HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2010, 4:57 PM
planarchy's Avatar
planarchy planarchy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 461
Public meeting tonight concerning this project:

Lobby of the TD building, 7pm-9pm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2010, 8:38 PM
Empire's Avatar
Empire Empire is offline
Salty Town
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Halifax
Posts: 1,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by planarchy View Post
Public meeting tonight concerning this project:

Lobby of the TD building, 7pm-9pm.
I hope they hear the message that roof has to change from several people......
__________________
Salty Town
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2010, 11:42 AM
sdm sdm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empire View Post
I hope they hear the message that roof has to change from several people......
Its been reported that the some elements of the redesign actually may not pass HRM by design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:01 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 8,130
I think its a good idea to have a before picture of this (photo by me);

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted May 21, 2010, 3:07 AM
Jonovision's Avatar
Jonovision Jonovision is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,744
A Tim Bousquet article from this weeks Coast.

TD Building re-design proposal revealed
Plans call for the demolition of 1820s-era Macara-Barnstead Building, now housing The Flower Shop
POSTED BY TIM BOUSQUET ON TUE, MAY 18, 2010 AT 2:43 PM



Toronto-Dominion Bank wants to nearly triple the size of its 18-storey Barrington Street tower. The plan calls for the demolition of the Macara-Barnstead Building on Granville Street, a registered historic property that dates to the 1820s.
Architect Bill Anwyll unveilled the plans last Thursday before the Design Review Committee. That committee reviews all building proposals and determines if they meet the design criteria established by the HRM By Design planning rules for downtown.

The TD building was built in 1972, explained Anwyll. The full tower sits to the south of the CIBC building on Barrington, and extends back only half a block, because at the time of construction TD didn't own the two lots on Granville. (One lot is occupied by the Barnstead building. The second is now empty, but once was the site of the historic Kellys Leather Goods Store, which was demolished in 2006.) TD has since acquired both lots.

Along George Street, the tower drops to a four-storey "podium," as to preserve the protected view shed from Citadel Hill down the George Street corridor to the harbour. That podium extends to Granville Street.

The TD proposal fills in the block, by extending the tower back to Granville Street. The podium would remain in its current configuration, but the facade at the corner of George and Granville would be reworked to be consistent with the larger building. There would also be a three-storey pyramid-shaped extension to the top of the tower, two storeys of which would be rentable office space, with the third storey housing some of the building's equipment.

The bigger building would increase the space on each floor from the present 3,500 square feet to 9,800 square feet, said Anwyll. He did not say, but that increase presumably does not include the podium or the pyramid. The overall increase in office space would be in the neighbourhood of 110,000 square feet; Anwyll gave no indication whether the bank would use the extra space itself, or lease it out.

Thanks to more efficient design, the bigger building would use less energy than the existing building, said Anwyll.

The Macara-Barnstead Building



TD's plans call for demolishing the Macara-Barnstead Building, although responding to a question from a committee member, Anwyll objected to that characterization. "We're not going to demolish the building," he said. "We’re going to deconstruct the rear of the building, which has very limited heritage value, but maintain the front facade... The intent is to get it looking like it looked in the 1870s."
Anwyll was referring to a brick extension to the rear of the building constructed in the 1880s, but in fact, the plan is to tear down the entire building, save for the facade and parts of three stone walls. Those walls now extend all the way to the rear of the original building (in the picture above, the exterior wall is one of the three walls), but TD intends to keep only the easternmost 12 feet of each wall. Keeping any more of the walls would interfere with the rentability of the space, said Anwyll.

Asked if The Flower Shop would be back in the reconstructed space, Anwyll said no. “The reality is that The Flower Shop is in this building because it’s a relatively inexpensive space to rent. When it’s new and it has air conditioning and proper heating and little things like that, and everybody wants to be there because it's in such a lovely condition on the street, the rent’s going to go up.”

"We think that entire building is important," said Phil Pacey of the Heritage Trust, after the meeting. "It's one of the few stone buildings left in the city."

The new building would also recreate the lost facade of the Kelly building along Granville Street.

Process issues

At a previous meeting, Pacey had asked to address the committee, to lay out his view that demolishing the Macara-Barnstead Building goes against the design guidelines laid out in HRM By Design. The committee, which was only created this year, had not yet drawn up rules for public presentations; at that time they voted not to allow presentations from the public.

That decision didn't sit right with four members of the committee, who insisted last week that their contrary views be recorded in the minutes of the earlier meeting.

"The developer just spoke before the committee for, what, an hour?" said Pacey after the meeting. "We think it's within our democratic rights to also address the committee."

As for the building proposal itself, TD will need two variances from the Halifax council in order to get permission to build. Both variances are needed to make the project economically viable, said Anwyll.

