Group calls for tax credit to preserve heritage buildings

[phrenic]

Group calls for tax credit to preserve heritage buildings

By RICHARD WOODBURY

Canada needs to implement a tax credit program for the repair and restoration of heritage buildings, says the president of a heritage group.

"We need to see the federal government acknowledge the great importance of heritage buildings as tourist attractions, as economic generators, as contributors to our quality of life and as an essential part of our legacy to future generations," Philip Pacey, president of the Heritage Trust of Nova Scotia, told the Commons standing committee on finance recently in Halifax.

Tourism is a $1.3-billion a year industry in Nova Scotia, employs 33,000 people directly and indirectly and generates more than $200 million in tax revenue, Tourism Department documents show.

"Other than walking and shopping, visiting historic buildings and sites is the biggest activity of tourists in Nova Scotia," Mr. Pacey said. "Our heritage buildings are major contributors to the economy and to our way of life."

The trust was established in 1959 to protect historically, architecturally and culturally significant buildings, such as the stone warehouses on the Halifax waterfront, now the Historic Properties.

"As you walk around Halifax, you may see vacant sites," Mr. Pacey said. "These were once the sites of fine buildings. They are demolition sites. They do not contribute to the economy."

The trust would like the federal government to introduce a program similar to one first implemented by former U.S. president Ronald Reagan. That program provides tax credits for the restoration and repair of historic buildings, Mr. Pacey said. That program is still active.

In 2003, the federal government introduced a program that provided financial incentives to encourage the private sector to conserve and restore heritage buildings, rather than demolish them. That program was closed to new applicants in September 2006.

( rwoodbury@herald.ca)

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1000108.html

////////////////////////////////////////////

As you walk around Halifax, you may see vacant sites," Mr. Pacey said. "These were once the sites of fine buildings. They are demolition sites. They do not contribute to the economy.

Ahuh, ahuh...and you know what does contribute to the economy? New construction!

Bah, this guy annoys me.

[someone123]

Yeah, that's awfully rich coming from somebody who has fought so hard to keep certain lots empty.

It's also untrue that every vacant site contained wonderful historic buildings. Many of them were wooden barracks, stables, or slum housing, which is why they were torn down. Of course, there are notable exceptions.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

This is what is so frustrating about the Heritage Trust. THIS should be their main battleground, not fighting every downtown development proposal. Tax credits for historic buildings could be a great thing but unfortunately a lot of people don't have time for the messenger.

[keninhalifax]

Originally Posted by phrenic

Ahuh, ahuh...and you know what does contribute to the economy? New construction!

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.

St. John's NL and Saint John NB are two Maritime cities who have accelerated their economies by providing locals incentives to refurbish the already existing building stock. Why can't Halifax follow in their footsteps? This does not need to preclude new development nor the emphasis of historic sites but can provide for an overall much more resilient and attractive built environment. I see certain downtown buildings and shake my head in disbelief that avant-garde reno-developers haven't hopped on the adaptive reuse opportunity. Perhaps if government incentives would tip the balance in their favour, this would happen more often.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

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.

St. John's NL and Saint John NB are two Maritime cities who have accelerated their economies by providing locals incentives to refurbish the already existing building stock. Why can't Halifax follow in their footsteps? This does not need to preclude new development nor the emphasis of historic sites but can provide for an overall much more resilient and attractive built environment. I see certain downtown buildings and shake my head in disbelief that avant-garde reno-developers haven't hopped on the adaptive reuse opportunity. Perhaps if government incentives would tip the balance in their favour, this would happen more often.

Ken I agree with you on all points. Unfortunately I think you've put the case together much more convincingly than the Heritage Trust. Is tourism the most important reason to keep heritage buildings? NO but every time Phil Pacey speaks on the subject it's almost all we hear about. In my opinion the Heritage Trust has not been a strong voice on heritage issues. They have an exceptionally narrow view of what constitutes heritage and their attention has been focused almost entirely on the relationship of new buildings to the downtown.

[someone123]

Part of the problem is that heritage regulation and incentives are so up in the air right now. It doesn't really make sense to renovate right before financial incentives are put in place and those have been coming "any day now" for about ten years.

Supposedly council will be voting on a Barrington Street heritage plan in a couple of weeks. Barrington itself is kind of tragic because, while it's not really as bad as most people say, it could be made a lot better with pretty minimal effort.

As for other cities, St. John's is quite different. Its older buildings are smaller and simpler than those in Halifax (St. John's city centre is more like the old parts of the South or North end). The old buildings in uptown Saint John are more similar to what's in Halifax but they are in many cases also underused or abandoned. Saint John is pretty much an example of what Halifax would be like if there were no new construction for about 50 years.

[keninhalifax]

I agree with you, someone123, and I use St. John's and Saint John not for comparative purposes but rather as examples of municipal leadership. Both cities aren't as economically well-situated as Halifax but have irregardless of this fostered a healthy development/heritage discourse within their communities by elevating the role of government in redevelopment initiatives.

Why can't the HRM, a City that seems to pride itself for its built heritage, walk the walk? I understand that the Heritage Trust has a very narrow focus, and its agenda is somewhat questionable, but I have yet to ascertain why the HRM is so vague about its heritage intentions. I can't even get a straight answer from the municipality about its evaluation process for designating heritage buildings. If the Heritage Trust weren't the only voice for built heritage in the city, perhaps things would operate differently.

