The controversial Waterside Centre development proposed for the heart of downtown Halifax’s historic district remains in limbo.
A public hearing spread over two weeks heard spirited arguments from 59 people on the project, leaving little time for Halifax councillors to discuss the matter among themselves at Tuesday’s meeting, so council moved back its vote on the matter until September 30. That vote, said several councillors, will be “the hardest decision I’ll ever make.”
The Waterside project deals with five buildings on a block bound by Upper Water, Hollis and Duke Streets and by the distinctive Morse’s Tea building. Like Morse’s, four of the buildings—the Imperial Oil building on Upper Water, the Shaw and Fishwick buildings on Hollis and the Harrington building, which spans the block—are registered historic buildings. The fifth building is a younger building that until recently housed Sweet Basil Bistro.
The Historic Properties, immediately to the east of the Waterside site, and Granville Mall, immediately to the west, are joined by a pedestrian walkway through the project site.
Developer Ben McCrea proposes to raze the Sweet Basil building and all but the street-side facades of the four historic buildings and build a nine-storey office complex behind and above the facades. The new building would also occupy the space presently devoted to the pedestrian walkway and a new facade in the style of the historic buildings would front the lower storeys of the building in that area, except on the Hollis Street side, where there would be an entrance ramp to an underground parking garage. McCrea’s proposal does, however, include an interior pedestrian walkway across the new building.
Detractors of the project say it will destroy an irreplaceable and important piece of Halifax’s history. But McCrea and his supporters say Waterside will actually preserve the historic character of the area.
Much depends on interpretation of legal restrictions concerning registered historic sites. Provincial heritage regulation applies only to the facades of registered buildings and not at all to the interior portions of the buildings. The Halifax planning code, however, insists that new construction around historically registered buildings meet undefined standards for scale and compatibility. Ultimately, these interpretations are up to council.
Most of the public input—44 of the 59 speakers—was in opposition to the project. Many condemned the project and said nothing of worth would be achieved by saving only the shell of a historic building. Waterside is “the most egregious example of historic destruction since the proposal to tear down the Historic Properties” and “deplorable Disneyfication,” said Michael Goodyear, who owns a historic house on Morris Street. The new structure will be a “bland, poorly designed, no-named wall of glass,” said Lori Olmstead, a NSCAD instructor.
Judith Cabrita, former president of the Nova Scotia Tourism Industry, pointed out that tourism brings $600 million to the province annually, and is the largest industry in Nova Scotia. Tourism depends on maintaining an “authentic” cityscape, she said.
McCrea was visibly agitated by criticism of his project. “For the best part of 40 years I’ve been an avid supporter of historic preservation,” he said, referring to his work on restoring Historic Properties and on the nearby Founders Square development. “I find it very difficult to keep on the high road. I have difficulty in understanding Heritage Trust,” which leads opposition to Waterside.
As McCrea tells it, no historic structure is “pristine”—the entire west side of Granville Mall was demolished and reconstructed with an additional storey and Historic Properties was reconfigured for commercial viability.
The historic buildings are falling apart, costing him “tens of millions of dollars” in potential rents, he says, and restoring the historic facades will consume 10 percent of the project’s cost. Moreover, the new structure will be set back from the facades and constructed of glass, the most inconspicuous building material, thereby maintaining the historic feel of the area.
Those councillors who gave an indication of their views are divided, with councillors Sloane, Hensbee, Hum, Murphy and Harvery appearing to be opposed and Streatch, Uteck, Rankin and Karsten appearing to be in favour.
Waterside will need the approval of 14 of the 23 councillors to move forward.
This article appears in Sep 18-24, 2008.
It is helpful to finally see a doctored photo illustrating what the development looks like.I like the tower – what some would call bland and uninspired, other would call understated and minimalist. But, the facades don’t look right. They actually look like they are tacked on to a modern building (as opposed to it looking like a modern building was tacked onto *them*)I think if the tower had a smaller perimeter – it is was a couple meters further back from the facades on all sides, it would appear to rise out of the centre of the block, almost as if it stood in a courtyard. I think would be a bit more graceful and would allow the facades to wear their authenticity better. It would have the added advantage of being narrower, as wide and squat buildings are a bit out fashion…I’m not against this development at all in principle. I think the Heritage folk are far too reactionary about this stuff. Depsite what they seem to think, we have no complete “old city” to save that is even comparable to Old Quebec or Old Montreal, and we never did. We are in a good position to blend new with old.But I agree this particular development could be done a little better.
The properties seem to be more of a pain for HRM then anything else. This is a first for town down Halifax in a very long time. With little space and not a huge development market, Halifax should take the opportunity to create something great. Not this however, not at all.I think we should be thinking out of the square glass box. HRM depends on Tourism, we should create a symbol for it and be bold in creating it. This is how we make our identity, even stronger. Bold doesn’t have to be tacky, its all in the details.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/magazine/31Style-t.htmlOtherwise restore and reuse.
Hey Tim, I see Armoyan is now offering to reduce the tower by a story or tow, and facing it in brick instead of glass. Sounds even worse to me…What are your thoughts on this? (Sincere question…)
Hey Tim, I see Armoyan is now offering to reduce the tower by a story or two, and facing it in brick instead of glass. Sounds even worse to me…What are your thoughts on this? (Sincere question…)
As someone who resides in a city (Portland MAINE USA) that has paid such close attention to historic preservation, I can tell you that what is happening in Halifax is a disgrace. But, Halifax has made so many mistakes already that this latest fiasco will go fairly unnoticed. The waterfront in Halifax has been destroyed; tall buildings; ugly ones, for that matter, block the view, and an ugly casino is built right next to what they CLAIM to be “Historic Properties”, but how “historic” are they with Andersen three-ply crank-out windows? Not to mention the T-Shirt shops and other wastes of time for stores they’ve got thrown in there. Then, downtown is filled with all these ugly walkways, and skyscrapers of every shape and colour all jammed in beside each other. Compared to Portland, you’ve got hardly ANY good shops or restaurants and virtually NOTHING attractive along the street to look at. Between Portland’s downtown Congress Street and the Old Port, it’s a shoppers paradise. In Halifax, I LOVE the Maritime Museum, and the Citadel is a great place, but after coming to Halifax three times and staying for awhile, I am convinced that Portland has it far far over Halifax (or Saint John), because of Portland’s respect for its history and all of the valuable old buildings that go with it. Back in 1961, when our classic Union Station was taken down, the “Greater Portland Landmarks” organization was born. This group painstakingly restored building after building downtown, and along with them, the private sector, one by one, started buying up old buildings in an old warehouse district, which in time became the “Old Port”, that is today one of the top tourist attractions in New England; one of the best examples of urban renewal in the country. Today, the new and the old in Portland fit together nicely like a jigsaw puzzle. Halifax obviously has paid NO attention to any of that WHATSOEVER, and sadly, I don’t think it will never be a major tourist destination because it’s had no direction or planning. Downtown Halifax is not a comfortable place to be for me, and as for the group that came with me to Halifax, the expanse of concrete and glass, and the visible lack of street activity made them not want to stay there. Cities must preserve their history to protect their futures. It’s too bad. Halifax is way too small of a city to make such great mistakes.