The proposed rebuilding of the YMCA and CBC buildings along South Park and Sackville Streets will require Halifax council to amend height limits included in the HRM By Design planning guidelines for downtown. That amendment would be the first break in the planning policies adopted in 2008.
The YMCA and CBC are jointly preparing a development application to rebuild their respective properties—the iconic Art Deco CBC radio building at the corner of Sackville and South Park Streets, and the 60-year-old YMCA building just to the south, facing South Park.
The HRM By Design rules adopted older height limits for properties facing Citadel Hill. In the case of the CBC building, that limit is 23 metres, with no opportunities for the “bonus” heights that can be awarded to other downtown property owners in exchange for the developers including a variety of “public goods,” like additional parking or affordable housing.
The HRM By Design height limits on the YMCA property is 39 metres, with a “bonus” increase to 49 metres possible. In real terms, that’s likely 10 storeys, with an increase to 13 stories.
On Friday, YMCA president Bette Watson-Borg declined to give specifics about the YMCA’s proposal, saying she wanted a complete “unveiling” of the plans to come at a public open house the organization is holding Wednesday and Thursday (7-9pm, both nights). Watson-Borg says the architectural drawings, by Halifax architect Michael Napier, will include several options for the public to consider.
But, speaking with city staff familiar with the YMCA’s general plans, I’ve learned that the Y intends to ask for the full 49 metres allowed for the present YMCA property under the HRM By Design rules, and also to extend that height all the way to Sackville Street, covering what is now the CBC building—that is, to more than double the HRM By Design height limit of 23 metres for that property.
While exact details of the plan are not yet available, I’m told that it will include some sort of nod to the present CBC building’s façade—either to preserve the existing façade, or to build a new façade reminiscent of it. Also, because of shadow concerns with regard to the Public Gardens across the street, the South Park side of the new building will require “ziggurat”-type street frontage—above the street level, each additional .6 metres of height will have to be set back .9 metres. (The Park Lane building along Spring Garden Road has a similar frontage.)
There’s no doubt that a new YMCA is needed. The existing Y is “aging, not green, not accessible and doesn’t meet the programmatic needs our citizens are looking for,” says Watson-Borg.
And the joint development with the CBC is inspired, as it benefits both organizations. Watson-Borg says the YMCA will not be able to raise enough money through fund-raising alone to pay for the size facility it needs. By bringing in the CBC property, and selling the height bonus to a developer, it can raise the difference. The new building would then house the YMCA facilities, street-level retail, office space and residential housing.
The ceeb, for its part, is presently looking to bring together its formerly separate radio and television divisions under one roof. That means closing its Sackville Street radio operations. One possibility is to build an addition to the Bell Road TV building—the sale of the Radio building might raise enough money to pay for the expansion of the Bell Road building into its parking lot, but that’s as yet uncertain.
Another possibility is for the ceeb to lease enough office space to bring radio and TV operations together. Andrew Cochran, CBC’s director for the Maritimes, tells me the CBC is committed to maintaining a downtown presence, and that might mean leasing space in the new Y development.
But no firm decisions have been made one way or another, says Cochran.
The YMCA has discussed the Citadel-facing height issues with Heritage Trust, and the Y’s web site maintains that a “computer model shows that we will not have a negative impact on the view from Citadel Hill or surrounding areas.” That’s probably right, because the new building will back upon the existing Martello condo project, which is 11 storeys built atop the eight-storey Park Lane complex—a new 13 story won’t impinge any views from Citadel Hill when there’s an 19-storey bind it. (Heritage Trust has not returned a phone call for comment.)
But it’s exactly those Martello residents who will likely be most vociferous opponents of the YMCA plans. The Martello is one of Halifax’s most pricey residences and, if the Y proposal moves forward, owners of the west side Martello units will have their views of the Public Gardens obstructed by the new building.
A recently proposed five-storey addition to the City Centre Atlantic building across Dresden Row from the Martello was opposed by residents of the neighbouring Heritage Way condo project, dozens of whom appeared at a council meeting last month to speak against the development. Despite the objections, Halifax council approved the project.
This article appears in Apr 29 – May 5, 2010.



er, I think you have some reading comprehension problems there. So far as I know, the Heritage Trust hasn’t opposed this. It’s gonna be those condo owners next door who oppose it. You know, the rich people.
Fucking right! Who gives a shit about height restrictions? This city NEEDS height and it NEEDS a trusted forward thinking Urban Planning department that takes SOME RISKS! Bad enough they have to fix the obvious planning errors of the past, but to put such ‘heritage’ limitations within their scope is a joke.
I’ll go one step further; explain to me what practical benefit the city gets from keeping the citadel? I mean the thing is a monster that 1% of us sit on during lunch breaks two months out of the year. Shave down the sides and build some live/work. Fuck sprawl. Build up.
Cities all over the world would be laughing at us.
