General Updates and News

[IanWatson]

No way would I support such a scheme.

But surely, grouping them all in one place would make it easier for you to burn them all down!

Weird comment about outgrowing the architecture school though. They're moving the school of planning into another building specifically so the architecture school can have more space in the Medjuck building. I also can't see the EAC wanting to move out of their building on Fern. They put a lot of work and money into reno'ing it.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

More on the pie-in-the-sky dream of using the old library for Dal and HRM offices.

In the Herald today an interview with Christine Macy, head of Dal's architecture school, which included this gem:

Most of the building’s “envelope,” which would increase from 40,000 to 85,000 square feet under the proposal, would be shared by the HRM’s planning department — now dispersed across metro — and the studios, classrooms and administration from Dalhousie’s faculty of architecture and planning, which is close to out-growing its existing space .

Downstairs, where people used to peruse the shelves and check out books, would be a public space, where all aspects of planning for the city’s future could be hashed out.

Macy says that public interest groups with a focus on Halifax’s future — heritage organizations, transportation coalitions, for example, along with, say, the Ecology Action Centre — could also share digs there.

Whaaaaat? No, no, no, no, no.

Why would we pay for facilities for outfits like the Heritage Trust, the EAC, and the Halifax Cycling Coalition, all of which advocate positions counter to those of many - likely a majority - of citizens? Jeezus! This is outrageous. No way would I support such a scheme.

".. all of which advocate positions of many - likely a majority - of citizens?"

Interesting how changing a few words drastically changes what may be reality. Not sure who you speak for Keith, but you definitely don't speak for me and people I know. Dal has a history of building things, I expect that they don't need your money to do so.

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by JET

".. all of which advocate positions of many - likely a majority - of citizens?"

Interesting how changing a few words drastically changes what may be reality. Not sure who you speak for Keith, but you definitely don't speak for me and people I know. Dal has a history of building things, I expect that they don't need your money to do so.

Not normally one to chime in. And I only recently joined the site. But I really cannot agree that Keith speaks for the majority. At least not the majority that lives on the peninsula.

Halifax is enjoying amazing progress, growth and development that we never thought would ever happen.

I grew up in Halifax and many of the people that I grew up with have left because of the attraction of living somewhere that was dynamic and forward thinking.

Its the new and different ideas of thought that are driving this growth. For the first time in quite a while, Halifax is actually retaining young adults rather than losing them to parts out west.

I'm afraid that the cynics are now the minority and we all know what Oscar Wilde said about cynics.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Summerville

Not normally one to chime in. And I only recently joined the site. But I really cannot agree that Keith speaks for the majority. At least not the majority that lives on the peninsula.

Halifax is enjoying amazing progress, growth and development that we never thought would ever happen.

I grew up in Halifax and many of the people that I grew up with have left because of the attraction of living somewhere that was dynamic and forward thinking.

Its the new and different ideas of thought that are driving this growth. For the first time in quite a while, Halifax is actually retaining young adults rather than losing them to parts out west.

I'm afraid that the cynics are now the minority and we all know what Oscar Wilde said about cynics.

Welcome to the forum.
I've have wondered who Keith thinks he speaks for, and have been intrigued that he believes that his is the majority opinion.
PS thanks for the Wilde reminder

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

Welcome to the forum.
I've have wondered who Keith thinks he speaks for, and have been intrigued that he believes that his is the majority opinion.
PS thanks for the Wilde reminder

The majority of taxpayers in this town oppose bike lanes.

The same holds true for many of the extremist positions of the EAC.

I am less sure of whether the Heritage Trust and other anti-development groups enjoy as broad a level of support as they once did, but regardless, none of the above deserve publicly-funded space.

I often wonder who some of the "progressive" members here think they speak for when they put forward their positions. Certainly not very many people whom I talk to regularly. Thankfully, the mindset found in universities and planning schools are not broadly held outside those bounds.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The majority of taxpayers in this town oppose bike lanes.

The same holds true for many of the extremist positions of the EAC.

