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

    307 Prince Albert Road in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Halifax Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2011, 4:52 PM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waye Mason View Post
Then they go back and forth and sometimes you end up with a better over all plan, like what has been happening with the St Joseph's property on Gottingen.
I completely disagree with you on that point. All that seems to matter is height, height, and height. Overall design plans never seem to be what people care about... 90% of the time it is just height. I rarely if ever hear discussion in the notes from public forums about how the street level design/integration could be changed/improved etc, but I do read constantly about how scary a "tall" building is.

In the case of the St J development, all that has happened is that the height was reduced 2 floors. What has that actually achieved in a positive way?

To some that is somehow better, although an equal argument could be made that this will make the overall plan worse by cutting into margins that will then negatively impact the budget for finishing details.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2011, 5:23 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,882
beyeas makes an interesting point...which made me wonder about the discussion Jono and I had about building height as well.

I've heard a few times that people equate height to fenwick, so fenwick = bad. But I wonder if that opinion would change once the work on fenwick is completed? Let's face it, fenwick is pretty bad as it stands now but when the recladding is done...would people feel the same way?

Another thought I had about height was this: Essentially everything in the regional core (inside the circ and peninsula halifax) is where the regional plan wants to concentrate 25% of the growth. The next regional plan, that might increase. If building height is such an issue - then perhaps what needs to be done is determine a context formula for building height?

You could set it up like this: In neighbourhoods where the prodominate building height does not exceed 2 stories (set some sort of distance around the site of a proposal); then the maximum height of any redevelopment project couldn't exceed say 5 to 7 stories. You could also set it up so that there are rare circumstances that it could go higher (say 9 stories) through a bonusing system.

Then if you have a neighbourhood like the hydrostone, where the context has buildings in the 5 to 9 storey range - then any infill could go up say 15, with bonuses up to 20.

This way, it's a gradual stepped approach to infill of the community. Calgary did that for the inner city when it came to infill houses. The maximum height and step forward of your new home depends on the context of the existing homes next to you. So if you are in a bungalow area - you can only get 8.6m. But if they are two stories, you could get a max building height between 8.6 to 10m. But no house can exceed 10m, unless a relaxation (variance) is granted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2011, 10:09 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyeas View Post
I completely disagree with you on that point. All that seems to matter is height, height, and height. Overall design plans never seem to be what people care about... 90% of the time it is just height. I rarely if ever hear discussion in the notes from public forums about how the street level design/integration could be changed/improved etc, but I do read constantly about how scary a "tall" building is.

In the case of the St J development, all that has happened is that the height was reduced 2 floors. What has that actually achieved in a positive way?

To some that is somehow better, although an equal argument could be made that this will make the overall plan worse by cutting into margins that will then negatively impact the budget for finishing details.
Exactly. All that happened with St. Josephs is that a few floors got lopped off because the local Mafia Don councillor Jerry Blumenthal decreed that it was "too TALL!!!". So that means a reduced revenue stream for the developer and a reduced ROI. That in turn means likely use of less expensive materials and other cutting of corners that results in a less attractive design and finished product. Who benefits from that? Nobody. This phobia about building height is resulting in far too many short, stubby, cheap-looking buildings in HRM. For what, I do not know.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 5:18 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,831
Yep, I agree with terrynorthend's comment. In order for housing to be affordable for a wide variety of people there has to be a decent supply. People who bemoan the loss of pastoral charm in Dartmouth in practice are asking for the whole city to be designed around the concerns of a small, privileged minority. The vast majority of people in Halifax will never own a charming Victorian on a giant lot.

I also agree about the disproportionate, misguided focus on height. I think it is a huge part of why public consultation is useless in Halifax. There isn't a real dialogue about the good and bad qualities of new development in the city -- it's just trench warfare.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 10:16 AM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I also agree about the disproportionate, misguided focus on height. I think it is a huge part of why public consultation is useless in Halifax. There isn't a real dialogue about the good and bad qualities of new development in the city -- it's just trench warfare.
the comments in the herald today are a great example of that, in the article about Spirit Place. There is not one single comment in the paper from any participant in the public meeting about the design. Instead, every single last comment is about the height. And all that will happen if they get their wish is that it will get shorter at the expense if design quality, thereby perpetuating the decades long trend of shit residential architecture in this city.

Community of communities my ass... We are a Compromise of compromises.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 1:33 AM
ibnem2 ibnem2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waye Mason View Post
That is right at Graham's Corner, as we used to call it. 15 stories is what, almost triple the height of anything near there? Sure there is a Superstore right there, and the condos and hotel, but that is a lowish density, residential neighbourhood. I grew up at the top of that hill (up Celtic) so I have to say I want to see drawings and such.

