HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 5:07 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,355
[Halifax] 1190 Barrington | ? m | 8 fl | U/C

Staff is recommending that the Design Review Committee approve the proposal for 1190 Barrington Street located at the southwest corner of South Street. The proposal is to remove the existing office building and replace it with a 8 storey building containing 86 residential units, ground floor commercial along Barrington and townhouse-style units along Tobin and South.

Case 21134 - 1190 Barrington Street

This is the existing office building that will be demolished;


Halifax Developments Blog (Photo by David Jackson)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 5:15 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,017
I always liked that building.

The new design is not particularly inspiring.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 5:58 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,130
The new building is extremely hideous and unworthy of the location, though that's in keeping with what's happening kitty-corner on South Street.

The old building is kind of cool. The new proposal has a five storey main mass and then a three-storey glass cube on top. I'd rather they just stick the cube on top of the existing building.

It's unfortunate that we're surrounding one of the downtown's best public spaces with some of the worst new buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 6:18 PM
Phalanx Phalanx is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 584
Yeah, the proposed building has 90s business park aesthetic to it. Really not something that belongs in the here and now and in a prime spot downtown. Repurposing and adding to to the existing building would definitely be preferable (assuming the structure could support it, but it looks sturdy...). Reconfigure the main floor - keep the main entrance but add some glass and additional entrances for retail, add a modern addition on top etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 6:44 PM
Jstaleness's Avatar
Jstaleness Jstaleness is offline
Jelly Bean Sandwich
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dartmouth
Posts: 1,683
I worked here in the early 2000's when Minacs was there. I remember the building seeming older and in need of upgrades. Not sure if it can structurally handle additions or expansion. My hope is that it could.
__________________
I can't hear you with my eyes closed

Last edited by Jstaleness; Sep 15, 2017 at 7:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2022, 3:22 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,355
There is an updated proposal for this going to Design Review Committee next week for approval. It appears to be basically the same just red brick and aluminum curtain wall for the exterior now.

Case 24497 Substantive SPA for 1190 Barrington Street
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2022, 4:26 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,694
One wonders what the design review committee is doing if they allow large blocks of aluminum curtain wall a few storeys above Barrington Street, fronting onto the park.

This has aged pretty badly. Since the original post we have seen new proposals like the Elmwood and Waverley Inn. In addition to looking better, those buildings have a historic reuse component.

HRM says they care about climate change but they don't seem to care much about the energy involved in poor maintenance followed by the replacement of buildings like this with slightly larger newer structures when there are empty lots and parking lots all over the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2022, 4:35 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
Pretty uninspiring for sure. I agree with the above posters that at least the facade of the older building should have been kept.

I find mid-century buildings like this have a really interesting style, a nice rhythm to the design with good use of materials. Yet seem to go unappreciated, and not considered 'historical' in any sense, perhaps because they aren't 'old enough' or are not considered to be significant since they are not from one of the the traditional historical architecture periods, i.e. Victorian, etc.(?)

Anyhow, even if the old building won't be kept in some way, at least it should be replaced by something that is at least as nice. This one is a definite disappointment. Yet another Halifax architecture failure...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2022, 6:52 PM
Saul Goode Saul Goode is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Pretty uninspiring for sure...Anyhow, even if the old building won't be kept in some way, at least it should be replaced by something that is at least as nice.
That immediately reminded me of something (then) Prince Charles said several yeas ago when addressing a roomful of planners at a dinner in London: "You have to give this much to the Luftwaffe. When it knocked down our buildings, it didn't replace them with anything more offensive than rubble. We did that."

I am anything but a fan of Chuck III (or the monarchy in general) but I've always loved that line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2022, 8:56 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
By coincidence, the link provided by someone123 in the "Old Halifax" thread today provided a view of this lot in 1947:



Halifax - Nova Scotian Hotel - park in front of hotel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 9:48 AM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
One more "historical shot" of the lot from 1952 - at the left side of the photo you can see that the house in the previous post has been removed, presumably in preparation for the building that is now about to be demolished.



N.S. - Halifax - Nova Scotian Hotel & part of city.

Zoomed in a little:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 9:50 AM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Goode View Post
That immediately reminded me of something (then) Prince Charles said several yeas ago when addressing a roomful of planners at a dinner in London: "You have to give this much to the Luftwaffe. When it knocked down our buildings, it didn't replace them with anything more offensive than rubble. We did that."

I am anything but a fan of Chuck III (or the monarchy in general) but I've always loved that line.
Great quote!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 1:01 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Pretty uninspiring for sure. I agree with the above posters that at least the facade of the older building should have been kept.