If only they knew who we were.
ps. Talk of another bridge? Really? C’mon now.
The Heritage Trust might not be involved in this specific story, but they are one of the forces holding this city back so I like to take a stab at them whenever I get the chance! 🙂
Funny Tim, it seems to me that The Heritage Trust is synonymous with rich people, and people who want to be uppity rich people.
They’ll probably be against it, claiming that Halifax will be forever ruined… I hope to hear that the council is forcing these projects through, we need them.
“Cities all over the world would be laughing at us.” You mean like the City of London? They have height restrictions so that buildings can’t obscure the dome of St. Paul’s, and that’s in the heart of the financial district. Do you think the residents there whine about not being able to build up?
I’m not advocating sprawl, that comes with a whole lot of other headaches, but a compromise should be found. Why does everything have to be in the downtown area? They’re trying to squish as much as possible into an area that is pretty much cutoff and limited- one side is the hill, the other, the harbour. There’s other parts of central Halifax that could be built up, such as where the CBC building is, I’m not sure why that area falls under the hill laws. Why do all the developers have this fixation with downtown being the only part of the city where businesses can have highrise buildings. Is there some prestige to being downtown? I say, keep the downtown historic for the most part, with some modern mixed in and try to divert our business core to another area.
I really don’t see the point of height restrictions in that little area as there are already several buildings up to 22 stories in the immediate vicinity. All these buildings would do is block the view of the buildings behind them. We need density in this city and given the restriction on the rest of downtown with the view planes it makes sense to build up this little area.
I have little sympathy for the residents of the Paramount as before buying a unit there, one would have to assume development of the YMCA/CBC sites would occur eventually.
Hopefully this will go through with the height as planned.
The new YMCA is desperately needed and it would be a tremendous asset to downtown Halifax. Hopefully common sense will prevail and the Y will get the go ahead. A good number of the residents next door appear to be wealthy students from the middle east here for only a few years of university.
Here’s a proper render of the proposal:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/458347…
It looks great to me. The CBC tower I find a little ugly but otherwise I think it’s great to put all those new residents on that street, which is pretty quiet ATM
I find it strange that the title of this article focuses on the height of one component of the proposal. That is only one small part of this proposal and not even a particularly interesting part.
It’s really too bad that in Halifax people tend to be fixated on building heights to the exclusion of all else, and part of it is the fault of the media. When people are worried about how tall a building is they tend to ignore the quality of the building design and how it connects to nearby buildings in other ways. The street level appearance of this development and its amenities are far more important than how tall it is. A well-designed 40 storey building would be much better on this site than an ugly 5 storey building.
As for London, they have all kinds of new highrise buildings mixed in with heritage buildings.
30 St. Mary Axe is an example of an architecturally interesting highrise building located next to historic lowrise buildings: http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/archives/30%…
The best thing for Halifax is to have a mix of buildings of a variety of heights and uses that support a wide range of residents and businesses. We won’t have this if we can’t get over the relatively unimportant height issue or abstract and largely unfounded concerns over traffic and parking or whatever else.
Halifax is not unique in having height restrictions. Much of Paris, France has them. The heritage restrictions and height restrictions seem to be similar to those of Savannah, Georgia – a port city of 150,000 people where the heritage people have clout and have convinced the community at large that this is good for business. I spent a day there in 1971 because of a missed train connection and was very impressed by the tour I was on. I have visited the web site for the city and found that last year they were updating their rules and from what I have read there, the sense of heritage is strong.
This looks great and will be a great addition to the city.
WHY SHOULD WE OPPOSE THIS JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT A CONTROVERSIAL STORY? Most Haligonians want a city of modern architecture not a backward city built of all red brick. Preserve the heritage buildings and allow new buildings side by side. We are tired of living in the past.
Clark Morris, there are two important differences between Halifax and Paris here — the latter has a population density something like 10 times greater than us, and they have height restrictions in place to protect structures of historical or architectural significance. I don’t believe the CBC or YMCA are worth preserving. The current CBC building is kinda neat, but the redevelopment essentially maintains all the attractive aspects of that building while eliminating the bad (namely, that ugly covered driveway at ground level right on the corner). I can’t comment on Savannah because I know nothing about it.
I’m all for protecting areas like Granville Mall and the Historic Properties, but I don’t think we should try to freeze the entire city in its current state. It only serves to hamper improvement and shift development to sprawling suburban areas and I am saddened that once again a new development has turned into an oversimplified debate about height.
If the CBC building is “deco”, it’s certainly not Art-deco; it doesn’t really strike me as American-deco either (or even Canadian-deco) ! I always think of it as “Garage-deco”. And though I love its “garagiste” feel, its curves and its location, the replacement proposed looks pretty good. On balance, it could be a good project. However, you have to watch out that you get what is promised and not some Frankenstein-post-modern-abomination.