another risk facing it. To save it long-term it would likely take a great deal of investment from someone or full relocation which does not seem likely.

This raises a bigger question for me which is that given the explosive growth we have seen in Halifax recently and the projections that it could reach 1 million residents by 2050, where do all those people go? You cannot get 20 lbs of potatoes in a 10 lb sack. There will likely be a lot of smallish wood frame buildings under risk of demolition to provide taller/bigger/modern housing. Do we just tell those people to go to the suburbs?

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Do we just tell those people to go to the suburbs?

Yes, so then we can complain about traffic and cars and all the associated environmental impacts!

[Drybrain]

I don't think for a second that Cameron actually cares a whole lot about Black history (or medical history), and this is clearly just an opportunity to dress up anti-development sentiment in more acceptable clothing.

Having said that, I'm not actually against heritage designation here--it seems to be in decent repair with much of its Victorian characters still intact, has a legitimate claim to historical interest and importance, and is a fairly significant character-defining building in the area. I would actually be in favour of designating this, even if Cameron's interests in doing so are probably less about history and more about preventing tall buildings from being constructed.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Having said that, I'm not actually against heritage designation here--it seems to be in decent repair with much of its Victorian characters still intact, has a legitimate claim to historical interest and importance, and is a fairly significant character-defining building in the area. I would actually be in favour of designating this, even if Cameron's interests in doing so are probably less about history and more about preventing tall buildings from being constructed.

There are at least 2 probable futures for that area. One is the future where a decent number of key heritage buildings are preserved and the newer developments themselves have more character, and it becomes one of the best neighbourhoods in Canada. The other is where the character is mostly erased and it becomes a watered down version of what gets built in most North American brownfield areas. The same thing goes for the Old South Suburb area but that seems to have more protection in place already and seems to be on a better trajectory with some planned developments having heritage components instead of following the demolition derby model.

We sometimes hear that these areas are "Disneyfied" but if you look at the picture from 1900 there was a lot of detail that has since been lost. The buildings still look nice but they are stripped down compared to what they looked like when they were built. Halifax could look much much better with relatively modest but fine-grained improvements to buildings like this.

[someone123]

One odd aspect of the debate in Halifax is how much people talk about the freedom to do what they want with their private property while the responsibility to of property owners to contribute positively to the public realm they benefit from is rarely mentioned. Waye Mason for example framed the question of whether or not to set up a heritage district in terms of what the property owners want in his neighbourhood, in his post responding to the Robie Street demolitions. In the specific domain of crappy homeowner behaviour, more or less uniquely, Halifax is a kind of Ayn Rand dream.

I think that there is a bit of motte and bailey going on here when talking about poor homeowners who can't afford renos when the properties are often worth a lot now and in most cases the ugliest ones are owned by landlords who charge high rents and just want to make more profits by minimizing upkeep even if it means degrading the public realm. There's a lot of angst about the worst landlord behaviour, with a huge focus on the evils of new construction, but not much talk of how to keep the buildings looking good so that they can be enjoyed for another 200 years.

It's not wrong to talk about ownership rights and flexibility but that's not the only value that exists in a city and sometimes you should take stock of where you are. Halifax is in the "how dare you tell me I can't put Home Depot siding on my 18th century apartment building that rents for $8,000 a month" range.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

There are at least 2 probable futures for that area. One is the future where a decent number of key heritage buildings are preserved and the newer developments themselves have more character, and it becomes one of the best neighbourhoods in Canada. The other is where the character is mostly erased and it becomes a watered down version of what gets built in most North American brownfield areas.

I agree that in an ideal scenario some developer would buy this building along with its neighbor on the corner, knock down the adjacent nondescript buildings on Robie as far as Willow, and propose a new apartment building on the bulk of the lot, with the pair of North St buildings incorporated into the design as townhouse units or whatever with fully restored street level finishes.

The problem is that this is one of the busiest corners in Halifax, being the intersection of the main N/S and E/W routes. Would anyone want to pay big money to live 10 feet away from all that traffic at street level? I suspect they would be a very hard sell. Perhaps the economics of the rest of the proposal would need to be able to carry them as a loss leader, but I wonder if any developer, even the most enlightened, would be willing to do that. In the end you end up with what could be a couple of jewels next to a very ugly and unfriendly Bell Aliaint facility, with a gas station and a used car lot across the street, and some of the worst traffic in town. It just doesn't seem practical.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The problem is that this is one of the busiest corners in Halifax, being the intersection of the main N/S and E/W routes. Would anyone want to pay big money to live 10 feet away from all that traffic at street level? I suspect they would be a very hard sell. Perhaps the economics of the rest of the proposal would need to be able to carry them as a loss leader, but I wonder if any developer, even the most enlightened, would be willing to do that. In the end you end up with what could be a couple of jewels next to a very ugly and unfriendly Bell Aliaint facility, with a gas station and a used car lot across the street, and some of the worst traffic in town. It just doesn't seem practical.

It's just an intersection of some small streets (2-3 lanes) with a low speed limit. There's nothing especially bad about it. The North Street and May Street demolitions are what have degraded this area.

I think in the long run this will be a mixed use medium density neighbourhood like many others. The traffic will become less and less of an issue as electric vehicles become more common. They are quieter and less polluting.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Having said that, I'm not actually against heritage designation here--it seems to be in decent repair with much of its Victorian characters still intact, has a legitimate claim to historical interest and importance, and is a fairly significant character-defining building in the area. I would actually be in favour of designating this, even if Cameron's interests in doing so are probably less about history and more about preventing tall buildings from being constructed.

I agree with this viewpoint.

I actually had no idea that the building had this history until I read the article. I suspect there are many other old buildings in Halifax that would have a good story to tell if there were more interest. Sadly, the discussions often centre around the lots and structures as a commodity, and what would be the best financial outcome for the owner.

I see no reason why new development and historic properties can't coexist in a case like this. The location shouldn't be a deterrent to quality development. Those streets have high traffic volumes, but are well signaled and tend to be much safer than multi-laned roads with 70+ km/h speed limits. The worst aspect would likely be traffic noise, though the expectation is that this will decrease in a major way once most vehicles become electrically powered in the next 20-ish years.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

One suspects few Haligonians have ever heard of the good doctor and using that as justification seems flimsy at best. This is a very busy corner and one suspects that at some point even HRM will sit up and take notice that the roadways in both directions need improvement, so that is another risk facing it. To save it long-term it would likely take a great deal of investment from someone or full relocation which does not seem likely.

Halifax already has plans to upgrade the intersection to allow for transit lanes on Robie. The neighbouring building has a transportation reserve zoning which prohibits any new structures. This actually could end up saving this building by coincidence because the narrow developable area between MT&T Building and the TR zoning is unlikely to be economical to redevelop unless the developer owns other neighbouring properties. If the neighbouring building gets demolished the wall along that side could be fixed up and maybe used to enhance the heritage value.