The Midtown Tower hotel proposal for the corner of Market and Grafton has seen its share of ups and downs—appropriate, given that the argument over the proposed building has been primarily about height. On Tuesday, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeals upheld a decision that the 17-storey tower was indeed too tall for its proposed location, and that it would be in violation of municipal viewplane restrictions.
Translation: the tower would impede the view of the harbour from Citadel Hill, a polarizing issue in downtown Halifax. Philip Pacey, president of the Nova Scotia Heritage Trust, considers the decision a victory.
“The reaction was one of great delight, especially because we’ve waited a long time. I mean, this proposal first came up almost three years ago,” he says.
The decision about the Midtown Tower has already been appealed—twice—and Pacey admits that the process may not yet be over.
“There is a chance that it could be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada,” he says. “Their lawyers did cite some cases from the Supreme Court of Canada in their appellation to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, so they certainly could decide to apply for an appeal.”
Eric Grant, a manager at the Midtown Tavern and a member of the Grant family behind the tower proposal, had little comment on Tuesday.
“We haven’t even had a chance to read it yet. All I know is, it was a no.”
There is some speculation that this decision will have implications for the United Gulf Towers, AKA the “twisted sisters.” Pacey, on behalf of the Heritage Trust, is hoping the Towers are subject to a similar decision.
“Our appeal of the United Gulf Towers is based on the same policies which have just been upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Utility and Review Board,” he says. “So, that gives us reason for some optimism. But we certainly can’t be overconfident. We can only be hopeful.”
Steeple chased
Not too far away from the Midtown, another development may eventually alter the Halifax skyline. The Trinity Anglican Church, located on Cogswell between Gottingen and Brunswick (near Staples Business Depot) has reached an agreement with a development company that will ultimately see the church torn down and the property redeveloped—likely as condos.
“An agreement was signed on the 14th of September,” says Reverend Stephen Ashton, “but this process has been ongoing for over 13 years.” The property has not yet been sold—a formal change of ownership will not happen for at least another year.
“It’s a beautiful building, but it’s also a very old building,” says Ashton. “It was built in 1927. Handicapped accessibility, that’s not that easy. And it’s an enormously expensive building to heat.”
The church sits on a prime piece of downtown land—Ashton says that he received interest from more than a dozen different developers. Like many other downtown churches, Trinity had been struggling as of late to attract parishioners.
“Part of it I’m sure is the changing dynamics of the community,” he says. “Technically, our parish is currently covered by Scotia Square”—Ashton stops to chuckle—“and when this parish was established, that was all residential.”
Worship at my alter. email: mikef@thecoast.ca
This article appears in Oct 26 – Nov 1, 2006.
This is getting ridiculous. How will there ever be development in the downtown core if everything keeps getting turned down? Empty lots and holes in the ground are pretty good for a city im sure. The heritage trust can suck my cock. They are ruining our city.
If Halifax keeps this up, we will end up as the Armpit instead of Dartmouth. A little positive development never hurt anyone. We want Halifax to be a memorable and beautiful city, which it is, but why not make it more so? As for the viewplane, I’m sure that a few taller than normal buildings won’t completely obstruct it. If anything, they may make the skyline more interesting.Haligonians need to stop being so afraid of change.
While I agree that progress is an important element of any city I also have to caution that it is best to go slowly. I am a former Halagonian living in T.O. and believe me the skyline is only attractive on a post card. No Lake veiw, all buildings are tall, glass structures that look exactly like the last one. Progress can be positive but it can also be severly ugly. Halifax is attractive to so many because of its herritage and ocean surroundings. Any future development should encompasse and highlight what naturly exists not try and re-mold the city into something it clearly is not.
I am also an ex-pat of Halifax living in Toronto. I’m sure there are people who live in Toronto and don’t know it is situated on a lake because of the development on the lake front. One of the things that makes Halifax amazing is its flexibility, its ability to embrace both progress and tradition at the same time. We can’t let corporate ventures jeopardize long standing practices that are in place for the well being of the average citizen. Perhaps some might say this might be a heavy decree about what may be classified as a trivial dispute but it’s the old story of “If we let one building obstruct the view of the harbour then what’s to stop the next development company from building just a little taller”. And if we are changing policies for profit, what else might be changed. The Public Gardens are prime realty. Why not build there.
What long standing practices do you speak of? Downtown Halifax is riddled with empty lots, decrepit and abandoned buildings and the like. No, massive scryscrapers are not the answer. Creative and interesting developments are. I believe the “twisted sisters” is a great idea, look at the creativity and originality of it’s design, where have you seen such buildings? Surely not in Toronto, and if the heritage trust gets it’s way, not in Halifax either. Brick buildings and those with a faux “heritage” feel are lame and boring. How original and creative is it to simply rehash the past ? The answer is NOT AT ALL. I am willing to trade a slightly blocked view of the “beautiful” city of Dartmouth and it’s oil refineries for a world class building in our downtown core that will make me want to go there instead of sitting on my ass out in the suburbs.
The Public Gardens are not easily compared to the Halifax Citadel viewplane. I personally have never specifically been up to see the viewplane but I’m sure that the view of Dartmouth is nothing to be in awe over, and vice versa. The Public Gardens, on the other hand, are widely used by the whole city while the viewplane is not. What Halifax needs is new development and more interesting architecture. There is a lot of building going on in the downtown core right now, but it’s nothing but monotonous 4 or 5 storey condos/apartment buildings. Those are not what we need. We need something that will not only attract MORE tourism and make Halifax MORE of a metropolitan city, but also create new jobs and aid the economy. I think we can all safely say that Halifax is the only major city in the Maritimes and it needs to live up to its role.I live in Halifax and I know that building a few towers will not disrupt its strong heritage. I think it’s time for Halifax to have not only the role of a historic port city, but also the role of a modern city.We need to get our minds off the past. I know it’s no Toronto, but going one, or a few steps further in that direction will better the city in the end.
I was a Scottish tourist who has now become a resident of downtown Halifax. Don’t underestimate the attraction of the viewplane and the type of buildings presently inhabiting the area. Developing downtown is not the object of these new buildings, maximising profit for the developers is. A 17 storey tower or the incredibly ugly ‘twised sisters’ lack any motive other than greed. Once the precedent is set there will be no going back back and Halifax will suffer the consequences. As for regenerating the central core of the city, do you really think a couple of tower blocks will do that?