[Halifax] Richmond Yards | 103-47-41-40-32 m | 31-13-12-10-8 fl | U/C

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Empire

Due to a the fact that we lack a healthy supply of brick and stone buildings, much emphasis should be placed on maintaining the great wooden structures that we have and restoring features that have been stripped away because of lazy maintenance. This would include removing vinyl. The hydrostone area is a prime example of how vinyl has diminished the character of quality stone buildings. It is the 'Hydrostone' not 'Hydrovinyl'

Agree those are unfortunate. What are they doing, just hanging the vinyl siding over the old stone? Why?

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

- I love the Hal Forbes-type of sprucing-up with Victorian-style gingerbread and the associated detail painting of said gingerbread, but Keith has a point in that many of these homes were just utilitarian 'boxes' that were built on a modest budget to serve as residences and just that. One could argue that the retro-detail adding is not a true restoration, but is actually 'Disneyfying' (I hate that term but feel it is at least slightly applicable here) these old homes to try to make them something that they weren't. I like it, and it's pretty to look at, but it's not really historical preservation in its purest form.

I agree with this, but I'm inclined to give the Forbes-like restorations a pass since they’re still attractive, and done in a way that’s visually coherent with, and sympathetic to, the historic styles.

And even the plain old saltbox-style boxes tended to have some ornamentation—they weren’t quite the unadorned boxes we see today. It's hard to find good photographs of non-descript streetscapes in the 19th century, and even by the 1940s and 50s many of these buildings had become rundown and stripped, but the municipal archives has lots of mid-century images that indicate that even pretty plain houses generally were ornamented around the gables, eaves, windows and doors, and often had decorative transoms, etc.
(e.g., one, two, three)

There was a time when even pretty plain, working-class housing had these elements. Which shouldn't be surprising; I'm sure they were something close to "mass-produced," with carpenters cranking out samey-looking trims and the like.

And yes, I also think wood shingles make a huge difference, adding texture and visual interest. Vinyl makes a building look like a shed.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by kzt79

Agree those are unfortunate. What are they doing, just hanging the vinyl siding over the old stone? Why?

I'm not sure, but as a Hydrostone resident, it's totally baffling to me. I bought my house in 2015, and it was bare stone, but if I had bought one with siding, I'd strip it off immediately. I can't understand the purpose of it.

Possibly some houses have stone that's been poorly taken care of and needs repointing, and the siding is a way to cover that up. But I suspect most people with siding just prefer it. I remember the owners of a house across the street from me stripped off its white siding a couple of years ago, exposing pristine stone underneath. I was glad to see it--until a few days later it was covered up with brand-new blue siding. Completely bizarre.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

It's hard to find good photographs of non-descript streetscapes in the 19th century, and even by the 1940s and 50s many of these buildings had become rundown and stripped, but the municipal archives has lots of mid-century images that indicate that even pretty plain houses generally were ornamented around the gables, eaves, windows and doors, and often had decorative transoms, etc.

The development was finely differentiated with higher or lower end housing often only being separated by a block or two. For example Brunswick itself had lots of high end houses. I have an old book with a sketch of the streetscape from 1968 and it was quite wonderful looking. It got wrecked in the 70's.

Many, many buildings in Halifax are stripped down compared to what they looked like originally. This is true of a lot of larger masonry buildings as well. These are more numerous and prominent than the Hal Forbes renos.

To me the "we're no Boston" sentiment seems irrelevant to the question of what effort to put into preservation in Halifax. If those nicer buildings are scarcer locally, doesn't that make preservation more valuable rather than less valuable? I doubt this kind of framing would even enter the debate in other cities, e.g. people in Victoria saying that their 2 storey brick 1900 buildings aren't worth saving because there are nicer ones in San Francisco. I really only hear this type of view from NS, often about buildings that are much more historic than what exists in most parts of Canada.

