Quote:
|
Quote:
The developer isn't doing the right thing by demolishing these buildings. |
Some people think we can get the developers to pay extra to support specific kinds of buildings for the public good. That is a naive approach that is doomed to fail - developers will just favour new buildings and empty lots that are more efficient, equally taxed, and come with no negative strings attached. This is exactly what we have been seeing downtown.
I have no problem with the city spending some money on heritage buildings. If the city implemented tax rebates and funding for facade improvements the downtown would end up looking much better. It would ultimately cost very little because it would result in more business in the downtown core. This is what many, many other cities have been doing for decades. Unfortunately, as far as I know HRM council has yet to follow through with this even for Barrington Street. Most of the blame here rests with council. They are either clueless when it comes to the downtown, simply don't care, or, even worse, think they can sabotage the downtown to favour their own districts. It's really frustrating to me because Halifax could be so far ahead right now, but almost totally wasted the last cycle of economic prosperity when it came to improving the downtown. |
The statement about the Shaw building being the only one worth saving was about aesthetics, not structural integrity... so the stress fracture debate is irrelevant to the original discussion. The point is (or was) that the Shaw building is the only really nice building on the site. The Imperial Oil building is ok. The others are pretty plain. It wouldn't bother me to see them come down. Personally. That said, this discussions is irrelevant as well since the only options Ben seems to be entertaining are saving all 4 or demolishing all 4.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Art Gallery was totally gutted and brought up to code about 15 years ago. Province House's use will never change. However it requires significant upgrades. Most office use has been moved out. It is mostly a ceremonial space now. The L-Gs residence is in the midst of a massive upgrade right now and is a good example of what we are discussing. It is costing many millions more than originally estimated and is way behind schedule because of the difficulties encountered with such an old structure. I know of no provincial govt bldg on Barrington. If you are talking about the Provincial Building on Hollis, that was totally redone in the 1990s at huge cost. The Westin needs significant upgrades. I am unsure how much longer it can remain competitive as a decent hotel. The Town Clock is a ridiculous example. Historic Properties was subject to exactly what Waterside was all about. Are you daft? There is very little in there that is old. The old post office was totally gutted in the 1990s. Note that the only ones other than publicly-owned bldgs subject to this sort of expensive treatment is Historic Properties, as done by Ben McCrae. There usually isn't an economic case to do this without changing the size/use of the building. |
The fact is that many of the preserved historic buildings downtown have been subject to the same kinds of modifications that would happen with the Waterside Centre.
Some buildings have very high quality interiors and are of exceptional historical and cultural significance. They should be preserved inside and out. None of the buildings being talked about for this proposal qualify. Ultimately I see this proposal as yet another change that people are making a fuss over for no real reason. If it is ever completed it will be forgotten about because 90% of what is good about this site will remain. The 10% is a good trade for seeing investment and activity on a block instead of underuse and slow decline. If we were to repeat developments like this in other parts of the downtown core, fully restore the best buildings, demolish the worst ones, and fill in empty lots, the difference would be like night and day. The downtown would be very successful and Halifax would be one of the best cities around because of its long list of advantages. I don't expect this to happen because leadership in the city is so poor. I was just reading a Bloomfield article and it's more of the same - spend 10 years running a community centre in the red, wasting millions, and then refuse to spend public money on the redevelopment. It doesn't get much worse than that. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If it's privately owned, at the end of the day it's entirely up to the owner. If they can justify the dollars required to get the building to where it needs to be, then that's a decision they need to make. |
Quote:
|
someone123 said:"if the city implemented tax rebates or funding for facade improvements the downtown would look much better" the city does in fact offer exactly that: funding for facade improvements. I know this because at the Henry House (which I co own) we have had extensive facade work done (we won the Capital district urban design awards "Honorable mention for building design: restoration category" 2005) and we received substantial cash rebates from HRM Heritage Dept for it. I'm not at liberty to say how much we received, but they offer up to 50% back. So the dilapidated state of many buildings in the core also has a lot to due with owners themselves....they should take a little pride in ownership and splash out a few bucks, if everyone did the downtown would be much more attractive
|
the exact dept is...HRM Community Development: Heritage property Program. the city could do a lot more though, your right someone123
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You appear to want a museum district so there is little to be gained from further discussion. |
Quote:
|
Who here has been objecting to building over 20 stories?
