[Halifax] The Alexander | 65 m | 24 fl | Completed

[sdm]

Pretty clear message here tonight, would be surprised if this wasn't approved.

[terrynorthend]

I'm pleasantly surprised by the public support..

[phrenic]

Me too.

[Dmajackson]

I've so far only missed a minute or two of the speakers but i've only heard three or four against it. This is the first time i've heard something like 6 in a row in support. Did Pacey speak yet? I haven't heard him and he usually goes first.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

I've so far only missed a minute or two of the speakers but i've only heard three or four against it. This is the first time i've heard something like 6 in a row in support. Did Pacey speak yet? I haven't heard him and he usually goes first.

both pacey's and the famous alan ruffman spoke pretty much last in this evenings hearing. All three had no sound arguements against the project.

It will be approved

[Haliguy]

Yeah it was great to see so many for the project tonight. It was quite refreshing. The people against it are the same old people who make absurd arguments against why it should not be built. Its like a broken record. They are losing more and more credibility all the time.

[someone123]

Didn't see the hearing but this is all pretty encouraging.

Did Sloane vote against it after the "blank wall" stuff? That would be amusing.

[Dmajackson]

They didn't have time for all the speakers so nobody voted tonight. I think they had something like 30 people left at the half-hour mark. Its being carried over to next monday or tuesday. Oh well with all the support it should be approved easily.

Okay i heard Elizabeth Pacey speak and i swear i heard her say they shouldn't allow this because of some made-up story about someone sneaking away from an insignificant historic house. If this was true that would mean tht everyone who has worked on the harbour should have a view of the harbour from their three storey house in a growing downtown....weird....

[someone123]

Rather than forcing the Paceys to speak over and over I think they should just record one of those "Scottish Georgian" speeches and play it back at every public hearing regarding downtown development.

She probably complained about how Government House wouldn't be visible from the water anymore but that minor drawback is dramatically outweighed by the restoration of Keith Hall, something that is much less likely to happen if a smaller development is built. 99% of the historic value of Government House is in its street presence and that will be largely unaffected by the new tower.

[Dmajackson]

I don't recall her saying anything about the Government House then again i stopped listening after hearing her tell the irrelevant "Scottish Georgian" story about the shipbuilder. She kept saying how we shouldn't block the view of the harbour from the shipbuilder's houses. I don't know about her but when i leave work i don't want to see it until i clock back in the next morning. And the people who know live in these houses don't work on the harbour so protecting the view for someone who doesn't exist anymore is strange to say the least.

[Spitfire75]

Tower draws mostly cheers
Most support Brewery project during crowded council meeting
By AMY PUGSLEY FRASER City Hall Reporter
Wed. Jun 18 - 5:43 AM


Halkirk’s proposed 21-storey tower on Hollis and Bishop streets. (Contributed)


A proposed 21-storey building for downtown Halifax was creating so much buzz at city hall Tuesday that its future will have to be decided next week.
That’s because regional councillors only had time to entertain 27 speakers out of an expected 54 at a three-hour public hearing.

If Tuesday’s speakers were any indication, expect almost 75 per cent to be in favour of putting the new building on the corner of Hollis and Bishop streets.

That’s an unusual ratio of people in favour of a development.

A hearing at city hall last week for a 19-storey building on the corner of South Park and Brenton streets drew an almost equal number of speakers for and against before council gave it a resounding thumbs up.

Last night, people were asking council to approve the project so Halifax could have a future to go along with its past.

"It’s not about freeze-drying the downtown, it’s about growth in the downtown respecting our heritage without compromising the ability for our city to grow," said Brad Smith of Dartmouth.

Heritage and development don’t have to be mutually exclusive, he said.
That point was picked up by a number of people, many of whom lauded Halkirk Developments for its planned $2-million restoration of historic Keith Hall on Hollis Street.

Halkirk needs to make the money from the residential component of the tower with its condominiums before it can restore the former home of mayor and beer baron Alexander Keith.

"Keith Hall is sitting there rotting," said Paul MacKinnon, executive director of the Downtown Halifax Business Commission, noting he’s willing to trade in a little height for its restoration.

Kent Lane, who works with CBCL in the Brewery Market, said the attention to detail on Halkirk’s current proposal is indicative of the "attention to detail" they put into their Salter’s Gate hotel and condo project which opened last summer.