I find mid-century buildings like this have a really interesting style, a nice rhythm to the design with good use of materials. Yet seem to go unappreciated, and not considered 'historical' in any sense, perhaps because they aren't 'old enough' or are not considered to be significant since they are not from one of the the traditional historical architecture periods, i.e. Victorian, etc.(?)

Anyhow, even if the old building won't be kept in some way, at least it should be replaced by something that is at least as nice. This one is a definite disappointment. Yet another Halifax architecture failure...
I could not agree more. I quite liked the original building's design. The thing being proposed as its replacement looks like something that could have been constructed out in Uteck-land 20 years ago. Totally uninspiring design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 2:48 PM
LikesBikes's Avatar
LikesBikes LikesBikes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: Halifax
Posts: 175
I find the existing building on the site quite nice. Too bad they can't just keep as is and convert it to residential.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 3:36 PM
Empire's Avatar
Empire Empire is offline
Salty Town
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Halifax
Posts: 2,064
If this building is built as shown it will look like a plastic box. So out of sync for this area. The design review committee should be able to address the negative impact of such designs. As mentioned, the existing building has more to offer in terms of appearance than a plastic box that looks like a hotel in an industrial park.
__________________
Salty Town

Last edited by Empire; Nov 5, 2022 at 8:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2022, 9:09 PM
Hali87 Hali87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,465
Yeah I agree that it would have been nicer to just convert the existing building to residential, at least keeping the shell and maybe adding some additional floors on top. I wonder if asbestos is a factor that made that less practical/economical somehow - it might be a bit more complicated to "partially deconstruct" buildings from that era, depending on which of their building materials contain asbestos.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2022, 6:03 AM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
From the 1960s. Never realized it was used as Navy headquarters at one time.

Caption:
Quote:
Item consists of a view of Cornwallis Park with the statue of Cornwallis as seen from one of the upper floors of the Nova Scotian Hotel. South, Barrington, and Tobin Streets can all be seen in the photograph, with the Royal Canadian Navy Operation headquarters in the upper middle of the photograph.


Source
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2022, 12:13 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
From the 1960s. Never realized it was used as Navy headquarters at one time.
I believe the caption is wrong. The Navy used the building on the upper right of the pic. The building in the center was Imperial Oil offices originally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2022, 2:05 PM
ns_kid's Avatar
ns_kid ns_kid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
I believe the caption is wrong. The Navy used the building on the upper right of the pic. The building in the center was Imperial Oil offices originally.
As Keith says, the building that stood on the northwest corner of Barrington and South -- now 5217 South Street -- was the site of the eastern command of the RCAF and, later, the joint navy-air force Canadian Northwest Atlantic Command, during WWII, according to the Halifax Military Heritage and Preservation Society. Before that it was the site of the Sailors Home and Navy League.

According to the Halifax South heritage district plan, the current building at 1190 Barrington Street was built circa 1986, which is clearly wrong, as Mark's photos (and the memories of us oldtimers) can attest. It's been there as long as I can recall, which would be early 60s, and for many years it carried the Imperial Oil Limited sign above the door (faintly visible in Mark's last photo). According to the plan document, Imperial Oil owned the property from 1939 until 1971, after which it was acquired by One Sackville Place Ltd., a.k.a. Ralph Medjuck. It's quite possible Imperial remained a tenant there for some time.

I found it amusing that the heritage plan's author, apparently believing this is a 1980's building, suggests that it "is constructed of historic looking materials. This includes antiqued bricking and single-hung 'factory' windows, which complements the historic buildings along the surrounding streetscapes. In addition the material includes concrete with distressed texture to give the appearance of historic sandstone."

I have also found this to be an attractive mid-20th century structure and I'll miss it. It points out the subjective nature of historical preservation. At what age or at whose conception of significance does a building become worthy of conservation? It disappoints me how many structures of commercial and industrial significance have been lost in this province with nary a whimper from heritage advocates, even as they fight to protect vacant lots from the scourge of high buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2022, 3:53 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,479
Great catch, guys. Thanks for the info. That's what I get for trusting notes from the Halifax archives. It can be like the proverbial Forrest Gump box of chocolates, sometimes.

I recall the discussion here about the building in the upper right of the photo, which was an interesting one indeed, and another one replaced with a disappointing structure (to use the kindest words possible).

I don't recall this one being Imperial Oil offices, but then during that period of time I spent most of my days haunting 'old Dartmouth'...
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:52 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.