[someone123]

They can't give any clear answers because they have no real policies. All the current heritage designation does is delay demolition of registered buildings by one year and registration itself must be initiated by the building owner. Basically, the system assumes that owners will volunteer to have more restrictions placed on their properties without any accompanying benefits. It's a dumb system.

I am a bit skeptical about heritage preservation and economic growth. I think that at the very least people misinterpret what's going on. St. John's is largely looking better because there's more money floating around. The money is a result of local industrial projects and, indirectly, probably also migration to Alberta. A lot of heritage advocates try to claim that the reverse is true and that is pretty absurd.

[keninhalifax]

Originally Posted by someone123

St. John's is largely looking better because there's more money floating around.

The city is indeed wealthier today, but the majority of the improvements to the building stock in central St. John's occurred during the years following the 1976 Heritage By-law, at a time when the city was in the midst of a severe economic downturn and the downtown was a deteriorated shell of its former self.

Building owners don't need much of an incentive in order to restore their properties, especially in cities where this is a much more fiscally viable option than building anew. This is heritage 'preservation' (i.e., making use of the buildings that already exist) as it should be done.

[1ajs]

want grants from the feds get a national historic area designation like the excahnge distric in winnipeg has...

[SteelTown]

^ Harper cut that program last year along with other billion dollar worth of cuts. Winnipeg was the last to recieve the grant.

[keninhalifax]

Good ol' Steve. He's so good to Canada's cities.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Personally I get the impression that HRM feels that much of this debate will be handled by HRMbyDesign and a bunch of rules and policy will be recommended which resolve the issue. That could explain some of the confusion at city hall on the issue. Essentially there isn't a coherent heritage strategy and they are waiting for HRMbyDesign to flesh one out.

Unfortunately though the debate at HRMbyDesign on heritage seems to be the same old garbage: view planes, Citadel, complimentary buildings, height.

So much of this city's heritage lies outside downtown proper, yet so little is said about the north end, or Schmidtville, or even the old streetcar suburbs west of Robie. That's why it's almost premature to talk about incentives for heritage properties until we sort out what constitutes a heritage property and what we want to accomplish with these buildings. Right now the city doesn't have a clue, and the Heritage Trust's agenda is exceptionally narrow.

[keninhalifax]

^ I'm astonished at the lack of 'blue plaques' on the buildings in Schmidtville. You'd think the entire area would be lumped under a special designation of some kind or another, but HRM are rather ambiguous about this.

[Keith P.]

Schmidtville is a new discovery to most. I lived in it for nearly 10 years and never heard the term until a couple of years ago. I suspect most other residents were the same. A couple of activists have drummed up some publicity for the term and suddenly its a historic district. Not saying it isn't worthy, but nobody really knew about it until recently -- which does make you wonder.

[skyscraper_1]

Schmidtville was one of the first suburbs of Halifax I believe. Of course it has long since been absorbed into the city fabric. Does anyone know exactly what area constitutes Schmidtville? I am completely in favor of trying to enhance and foster a unique dictrict.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by keninhalifax

^ I'm astonished at the lack of 'blue plaques' on the buildings in Schmidtville. You'd think the entire area would be lumped under a special designation of some kind or another, but HRM are rather ambiguous about this.

I'm astonished at the lack of heritage plaques in general in this city. They are essentially non-existant outside of downtown and the south end, with the exception being Brunswick St.

Maynard/Creighton, West St. and Moran, Fuller Terrace, Compton and Cunard, etc. etc. As far as I can tell Heritage is only worthy of protection if it is related to the wealthy Victorian or Georgian eras, or the military. Unless it's of outstanding value anything middle or working class (like Schmidtville) is ignored.

Schmidtville was one of the first working class suburbs of Halifax and it used to consist of the area between Queen, South Park, Morris and Spring Garden. As of today I guess Schmidtville would be considered to be bounded by Brenton, Queen, Morris and Clyde St. It's almost entirely intact 1840s-1860s. If you are looking for a historic district this is where you focus NOT on the downtown.

[keninhalifax]

^ Almost entirely intact save the bits that they decided to tear down to make way for those parking lots behind the buildings on the south site of Spring Garden. Ugh.

[someone123]

Yes, those parking lots are terrible, although I don't know what was there originally. The Spring Garden and Queen lot had a few buildings including an 18th century stone mansion (the site of the Lord Nelson and other buildings along SGR were originally large houses as well). There are also a few buildings along Morris that have had bad renovations and the Morris Street School, a stone building, was torn down and replaced with a low-slung seniors' home.

I don't think there necessarily have to be plaques up everywhere but it would be nice if minimum standards were established for neighbourhoods along with some financial incentives to compensate. Many areas would look much better if vinyl siding were eliminated.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't think there necessarily have to be plaques up everywhere but it would be nice if minimum standards were established for neighbourhoods along with some financial incentives to compensate. Many areas would look much better if vinyl siding were eliminated.

As plaques are the only way we have to know what's an historic building and what isn't they are still a great way to quickly see what people value in heritage.

It's a good point though about individual building preservation vs. neighbourhood preservation. In most areas of Halifax the concern would be in preserving the best buildings, but in certain areas a bigger picture approach is needed to preserve entire intact streetscapes or in the rare case intact neighbourhoods. The Tower Rd., Inglis St. and Carleton St. streetscapes are great examples of where Halifax has done it right.