[someone123]

As an aside I think the local vernacular in Halifax and the Maritimes is somewhat unique. It's really appealing when the buildings are kept in good shape (not just to me; people take tons of pictures of these houses and visitors remark on them). It is reductionist to describe these buildings just in terms of size or materials. There are plenty of wooden streetscapes I'd take over other brick streetscapes.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by someone123

Brunswick itself had lots of high end houses. I have an old book with a sketch of the streetscape from 1968 and it was quite wonderful looking. It got wrecked in the 70's.

I'll bet those are Yogi Jenson's sketches, right? I love his work.

Anyway, yes, there were lots of grand century-plus-old residences on Brunswick in the 60s. What the Jenson sketches (mercifully) don't really show is that many were, by then, in very, very poor states of repair and many had been chopped up into apartments or rooming houses. I've often wondered what the northern-most few blocks of Brunswick could've looked like today had they all been restored/revitalized. Many of them easily could have been $1-$2-$3M homes in today's market.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by kzt79

Agree those are unfortunate. What are they doing, just hanging the vinyl siding over the old stone? Why?

I lived in a Hydrostone for a few years in the early '70s. The siding trend was underway even then. I think part of it was to provide a bit of distinctiveness to your house so that it didn't just look like all the others. For some time prior to that there seemed to be a trend to put something on the front wall around the entry door and the area that was under the front porch roof, which seemed fine. Some people also enclosed or expanded their rear porch and that got a similar treatment. I do agree that when that was expanded to cover all exterior walls it looked bad, especially if the adjacent unit did the same but in a different color or size.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I assume you're talking about this one?


Here's a pic from April, 1956:

Source

Thanks ODM! That's definately the right site but I find myself wondering if it's the same building. At first I thought that perhaps a sloped roof had replaced the original flat roof of the building but is the footprint of the blue vinyl sided current structure the same as pictured in the historic pic? Maybe it's a different building?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I have spent many hours looking at old photos of Halifax/Dartmouth, and while I am aware that many nice masonry/stone buildings were lost during the 'slum clearance' or for other reasons, I won't for one second think that Halifax is comparable to Boston on any level. Or even smaller cities like Portland, ME, for that matter.

I find that Portland has more impressive buildings from circa 1880-1920, and is more intact, but similar or less impressive buildings from pre-1880 or so or post-1920. As an illustration I'd ask what buildings you could trade Province House or the Dominion Public Building for that are an obvious step up.

There's the odd building type you see in Portland that Halifax just doesn't have, like the 4 storey brick row on Park Street, but you could make the same observation in the other direction. I don't think Portland has a Dalhousie equivalent for example. This situation reminds me of Saint John.

Boston is a different story. It's a much bigger and older city with much more objectively impressive buildings. However, it still doesn't have ironstone buildings or Scottish dormers nor is it all that colourful, and Haligonians cannot enjoy the buildings in Boston on a day to day basis. In the same way Boston's buildings are less impressive than New York or London but it's still worthwhile since it's qualitatively different.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

Thanks ODM! That's definately the right site but I find myself wondering if it's the same building. At first I thought that perhaps a sloped roof had replaced the original flat roof of the building but is the footprint of the blue vinyl sided current structure the same as pictured in the historic pic? Maybe it's a different building?

To be honest, I'm not sure. If you look at the west-facing side of the building along North Park St., the general proportions (below the sloped roof) and the window/door spacing seem to be the same. If it's the same building, it's obvious that a huge modification was done, and the result is not attractive. Also, similarly the house to the left in the photo appears to be the same building but hugely altered in appearance (and not an improvement IMHO).

From March 1963:

Source

From July 2019:

Source

Also notice that in plan view, the building is not rectangular, and is angled to follow Cogswell on the south side of the building. That seems to be the same in both new and old shots.

1962:

Source

Google maps:


Also, I think in the case of the photos posted previously, that this irregular shape changes the perception of length in the side view shots along Cogswell. If one is imagining that it's a rectangular building, then the change of the angles in these shots wouldn't skew the perception of length as much as it appears to (not sure if I've worded that clearly enough). This is convincing me more and more that this is the same building, but heavily modified over the decades.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

I find that Portland has more impressive buildings from circa 1880-1920, and is more intact, but similar or less impressive buildings from pre-1880 or so or post-1920. As an illustration I'd ask what buildings you could trade Province House or the Dominion Public Building for that are an obvious step up.