I am less sure of whether the Heritage Trust and other anti-development groups enjoy as broad a level of support as they once did, but regardless, none of the above deserve publicly-funded space.

I often wonder who some of the "progressive" members here think they speak for when they put forward their positions. Certainly not very many people whom I talk to regularly. Thankfully, the mindset found in universities and planning schools are not broadly held outside those bounds.

Keith, you can of course provide us with links to those studies that show a lack of support in HRM for bike lanes and the EAC?

"I often wonder who some of the "progressive" members here think they speak for when they put forward their positions. Certainly not very many people whom I talk to regularly. " Keith, I speak for myself, I try not to speak for others. I suspect that you and I don't travel in the same circles; although perhaps roundabouts we might.

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by JET

Keith, you can of course provide us with links to those studies that show a lack of support in HRM for bike lanes and the EAC?

"I often wonder who some of the "progressive" members here think they speak for when they put forward their positions. Certainly not very many people whom I talk to regularly. " Keith, I speak for myself, I try not to speak for others. I suspect that you and I don't travel in the same circles; although perhaps roundabouts we might.

I don't see why we can't have a conversation from different viewpoints and meet in the middle. I'll admit that I support the EAC, but I also support fracking and natural resource development. But there has to be a voice from various parts of the population.

You can't develop a society in a vacuum. You need different ideas from different ends of the political spectrum and then you meet in the middle.

But yeah,...I am always hoping the we end up on the left side with the end result. The word "liberal" has been given a bad name. It used to mean that you were open to new ideas and different ways of doing things.

How can you justify making long term decisions in the development of the city without considering all factors or perspectives? You'll end up with another Cogswell interchange.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

Keith, you can of course provide us with links to those studies that show a lack of support in HRM for bike lanes and the EAC?

"I often wonder who some of the "progressive" members here think they speak for when they put forward their positions. Certainly not very many people whom I talk to regularly. " Keith, I speak for myself, I try not to speak for others. I suspect that you and I don't travel in the same circles; although perhaps roundabouts we might.

I was fully expecting the inevitable "Citation?" response. I gave you my citation in my response. Any study you post showing a majority here in HRM support bike lanes I will debunk because it would have to be bogus.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I was fully expecting the inevitable "Citation?" response. I gave you my citation in my response. Any study you post showing a majority here in HRM support bike lanes I will debunk because it would have to be bogus.

A lack of a citation is not a citation. Which is why discussions that include the word "most" usually fall flat.

[someone123]

I think the old library proposal looks great. It is exactly the sort of redevelopment I was hoping would happen. The old building is nice, as is the triangular park, but the site could be put to more use. Turning it into a bigger square park and tearing down the building would be a mistake. The old library is a nice stone building that responds well to the site while the side of St. David would not really do much for the park. This part of downtown Halifax does not need more parkland. It is already half parks. Right next door Artillery Park sites underused, along with the Citadel grounds.

This view in particular shows how nicely it would fit in with the surroundings:


From the article: https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2018...0-million.html

I don't know what the status of the proposal is but there was also a plan for a lowrise building on the parking lot next to St. Mary's Basilica. This area could really come together with consistent medium scale. It also fits in with the idea of building a small civic district around the library with more indoor space that is open to the public.

[OldDartmouthMark]

All things considered, I think this is a very good proposal. The original agreement for it remaining parkland was right for the 1800s but moving forward the lot developed a new history with the Memorial Library - which was quite a step up from what meagre library facilities were available to the general public beforehand.

Maintaining the façade, and perhaps some of the character of the original building would continue that history, as well as the triangulated park area that exists.

I think that the ground floor public space is a great idea, and actually giving the different associations mentioned a place to meet and interact is a good idea.

I won't pretend to speak for the people of Halifax, but from the many people I have spoken with and read from... building heritage, transportation, and the environment are all very important concerns that people have for Halifax. Providing a space for them to exchange ideas, perhaps with the Halifax planning people, seems to be a very good direction in which to go. It may help develop more focused ideas on how to move Halifax forward, rather than be a mishmash of competing idea.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

All things considered, I think this is a very good proposal. The original agreement for it remaining parkland was right for the 1800s but moving forward the lot developed a new history with the Memorial Library - which was quite a step up from what meagre library facilities were available to the general public beforehand.

