HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #141  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2015, 7:08 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Actually, if you read the VOCM report on the matter, it sounds a bit like the developer may want to do his own thing without adhering to standard building code rules. It's not easy from the report to understand just what the problem is.
"Standard building code rules" shouldn't have to be applied to a 1860s building.

I don't know how it works in other provinces but in Quebec there's a separate set of much less strict rules that older, predating-building-codes buildings must comply with.

1860s, that one should definitely fall into the very loosest set of rules.

When in disagreement, you can also get special permissions on a case-by-case basis. I managed to at least partly do that once for a four-story, commercial/residential mixed 1870s era building in downtown Sherbrooke that has been rented as rooms since the 1920s at least (I had to document this to help my case).

I can't possibly conceive that a jurisdiction won't accept to let older buildings be non-compliant of the latest versions of the building codes. Makes zero sense.

The issue here is probably that he stripped so much of the building that his "grandfather rights" are deemed to be gone (only the shell is from the 1860s) by the authorities. I think he can fight that...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #142  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2015, 7:16 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
I can't load the article for some reason but in the actual news report they explained that here it's based solely on how much money is invested in the building. Cross a certain threshold, and the building is considered new construction and therefore the modern building code applies.

That sounds so nonsensical to me that I wouldn't be surprised if its wrong.

However, I do know that the Province last year announced some program meant to help alleviate the problem of vacant third floors pretty much throughout the entirety of downtown St. John's. If they're converted into ANYTHING other than their original use (so, say it was storage, and you want to put offices; or it was an office space, and you want to put apartments), then the entire building must meet modern building code requirements - including prohibitively expensive emergency and accessibility requirements.

And there was at least one case where parking requirements even came up. So this owner wanted to take a building with an unused third floor and put in, I don't remember what, say apartments. Not only would they have to install emergency exits, but it was suggested they'd need wheelchair access and off-street parking as well.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #143  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2015, 5:34 AM
red-paladin's Avatar
red-paladin red-paladin is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,510
Please let us know if you hear any further updates on that case.
Ideally, write a long letter to the paper and city hall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #144  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2015, 2:59 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by red-paladin View Post
Please let us know if you hear any further updates on that case.
Ideally, write a long letter to the paper and city hall
Hell, I kind of want to.
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #145  
Old Posted May 9, 2015, 3:12 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,491
Recently-unveiled facade of a circa 1830's building on Granville Street in Halifax. It should have a pretty interesting indoor space too. There aren't a lot of older buildings in Halifax that have two-storey glass storefronts like this one.


Source


Unfortunately, there was a similar brick building next door that was going to receive a similar treatment at one point but was demolished instead.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #146  
Old Posted May 9, 2015, 1:47 PM
The_Architect's Avatar
The_Architect The_Architect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 3,387
That's facadism as opposed to historic restoration.
__________________
Hope is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of our greatest strength, and our greatest weakness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #147  
Old Posted May 9, 2015, 3:37 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Architect View Post
That's facadism as opposed to historic restoration.
Well, I'm happy the facade at least has been restored. There isn't much change from what used to be there because the facade was all you could see before; if it still has its own entrance and interior space then it will function in the same way too.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #148  
Old Posted May 20, 2015, 12:53 AM
Dwils01's Avatar
Dwils01 Dwils01 is offline
Urban Fanactic
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Surrey
Posts: 3,127
These three buildings were part of the old St. Mary's Paper mill. The buildings were built from the late 1800's to early 1900's.

New home to the Algoma Conservatory of Music.


New Mill Machine Shop Concert Hall.


Old pulp tower to be converted into a museum of nature.


Our old hospital will have new life in them in a couple of years.

Phase 1 of the Riverwalk Condo. Will convert the old Plummer hospital to condominiums. It's 90% sold and is the first condominium to be built in the city in six years.
Bringing the old Plummer Hospital built in 1905 back to life.


Phase 2 of the Riverwalk Condos. Will convert the old general hospital built in the 1940's to condominiums.


Pictures by me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #149  
Old Posted May 20, 2015, 5:03 PM
davidivivid's Avatar
davidivivid davidivivid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ville de Québec City
Posts: 2,495
__________________
"I went on a diet, swore off drinking and heavy eating, and in fourteen days I lost two weeks" Joe E. Lewis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #150  
Old Posted May 23, 2015, 12:58 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
Now that the City has made it easier for the owners of Water Street buildings to convert the top floors into apartments, we're seeing more and more. An acquaintance has put his up on Air BnB - gorgeous, and right on Water Street.

No before pictures, sorry, but it just would've been plain storage.









__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #151  
Old Posted May 23, 2015, 6:49 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,262
The third floor (with full height ceilings and windows) couldn't be used?!?

That's... pure nonsense. What was the goal of that measure, help to push people into Mount Pearl bungalows instead of having a denser Water Street?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #152  
Old Posted May 23, 2015, 6:53 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
They just had ridiculous rules about bringing things up to code, providing off-street parking if building purpose or owner changed, etc. I believe it's still kind of insane but at least it's possible to do something with the upper floor now.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #153  
Old Posted May 23, 2015, 11:08 PM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Hmm....
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,405
One underway in Regina...

This was originally built as a department store in the early 1900s. It was then used as the head office for the organization that developed into the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool... then Viterra... and now within "Glencore", as they have added Viterra into their giant organization.

This was supposedly in the works for years (in terms of planning, trying to get some city tax breaks/heritage restoration funding, etc). It's unclear if they will just be restoring the building, or if they will be trying to repurpose it. There have been some staff reductions, so Viterra could probably mostly consolidate into the tower behind and leave some (maybe 1st floor retail) or all of the old Department Store for another use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan View Post


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #154  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:24 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
Passed through Harbour Grace today. They're doing a great job of rehabilitating all of their old heritage properties. A lot were completely ruined - as in no roofs, etc. But these days they're mostly bought up and fixed, and more often than not by year-round residents, which is nice.

But, in any event... I'm curious about this house on the right. This neighbourhood has a mixture of stone and wood so it genuinely could be either... but I can't tell if that's real stone? The way the stone and wood meet on the left corner of the house... that makes the stone seem fake to me. Is it?

__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #155  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:28 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,262
The total lack of the slightest lintel ornamentation is IMO a dead giveaway that that brick covering is relatively recent. That rectangular stone on the portico, same thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #156  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:29 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,262
Can you give us an update, did that rich American raze the Stone Jug or not?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #157  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:30 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
Ahh, thank you. I'm surprised... I don't mind this so much, and usually I hate the fake shit if only on principle.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #158  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:38 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
He didn't raze it, but he's still ready to walk away in June. HOWEVER - more work is clearly being done on the interior so someone is still hoping for the best.

Took these in Carbonear today.

The view up Water Street from the Stone Jug:



The Stone Jug exterior:



And two interior shots of the restaurant on the main floor through dirty windows:



__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #159  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:50 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 24,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker View Post
He didn't raze it
Damn. I'm disappointed

Though it's not June yet......
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #160  
Old Posted May 24, 2015, 12:51 AM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 27,762
And a couple more from today's trip. They're working on the Court of Newfoundland in Harbour Grace:



And the older, red brick half of the Cable Station in Heart's Content:

__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
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 12:15 PM.

     

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