There's the odd building type you see in Portland that Halifax just doesn't have, like the 4 storey brick row on Park Street, but you could make the same observation in the other direction. I don't think Portland has a Dalhousie equivalent for example. This situation reminds me of Saint John.

Boston is a different story. It's a much bigger and older city with much more objectively impressive buildings. However, it still doesn't have ironstone buildings or Scottish dormers nor is it all that colourful, and Haligonians cannot enjoy the buildings in Boston on a day to day basis. In the same way Boston's buildings are less impressive than New York or London but it's still worthwhile since it's qualitatively different.

I think leaving out the first sentence in your quote of my original post changes the context of what I was trying to say:

I have long observed that NS has a higher percentage of wooden construction to masonry construction than comparable cities in the US.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I think leaving out the first sentence in your quote of my original post changes the context of what I was trying to say:

I dunno. If you went back to 1940 you'd find that a large proportion of buildings from about Morris over to Cornwallis were masonry and this is roughly comparable to the brick-dominated footprint in Portland. Then you've got areas like the Hydrostone. Portland seems to have more detached brick houses and apartments while Halifax may have and almost certainly originally had more masonry row housing. I think a lot of the perceived difference today is due to demolitions and modern development that detracts from the feeling of historical cohesiveness. I have seen a considerable stock of brick buildings torn down while I've been watching in Halifax, like the Roy Building which would have been one of the bigger old brick buildings in Portland, or the rows along South Street or Spring Garden Road.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

I dunno. If you went back to 1940 you'd find that a large proportion of buildings from about Morris over to Cornwallis were masonry and this is roughly comparable to the brick-dominated footprint in Portland. Then you've got areas like the Hydrostone. Portland seems to have more detached brick houses and apartments while Halifax may have and almost certainly originally had more masonry row housing. I think a lot of the perceived difference today is due to demolitions and modern development that detracts from the feeling of historical cohesiveness. I have seen a considerable stock of brick buildings torn down while I've been watching in Halifax, like the Roy Building which would have been one of the bigger old brick buildings in Portland, or the rows along South Street or Spring Garden Road.

Perhaps you're right, but that hasn't been my perception. Too bad we don't have Google streetside views that date back into the 1800s as it would make discussions of this type much easier!

Anyhow, I think we're starting to clog up the Richmond Yards thread with off-topic stuff, so I'll leave it at that.

[Northend Guy]

Better jump on this quick folks - you have an opportunity to restore the character of the city!
https://www.viewpoint.ca/map#eyJvdmV...9pZCI6IjEifX19

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I agree with this, but I'm inclined to give the Forbes-like restorations a pass since they’re still attractive, and done in a way that’s visually coherent with, and sympathetic to, the historic styles.

And even the plain old saltbox-style boxes tended to have some ornamentation—they weren’t quite the unadorned boxes we see today. It's hard to find good photographs of non-descript streetscapes in the 19th century, and even by the 1940s and 50s many of these buildings had become rundown and stripped, but the municipal archives has lots of mid-century images that indicate that even pretty plain houses generally were ornamented around the gables, eaves, windows and doors, and often had decorative transoms, etc.
(e.g., one, two, three)

There was a time when even pretty plain, working-class housing had these elements. Which shouldn't be surprising; I'm sure they were something close to "mass-produced," with carpenters cranking out samey-looking trims and the like.

And yes, I also think wood shingles make a huge difference, adding texture and visual interest. Vinyl makes a building look like a shed.

Good points, and I do agree that the Forbes-style embellishments improve the appearance of the buildings and are done in a period-correct style. I would definitely will give them a pass.

