1592 Barrington | 22 m | 6 fl | Complete

[someone123]

This thread is for the development proposed for the CD Plus site adjacent to the Tramway Building near Barrington and Sackville.


Source

A report for Starfish Properties is available here: http://starfishproperties.ca/admin/F...BARRINGTON.pdf

[someone123]

When this is combined with the Espace development on the next block it will form a fairly impressive, eclectic row of mostly 6 storey buildings. The Discovery Centre development will build on this. In a few years I could see Barrington having more of a mid-sized downtown feel whereas in the past it felt 80% downtown and 20% small town. The empty lots (like when you look down Sackville from Barrington) and 2-3 storey buildings are where the smallness comes from.

Similarly the path up and along Spring Garden Road is going to feel much more city-like in the future, because pedestrians will pass by the Nova Centre towers and new library. On sidestreets they will see buildings like the Martello, City Centre Atlantic addition, or the Clyde Street developments instead of small buildings and parking lots characteristic of a small town or minor commercial area. Spring Garden is starting to take on a form more like Yonge Street in Toronto or Robson or Granville in Vancouver where there are older, more pedestrian-scale buildings along the main strip and then larger towers set back from the street or on adjacent blocks.

The infill projects will also bring in a higher level of activity that will contribute a lot to the city, but it's harder to estimate exactly what that effect will be like. It would be great to see more streetlife and more activity extending later into the evening.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

This thread is for the development proposed for the CD Plus site adjacent to the Tramway Building near Barrington and Sackville.


Source

A report for Starfish Properties is available here: http://starfishproperties.ca/admin/F...BARRINGTON.pdf

I like the renderings. It is certainly better than what is there now. I keep hoping that the NFB development will begin.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I like the renderings. It is certainly better than what is there now. I keep hoping that the NFB development will begin.

I keep hoping that they will dig a hole big enough so that the Khyber will tumble into it and we can be rid of it forever.

[someone123]

To me, the NFB project seemed like an unusually important project because that site is so infamous. It is the poster child for the decline of the street, and must leave a very negative impression on visitors. A single derelict building can stick out in a person's mind and have a huge impact on first impressions.

As time goes by without news of the redevelopment I have less and less confidence that it will actually be built. Then again, there are many examples of projects in Halifax that were ultimately successful but took a long time to get off the ground. The city moves slowly and you can't write something off because a year has gone by.

[Kevin_foster]

Hey thats the khyber!

I partied there once.

[JustinMacD]

Beautiful. Fits in perfectly on Barrington.

People will be clamoring for more height, but there is nothing wrong with a bunch of these types of buildings. Block by block downtown Halifax is making a huge comeback.

[JustinMacD]

It also shouldn't take this building that long to be built (however I'm sure with red tape it'll probably be finished by like 2015 or something)

[someone123]

Height is nice but one pitfall of large-scale development in a small city like Halifax is that there's a tendency to build one giant tower in one spot while everywhere else languishes. The single large building also tends to have one main entrance and a limited mix of uses. Walking by one block you get a big blank wall, maybe some shrubs, the parking entrance, maybe some sort of chiropractor or dentist's office, etc. While not always true there's a tendency for those developments to be sparse, and attempts to mix up the architecture on a single building tend to look artificial.

Small buildings like this proposal keep things interesting. If you walk down these 2 blocks of Barrington you'll pass by a couple dozen buildings of different ages that have different rent levels and tenants. Some have residential above and some have offices. There's a complicated mix of architecture and there are lots of storefronts, so the street-level experience is interesting.

I do not expect this one to have much trouble, but I am a little worried that this will devolve into a fight about "style", with a certain camp demanding pressed-on foam cornices or something similar. I think these style debates would be more at place in a Jonathan Swift novel (Lilliputians arguing about which end an egg should be broken on). They have very little impact on the way a building functions and so spending time on style is counterproductive. It's also pretty unlikely that random people attending a public meeting are going to substantially improve upon a professional architect's design. Plenty of designs we love now were avant-garde and unpopular at one point in the past. I would even go so far to say that your chances of doing something right are probably higher if you're upsetting people, because our present standards are extremely poor.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Kevin_foster

Hey thats the khyber!

I partied there once.

I went to an intimate, one-person concert there once.

I like the building.

[Dmajackson]

All necessary information for a thorough discussion on this project is now available.

