SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=223)
-   -   [Halifax] Macara Presidio | 26m | 8 fl | Proposed (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219938)

Empire May 27, 2017 6:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns (Post 7778761)
But outstanding to who? The Centre Plan could be passed in it's current form with an understanding that further work and refinement is coming. No plan is perfect and frankly is out of date the moment it passes.

The public comments, to me as a planner, frankly show the need for Halifax to have something along the lines of a planning 101 program. But as much as such a thing may be offered; you can't force everyone to take it. The centre plan won't stop people who just don't want to be informed from staying out of the loop and having their opinions. Just have to be prepared for folks like that and ready to defend the recommendations.

Limiting heights in the Center Plan to ~20 storeys will result in rash of chunky, squat looking buildings with economy finishes like this one on Barrington St.:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.66278...7i13312!8i6656

TheGreenBastard May 27, 2017 7:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire (Post 7817026)
Limiting heights in the Center Plan to ~20 storeys will result in rash of chunky, squat looking buildings with economy finishes like this one on Barrington St.:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.66278...7i13312!8i6656

*Shudders*

What a sad looking building. You wouldn't catch something like this being built in Toronto.

terrynorthend May 27, 2017 7:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire (Post 7817026)
Limiting heights in the Center Plan to ~20 storeys will result in rash of chunky, squat looking buildings with economy finishes like this one on Barrington St.:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.66278...7i13312!8i6656

To be fair, I believe that building owes most of its banal design to its function as a military barracks. Not much cutting edge architecture to be found here.

Maple is ~20 stories and didn't turn out too bad.

Not that I mean to be an apologist for the height caps, I would love to see some variety and taller buildings.

Empire May 27, 2017 8:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrynorthend (Post 7817057)
To be fair, I believe that building owes most of its banal design to its function as a military barracks. Not much cutting edge architecture to be found here.

Maple is ~20 stories and didn't turn out too bad.

Not that I mean to be an apologist for the height caps, I would love to see some variety and taller buildings.

I think it is totally unacceptable that we can't expect quality design and materials for military buildings in Halifax. You would not see this in Ottawa.

Drybrain May 27, 2017 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGreenBastard (Post 7817042)
*Shudders*

What a sad looking building. You wouldn't catch something like this being built in Toronto.

Of that era? There's lots of that stuff in Toronto. Toronto has a huge stock of mid-century buildings, some very elegant, but a lot very poor.

Whatever the merits of demerits of a 20-storey cap, I don't think it will necessarily lead to mediocre buildings. A lot of the better-looking buildings in the city (the Vic, Southport, Grainery, St. Joseph's, potentially Gorsebrook and The Curve) are well under 20 storeys. I don't see any direct correlation between quality and height.

Empire May 27, 2017 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drybrain (Post 7817151)
Of that era? There's lots of that stuff in Toronto. Toronto has a huge stock of mid-century buildings, some very elegant, but a lot very poor.

Whatever the merits of demerits of a 20-storey cap, I don't think it will necessarily lead to mediocre buildings. A lot of the better-looking buildings in the city (the Vic, Southport, Grainery, St. Joseph's, potentially Gorsebrook and The Curve) are well under 20 storeys. I don't see any direct correlation between quality and height.

These are quality buildings?
By what measure?

Drybrain May 27, 2017 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire (Post 7817163)
These are quality buildings?
By what measure?

No, I mean those are similarly bad (GreenBastard said TO doesn't have crappy buildings like that).

TheGreenBastard May 28, 2017 2:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drybrain (Post 7817176)
No, I mean those are similarly bad (GreenBastard said TO doesn't have crappy buildings like that).

They weren't built in the last year...

IanWatson May 29, 2017 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire (Post 7817026)
Limiting heights in the Center Plan to ~20 storeys will result in rash of chunky, squat looking buildings with economy finishes like this one on Barrington St.:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.66278...7i13312!8i6656

Not sure that building can be used as an example of anything. It's a federal government build, and would not have been subject to any of the municipal planning rules. Even if it had been built to 100 storeys we would have probably been build with the same crappy design, because I'm sure the only marching order on that one was "we don't want to be seen wasting tax dollars, we need the absolute minimum cost per square foot".

Takeo May 29, 2017 3:16 PM

Do we know if this is going to be rentals or condos? I'm guessing rentals.

Metalsales May 29, 2017 9:58 PM

The ADM building was built to withstand a blast and secure the occupants. It was not meant to be pretty. I'm sure he public would have nothing good to say if they made it fancy.

As it was, the building cost much more than the average build. iIRC it was ~$60m....

Empire May 29, 2017 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson (Post 7818287)
Not sure that building can be used as an example of anything. It's a federal government build, and would not have been subject to any of the municipal planning rules. Even if it had been built to 100 storeys we would have probably been build with the same crappy design, because I'm sure the only marching order on that one was "we don't want to be seen wasting tax dollars, we need the absolute minimum cost per square foot".

Well the federal Gov. doesn't build crap in Ottawa. A large portion of the downtown, and Halifax in general, is used for Military purposes. Yes they provide jobs etc. but it is time they said thank you and they could start by providing buildings that contribute to the city.

IanWatson May 30, 2017 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire (Post 7818821)
Well the federal Gov. doesn't build crap in Ottawa. A large portion of the downtown, and Halifax in general, is used for Military purposes. Yes they provide jobs etc. but it is time they said thank you and they could start by providing buildings that contribute to the city.

Oh no doubt. I am not at all happy about how that building looks. The feds can and should have done better. But I don't think we can point to that building as any failure of municipal planning, because the feds don't have to follow municipal planning.

Keith P. May 30, 2017 1:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson (Post 7819262)
Oh no doubt. I am not at all happy about how that building looks. The feds can and should have done better. But I don't think we can point to that building as any failure of municipal planning, because the feds don't have to follow municipal planning.

Ah. That explains how they were able to build something taller than 4 floors.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.