My only point is that this newer add-on type of ornamentation would be considered a little over the top, if one were doing what would be called a 100-point restoration in the automotive world. it's fine, and most people don't care, to be frank. Nobody is really trying to 'restore' a building to absolute original state, they are just trying to make them look nice and be respectful to the era in which they were built. And i think that's great... a little payback for all of the 'run of the mill' ornamentation that was unceremoniously stripped off these houses during the cheap-o vinylification that happened years ago.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Northend Guy

Better jump on this quick folks - you have an opportunity to restore the character of the city!
https://www.viewpoint.ca/map#eyJvdmV...9pZCI6IjEifX19

I thought they were going for more than $600k at this point. Maybe prices will come down in the next year or two as interest rates go up. A couple of years ago you could buy a Halifax house for the price difference between a 2 or 3 BR Vancouver condo.

I've often considered "putting my money where my mouth is" and buying some really ugly properties (I'd pick the worst ones, so that Hydrostone house wouldn't qualify; that smaller house with the mansard roof that got a vinyl hack job might due to its prominence) and making them into what I think is ideal. But prices went up a lot and I live quite far away now. Maybe one day.

Another thing I wonder about is trying to apply modern technology like CNC milling to mass-producing high-quality wood elements in the local style. It would be more of a fun project than an attempted money-making venture. Part of the goal would just be to offer a relatively affordable supply of those items so that people restoring their little wooden rowhouses wouldn't pay as much of a premium to go with something nicer than vinyl.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Empire

- Vinyl is used on many large apartment buildings leaving broad surfaces exposed to wind. There are many examples of patched siding that doesn't render a colour match either due the stock being no longer available or because of UV fading.

- IMO natural tones of brick and stone would not deter as many purchasers as yellow or bright blue vinyl siding.

- Vinyl is not maintenance free as it requires expensive routine pressure washing to remove black mold and algae.
source Google search:
"The mold and algae are attracted to the sidings because of the dirt ,dust and sugars that are attached to the vinyl. Most people may be unaware that trees and other vegetations release into the air ultrafine particles of sugars at different times of years. Some of these sugars settle on the vinyl"

- a new building can have features added that were present in past Halifax architecture without it being 'Disneyfing', it is simply recognizing quality architecture.

I think you misinterpreted my intent. I despise these character-removing vinyl makeovers as much as the next guy, but I also don't think we need to exaggerate the 'evils' of vinyl siding almost to the point that it makes the discussion silly.

For example, to say that stripping off the ornamentation from Victorian-era houses and covering the wooden shingles with vinyl siding destroys the appearance and character of these houses is spot-on, and hard to argue. However, equating stripping and repainting a house every 10 years or so to a quick pressure wash of vinyl siding every couple of years doesn't add credence to the argument. Just trying to keep it real.

And with that... I don't want to contribute to clogging up this thread with off-topic stuff any further.

[coastalkid]

Originally Posted by someone123

I thought they were going for more than $600k at this point.

The strategy for sellers in this market (over the past 2 years) has been to list low to attract as many offers as possible, thereby driving up the final sale price. The average sale price on the peninsula last month was about 20% over asking. There were 2 Hydrostone townhomes sold in March - they went for $707k and $770k respectively.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by someone123

I thought they were going for more than $600k at this point. Maybe prices will come down in the next year or two as interest rates go up. A couple of years ago you could buy a Halifax house for the price difference between a 2 or 3 BR Vancouver condo.

That house does seem priced low. It's a bit dated, decor-wise, but there's nothing fundamentally wrong with it. I'd bet it's priced low to spark bidding.

[EDIT: I see someone made this point before me!]

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

That house does seem priced low. It's a bit dated, decor-wise, but there's nothing fundamentally wrong with it. I'd bet it's priced low to spark bidding.

[EDIT: I see someone made this point before me!]

It is no doubt priced low because of the poor quality vinyl job. This unit is in desperate need of a pressure wash to remove the black that likely is algae. You can see the white beside the windows where it looks like shutters were removed.

Another downside to vinyl is how it destroys the appearance of window / door casings due to being built out the thickness of insulation and the siding. Many homeowners install vinyl for the cost savings on their heating bill. Unfortunately, the pay back period to just break even would be 20-40 years and the vinyl would likely need replacing at that point.

source google maps - poor curb appeal
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/552...!4d-63.6041208