Like always, it will depend on the ground level, how it faces the streets, and the quality of materials for me.

A secondary consideration is that it will have to pass an extensive wind study to make sure it does not frig with Banook and the paddlers.
A few things

- that article was pretty badly done - no real journalism there

- I doubt that there is even a foundation left from that misleading picture. when was that taken circa 1895. and even if it was around fifty years ago, I doubt it looked like that.

- in the bylaws, C2 allows any size or height for commercial like a hotel, without council approving.

- But he C2 doesn't let them build high density residential, so they're applying for rezoning and development agreement (giving HRM control)

- sounds like a wind study is done from the article and if you're use common sense and read wind about other proposals in the area there are no wind issues. This is way overplayed as an excuse.

- there are a few buildings across on lake banook that are around same height. also a couple by sullivan's pond. all around in other dartmouth places and halifax if you look.

- on bldg height this is so subjective and what's the difference between a 10 or 14 storey bldg, my neck stretches when I look up at a 3 storey building. give me space around the building and I'll take the height any day. Crazy how we keep building cheap squatty buildings.

- many parts of the area are run down, with of bad multi unit around the corner and some rough commercial. even a lot of the homes are being rented out. also crime was much worse in the area before superstore - this building would help

- this building is high end - that is obvious

- Everyone moves away from Dartmouth when they need a condo or they get older. No wonder the city is dying

It's a good offer by the builder and the residential building fits better. They should support and not oppose this.

Last edited by ibnem2; Jul 8, 2011 at 2:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2011, 12:38 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibnem2 View Post
A few things

- that article was pretty badly done - no real journalism there

- I doubt that there is even a foundation left from that misleading picture. when was that taken circa 1895. and even if it was around fifty years ago, I doubt it looked like that.

- in the bylaws, C2 allows any size or height for commercial like a hotel, without council approving.

- But he C2 doesn't let them build high density residential, so they're applying for rezoning and development agreement (giving HRM control)

- sounds like a wind study is done from the article and if you're use common sense and read wind about other proposals in the area there are no wind issues. This is way overplayed as an excuse.

- there are a few buildings across on lake banook that are around same height. also a couple by sullivan's pond. all around in other dartmouth places and halifax if you look.

- on bldg height this is so subjective and what's the difference between a 10 or 14 storey bldg, my neck stretches when I look up at a 3 storey building. give me space around the building and I'll take the height any day. Crazy how we keep building cheap squatty buildings.

- many parts of the area are run down, with of bad multi unit around the corner and some rough commercial. even a lot of the homes are being rented out. also crime was much worse in the area before superstore - this building would help

- this building is high end - that is obvious

- Everyone moves away from Dartmouth when they need a condo or they get older. No wonder the city is dying

It's a good offer by the builder and the residential building fits better. They should support and not oppose this.
It is possible that the old building still exists under the 'modern' exterior. A lot of funeral homes were old homes that became funeral homes. Take off the porch, towers, and hip roof, and make a flat roof; you have a box. Add starnge siding and slit windows and voila: ugly building. Maybe not, just saying. I support the new project. It would be Interesting to know more about the history (all of which is without merit now).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2011, 11:20 PM
Heather Heather is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Halifax
Posts: 5
In my back yard...

Yes please....its time for some changes ....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2011, 12:09 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather View Post
Yes please....its time for some changes ....
Welcome to the forum Heather, tell us a bit more about your thoughts on this development. Do you remember when the old house 'became' the funeral home?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2011, 2:53 PM
Heather Heather is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Halifax
Posts: 5
Over 3 decades ago...!

Back in the 1975/76 era, the original homestead was all but eliminated, the structure roof was leveled, the footprint increased and the structure was "commercialized". All that remains in originial condition is the set of stairs leading to the second floor...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2011, 4:48 PM
TheNovaScotian's Avatar
TheNovaScotian TheNovaScotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 176
A eye opener

LOL, thank you for posting that, I just about spit water all over my computer screen.
Maybe BARA should change their name to Save the View from the top of the Staircase.
I still get upset when i read of Ms. Eisener's comment of "Oh my Goodness, i didn't know what to think." I'm guessing that happens alot to her at her age.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2011, 3:28 PM
kojak23 kojak23 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4
there is a website for this proposal.

http://theprincealbert.ca/

From the renderings you can see that the building is being built with the highest of finishes. I am being told that there is a video that is being worked on that will highlight the interior finishes and attention to detail. I have seen some of it and it looks bar none like the nicest most luxurious building in HRM (including the VIC).

