[Halifax] 1649 Bedford Row | 33 m | 12 fl | Proposed

[RoshanMcG]

"A pre-application submitted by Root Architecture Inc. for Substantive Site Plan Approval to permit a 12-storey mixed-use building at 1649 Bedford Row, Downtown Halifax":













Source

[Dmajackson]

From just the renderings the project looks like a nice infill project. It's unfortunate that three sides are interior property lines and with such a small site there's no way for harbour view or even south facing windows. The lack of windows also indicate this will likely only have three units per floor or about 33 units total. Also no parking which is okay. I'm very interested to see the floor plans.

Found the project page; Root Architecture - 1649 Bedford Row. Worth the read but the basic overall details are;

Overall, this development is set to create 33 new residential units on a small lot in a desirable downtown neighbourhood. There will be 11 two-bedroom, 16 one-bedroom and 6 studio apartments. There is no required vehicular parking, but there are 14 indoor and 6 outdoor bicycle parking spots. The design provides Barrier-Free access to all units, as well as two dedicated Barrier-Free designed suites. On the ground floor there is a residential lobby and an 1150 SF commercial space

[Keith P.]

Bye-bye to The Great Wall.

[Drybrain]

I’m just glad to see a substantial downtown project that proves developers can profitably build with smaller floor plates, and don’t need to rip apart a whole block to build.

[someone123]

It's a nice project but yes there is that problem of the walls against the lot line and the impracticality of building window setbacks on a site like this. I wonder what can be done to make these blank walls nicer? Fake windows? Artwork? Are those vertical line patterns meant to break it up a bit? Maybe a grey tone would blend in enough to not be so noticeable.

I like The Dillon overall but from some angles it looks awful, like a bright red box. Admittedly from street level the blank walls are not as prominent. I hope it's improved someday.

[Jonovision]

I can't seem to link it from their site directly but there is an additional rendering that shows the project in context from the water.
https://www.rootarchitecture.ca/1649bedfordrow

It's actually fairly skinny and doesn't look too bad. I think the fact that it is a rather neutral colour is a good thing. Having a mish mash colour pattern back there would look odd.

I'd also love to see the brickwork pulled down along the columns to meet the ground level on the front facade. I always hate when you have a heavy material that "floats" above glazing. It looks off balance.

Overall a great little project. Happy to see a small floorplate, with a taller design and no parking for a project downtown.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I can't seem to link it from their site directly but there is an additional rendering that shows the project in context from the water.

I think you mean this one?


Source

It does not look too bad but maybe some faux window pattern would look better from afar?

[OldDartmouthMark]

IMHO it looks fine from the water side. It's tall and narrow, so doesn't present like a large blank wall. Faux anything looks... well... faux - so probably best to stick with the plan and play off the surrounding windowed buildings as a contrast point. Besides, the lot on Lower Water will probably be developed at some point, which would cover a good portion -or all- of the blankness.

I'm curious about why the lot is shaped in this way. If you look at it on Google Maps 3D view, it almost looks like the lot being developed shares a common rooftop with some of the buildings adjacent to it, though the zig-zag pattern depicted on the proposal is shown as a division on the top of the existing buildings.

- It seems odd that a lot would be divided up that way. I had always thought that the Bedford Row and Lower Water buildings were all one, and have memories of entering on Bedford Row and accessing the Lower Water section via an internal staircase.

- More on a technical level, I'm wondering how difficult it will be to demolish existing, and then build new in conjunction with existing surrounding buildings. On the surface it appears like it will be a challenging build and potentially intrusive to its neighbours.

- Looking at it on Google Maps, it really becomes apparent how small of a footprint it actually has.

Interesting project.

[atbw]

Just mentioned to a friend how underrated Bedford Row is. Brick, treed sidewalks, really quiet* and still central to everything. Cannot wait to see this project help it live up to its potential and continue the push of downtown being a place to live, not just work and visit.


*barring the Irish pub that has spilled into the street

[Keith P.]

I don't understand how HRM has gifted a big chunk of the street to The Old Triangle. While Bedford Row is not necessarily a "thoroughfare" (ahem) it was a useful connection to the Dominion Public Building and the Art Gallery, and let deliveries occur along with avoiding a congested section of Water St. Not now.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I don't understand how HRM has gifted a big chunk of the street to The Old Triangle. While Bedford Row is not necessarily a "thoroughfare" (ahem) it was a useful connection to the Dominion Public Building and the Art Gallery, and let deliveries occur along with avoiding a congested section of Water St. Not now.

Kelvie's, and a cafe farther down the block, also used it. It provided additional space for those businesses when indoor capacity was limited and it made for a great, lively little nook in an unexpected place. I hope this is done every summer and maybe some effort is made to set up patio space for other nearby businesses. (Like the distillery on the other side of the block, which has no patio space at all).