Maintaining the façade, and perhaps some of the character of the original building would continue that history, as well as the triangulated park area that exists.

I think that the ground floor public space is a great idea, and actually giving the different associations mentioned a place to meet and interact is a good idea.

I won't pretend to speak for the people of Halifax, but from the many people I have spoken with and read from... building heritage, transportation, and the environment are all very important concerns that people have for Halifax. Providing a space for them to exchange ideas, perhaps with the Halifax planning people, seems to be a very good direction in which to go. It may help develop more focused ideas on how to move Halifax forward, rather than be a mishmash of competing idea.

If HRM isn't paying for the space, let them go to town. But single issue activist groups like the HCC and the HT should not receive funding or benefits from city government, as it makes them an arm of the city and provides their view undue influence. We have seen that already with the EAC.

I have some difficulty with the proposal overall not just from that viewpoint but also from the financial commitment the city would be making without any assurance of a revenue stream. If they are estimating $30 million now I imagine it could easily actually be double that. That is some mighty expensive office space for a bunch of bureaucrats.

[ns_kid]

I'm surprised that no one has yet weighed in on the ask by the Link Performing Arts Society for a $1 million injection from Halifax (and more from the other two levels) to develop a performing arts venue in the old World Trade and Convention Centre.

There are many here who have voiced the need for a larger performance space downtown, but I must admit to some bemusement over this proposal.

Last week's funding request to council proposes an 1800-seat performance hall that can be "flexibly divided" into smaller spaces. (The society's co-founder, Marc Almon, former head of Screen NS, told CBC the space could hold up to 2000.) It would also house a small cinema, a production studio, and couple of dance studios and office space for cultural groups, along with a box office and cafe.

That sounds impressive but the space limitations seem to me to really work against the functionality and appeal of this project. You'll recall that one of the main reasons for abandoning the WTCC as a convention space was its cramped conditions, with low ceilings and numerous pillars. Most of the exhibit spaces have horrible sightlines; the only really suitable space is the grand ballroom (Port Royal Room) on the second floor. According to JDA Architects that space is 20,141 sf, but it's broken on both the north and south sides by rows of (big!) pillars that essentially carve 5,040 sf of space from the room. In the centre the room is 19.5 feet high but behind the pillars it's only 16'. The WTCC put the theatre-style seating capacity of that room at less than 1,600, so I'm not sure where the other 200-400 seats are supposed to go.

(By contrast the 1,023-seat Rebecca Cohn has a proscenium height of 20'. While I could not find dimensions for the house, based on the drawings I estimate the auditorium around 24.5' at its highest.)

It seems to me that any effort to bring life to that block of Argyle Street is admirable, but this is clearly not the majestic new downtown performance venue some have dreamed about. Waye Mason mused about it attracting acts like Wilco and Steve Earle, but I admit to some skepticism about its suitability. My recollection is the acoustics in that place were abysmal; correcting that will be a job in itself.

It also puzzles me that there is no apparent interest in incorporating a significant performance space into the new waterfront art gallery project the premier seems intent on championing.

Other than Neptune's 479-seat main auditorium, and the awful 650 seats in the Casino's Schooner Showroom, there hasn't been a large-capacity performing arts space downtown since the loss of the Capitol in 1974. I sometimes wonder what is says about our culture and economy that the private sector could open a grand 1,980-seat theatre at the height of the Depression but we struggle to find a way to put bums in seats in 2018.

[Keith P.]

The more I look into the WTCC proposal the more I get the impression it is the Khyber boondoggle all over again but on a much grander scale. The building, as you note, is saddled with many design issues that severely compromise its intended use. It really needs either a full gut and rebuild at likely massive cost if it is even possible, or a teardown and rebuild if you want to use it as something like that which is proposed. In its present form it is limited really to office space or conversion to a hotel, perhaps.