Design Review Committee Agenda

Supporting Documents
Renderings

Letter from the Heritage Trust (neighbours to this building)

[someone123]

Surprise, surprise. Phil Pacey and the HT are against this one.

I'd like to say that the CD Plus building is the crappiest structure anybody in Halifax has talked about preserving, but it's a tough race given that fiasco surrounding the canteen building near the Wanderers' Ground a few years' back. What a joke!

One element of this building's design I don't really like is the brick and faux mansard roof above the entrance on the left side.

[cormiermax]

Cant really say I care for the design much, but anythings better than what's there currently.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

Surprise, surprise. Phil Pacey and the HT are against this one.

I'd like to say that the CD Plus building is the crappiest structure anybody in Halifax has talked about preserving, but it's a tough race given that fiasco surrounding the canteen building near the Wanderers' Ground a few years' back. What a joke!

One element of this building's design I don't really like is the brick and faux mansard roof above the entrance on the left side.

The design is not anything special, but is certainly an improvement over the dump that currently stands there. I find the architect's statements about the existing pile quite amusing - "no redeeming value". Too bad the entire center of the block cannot be knocked down.

The Heritage Trust has lost most of their credibility of late and cannot be taken seriously when they make statements such as those in the letter. Clearly, they are opposed to any change that does not fit their unrealistic, narrow criteria. Hopefully they will not be given status at the hearing.

[Northend Guy]

Originally Posted by someone123

One element of this building's design I don't really like is the brick and faux mansard roof above the entrance on the left side.

I am with you on that - I understand what they trying to do with blending with the Khyber, but...wow...not a fan of the effect. I think this is an example of how trying to pander to existing heritage structures can actually hinder good design. I believe that in limited scope, paying tribute to existing heritage structures in the design can be good, but when micro-managed and dictated to the nth degree, it can take a potentially attractive building and make it less so. If that mansard section were deleted entirely, I would be much happier...then again, as others have said, its certainly better than what is there.

And since when did Phil Pacey and the HT have the mandate to comment on snow loads?

[JET]

Originally Posted by Northend Guy

I am with you on that - I understand what they trying to do with blending with the Khyber, but...wow...not a fan of the effect. I think this is an example of how trying to pander to existing heritage structures can actually hinder good design. I believe that in limited scope, paying tribute to existing heritage structures in the design can be good, but when micro-managed and dictated to the nth degree, it can take a potentially attractive building and make it less so. If that mansard section were deleted entirely, I would be much happier...then again, as others have said, its certainly better than what is there.

And since when did Phil Pacey and the HT have the mandate to comment on snow loads?

Since they are tenants in the Khyber, it does not seem unreasonable that they raise the snow load issue. Dal rink is being torn down because of a snow load issue with the new building next door.

[Northend Guy]

Originally Posted by JET

Since they are tenants in the Khyber, it does not seem unreasonable that they raise the snow load issue. Dal rink is being torn down because of a snow load issue with the new building next door.

Granted - but would this not be an issue the owner of the building would address? It seems to me that the HT should address issues of affecting the Heritage aspects of the development, not issues that an engineer should be paying attention to? To me it sounds like the HT is looking for an excuse to get their foot in the door. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the relationships here?

[halifaxboyns]

It seems to me that the HT tried this tactic before (wanting to speak to the design committee) and they didn't hear them then. So I suspect they wouldn't be given much of an audiance now.

I have to agree, never liked the Tip Top tailors building now, frankly never even noticed the stone work on the ground. This building needs to be replaced. The proposal isn't terrible, but it's not stunning either.

[JET]

Originally Posted by Northend Guy

Granted - but would this not be an issue the owner of the building would address? It seems to me that the HT should address issues of affecting the Heritage aspects of the development, not issues that an engineer should be paying attention to? To me it sounds like the HT is looking for an excuse to get their foot in the door. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the relationships here?

The owner of the building is HRM; your're suggesting that HRM might do the logical and reasonable thing, beacause they have a good track record of doing so?

The current bulding (tip top) is dreadful, and always has been

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by JET

The owner of the building is HRM; your're suggesting that HRM might do the logical and reasonable thing, beacause they have a good track record of doing so?

The current bulding (tip top) is dreadful, and always has been

The best thing that could happen to the burden on the city that is the Khyber is for the roof to fall in and take the rest of the building with it. I'm hoping this proposal get approved so that during demo of the TipTop site, an out-of control wrecking ball or a bulldozer driver gone postal will take the Khyber out too.