The benefit to the businesses on the block, and to the general liveliness of the downtown area, seem well worth it the extremely minor inconvenience of making delivery drivers spend an extra 30 seconds on the parallel block of Water Street.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Kelvie's, and a cafe farther down the block, also used it. It provided additional space for those businesses when indoor capacity was limited and it made for a great, lively little nook in an unexpected place. I hope this is done every summer and maybe some effort is made to set up patio space for other nearby businesses. (Like the distillery on the other side of the block, which has no patio space at all).

The benefit to the businesses on the block, and to the general liveliness of the downtown area, seem well worth it the extremely minor inconvenience of making delivery drivers spend an extra 30 seconds on the parallel block of Water Street.

I agree. I spent a great Saturday evening last Summer out side the Triangle and the closed off street just added to the atmosphere. Halifax felt like NYC .

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Kelvie's, and a cafe farther down the block, also used it. It provided additional space for those businesses when indoor capacity was limited and it made for a great, lively little nook in an unexpected place. I hope this is done every summer and maybe some effort is made to set up patio space for other nearby businesses. (Like the distillery on the other side of the block, which has no patio space at all)...

Yes - it was a really great space last summer - I stumbled across it by accident and it was such a good atmosphere!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

While Bedford Row is not necessarily a "thoroughfare" (ahem)

I do appreciate your sense of humour, even if the sarcasm is being sent in my direction.

Along with the opposable thumb, a sense of humour is what separates us from things such as house plants and rocks. It shows that we have a personality...

[Keith P.]

My comment about the section of street being gifted to these businesses still needs to be explored. It seems a rather big question if only for other businesses not so lucky to be on Bedford Row. Could a resto or bar on other streets demand equal treatment? Are these places paying rent for use of the street ROW? How do such decisions get made to ensure equity of treatment? Nobody likes govt picking winners and losers. One wonders if the fact that the Triangle and McKelvies are both favorites of politicians and public-sector expense-account types had anything to do with the decision. It just seems very curious.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

My comment about the section of street being gifted to these businesses still needs to be explored. It seems a rather big question if only for other businesses not so lucky to be on Bedford Row. Could a resto or bar on other streets demand equal treatment? Are these places paying rent for use of the street ROW? How do such decisions get made to ensure equity of treatment? Nobody likes govt picking winners and losers. One wonders if the fact that the Triangle and McKelvies are both favorites of politicians and public-sector expense-account types had anything to do with the decision. It just seems very curious.

I don't think there's anything nefarious or backroom-dealing happening. But I actually agree that there's a fair question in here. The handful of bars/restos on Bedford Row are lucky to be facing a street that can be closed to cars with little impact or protest. A restaurant on Barrington Street, for example, doesn't have that option, through no fault of their own.

I actually think closing down Barrington on, say, weekend evenings over the summer might be a good idea. But with Argyle already closed it does threaten to create undesirable congestion, even for me, and I love me some street closures. We'd need more people coming downtown via transit or cabs/ride-shares rather than personal vehicles.)

There are probably other creative fixes though. Maybe setting up tables in part of the Grand Parade and letting Barrington Street restaurants, which are at a patio disadvantage compared to Argyle and Grafton, serve food and drink there.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Does it really need exploration, though? I mean, it doesn't hurt to look into it to make sure that there isn't some illegal activity behind it (though one would assume that there are already checks and balances in place). However, there will always be inequities between similar businesses due to differences in location. Being on a street that's easy to shut down with little or no negative effect is a bonus, however perhaps being on Barrington Street exposes a restaurant to more visibility and foot traffic, yet another inequity. Argyle Street businesses can benefit from both a pedestrian oriented street and lots of foot traffic due to its popularity, but then there may be differences in rent between the two locations.

The point is, do you remove the ability to shut down Bedford Row because all businesses don't have that opportunity, or do you just adapt for what's possible and practical? No two locations will ever be exactly equal, and perhaps that's where business acumen comes into play. C'est la vie.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

However, there will always be inequities between similar businesses due to differences in location.

It's actually self-correcting to some degree. The desirability of a property impacts its assessment and the tax bill paid to the municipality.

There will always be debate over who wants or doesn't want some benefit or who can or can't get it but some of that compromise is inherent to being in a city I think.

[Dmajackson]

Case 23725: Substantive Site Plan Approval for 1649 Bedford Row, Halifax

[DigitalNinja]

Does anyone know what's in the 1-2 story building surrounding The Great Wall/This development? Looks like the blank wall was designed to facilitate another building to replace this other building.