HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #381  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 9:33 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
It's a nice block that shows how architectural styles shifted over time, from the simpler Georgian-era buildings to the elaborate brickwork on the late-Victorians.

If I remember correctly the building with the "verb" sign is relatively new, designed by Andrew Cobb around 1900-1910. He was a great local architect.

It was sad to hear in discussion in the Halifax section (but not surprising) that even the 1960's Canada Permanent Building is missing some of its original ornamentation.
Yes, I think you must be referring to the aluminum solar screen grille that was on the Sackville Street side, which, IMHO, is a real loss to the original sixties vibe that it had at street level.

I remember there were a lot of patterned grille-style adornments on buildings in metal and concrete in those days, that seemed to silently disappear over the years.

One member seems to recall that the grille disappeared when the Tim Horton's franchise went in there, but I'm not sure when that was, exactly (1980s?)

It was discussed on page 463 of General Updates and News, and Page 30 & Page 31 of the Old Halifax thread.

This raises an interesting question: What would be considered a reasonable cut-off point when changing features/details on a building becomes thought of erasing historical features, rather than just updating or functional changes? Another way to think of it is: when does an 'old building' become a 'historical building'?

One might argue that any changes made from day 1 are altering the historical correctness of the building, but then there are some buildings where the changes made actually become historical features of the building (such as the top 3 floors of the Dennis Building, and the top 2 floors of the Morse's Tea Building, in both cases extra floors were added during post-fire repairs).

In the same vein, with the way peoples' perception for fashion goes, decorative items from 20 or 30 years ago can become passe (such as some of the wild colours and fashions of the 1970s), but years later can come back into fashion for their nostalgia, or because they are an artifact of a particular era of design.

I'm willing to bet the aluminum shading being discussed was in the 20 - 30 year old range when it was removed and was considered ugly and old-fashioned, but now it has reached a sufficient age that many people would like to see it re-installed for nostalgic or historic reasons.

A couple of pics from those threads for people who may be wondering what I was referring to:

Canada Permanent Building on Google streetside.

The aluminum solar screen as it appeared in the late 1960s:


Source: City of Halifax fonds
Halifax (N.S.). Committee on Works records
Halifax (N.S.) Works Department photographs
Barrington St. [corner of Sackville St.]
Retrieval code: 102-39-1-492
[between 1967 and 1970?]


The Drawing (from Built Halifax blog):


Built Halifax blog link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #382  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 9:39 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,488
I think of it in terms of character and uniqueness or quality of materials, not age. The aluminum solar screen would be an unusual and interesting feature today.

It's true that these old architectural features can seem ubiquitous during one era and become rarer in the next. A lot of 50's-80's stuff is torn down today without a second thought. Halifax has lost maybe half of its modernist 50's-era architecture in the past 15 years (Bank of Canada, Herald, Ralston). It quickly went from being somewhat common to being endangered.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #383  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 9:56 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
Some of that is good, Someone123.

It was the destruction of our finest block on Water Street to construct hideous Atlantic Place that really created the heritage protection movement in St. John's. Prior to that, whatever our economy would allow to replace, we gleefully did. You could not tear down a Victorian stone or clapboard rowhouse block fast enough in the 1950s and 60s. We were ashamed of them, we wanted what Canada had in popular culture.

But a lot of that has been reversed.

Queen's Road is a perfect example. Lots of rowhouses were demolished and replaced in the 1950s/60s. They've all been returned to their former glory.

This is from an inventory of every house in St. John's back then:



The third house, the modern bungalow, replaced two old rowhouses.

Thankfully, by the time it was replaced, strict heritage protection laws were in effect, and this is what had the buyers had to build:

__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #384  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:08 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I think of it in terms of character and uniqueness or quality of materials, not age. The aluminum solar screen would be an unusual and interesting feature today.

It's true that these old architectural features can seem ubiquitous during one era and become rarer in the next. A lot of 50's-80's stuff is torn down today without a second thought. Halifax has lost maybe half of its modernist 50's-era architecture in the past 15 years (Bank of Canada, Herald, Ralston). It quickly went from being somewhat common to being endangered.
I tend to think in the same terms - an interesting or well-done/high quality feature never goes 'out of style' for me.

Agreed, I consider the Bank of Canada building to be more of a loss. The Ralston, not so much, but that's just a personal preference. I actually liked the old Herald Building more (which I believe was built earlier than the 1950s, but can't confirm).

In 50 years time, I'm quite sure there will be an era or two that will have little to no representation left in Halifax...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #385  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:12 PM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker View Post
...
Queen's Road is a perfect example. Lots of rowhouses were demolished and replaced in the 1950s/60s. They've all been returned to their former glory.

^ So they replaced something that was 70/80 years newer than the neighbors with something that looks 100 years older than the neighbors (Georgian), but to our untrained eye it's fine, of course much better than the utilitarian pos before.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #386  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:20 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Architype View Post
^ So they replaced something that was 70/80 years newer than the neighbors with something that looks 100 years older than the neighbors (Georgian), but to our untrained eye it's fine, of course much better than before.
Yes, of course. It looks much better. It still stands out like a sore thumb - I wouldn't know it was Georgian but just the fact it's detached is enough that I know it's not original. No servants' quarters in the garrett/attic. The kitchen is almost certainly NOT in the basement, like it was originally in the neighbouring houses, and still is in many of them that haven't been split up into multiple units. But it fits in MUCH better than a 1950s house.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #387  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:42 PM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 4,481
I'm actually willing to bet that the current house there now is the same house built in the 50s/60s with an additional floor, and severe exterior renovation. So much so that it may have been cheaper to demolish it all and start anew. It does look nice though, and I'm usually against that faux-heritage look that I find tacky and generally lifeless (rebuilt portion of Harvey Road).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #388  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:48 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
You could be right. The width from each of the houses on either side looks to be identical.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #389  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 10:55 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
RE: Harvey's Road, the last major destructive fire in St. John's.