|
Quote:
Furthermore, unless you've been living under a rock for the past decade, anything over 2 stories is being contested downtown, regardless if it involves heritage buildings. |
Empire, even though this is a development site, I'm sure most, if not all agree that marque historical buildings should be saved. But pieces of C*** like the sweet basil building should demolished and every available inch of land around marque historical building should be developed to the max. With a strong, vibrant, thriving downtown, which requires lots of people living and working in the core....high density... we can save the marque buildings-they will be economically viable. But in order to due that the C*** has got to go.
|
Quote:
|
sweet basil wasn't registered and you still shed a tear over it....same with the house's that had to make way for the Trillium....like I said, get rid of the c***
|
Quote:
|
|
just visited www.hpwatersidecentre.ca website and see there are tons of documents which have been filed with the UARB.
So far there is some interesting reading, and even finally pictures of the interiors of the buildings. Looking at the economic proforma's is truly interesting. worth a look i guess. |
Like I said, it's hard for me to imagine this not being approved by the URB.
Personally, the more I consider this proposal the more I want it to move forward. The buildings on the site currently are nice but of moderate quality and are smaller than everything around them (including other heritage buildings), making them exactly the kind of thing you'd want to add more floors on top of. I predict that this will be approved and that, if it is built, it won't change the feel of the area much and in fact the appearance of the heritage buildings themselves will be better off for it. |
Looking at the floor plans and elevations... a few things...
1. How are they resolving the various window placements? It looks like some of the windows will be bisected by the new floor plates. I hope they don't have to resort to fake windows / mirrored glass. 2. 16 underground parking spots? Why bother? Without the parking entrance, they could do a lot more with the lobby... make it bigger and more interesting... fill it with light... preserve the Morse Tea stone wall instead of covering it... create a much more appealing entrance from the street... etc. 3. Those 2 story in-fill facades are so dull and opaque. Bring the modern steel and glass aspect down to the sidewalk. This project is very plain and predictable. I don't think it would necessarily cost more to be a little more thoughtful about the design. 4. Please don't plant shrubs on top of Imperial Oil. |
Quote:
Once again, I am against this project... but I feel obligated to say that the heritage folks would not likely share an opinion with me in other development issues. I find this point to be most distressing, as they are inflexible and only concerned with an unwavering agenda that takes little contingency into account. In most cases (throughout history) this type of thinking leads to the stagnation that heritage groups have caused in Halifax. It almost hurts me to be against Waterside, but I am being the bigger person for not merely supporting all developments because I believe in development. |
Quote:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia...rb-appeal.html Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I guess everyone knows how easy it is to work the system and that a registered heritage building means nothing. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
They gutted them and rebuilt the interiors, then added an office component.
Huh... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The size of historic properties is significantly more, therefore providing a signifcantly more area to spread costs over. Secondly, they added floors (yes non original) to the buildings on the waterfront to give it economic stability. |
I think Historic Properties is kept afloat solely by the outrageous cruise ship pricing in the food court. LOL.