The first involves extending the front facade, above the Macara-Barnstead facade, to 41 metres before it is stepped back from the street. HRM By Design guidelines dictate a stepback after 37.5 metres in height.

The second variance would apply to the north side of the new portion of the building, facing the CIBC building. Planning rules say that after the first 33.5 metres of height, new construction must be stepped back at least 17 metres from the common property line. Abiding by those rules would leave a large blank space omitted from the otherwise square tower. Anwyll argued that it made no difference, except to the people in the CIBC building, if that blank space was filled in, because the existing tower already blocks views and sunlight.

The Design Review Committee will formally decide on the merits of the TD proposal at its next meeting, which hasn't been scheduled yet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted May 21, 2010, 3:39 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 8,130
^Damn you just beat me to it.

While I am not a major supporter of facadism if they are planning to recreate the Kelly building section while updating the other building to modern standards I think it would be acceptable in this case. In my mind it balances out the ups and downs of this proposal. When the entire block is consolidated into one high quality building it will probably look a lot better than the cut form it currently has though the weird podium heading down George Street will still be present (whats that viewplane for anyway?).

Though this is not reallly "new construction" since this expansion is 18 storeys this will be a major test for taller proposals going through the HbD process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted May 21, 2010, 4:29 AM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,882
I think the committee vote was fine - not to allow Pacey to speak. From what I understand, the committee functions much like the Planning Commission that we have here in Calgary.

The Calgary Planning Commission (CPC) functions much like a technical design review for land use applications and certain development permits, so in a sense it would be like a site plan application. Now typically, the planner involved in the file will present, answer technical questions and if there are questions which say only the applicant could answer - the question gets differed to the applicant, they come up and answer only that question. No one gets to speak other than that or any other reps from staff for engineering or transportation.

So while the committee members may oppose the motion not allowing Pacey to speak; if the function is much like CPC then they did the right thing. Plus isn't the appeal of the approval to City Council? So if they don't like it; appeal it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted May 21, 2010, 11:18 AM
joeyedm joeyedm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 72
anything to prevent pacey from opening his yap is fine by me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted May 21, 2010, 10:37 PM
mcmcclassic's Avatar
mcmcclassic mcmcclassic is offline
BUILD!
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyedm View Post
anything to prevent pacey from opening his yap is fine by me.
The developers were probably pleased by that decision too
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 2:43 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Phil Pacey has found a way to give a presentation against this TD Tower expansion (according to allnovascotia.com). Why does he have so much influence in the Halifax area? If he has the right to give a presentation against will there be a resident who can voice a presentation in favour?

If Phil Pacey and the Heritage Trust was against HRM by Design then why is he using it to fight this development? Shouldn't someone point out that they are planning to replace the reflective glass that is not allowed by HRM by Design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 5:48 AM
mcmcclassic's Avatar
mcmcclassic mcmcclassic is offline
BUILD!
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Phil Pacey has found a way to give a presentation against this TD Tower expansion (according to allnovascotia.com). Why does he have so much influence in the Halifax area?
I've been wondering the same thing for ages. Imagine if there was a developer with the same amount of sway Pacey had...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 12:15 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcmcclassic View Post
I've been wondering the same thing for ages. Imagine if there was a developer with the same amount of sway Pacey had...
Ben McCrea perhaps? Given the numbers of premiers that have thrown support behind particular developers (sometimes good), I would say that some developers have a fair amount of influence. JET
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 1:08 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by JET View Post
Ben McCrea perhaps? Given the numbers of premiers that have thrown support behind particular developers (sometimes good), I would say that some developers have a fair amount of influence. JET
Ben McCrea deserves a civic award. He did the Founders Square development and I think he also redeveloped Historic Properties.

Do people in the Halifax area really want a bunch of dilapidated buildings in the city. Where do you think all these buildings came from in the first place. They didn't just spring up out of the ground (even the old ones were built by developers). I don't see people like Phil Pacey going out and raising money and getting building permits to preserve old buildings. (This might be a far better use of the Heritage Trust's money instead of spending it on lawyers.)

At one time development was able to proceed in the Halifax area; when will these anti-development people catch up with the 21th century (maybe they should start by catching up to the 20th century). Does Halifax have to crumble to the ground before these people will wise up? Why must Halifax be stuck in the 1800's?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 1:56 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Ben McCrea deserves a civic award. He did the Founders Square development and I think he also redeveloped Historic Properties.

Do people in the Halifax area really want a bunch of dilapidated buildings in the city. Where do you think all these buildings came from in the first place. They didn't just spring up out of the ground (even the old ones were built by developers). I don't see people like Phil Pacey going out and raising money and getting building permits to preserve old buildings. (This might be a far better use of the Heritage Trust's money instead of spending it on lawyers.)