I strongly urge that we all sign the petition and send in our comments on the website here: http://theprincealbert.ca/petition
and email Councillor McCluskey to let her know of your support for this project.

This building is too nice to allow it to be built somewheres else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2011, 2:54 PM
takepart takepart is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1
I know the east is known for its slow pace of life - but really...come on people

For the life of the cities - grow up...literally. "If you're not willing to use it, maintain it ,clean it up, grow it,think or talk about it- you'll lose it." Any person coming back to the Metro area after a few years or more has got to shake their head & wonder why more (I take that back) SOME / ANY, reasonable thought, action , development hasn't yet in much capacity reached the east, in particular Metro & Dartmouth. We have the opportunity to beautify, be progressive instead of reactionary- instead I hear whining and see fear factor paralysis and read misinformation that is purposely put out there to confuse the masses because the average person doesn't take the time to "think, research, learn and enlarge their understanding ". It is ludicrous that broken down, eyesore buildings, burnt out bldgs, bulldozed lots - to name a few- remain undeveloped or improved due to "bottiellage"- bottlenecks in development processes that uphold "old thought processes" of "not here".

These communities are likely the same ones complaining, demanding in "woo is me" voices that have "I want " lists for side walks, keep my school open and improve it, get the crime out of my neighborhood . These ques. need to be developed one step further-- what is required to have these concerns met.... increased density, increased tax base, increase in businesses, revitalized areas that provide housing of all types to facilitate demographics and lifestyles. This hasn't got a snowball of a chance without some change and growth in development...Gosh, why don't they teach these basics in school??
In other cities these run down ,or vacant properties are snapped up by the savy thinkers, doers and developers who put vitality back into the areas and cities making people want to come there, live there and grow a thriving community .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2011, 6:02 PM
KathyMT KathyMT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3
This area needs revitalization!

I grew up in the area. I'm sad to see the condition of some of the properties as they currently exist. I would consider moving back to the area with a quality development like this one. It's such a great part of town otherwise with the Superstore close by, the beautiful lake which is a lovely route to walk around, lots of community activities on the lake, the large regional mall and Dartmouth Crossing close by, the trails, close to downtown. I'm sure this development could maintain many of the locals who wish to downsize. What a great improvement to the community this would be, especially since the developer has taken quality, esthetics and most importantly environmental, economic and social sustainability into account in the design. This area needs something this beautiful to revitalize it...not to mention the increase in tax revenue.

Since the project would be outside the limit on height restriction, then what's all the fuss about wind? If mostly seniors were living there, who wouldn't typically be coming in and out during peak traffic hours, I don't see any issues regarding traffic. I don't think traffic would be nearly as bad as it was when funerals were held at the funeral home which currently exists on the site.

I'm all for it and hope that it goes ahead. Lets make the most of this incredible part of HRM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2011, 6:04 PM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,283

welcome takepart and KathyMT!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2011, 11:07 PM
ibnem2 ibnem2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 37
when is the public hearing on this project

From what I've read there are few or No technical issues (planning, wind, shadow and traffic look good) with the application - it's all about the politics. The only way this will get passed is if the councillors (who I am sure will want this project) are given ammunition by supporters. The more people that come to the hearing and support the more likely it is to be passed by council.

Anyone hear anything about hearing dates ...?

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2011, 10:18 AM
Heather Heather is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Halifax
Posts: 5
Hearing dates

The hearing dates have not been set, but they are quickly approaching. From what I have heard it is a 60-90 day window, so there is more time to get to and sign the petition www.theprincealbert.ca/petition and tell friends about it. We need to make sure this building goes up on this site, not elsewhere.
We HAVE to keep these Developers focused on this residential project....remember this property is primarily zoned C2.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2011, 6:38 PM
KathyMT KathyMT is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3
Hearing

To show my support, I would like to speak briefly at the hearing. Anyone else speaking? We'll watch for the date to be announced.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2011, 7:11 PM
JET JET is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,671
This seems like a unique thread. There are a number of relatively new forum posters who are from the neighborhood and are proponents of the development. I can't remember that on other threads.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2011, 7:17 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 3,882
The website for this project has a link to the case website on HRM. There is nothing on there with the public hearing dates, but usually DMJackson is on the ball and checks every community/regional council agenda.

Considering the interest in this item, we'll all keep an eye out I'm sure.
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 9:04 AM.

     

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