The capacity numbers being tossed around are based upon no seats at all - festival style. I cannot imagine being jammed into that room with 1800 standees. A more unpleasant performance experience would be hard to fathom. But that is what Mason, the main cheerleader on Council for all such things, is touting in posts elsewhere. And the business model strikes me more as pie-in-the-sky promises than anything. Profits are going to be hard to find given all of the uses being touted, so forget about any return to whatever other organizations are supposed to benefit.

HRM of course is quick for fork out money to these sort of things but I rather doubt the province would be so generous. I do agree we need a suitable performance venue, but not this half-assed scheme.

[TheNovaScotian]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The more I look into the WTCC proposal the more I get the impression it is the Khyber boondoggle all over again but on a much grander scale. The building, as you note, is saddled with many design issues that severely compromise its intended use. It really needs either a full gut and rebuild at likely massive cost if it is even possible, or a teardown and rebuild if you want to use it as something like that which is proposed. In its present form it is limited really to office space or conversion to a hotel, perhaps.

The capacity numbers being tossed around are based upon no seats at all - festival style. I cannot imagine being jammed into that room with 1800 standees. A more unpleasant performance experience would be hard to fathom. But that is what Mason, the main cheerleader on Council for all such things, is touting in posts elsewhere. And the business model strikes me more as pie-in-the-sky promises than anything. Profits are going to be hard to find given all of the uses being touted, so forget about any return to whatever other organizations are supposed to benefit.

HRM of course is quick for fork out money to these sort of things but I rather doubt the province would be so generous. I do agree we need a suitable performance venue, but not this half-assed scheme.

It definitely is a project I hope doesn't happen. I'd always thought the most reasonable and cost effective way to eventually expand the 40 year old Metro Centre was to re orientate the bowl and use that space for the expansion. This would just give us a new group that expects special treatment.

I have to agree with Keith on this one, it's a half baked idea with new performing spaces being built by Dal behind the Rebecca Cohn that would fill that niche for the city. Eventually a new performing arts centre could happen but until then they should focus those funds on furthering a realistic solution, not a band aid solution.

[Spire]

I'm cautiously optimistic about the Culture Link project, for several reasons. There is, understandably, a lot of focus on the "concert venue" element of the proposal, but the potential to bring a lot of arts organizations under one roof, with a stable rent structure, is the most exciting part of the proposal to me. Back in the days of the CBC Radio Building on Sackville St., it was home to a bunch of cultural organizations because CBC had a bunch of unused space, and it accidentally ended up being a fantastic sort of "incubator", resulting in a great deal of collaboration and shared ideas between organizations. Now all of those organizations are scattered around the city, often in spaces that aren't particularly suited for their needs. This project could potentially address that, bringing film, music, theatre, and dance organizations together. The dance community, in particular, has had a tough time of it, and this would be a huge upgrade for them. Fredericton's beautiful Charlotte Street Arts Centre, partially an old schoolhouse and partially a new build, is a great example of how this sort of space can work (albeit on a smaller scale).

Originally Posted by ns_kid

Most of the exhibit spaces have horrible sightlines; the only really suitable space is the grand ballroom (Port Royal Room) on the second floor. According to JDA Architects that space is 20,141 sf, but it's broken on both the north and south sides by rows of (big!) pillars that essentially carve 5,040 sf of space from the room. In the centre the room is 19.5 feet high but behind the pillars it's only 16'. The WTCC put the theatre-style seating capacity of that room at less than 1,600, so I'm not sure where the other 200-400 seats are supposed to go.

