There were some at the meeting, and Mitch Dickey from planning had mentioned trying to post them on the city website. There wasn't a drawing showing how all the buildings would fit on the lots, which would have helped.
PS Welcome to the Forum. JET

The 14 & 23 storey buildings are far too basic. Granted they are only sketches at this point but they don't instill any confidence that they will be great looking buildings. I think this is a huge mistake by the developer. The reference to glass curtain wall is not obvious. There is a similarity to nearby Seacoast tower which is all bad. If he is really trying to build a 23 storey building in a two storey neighbourhood then I feel the approach is way off base. The 14 & 23 storey buildings are identical in design (whatever that is)?

I think the developer would have a much greater chance of getting the taller buildings approved if they looked like some of the buildings on Central Park West in New York. Much less detail of course but more of that type of design than just a box like the ugly buildings beside MicMac Mall.

I think the reference to the Horizon towers is a bit far. Those are drab concrete boxes. This proposal is calling for curved glass towers full of balconies. Much much better then the towers by MicMac. And I think towers similar to those along Central Park in NYC would feel much more heavy and dominant in the area. Glass at least reflects the sky and has less of an impact. Big stone towers would feel like giant monoliths.

They may be calling for curved glass towers but they were showing square precast boxes.

Empire, were we at the same meeting? The tall building was anything but a square box. It seemed too big for the space, but the design was fine. JET

We were at the same meeting. The towers didn't stand out like King's Wharf which is what was being suggested.

I resolve this dispute with my magical research abilities ;)

Case 15781 Details

OOOOHH... magic !

Looking at the site plan I continue to think that the Ochterloney st building takes up too much of the lot, it will squeeze out the beech trees.
The tower does not match up to the kings wharf tower, but still not a bad design. But it's too big for that area, given what it will dwarf. ZET

And to match Bedford Djs magic research skills I will use my magic copy and pasting skills! :P

Site Plan

http://inlinethumb02.webshots.com/43...600x600Q85.jpg

The Wellington on Ochterloney

http://inlinethumb39.webshots.com/44...600x600Q85.jpg

http://inlinethumb14.webshots.com/43...600x600Q85.jpg

http://inlinethumb39.webshots.com/45...600x600Q85.jpg

Floor Plan for the top floors of The Grand

http://inlinethumb36.webshots.com/46...600x600Q85.jpg

the ochterloney building looks awful and I hope it never gets built. the other one looks very good, though the height is a bit much.

Before it became clear that it would be a park I was imagining the starr site would look great with a hydrostone market type development. I imagined it running along the newly opened up section of canal with the public able to walk its length as they window shopped. Three to five stories with commercial on the ground floor and condos or apartments above.

That is actually a really cool idea. I don't know if the residents would ever go for it. But I think it would be awesome!

The highrise looks very generic - I wouldn't be surprised if the design changed a lot, just like King's Wharf. Even if this is the final product, however, I don't think it would be bad because there is nothing else like this in Dartmouth. It is good to have distinctive buildings but not every building needs to be distinctive.

The tower will also look kind of hilarious next to the dumpy suburban development next door.

The Ochterloney building looks distorted and nightmarish.

I wonder what the effect of cutting off traffic between Pine St and Prince Albert Road would be? Usually that kind of thing is bad (and unnecessary) but I don't know much about traffic patterns in downtown Dartmouth.

How far along is this development? Is it something that would start up soon if approved?

Great minds! I had thought exactly the same thing way back before they built that awful "barn" of apartments behind Greenvale. Something like the Manchester docklands or the canals of Amsterdam.

It would cut off a short-cut for traffic, but would not make really much of a difference for most traffic. There are lots of one-ways in that area, which makes getting around interesting. Most traffic would now go from Prince Albert to Victoria, or Victoria to Maple, and avoid pine st; not a bad thing.
The height for this proposal is the main issue; there are limits to height for that area. Anything next to the greenvale should not hover over it.
Greenvale is looking good with most of the landscaping almost finished.
The footprint for the Ochterloney building is far too large.

As far as I know this is still in the amendment stage. Trying to get that opportunity site into the downtown plan to allow this to happen.

Wouldn't this be in the viewplanes? These viewplanes bylaws really peeve me. Some ex-Dartmouthian Mayor doesn't like tall buildings so viewplanes are added. (after all, why would anyone want tall buildings in downtown Dartmouth - don't they belong in the suburbs, LOL)

Actually it falls just outside the viewplanes. If my recollection of the site is correct, I've put it in bright red. Please, if I'm wrong let me know - but I'm pretty sure it's the one I've noted. If not, I believe it's the one to the right - either way; it falls just outside the viewplane which is why they can propose such height.

Now if the viewplane from Brightwood Golf Course (noted in the HRM GIS as the Dartmouth George's Island Viewplane) was removed; a lot of downtown Dartmouth would open up (as I've been championing since I began posting).

Sorry if I seem a bit fussy; City council with Calgary just finished and it's almost 10pm. Fun!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/...e125fb4d_b.jpg

It would be to the right of the area in red. The top of the building, from what I've heard would be level with Brightwood. Although it is currently a golfcourse there was some discussion about the city obtaining the land and making it parkland; a great idea IMHO.
The height issue is that the downtown MPS limits height to 7 or 9 stories (i'm guessing). I think that this is too massive for that spot, but something smaller will get approved. JET

Well I was close :)