At one time development was able to proceed in the Halifax area; when will these anti-development people catch up with the 21th century (maybe they should start by catching up to the 20th century). Does Halifax have to crumble to the ground before these people will wise up? Why must Halifax be stuck in the 1800's?
Fenwick, my statement was in response to the question: "Imagine if there was a developer with the same amount of sway Pacey had..."
Although Mr. Pacey is able to speak out about heritage, it is the developers that have the influence. Very rarely are old buildings saved (even the facades in most cases) in Halifax. It is good that someone speaks out about heritage. The TD plan is to save the facade of the Macara-Barnstead Building
and recreate the facade of the Kelly building. That's good. If someone wasn't speaking out about heritage then no effort would be made to maintain some aspects of heritage. There is a need for balance, not only in construction, but also in dialogue. Doesn't seem unreasonable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 4:52 PM
mcmcclassic's Avatar
mcmcclassic mcmcclassic is offline
BUILD!
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 431
I'm not against recreating the street level heritage buildings on Granville st, I just worry that when Phil and the HT get involved in something like this project it will be either delayed or killed off altogether. If they expanded the tower and remade the Kelly building and such that would be excellent and a fair balance for both "sides"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 9:44 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 976
I have to say that I do not like the idea of recreating the Kelly Building. It's an affront to the actual heritage building right next to it. Better to have something high-quality, reflective of today, adding to the city's urban fabric.

As for the rest of the proposal, I haven't made my mind up. Not much about this makes me super excited.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 10:22 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
I don't see the point of recreating a heritage building (the Kelly building) unless they actually still have the original facade materials from the building (unlikely). Recreating it seems too much Disneyland-ish.

Based on the renderings it looks good to me. I have always thought that the TD building was too narrow for such a height. The final result would seem to be already known, it is already there and they are just expanding it; so there shouldn't be any surprises and it will create more office space downtown with very minimal adverse effect.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 10:36 PM
planarchy's Avatar
planarchy planarchy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by JET View Post
Fenwick, my statement was in response to the question: "Imagine if there was a developer with the same amount of sway Pacey had..."
Although Mr. Pacey is able to speak out about heritage, it is the developers that have the influence. Very rarely are old buildings saved (even the facades in most cases) in Halifax. It is good that someone speaks out about heritage. The TD plan is to save the facade of the Macara-Barnstead Building
and recreate the facade of the Kelly building. That's good. If someone wasn't speaking out about heritage then no effort would be made to maintain some aspects of heritage. There is a need for balance, not only in construction, but also in dialogue. Doesn't seem unreasonable.
I agree completely with JET - some developers have a tremendous amount of pull in this city. And while it seems like Heritage Trust is out to stop all development this really isn't the case. And the reality is that that majority of projects that are proposed by developers for Halifax are medicore at best - cheap materials, terrible design and inappropriate for the proposed site. You just have to look at all the suburban style developments that litter the peninsula - parking lots adjacent to the street, vinyl siding, , little to no relation to the street.

While I certainly don't agree with Heritage Trust and support many projects they fight against - such as the Waterside Centre - I also wouldn't want a number of other ill-conceived projects to proceed - such as the WTCC mess. With so much civic apathy, there needs to be some voice that challenges bad development (and there is lots of it). Unfortunately no other influential group exists to fill this role, so HT is the compromise. That being said, I wish they would bring in a few individuals to better guide them on the potential of good urban design to compliment existing heritage structures.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted May 27, 2010, 11:05 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Why not just have a plebiscite on every single development that comes along? Most people seem to like the WTCC proposal so why are so few people making it sound so bad? Too tall, too much glass, not enough glass, too close to the Citadel, no residential component, too many hotel rooms, too much office space, etc., etc., etc.

The TD building is already there - they are just talking about expanding it. Is this really worthy of opposition - if it is, then why not just say all new development must go in the suburbs or some other province? Like it is now ....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted May 28, 2010, 3:38 AM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Why not just have a plebiscite on every single development that comes along? Most people seem to like the WTCC proposal so why are so few people making it sound so bad? Too tall, too much glass, not enough glass, too close to the Citadel, no residential component, too many hotel rooms, too much office space, etc., etc., etc.

The TD building is already there - they are just talking about expanding it. Is this really worthy of opposition - if it is, then why not just say all new development must go in the suburbs or some other province? Like it is now ....
They are desperate to look for excuses. It's getting to the point that people oppose stuff just for the hell of opposing something. It's the hip thing to do.
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 6:12 AM.

     

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