Angus MacDonald said he’s in favour of modernization and development but it must be in keeping with the city’s nearby registered heritage buildings.And while the Alexander would not be an "incongruous monstrosity" like some other nearby buildings, he said, at 21 storeys, it doesn’t fit.

Heritage Trust president Phil Pacey, of Halifax, said the tower was not compatible with the historic nature of the neighbourhood, including historic Government House. The block is also home to the finest collection of Scottish Georgian architecture outside Scotland, he said, and controls should be put in place to ensure its survival.

The area is currently governed by a 7.5-metre height limit, he said.
"And instead of changing the proposal to meet the (planning strategy), the applicant is asking HRM to change the strategy to match its proposal," Mr. Pacey said

Fred Morley of the Greater Halifax Partnership said heritage properties need economic vitality "surrounding and embracing them" or they will slowly crumble.

"We will end up with parking lots. If we don’t accept change of any kind we end up a city with no future, and increasingly no past."

Another speaker said parts of the city are already crumbling.

Before the council meeting, Adam Conter said he walked through a barren Barrington Street with run-down spaces.

"The urban sprawl no longer brings people to the downtown core."
Bringing more density to the downtown core is part of the city’s regional plan, which is being carried forward by its HRM By Design project.

Bill Campbell, who spoke on behalf of the developer, said the project would do just that: bring life to the area and enhance the heritage value of the streetscape through its design.
( apugsley@herald.ca)

Some positive comments on the article too. I really can't see this not going through.

[Aya_Akai]

"incongruous monstrosity"

LOL

I will never forget the first time that quote was pulled out at the United Gulf hearings, and how dramatically it was said with tone and the rolled "r" in "monstrosity". I was at the hearing for UG when it was initially said, then came home as fast as I could for the re-broadcast later in the evening just to get that soundbyte recorded.

I wasn't able to catch the hearing last night, I was visiting with a family friend who lives on the burned side of Candy Mountain Road (house is kinda melty but its still there) But from what I've been seeing here about the overwhelming ammount of support for this, I think this will be approved.

[someone123]

Annoying how Pacey still uses the "changing the planning strategy" argument when this was totally debunked by a member of staff during the South Park and Brenton public hearing. These 7.5 metre cutoffs were never meant as a hard limit on development heights, but rather define a point beyond which development is deemed important enough to require some level of public input.

[planarchy]

This really is a horrible looking proposal. Assuming it will be similar to the project on the North end of the lot, the Keith's brewery will be surrounded by pathetic, uninspiring crap.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by planarchy

This really is a horrible looking proposal. Assuming it will be similar to the project on the North end of the lot, the Keith's brewery will be surrounded by pathetic, uninspiring crap.

That may be a bit strong, but given that I believe they are using the same architect that they did for the Marriott down at the other end of the block, and the general resemblance to it that the rendering shows, it does not offer much hope for a good design.

[someone123]

Could be better, could be worse. I think this will turn out a little better than Salter's Gate. The ground floor details are a little cleaner. The tower itself doesn't look too bad.

I'm not a fan of the precast that will no doubt be used for most of the cladding but I'm also not a fan of the dumpy empty lot that's been there for decades. The site of Salter's Gate is similar and I would argue that the current building, for all its shortcomings, is a hell of a lot better than having the old parking lot and loading area there.

[Jonovision]

I know it's not the most inspiring architecture, but I like it. Salters Gate is really growing on me and I think the Alexander will do the same. It is at least something different from all the other boxy towers downtown.

[Keith P.]

Passed tonight at council, 17-3. Once again Sloane voted against it. While I have little hope it will be much more than a barely adequate design, at least it beats a hole in the ground.

[Dmajackson]

It's nice to know it got passed. Now we wait for the appeal from HT...

[someone456]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Passed tonight at council, 17-3. Once again Sloane voted against it. While I have little hope it will be much more than a barely adequate design, at least it beats a hole in the ground.

That Sloane is a real item - she supported the project earlier, after she bullied the developer into making very costly changes, then flip-flops when a couple of student renters moan. Democracy - gotta love it! Glad to see it passed. I'm sure however, that no design could please certain members of this forum.