Group calls for tax credit to preserve heritage buildings

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by keninhalifax

If the Heritage Trust weren't the only voice for built heritage in the city, perhaps things would operate differently.

I think people need to stand up to them at the least. Their ideas on Heritage are rarely challenged except when it concerns the big question -- height -- It usually gives the perception that it's developers vs. heritage and you have to take a side for progress or against.

[keninhalifax]

Yeah, Inglis seems to be the only place in town outside of the 'tourist axis' that I've seen with interpretive signage.

[skyscraper_1]

What other neighborhoods in the HRM could/should be preserved? I agree that certain neighborhoods should be kept intact as long as residents realize that other districts like Spring Garden are going to develop in another direction. For example, just because you can see a potential high rise doesn't mean it is going to destroy the feel of the neighborhood.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

^^^^

I think the "tourism" angle brings up a whole lot of issues. You definetly get a lot different type of conservation if you're trying to live up to tourist's expectations of Ye Olde Halifax than if you're concerned about the culture and built heritage.

Personally I think we've bought into the hype of Historic Halifax a little too much and a lot of people look at the city through the blinkers of sailors, soldiers, Halifax Explosion, and Alexander Keith's. The general populace has a strong attachment to a romantic old Halifax that they really know little about. Personally I'd make an argument the city was a slummy backwater for most of its history. Other than some outstanding exceptions in the downtown most of the city's heritage isn't too flashy.

I also think a larger issue is that Halifax defines it's downtown so tightly that we fight over fifteen or twenty square blocks and consequently lose sight of the bigger picture. Downtown Halifax has some amazing historic buildings that contribute a lot, but personally I don't think the entire area warrants conservation district status. Focus on getting the most out of the best and adaptive reuse of other buildings where possible.

Outside of downtown is where we should be more concerned with protecting neighbourhoods because that is where parts of the old urban fabric is still intact. Even with generous protected areas we'd still leave large areas for new developments both in and around downtown because the Schmidtvilles of Halifax only make up a very small part of the city.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by skyscraper_1

What other neighborhoods in the HRM could/should be preserved? I agree that certain neighborhoods should be kept intact as long as residents realize that other districts like Spring Garden are going to develop in another direction. For example, just because you can see a potential high rise doesn't mean it is going to destroy the feel of the neighborhood.

Schmidtville - working class artisan's suburbs 1840s-1860s
Maynard/Creighton/Falkland - 1860s-1870s working class
Fuller Terrace and some surrounding streets - maybe some of the nicest streets in Halifax - 1890s?
West St./Moran St./Sarah St. - 1870s - 1880s?

Outside of those areas maybe the city could take an analagous approach to ecological conservation. Look for the best examples of each "urban ecosystem" and conserve them to represent the bigger picture. I mean there is so much intact 1900-1920s streetcar suburbs left that preserving all of it would be overkill. War time housing would be a similar idea - preserve something that best represents that urban form.

There's definetly some quality stuff out there - I'm a neophyte at this heritage thing I'm probably missing a lot.

[someone123]

Yes, there is a lot of unrealistic nostalgia. Halifax looked terrible in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Some nice buildings have been destroyed but there are also many areas that consisted of low-slung wooden slum housing, warehouses, barracks, etc. which cannot in any way be considered superior to what replaced them. Overall, the city has improved remarkably since even the mid-90s.

Barrington is one part of the city where nostalgia is definitely prevailing. The main stretch of Barrington is about 1/3 post-war, 1/3 mediocre pre-war, and 1/3 historic buildings worth preserving. Many people seem to think that the whole street should be kept in stasis and that installing new light fixtures or whatever will turn it into what it was in 1960. This is absurd. It would be much better to preserve the best buildings on the street and tear down some of the smaller ones for modern developments.

[sdm]

In downtown what about the ability to blend old with new, like projects in the uk and stuff like founders square? I think this should be allowed as its one way to make the economics of keeping older buildings erected.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Halifax Hillbilly

Schmidtville - working class artisan's suburbs 1840s-1860s
Maynard/Creighton/Falkland - 1860s-1870s working class
Fuller Terrace and some surrounding streets - maybe some of the nicest streets in Halifax - 1890s?
West St./Moran St./Sarah St. - 1870s - 1880s?

I would not consider much of those worth preserving to be honest. Schmidtville I can give you, but only because the houses there are generally well-preserved and some are interesting architecturally. The Maynard/Creighton/Falkland area is truly slummy and always has been for my entire life. If you razed it and put something of reasonable quality in there it would be a definite improvement. The Fuller Terrace area... maybe. I've been in those houses and some were nice once. I just wonder how much that's worth preserving remains as it became working class and transient in the 1950s and later. West and Moran... my family had houses on those streets when I was growing up. Frankly, there is nothing special about it.

This is the problem I have with much of the heritage argument. They place inordinate value on things that weren't special when they were new, just because they are old. They built the equivalent of chipboard wonders in the 1890s too, you know. I mean, we're not talking about Penn Station in NYC with any of these places. They are all pretty ordinary and nothing would change much if something new and nicely done were to replace it. If anything, the city would improve.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Haven't we tried to raze slummy areas of town before?

I'm not saying any of those buildings are exceptional on their own but when taken as a whole they represent good examples of Halifax's middle class and working class housing from the 19th century. I don't really find Maynard/Creighton area to be too different from what you might see in downtown St. John's Nfld. Get rid of the vinyl siding and a chop shop or two and you've got part of a neighbourhood that's almost 150 years old. That's unique and I believe its worth preserving older working class areas of the city.

Compare the gentrified section of Maynard near Rainnie drive to the shabbier bits - it's pretty much the same housing but fixed up they're pretty nice. These places are desireable with a little care.

There's no lack of land in the North End for new construction. What do you gain by tearing down useful buildings when there isn't enough development pressure to fill in the vacant lots that already exist? If we are trying to build working neighourhoods let's start with what we have.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by sdm

In downtown what about the ability to blend old with new, like projects in the uk and stuff like founders square? I think this should be allowed as its one way to make the economics of keeping older buildings erected.

I'm totally for quality new construction downtown and Founder's Sq. kind of projects. Downtown proper has some really great buildings but personally it's historic character is long gone, except maybe Barrington St. The focus should be on good design instead of complimenting historic buildings.

I think what has to be decided downtown is what buildings are exceptional and deserve protection, what buildings are good and should be adapted and re-used, and what old buildings could be taken down if there's the demand/desire. HRMbyDesign didn't bother to ask these questions and instead just called the whole thing a historic district which doesn't make any sense.

[someone123]

I think a large percentage of the North End's original housing stock could become very attractive if it were cleaned up. The gentrified parts do provide good examples of what can be done. Agricola also has examples of buildings that used to appear unremarkable but are now highly attractive inside and out and yet still maintain some kind of historical integrity.

Of course, the area also needs lots of new construction so it can support more local amenities and better transit service. This is already happening to some degree.

The Cogswell/Robie/North area has a ton of potential.

[phrenic]

Originally Posted by keninhalifax

Preservation of culturally-significant heritage buildings and new construction alike contribute to a local economy, but proper rehabilitiation and reuse of typical, underused buildings can also be a boon to a local economy. Heritage, as far as I'm concerned, is not about pushing "Ye Olde Halifax, 1802" so much as it is about making use of the 98.5 percent of the building stock that at any given time is not under construction.

I agree, I was simply pointing out Mr. Pacey's inability to see the benefits in any new construction.