Last week Starfish Properties, the real estate company that owns a number of vacant buildings and storefronts on Barrington Street, released a design plan for the former Sam the Record Man and the businesses directly adjacent, which include the former Granite Brewery and Ginger’s Tavern.
It will be the first new development proposed under new HRM By Design rules. The plans detail big changes to the interior, connecting the three properties to each other and with Argyle Street, and adding two more floors above the three existing. The facades of the buildings will be maintained and storefront retail is planned for street level.
“We have a lot of interest for Barrington Street,” asserts Starfish property manager Rob Landry. “Contrary to popular belief.”
The plans fit nicely with the HRM By Design criteria, suggests HRM heritage planner Bill Plaskett. “Having said that, posting application details are part of the process and it has to go through the new design review committee,” he says. “If it goes through, it will be a great renewal” of the buildings.
Heritage Trust president Peter Delefes is encouraged that architect David F. Garrett is on board, but has a few concerns about the design, including that the added floors will be in stark contrast with the existing building; he would prefer something more “sympathetic.” Another element Delefes opposes is “facadism,” or the preserving of the exterior while gutting the building’s interior. “That’s not an accepted form of heritage conservation,” he says. “It’s a concern because it sets a precedent for the whole streetscape.”
Starfish will host a public open house for the new project at its offices (1668 Barrington Street, suite 200) December 21 from 7-9pm, beginning the formal HRM By Design process. As early as mid-February work on the buildings could begin, allowing for appeals or any hitches in the new process. —Carsten Knox
This article appears in Dec 10-16, 2009.
“Another element Delefes opposes is “facadism,” or the preserving of the exterior while gutting the building’s interior. “That’s not an accepted form of heritage conservation,” he says.”
Seriously? Anyone who’s actually explored the interior of the Sam’s building would want it gutted. That place was filthy and run down.
Here we go again, developers cannot win in this city. Heritage Trust would prefer to see these buildings as dried up husks, rotting inside and out, rather than rejuvenating a once vibrant downtown core. This is a perfect compromise, maintaining the existing exterior and renovating the interior. I’m sure that anything built on top of the existing exterior will be tasteful and appropriate. Heritage Trust needs to realise that just because a building is old doesn’t mean it’s worth saving. Buildings die too.
Why do we even solicit comment from the Heritage Trust? It is a given that they will oppose anything that is not a full-scale restoration of any old building.
This is a decent proposal by Starfish and should be allowed to proceed.
Amen, Folks.
Heritage Trust are a bunch of whiners. These buildings are old, their foundations are rotting and they can’t accommodate the necessary utilities to run any modern business. So the plan is to get businesses back into the downtown core, but if you can’t equip said business with the services they need, well, then off to Burnside they go. Heritage Trust needs to learn a thing or two about building foundations and structural integrity before they spout off about leaving the interior as is.
We have HRM by Design. It requires stuff. Does this proposal meet the requirements, is the stuff there? I see a setback from the third floor, and I see 5 stories, max, I see a great use of existing buildings, and the PDF looks like they are keeping interior walls of the original buildings and then expanding back to where the narrow part of the old Belgian Bar of the Show Shop was. We are allowing modern floors above the heritage district? They do in Gas Town in Vancouver, so I guess so. We just spent years developing a plan. This reno appears to conform to that plan. I hope Heritage Trust backs off, unless the developer starts to violate the HRM by Design, then they have a case.
Gawd those heritage trust guys are a bunch of wankers… every time they open their mouth I end up rolling my eyes. Can they seriously state that, as a pedestrian, walking down the street, that you’d even see the three stories built on top of these pre-exsisting buildings? Have they ever heard of a setback? Are they intimately familiar with the architectural designs??
In 60 years when Scotia Square becomes a “heritage building” I wonder if they will be there protesting its possible destruction too? lol
Sympathetic means – lets build all of out buildings above three stories at the edge of the city so we don’t interfere with “heritage” – what school of thought did they garner those little golden nuggets from? Not to mention the Italians have had 7 story towers since the 1400s…
And they have also never apparently been to Lower Manhattan, where they have actual office TOWERS (like 70, 80, 90 stories) that co-habitate the same general space as many historical buildings that significantly pre-date ANYTHING in Halifax, by at least 150 years. And to think people buy their crap.
Almost as bad as the Save our view folks, probably one in the same, who are vehemently opposed to qa new Trade Center across from Citadel Hill because it is going to block the view of… The oil Refinery in Dartmouth.
Yes, all those rick yanks who visit our fair city are really missing out on an impressive Imperial Oil Property. Jesus H!
I like this plan, too. I’m hoping Heritage Trust can come to terms with it. I’m not a big fan of “facadism” either, as a heritage building is so much more than just it’s outside, street facing wall. However, sometimes that is the best solution. Sounds like Starfish thought this one through and came up with a good mix of keeping the historic feel while creating a workable space.
I think Heritage Trust may have their heels dug in a little too deep and are unwielding in their opinions of what is acceptable. But, I can see how they got that way, because without any heritage support groups such as them, Halifax would’ve been razed of all its historic buildings years ago, and we’d be asea in verticle ice cube trays and condos. They’ve got major fights on their hands and that makes them very stubborn in some bad ways.
They have a tough job that requires a good deal of architectural education and an even bigger chunk of good ol’ common sense…..with a healthy sprinkling of negotiation and compromise skills…..and an experienced understanding of construction.
Bill Plaskett, in my humble opinion, has some of these qualities, but there is one person on that assembly that seems to display none of these qualities…..and is giving the whole Trust a bad reputation……..she should step down. Bluntly but accurately put, she is anal!……in my humble opinion.
She doesn’t trust developers, she doesn’t listen to them……or perhaps doesn’t understand what they are telling her…..and she pushes the most ridiculous issues without any sense of the big picture and the real values of heritage importance. It amounts to incompetence of her position.
Having the upper floors “in stark contrast with the existing buildings” can work great. Check out Vienna, which is ablaze with it, and successfully. How well it works depends upon design. Give it a try! Joe Foy