The 1800 figure is for a standing-room crowd, like you'd see at the Marquee - it certainly would only be for a particular type of concert (and not the ones I go to, that's for sure). I honestly don't know why the Culture Link folks are hyping that figure, because it distorts the real purpose and potential of that space. The really interesting part about that space to me is that it would be a fully configurable black box space, configurable for theatre (including theatre-in-the-round), dance, etc...this is a type of space that Halifax has noticeably lacked, and is sorely needed. Currently, we only have the Bus Stop and Studio 1 at the Dal Arts Centre, both of which are tiny and have significant limitations on their suitability and use. And as far as the pillars go, by looking at the preliminary floor plans for the project (page 23 onwards), they've worked around the pillars. resulting in a space that's around 12,000 Square Feet. I've been in that space numerous times at conventions, and in a converted form, I can imagine the potential - I think it would definitely be an improvement over what's available in the city now.

It also puzzles me that there is no apparent interest in incorporating a significant performance space into the new waterfront art gallery project the premier seems intent on championing.

There was a campaign for a waterfront concert hall several years ago, but as expected, nothing came of it. It would be great if that happened (the Cohn's acoustics are pretty awful for classical music, something that Symphony Nova Scotia have had to live with for years), but I'm not holding my breath.

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

it's a half baked idea with new performing spaces being built by Dal behind the Rebecca Cohn that would fill that niche for the city.

The new concert hall being built by Dal will be controlled by the Fountain School of Performing Arts, and is primarily for their students' use, for recitals and concerts. It's also going to be acoustically treated and designed for classical music (wood-paneled walls, etc.), which limits its suitability for many other types of music or events. It's a great new facility for them, and for the Scotia Festival of Music, who will certainly move their events there from the Dunn Theatre, but it certainly doesn't address the lack of suitable spaces that the Culture Link project could potentially offer.

Eventually a new performing arts centre could happen but until then they should focus those funds on furthering a realistic solution, not a band aid solution.

I'd love to see something new, built from the ground up, but given our past track record in this city, and the amount of money it would take, I don't think that's ever going to happen. Compared to other cities our size across Canada and North America, we have a lack of suitably-sized and designed performance spaces, for a variety of artistic disciplines. Fredericton, Moncton and Charlottetown all have better-equipped and larger proscenium theatres, for example (the Cohn isn't an equivalent in any way.) We're the largest city in Canada without a permanent independent cinema. We're also set to lose our television studio next year when Studio 1 at CBC Bell Road closes, and this would provide a replacement.

There's still a ton of question marks, no doubt, and I'm not holding my breath that they'll be able to get all of the funding to make it happen, but there is absolutely a need and desire for this sort of facility, whether it is here or somewhere else in the downtown. This seems, to me, like the best shot for the arts community of something actually happening - because it's probably not going to happen any other way.

[someone123]

Reno for the Durty Nelly's exterior:


Source

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Spire

I'm cautiously optimistic about the Culture Link project, for several reasons. There is, understandably, a lot of focus on the "concert venue" element of the proposal, but the potential to bring a lot of arts organizations under one roof, with a stable rent structure, is the most exciting part of the proposal to me. Back in the days of the CBC Radio Building on Sackville St., it was home to a bunch of cultural organizations because CBC had a bunch of unused space, and it accidentally ended up being a fantastic sort of "incubator", resulting in a great deal of collaboration and shared ideas between organizations. Now all of those organizations are scattered around the city, often in spaces that aren't particularly suited for their needs. This project could potentially address that, bringing film, music, theatre, and dance organizations together. The dance community, in particular, has had a tough time of it, and this would be a huge upgrade for them. Fredericton's beautiful Charlotte Street Arts Centre, partially an old schoolhouse and partially a new build, is a great example of how this sort of space can work (albeit on a smaller scale).



The 1800 figure is for a standing-room crowd, like you'd see at the Marquee - it certainly would only be for a particular type of concert (and not the ones I go to, that's for sure). I honestly don't know why the Culture Link folks are hyping that figure, because it distorts the real purpose and potential of that space. The really interesting part about that space to me is that it would be a fully configurable black box space, configurable for theatre (including theatre-in-the-round), dance, etc...this is a type of space that Halifax has noticeably lacked, and is sorely needed. Currently, we only have the Bus Stop and Studio 1 at the Dal Arts Centre, both of which are tiny and have significant limitations on their suitability and use. And as far as the pillars go, by looking at the preliminary floor plans for the project (page 23 onwards), they've worked around the pillars. resulting in a space that's around 12,000 Square Feet. I've been in that space numerous times at conventions, and in a converted form, I can imagine the potential - I think it would definitely be an improvement over what's available in the city now.



