"any home had to be accessed more than $2'000 if wood, or $3'000 in brick." Then, "no building could be erected within 180ft (60m) of Young Ave without permission of the City Council and it was forbidden to use such buildings as hotels, house of entertainment, boarding house, shop or for sale of liquor." Historic South-End Halifax; page 80
This is just for fun but how many people think something along the line of this by-law should be reintroduced for Young Ave?
There is a reason for reintrodusing this bylaw. I'm not sure how many forumers go down this street but over the past year two mansions have been demolished to make way for townhouses between the Tennis Club and Atlantic Street. Many locals agree that this is a shame and is ruining the character of the street. I agree with them. Being pro-development i can see that this adds density to the area but this street is widely known as being wealthy and full of character. It is the beautiful gateway to Point Pleasant, connecting wilderness with downtown. IMO while the buildings themselves should not be preserved, the setbacks, and high-class houses should be. Developers can build up to five-storeys on the back-streets (like McLean) so why not protect something unique so close to downtown while having a one-of-a-kind bylaw in our city?
I'm estimating this but at the bare minimum $800'000-$900'000 should be required, some setback (maybe 20 feet?), and the properties should be zoned R!.
I'm not sure how many forumers go down this street but over the past year two mansions have been demolished to make way for townhouses between the Tennis Club and Atlantic Street. Many locals agree that this is a shame and is ruining the character of the street.
I don't know about the second property but one of the demos was the Stanbury house on the corner of Atlantic. I was astounded it was able to be demo'ed so easily. A prime example of how the Heritage Trust is absolutely worthless -- they should have been actively trying to sabe this building as it was quite distinctive and a landmark.
I don't know about the second property but one of the demos was the Stanbury house on the corner of Atlantic. I was astounded it was able to be demo'ed so easily. A prime example of how the Heritage Trust is absolutely worthless -- they should have been actively trying to sabe this building as it was quite distinctive and a landmark.
Now that I think of it I'm not sure if it was a mansion but it was the Stanbury's neighbour. I know something stood there I just can't remember what it was exactly.
I was there when they demolished the Stanbury's and some people in the crowd looked like they were going to cry. A hundred years of character and all it takes to get rid of it is a demolition permit. There should be some sort of by-law to protect houses of a certain age. I'm still for renewing the peninsula but owners should have to have a good reason to demolish some buildings.
As a side note, foundation has begun on the two townhouses replacing Stanbury's.
Just to give this thread some visual help (all photos taken by me):
The new townhouses.
Construction at the former Stanbury House.
Sample of whats across the street.
This is what the street should be like. Note the setback, low wall, landscaping, beauty.
I emailed Councillor Uteck with this idea just to see what she thinks of it. I might not get a reply for awhile, though, because of the elections coming up and i know she has already started her campaign.
I agree that this is a special street and unique old mansions are being replaced with vulgar suburban style McMansions. This is an area where design controls actually make sense.
The only problem is that it's not really that great of a location anymore. If you're going to pay $4-5 million to build something along the lines of the older Young Street mansions you might as well put it on the Northwest Arm or on oceanfront property somewhere. That is where houses like that are going up - there's a huge new one visible from the Dingle for example.
Perhaps it's time to re-visit this older forum thread.
Since it was first created in 2008, 2 more mansions have been demolished, and finally the city has begun to take action to protect the character and form of Young Avenue (Case 20854).
Similar to Land Use By-laws specific for the Northwest Arm area, or Oakland Road area, the city has recently passed a Young Avenue Land Use By-law prescribing a minimum lot width of 80 feet, which is the current average lot width remaining on the street, even with the infill of 5 houses on 40 foot lots on the former Brookfield-Stanbury property. The intention of the new LUB is to discourage subdivision of the remaining wide lots into multiple 40 foot (as of right) lots.
Young Avenue once had its own Provincial Act of Legislation (1896), which prescribed what could be built, including a 40 foot setback.
In 2017 the National Trust of Canada declared Young Avenue to be one of its "Top 10 Most Endangered Places in Canada".
The Canadian Register of Historic Places makes mention of Young Avenue several times.
It was the first example in Halifax of the "City Beautiful" planning initiative" of the late 1800's.
Last edited by north815; Mar 15, 2018 at 6:45 PM.
Reason: added statement about new (2017) Young Avenue by-law.
Linear Mode
