HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


    307 Prince Albert in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Halifax Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 4:18 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,310
[Halifax] 5189 South Street | 20 m | 6 fl | Proposed

There is a public open house scheduled for June 8th, 2016 @ 7pm @ The Westin to discuss the proposal for a mixed-use building at 5185-89 South Street (NW corner at Barrington). It will house 8'000 sq ft of ground floor commercial and 42 residential units above.

The only information available right now is at http://principaldevelopments.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 11:59 AM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmajackson View Post
There is a public open house scheduled for June 8th, 2016 @ 7pm @ The Westin to discuss the proposal for a mixed-use building at 5185-89 South Street (NW corner at Barrington). It will house 8'000 sq ft of ground floor commercial and 42 residential units above.

The only information available right now is at http://principaldevelopments.com/
That is really, really disappointing! 5189 South is that beautiful yellow Victorian across from Cornwallis Park. To have it redeveloped would be bad enough, but to have it redeveloped with what looks like a pretty uninspired piece of architecture is painful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 12:39 PM
mleblanc mleblanc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
That is really, really disappointing! 5189 South is that beautiful yellow Victorian across from Cornwallis Park. To have it redeveloped would be bad enough, but to have it redeveloped with what looks like a pretty uninspired piece of architecture is painful.
I wouldn't call it beautiful. Have you walked past it lately? It would take a lot of money to bring it back from the student slum it's become. That being said, that is not at all an attractive proposal for such a prominent corner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 12:57 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mleblanc View Post
I wouldn't call it beautiful. Have you walked past it lately? It would take a lot of money to bring it back from the student slum it's become. That being said, that is not at all an attractive proposal for such a prominent corner.
I'm honestly sick of these "it's run down, so oh well" arguments. I have no empathy for developers who want to rip down the scanty remaining great buildings we have lest from earlier eras and erect their garbage. I guarantee almost any developer, in any city besides Halifax, would be interested in restoring this building. This shit does not happen anymore in other cities.

In any case, I've not just walked past in lately, I've been in it. Have some friends who moved our last year. It's in need of major renovation, but it's not falling apart or anything. There is no reason at all it can't be restored, except for laziness and/or cheapness, neither of which are acceptable in an urban property developer.

I don't know what's wrong with our development community, but they're more eager to fire up the wrecking ball than any collection of developers I've ever encountered in this country. This is just crap.

Last edited by Drybrain; May 18, 2016 at 1:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 1:54 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,424
Gotta say I'm getting pretty disappointed in my hometown. Yet another situation where a unique 19th century building will be torn down to facilitate another low-quality generic structure. This old building is significant in this area and one of the few of its type remaining. It really adds a nice backdrop for the-park-with-no-name, and really contributes to the character of that area of Barrington, which was once a very prominent part of the city and has managed to retain some pretty nice structures from the mid-late 1800s. Errr... I should say: "had managed to maintain until recently".

I almost can't believe they are planning to knock this one down, except for the fact that this is getting to be commonplace here, so actually I'm starting to expect it - almost becoming numb to it. ...And of course the city will have nothing to say about it - kinda pathetic, really.

Living my entire life here, I've always thought that Halifax is behind the times, and yet again this remains true as we are still treating our heritage stock the same way that we did in the 1960s and 70s, while other places have recognized their value and have made some effort to preserve such structures.

Sigh, what a bunch of morons we have running things here...





https://www.halifax.ca/council/agend...0324ca1131.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 2:08 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I almost can't believe they are planning to knock this one down, except for the fact that this is getting to be commonplace here, so actually I'm starting to expect it - almost becoming numb to it. ...And of course the city will have nothing to say about it - kinda pathetic, really.

Living my entire life here, I've always thought that Halifax is behind the times, and yet again this remains true as we are still treating our heritage stock the same way that we did in the 1960s and 70s, while other places have recognized their value and have made some effort to preserve such structures.
That's exactly correct. I can't believe how retrograde we are on this. And it's getting worse, not better.

The Barrington South HCD should be in effect eventually (Waye Mason thinks Sept/Oct) but if they applies to demolish before that, the as-of-right demolition will be grandfathered and that'll be that.

Pathetic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 2:39 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by mleblanc View Post
I wouldn't call it beautiful. Have you walked past it lately? It would take a lot of money to bring it back from the student slum it's become. That being said, that is not at all an attractive proposal for such a prominent corner.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder... I would not hesitate to call it beautiful were it painted. I'd also add it's of a type that is becoming less common.... not many left with the verandas - most of the Victorian housing stock it the type pushed up close to the sidewalk with very little domestic outdoor space in front (saving for the rear)... it's a very different approach to urbanism.

I really don't think it would take a ton of cash to keep it in decent shape. Maybe I'm wrong.

This building is something I'd think would be worth preserving.

I find the blandness of the proposal insulting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 8:27 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
The problem with the argument that this should be torn down because it's in rough shape is that such an argument can be used to justify tearing down any building as long as the owner neglects it for a while. This is exactly the pattern that has been happening over and over; a developer buys an old building, lets it deteriorate, then argues that it must be torn down because it is in a deteriorated state. Usually even at that point the buildings are still financially viable. They're just not maximally profitable for developers.