There was a campaign for a waterfront concert hall several years ago, but as expected, nothing came of it. It would be great if that happened (the Cohn's acoustics are pretty awful for classical music, something that Symphony Nova Scotia have had to live with for years), but I'm not holding my breath.



The new concert hall being built by Dal will be controlled by the Fountain School of Performing Arts, and is primarily for their students' use, for recitals and concerts. It's also going to be acoustically treated and designed for classical music (wood-paneled walls, etc.), which limits its suitability for many other types of music or events. It's a great new facility for them, and for the Scotia Festival of Music, who will certainly move their events there from the Dunn Theatre, but it certainly doesn't address the lack of suitable spaces that the Culture Link project could potentially offer.



I'd love to see something new, built from the ground up, but given our past track record in this city, and the amount of money it would take, I don't think that's ever going to happen. Compared to other cities our size across Canada and North America, we have a lack of suitably-sized and designed performance spaces, for a variety of artistic disciplines. Fredericton, Moncton and Charlottetown all have better-equipped and larger proscenium theatres, for example (the Cohn isn't an equivalent in any way.) We're the largest city in Canada without a permanent independent cinema. We're also set to lose our television studio next year when Studio 1 at CBC Bell Road closes, and this would provide a replacement.

There's still a ton of question marks, no doubt, and I'm not holding my breath that they'll be able to get all of the funding to make it happen, but there is absolutely a need and desire for this sort of facility, whether it is here or somewhere else in the downtown. This seems, to me, like the best shot for the arts community of something actually happening - because it's probably not going to happen any other way.

Thanks for your perspective on this. When I first heard of the proposal, I thought it sounded interesting, but didn't know enough about the current situation to offer an opinion one way or the other. Based on your comments it sounds like a worthwhile project and I hope it works out.

It's a sad commentary that we can't hope for anything better, but this is Halifax, where only the insanely practical projects seem to happen without a huge outcry from the penny-pinchers. All this despite that Nova Scotia is one of the most culturally rich parts of the country.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thanks for your perspective on this. When I first heard of the proposal, I thought it sounded interesting, but didn't know enough about the current situation to offer an opinion one way or the other. Based on your comments it sounds like a worthwhile project and I hope it works out.

It's a sad commentary that we can't hope for anything better, but this is Halifax, where only the insanely practical projects seem to happen without a huge outcry from the penny-pinchers. All this despite that Nova Scotia is one of the most culturally rich parts of the country.

I feel the same way.

There are a variety of hypothetical projects like this that suit different needs. If the goal is to provide cheap suitable space for a bunch of artists then repurposing an old building is usually the way to go. It would likely be vastly more expensive to provide this type of space in a new purpose-built waterfront cultural complex. I think sometimes people are too quick to complain about projects that are similar to what they have in mind but don't tick all of the boxes when ultimately many similar projects can and should happen.

There is something to be said for strengthening an arts/entertainment district around Argyle. Hopefully if this happens the building renos will make it look more vibrant and inviting and less institutional.

I don't know how practical a Metro Centre reno would be, but I'm generally against leaving central land fallow for long-term planning purposes. We don't really know what future needs will be and these strategies rarely generate a net payoff.

[someone123]

Bad urban design:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6488...7i16384!8i8192

This end of Argyle needs a do-over too. Eventually, this quasi-pedestrian area should connect down through the Grand Parade to the Province House area and onto the waterfront via George Street. The Dockyard Clock area needs an overhaul too.

The little cul-de-sac is pointless. Why not make this a place for people to spend time rather than park their vehicles (go park at the other end that is half surface lots) or spin around when they are lost? The urban realm here is ugly and there is nothing to draw visitors up from the waterfront: https://www.google.com/maps/@44.6494...7i13312!8i6656