The area before the fire:



Basically everything you can see except the building at right was destroyed. (The Church Lad's Brigade, the building with the grand entrance, looks the same in both but note ONLY the entrance in stone survived the fire. The new building is even set back from that preserved entrance).

The replacements have been reasonable in my opinion:



The part Marty is referring to is that little gridiron block, or whatever I'm supposed to call it. Authentic old clapboard houses and commercial buildings were replaced with faux heritage ones.



To be honest, I like the first green one, and the pink gallery. The others, though, don't look like anything. They have some heritage elements but architecturally they don't make sense lol

__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #390  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 11:25 PM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,378
^ Those are so far off from being real heritage that they aren't even real faux heritage, they are mere pastiche, or even post modern. Real heritage is quite precise in things like dimensions and proportions of windows and details.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #391  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 11:27 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
Yeah, that works as a description. The pink gallery and green one (used to be Olio pizzeria) are kind of sensible though.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #392  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 11:37 PM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,378
It's playful but architecturally a bit face-palmy, like recreating a Michelangelo with crayons.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #393  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 2:04 AM
Marty_Mcfly's Avatar
Marty_Mcfly Marty_Mcfly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: St. John's, NL
Posts: 4,481
Those buildings remind me of something that would get built if Las Vegas tried to make a "Little St. John's" inside a shopping mall. Or if a rather dumb AI was asked to designed a St. John's heritage building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #394  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 2:34 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,488
I assume the ugliness is due to a mismatch between the tight sites and heritage style and a desire to use mass produced modern components like vinyl windows plus other modern features you wouldn't normally get in an 1890's rowhouse.

Around here there are some new craftsman style houses that look as nice as or better than many 100 year old ones, but they tend to be $1M+. Then again the extra construction costs might be a small portion of that (maybe the house cost $400,000 to build instead of $300,000). Still, for an average family you're looking at, say, sacrificing a bedroom or two or driving 15 minutes extra every day for the sake of owning a less ugly looking house. Most people fall squarely on the side of wanting the ugly but more personally useful property.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #395  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 3:09 AM
lio45 lio45 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker View Post
Yes, of course. It looks much better. It still stands out like a sore thumb - I wouldn't know it was Georgian but just the fact it's detached is enough that I know it's not original.
Architype's 100% correct, it's as pure Georgian as it gets.

Lots of buildings in Ontario (especially from the 1800-1820 period) in that exact style. Very common too in New England and New York. They exist in wood, and in stone, and in brick.

Feel totally out of place there. It's almost (to the trained eye ) as out of place as in the "before" situation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #396  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 3:19 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 16,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Architype's 100% correct, it's as pure Georgian as it gets.

Lots of buildings in Ontario (especially from the 1800-1820 period) in that exact style. Very common too in New England and New York. They exist in wood, and in stone, and in brick.

Feel totally out of place there. It's almost (to the trained eye ) as out of place as in the "before" situation.
Georgian style lingered until the mid-1800s in Ontario.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #397  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 9:38 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Feel totally out of place there. It's almost (to the trained eye ) as out of place as in the "before" situation.
Well to the untrained eye, it looks much better.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #398  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 1:25 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,692
It's not entirely implausible that a Georgian house could exist on a street with Victorians. Houses from different eras can coexist for reasons like fire, with newer houses replacing those that were burnt, or land subdivision - a house is built on a larger plot of land then years later the land subdivided so newer homes can be built next door, etc.

IMHO this 'fake Georgian' looks good next to the other homes, and light years better than the one it replaced. All and all a net positive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #399  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 1:40 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,692
Now after all I posted above about the aluminum solar screen on the Canada Permanent Building, I find a photo on Halifax Municipal Archives that throws a wrench into the gears... no solar screen, and the photo is labeled to be from the 1960s. The screen is on the original drawing too.

I'm guessing that this is taken just around completion and maybe the solar screen wasn't ready and was added later? It would have been custom made for this site, so I can see that as a possibility.



City of Halifax fonds
Halifax (N.S.). Fire Department records
Halifax Fire Department photographs
Aerial photographs and streetscapes
Barrington and Sackville
Retrieval code: 102-111-4-6.9
[196-?]

Halifax Municipal Archives link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #400  
Old Posted May 29, 2019, 7:50 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 3,814
Address:104/108 Princess Street, Winnipeg, MB Winnipeg, MB
Location:https://www.google.com/maps/place/10...!4d-97.1421145
Developer: https://legatumdevelopment.co/
Architect: http://www.5468796.ca/

Redevelop two existing landmark properties on the corner of Princess/Bannatyne into 39 desirable residential rental units plus 5,500 sq/f of commercial space on the main floor.
The renovation will construct a 3 Storey addition on top of 108 Princess to accommodate more rental units plus access to rooftop patio on 104 Princess.






[/QUOTE]


https://twitter.com/e_backstrom/stat...44021326008320


alamasonryandcontractinginc
Here we go! Demolition of the Princess St facade has begun!
https://www.instagram.com/p/ByB6_25A1fu/
__________________
WINNIPEG | Projects and Development
In The Future Every Building Will Be World-Famous For Fifteen Minutes.
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
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:44 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.