Halifax Council Balks At 16-Storey Highrise On Historic Property
HALIFAX—Joseph Arab’s plan to build a 16-storey highrise behind the historic Victoria Hall hit another snag on Tuesday.
Halifax Regional Council said the developer’s plan to substantially alter the heritage building isn’t appropriate and councilors gave him six months to come up with a new concept for the project.
Arab’s plan would have seen most of Victoria Hall’s back wing removed and a 50-metre residential highrise built directly behind the hall.
As part of the project, Arab had also agreed to spend $3 million on badly needed renovations to Victoria Hall itself.
Design firm Fathom Studio presented the plan to the city’s Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) in June. At the time, the committee recommended council reject the project because the highrise didn’t fit with the character of Victoria Hall and would visually overpower the historic building.
Yesterday, council had the chance to make that rejection official. However, instead of shutting it down entirely council agreed to give Arab more time to come up with a design that can pass muster with the HAC.
As Coun. Lindell Smith explained, rejecting the design on heritage grounds would mean Arab couldn’t pursue other permits he needs to make improvements to the Gottingen Street property.
“There are other aspects of this [development] that could be beneficial to the community. But if this fails today those discussions go down the drain,” Smith said.
Substantial Alterations, Substantial Height
Victoria Hall was built in the 1880s and designed by well-known Halifax architect Henry Busch. It was built in response to a growing need for elder care in the city, specifically for aging women.
It remained a senior’s home in some form until Arab bought the property in 2013.
Arab paid just under $2 million for the property and converted the building from a retirement home into a multi-unit residential complex shortly after the sale.
His big development plan was to remove 90 percent of the back wing of Victoria Hall to build a 145-unit, residential highrise facing Creighton Street.
The back wing was added to the building long after it was first built and the HAC agreed it wasn’t historically significant and could be removed.
However, city staff and the HAC both agreed the massive highrise didn’t meet the crucial standard of being “subordinate” to the heritage building it would share a property with.
Precedent-Setting Case
Speaking about Arab’s proposal yesterday, city planner Aaron Murnaghan told council its decision on this project “could be precedent-setting.”
A large swath of development in Halifax will soon fall under new rules laid out in the Centre Plan, which is a master planning document that will cover the city’s urban core.
Murnaghan pointed out that rules around developing on heritage properties will soon change and that the city will likely see “a lot more” applications for large developments beside, behind, or integrated into heritage buildings.
“This is a chance for regional council and the heritage advisory committee to make a decision as to what might be allowable under this [subordinate] standard,” he said.
Murnaghan said that while the “subordinate” standard isn’t just about height, in the case of Arab’s application it was the primary issue.
“In this case, you will be seeing a building that is about six times taller than the existing Victoria Hall building, and it very much will be drawing your eye,” he said.
Support In Principle, But Not For Specific Project
Although most councilors appeared to agree the highrise design wasn’t appropriate for the Gottingen Street site, they did support the idea of developing the property in principle.
The restoration of Victoria Hall appealed to Coun. Waye Mason, who said he was “excited” to see more applications like it in the future.
“I don’t want this to be the end of this process. I don’t want a hard no because I really want to see something happen there that reinforces and protects that important heritage building and also sees a development behind it,” he said.
Coun. Matt Whitman cast the lone vote against the deferral, arguing the six-month delay council agreed on “sends the wrong message to other developers who are trying to save historic properties.”
Murnaghan said the city is working with the developer and it probably won’t take six months to bring forward a new proposal. He said it’s more likely to come back in about three months.