I have heard the claim that Halifax is behind the times a lot but I don't think that usefully explains what is going on. Halifax is not an isolated Amazonian tribe and in fact it was once ahead of the curve in terms of heritage preservation. It is still ahead of many other North American cities in a lot of areas, just not in heritage preservation. Why? Developers profit from the status quo, they have ties to regional council or the councillors don't care, most of the bureaucrats just seem to be counting down to retirement, and the provincial government doesn't understand or care.

The good news is that it's pretty easy to make councillors care about issues. They often win their seats by only a few hundred or thousand votes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 9:36 PM
mleblanc mleblanc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
The problem with the argument that this should be torn down because it's in rough shape is that such an argument can be used to justify tearing down any building as long as the owner neglects it for a while. This is exactly the pattern that has been happening over and over; a developer buys an old building, lets it deteriorate, then argues that it must be torn down because it is in a deteriorated state. Usually even at that point the buildings are still financially viable. They're just not maximally profitable for developers.

I have heard the claim that Halifax is behind the times a lot but I don't think that usefully explains what is going on. Halifax is not an isolated Amazonian tribe and in fact it was once ahead of the curve in terms of heritage preservation. It is still ahead of many other North American cities in a lot of areas, just not in heritage preservation. Why? Developers profit from the status quo, they have ties to regional council or the councillors don't care, most of the bureaucrats just seem to be counting down to retirement, and the provincial government doesn't understand or care.

The good news is that it's pretty easy to make councillors care about issues. They often win their seats by only a few hundred or thousand votes.
I actually feel like I made the wrong judgement on this one. I walked past it again this afternoon and it's a nice old building, but you're right. I wish developers had incentive from the city to preserve the old character buildings or redevelop such as the Barrington espace has, maintaining the streetscape but improving the conditions of the building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 9:41 PM
Hali87 Hali87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,465
So the existing building is registered heritage, correct?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted May 18, 2016, 10:24 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hali87 View Post
So the existing building is registered heritage, correct?
Nope.

And apparently according to Waye the owner has had a demolition permit since last year. So even the new conservation district can't retroactively undo that. It's toast, unless there's a public outcry that convinces the developer.

Last edited by Drybrain; May 18, 2016 at 11:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted May 19, 2016, 2:07 AM
Hali87 Hali87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,465
Ah, ok. Didn't realize a non-registered property would get a "Heritage Inventory Sheet" (although it makes sense to me now)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted May 19, 2016, 3:23 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
The publication that shall not be named had a colour rendering of this development tonight and it looks pretty good, particularly next to South and Hollis. In the worst case I guess the new buildings won't be too bad. Up until recently, buildings like this would be torn down for essentially suburban developments.

That being said, imagine how much better the Cornwallis Park area would have been had the South Street streetscape been preserved and had the new buildings instead gone in front of the Superstore.

Another point worth considering is that the Victorian apartment unit contains something like 17 units to 42 in the new development. Only a marginal increase in density compared to developing a parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted May 19, 2016, 1:11 PM
curnhalio's Avatar
curnhalio curnhalio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
The publication that shall not be named had a colour rendering of this development tonight and it looks pretty good, particularly next to South and Hollis. In the worst case I guess the new buildings won't be too bad. Up until recently, buildings like this would be torn down for essentially suburban developments.

That being said, imagine how much better the Cornwallis Park area would have been had the South Street streetscape been preserved and had the new buildings instead gone in front of the Superstore.

Another point worth considering is that the Victorian apartment unit contains something like 17 units to 42 in the new development. Only a marginal increase in density compared to developing a parking lot.
It would have been difficult to preserve the row houses at the corner of Hollis after that big blaze they suffered years ago. I agree that the parking lot/superstore is a ridiculous waste of space on that corner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted May 19, 2016, 3:16 PM
teddifax's Avatar
teddifax teddifax is offline
Halifax Promoter!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 1,080
That Superstore should've had a Residential component built into it when it was built. It would've been nice to see a tower with a Superstore at the base and underground parking instead of a huge parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted May 19, 2016, 4:08 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by teddifax View Post
That Superstore should've had a Residential component built into it when it was built. It would've been nice to see a tower with a Superstore at the base and underground parking instead of a huge parking lot.
I think the Heritage Trust was too busy trying to save the historic Tilden rent a car stand that was on the lot for years to be able to advocate for such things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted May 20, 2016, 8:31 PM
Hali87 Hali87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,465
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted May 20, 2016, 8:54 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hali87 View Post
Better than the other rendering, but how many other nearby sites would better candidates for this? Dozens. Not worth the loss.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted May 20, 2016, 9:17 PM
hokus83 hokus83 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 284
This looks like one that would be perfect for the lot on Queen street by the library
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted May 20, 2016, 9:25 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by hokus83 View Post
This looks like one that would be perfect for the lot on Queen street by the library
Yup!
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:44 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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