|
Quote:
|
saw this in the paper this morning. Cut it off so it would fit
High interest rating From educators to CEOs, this group caught our attention this year By Our Staff Sat. Dec 27 - 6:44 AM EDITOR’S NOTE: This week, we will be looking back at the good, the bad and the ugly in Crazy ’08, and see what’s on the table for 2009. Today, we profile the people who made this tumultuous year even more interesting. On Monday, we'll look at things left undone. THEY’RE NOT all rich. They’re not necessarily powerful, in the traditional sense. Their names won’t be familiar to everyone, but they definitely made 2008 interesting. From development veteran Ben McCrea’s no-nonsense stance on his Waterside property to Jim Wooder’s push for a new container business in Sydney, here are the stories of seven Nova Scotians who pushed forward with their dreams in 2008 and are making a difference in the province. Ben McCrea Founder, Armour Group For three decades Ben McCrea has tried to keep his "nose below the trench line" as he built some of the most prominent buildings in Halifax. The founder of Armour Group has always believed that projects such as Historic Properties, Founders Square and his new environmentally sensitive office building in the City of Lakes Business Park in Dartmouth can say more about the quality of the work his company does than anything he might say in an interview or news release. But in 2008 he was forced into a high-profile fight with both city politicians and a heritage lobby group when his plan to renovate buildings along the Granville Mall became a focal point for debate on new what kind of development is appropriate for downtown Halifax. Armour Group owns the four heritage buildings along the mall and wants to keep their facades while unifying them under a new six-storey office tower. Mr. McCrea argues it represents the only financially feasible basis on which the history represented by the buildings can be preserved. Critics counter that to maintain the true heritage quality of the buildings, their interiors need to be saved. There was considerable debate and threats of lawsuits, but in October city hall gave the plan a thumbs-down. Not to be deterred, Mr. McCrea appealed the decision to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board. Then, as if to underscore the seriousness of the effort, he applied for demolition permits for the four buildings and pulled down an old wooden building on the property that was not to be part of the redevelopment. There is a one-year waiting period before the heritage status can be removed and the other buildings taken down, but Mr. McCrea hopes it won’t come to that. He believes the board will rule in January that he has followed all the rules and should be allowed to proceed with the project as originally proposed. But for Mr. McCrea, 2008 was about much more than the Waterside project. He was nominated by the Halifax Chamber of Commerce as Business Person of the Year; he was inducted into the engineering hall of fame at the University of New Brunswick and his pet project with Ducks Unlimited, the Greenwing Legacy Interpretive Centre at Shubenacadie Wildlife Park, was officially commissioned. His plans for another new office building in Dartmouth and work on the $200-million Queen’s Landing office building, hotel complex and revamped Maritime Museum of the Atlantic are proceeding slowly, in part because construction costs have increased by 30 per cent since 2005 and in part because there is little financing for major projects in the current economic climate Adamant that Halifax has to do more to promote itself as the business centre of Atlantic Canada, Mr. McCrea says his push for the Waterside Centre shows his commitment to the cause, even if it forces him into a spotlight he would rather avoid |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
"the smaller the footprint and higher the density the lower the costs. Waterside doesn't have the density..." You crack me up empire with your statements that are completely wrong.. And sell the building individually and take a loss? that is a pretty silly comment to make. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
It certainly booms during the summer. The prices, though, reflect the touristy nature of the place and the food was hit or miss. That is an unfortunate trait of many seasonal places around here; they seem to not care about the quality of what they present to visitors. I honestly don't know how the rest of Historic Properties stays in business. The little mall area is basically empty. I suppose the office space above and the bars/restaurants that are there pay the bills for the whole thing. |
Quote:
- sell the buildings at a loss "that's right" and find a site to construct a quality building....happens every day! |
Quote:
The density is as maximum it can get on that site, that is including the heritage buildings (ie setback required). Further that and site is under the view planes so can't go higher. So therefore again, waterside maxi's out the density. One could get higher density if the required setback was gone. So its sell the buildings for a loss? Who is going to buy them who won't decide to tear them down? |
Quote:
That's the problem, Waterside is maxed out for density but is still not enough for a quality building. The Alexander, Trillium, Martello, Twisted Sisters and International place are the size needed for a good quality building on an expensive site. Add heritage buildings to the mix and you have a formula for a six storey cheap building with destroyed heritage buildings. The bylaw has to change so that demolition permits will not be issued on registered heritage buildings. Then the market will determine what the value of the buildings will be. Perhaps the buildings could be sold at a profit? A savvy investor wouldn't paint themselves into a corner with very few options would they? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Although, you've already said somewhere else that you would rather see an empty burned out shell of a building with boarded up windows and street people living in the boarded up doorway than a functioning building which contributes to the downtown. |
Quote:
So your now saying the developer is going to build a cheap building? |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 9:43 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.