[Halifax] The Abraham (2180 Robie) | 30 m | 8 fl | U/C
This one is coming to Council on Tuesday and looks like it could be approved. Another craptacular design by Fares Group. Although that block could use some help, I'm not much of a fan of this one.
https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default...90521rc123.pdf Robie St side rendering: https://i.imgur.com/rDd9Fao.jpg Existing street view on Robie: https://i.imgur.com/twTlPEN.jpg |
its a bit short it would be at least 14 floors or more
|
According to the much-ballyhooed Centre Plan this one is already too tall.
If you want a chuckle, read the section of the report I linked with the minutes of the community consultation. Everybody had problems with it. |
Very uninspired architecture for a very visible intersection in the city. It adds density to the area, but that's about it.
I hope they deep-six it and hold out for a better proposal. |
Quote:
Savage,Adams and Streatch were not there.....I suppose the hockey game was more important, free tickets etc |
Quote:
Just expanding the housing supply in the right parts of the city is very important. The city's apartment vacancy rate is low. It is worth approving these proposals while pushing for a bit more architectural merit in the long run. |
Quote:
As to the development, while it passed, the CBC article contains this nugget. "No-Waye" Mason chimed in with the "It's TOO TALL!" mantra: "Local councillor Lindell Smith tried to amend the design, so the building would start off at four storeys along Robie and three along Cunard. Coun. Waye Mason agreed with the idea. "Four and five [storeys] on this corner is too high," said Mason. "Look at The Keep on Quinpool, it doesn't work." But Smith's motion was defeated in a 7 to 7 tie vote. The overall project was then approved 12 to 2, with only Smith and Coun. Tim Outhit voting against it." Speaks against it, but votes in favor. Slippery fellow. I had not heard that particular criticism of The Keep previously. Maybe some of the more devout anti-height HRM planning staff are whispering in his ear. |
Quote:
At this point, we need all the housing we can get. If it's displacing some affordable housing, maybe use that as pushback to get some affordable units in there, but we need to build housing where people want to live, and people want to live on the peninsula. |
Quote:
So here we have poorly-maintained Victorians that are being torn down to be replaced with poor (IMHO), or at least mediocre, architecture. As Keith will point out, they have been neglected for years and probably there are not many original elements left on the inside, and I would not argue against that, as this is the usual path that is followed (neglect to the point that nobody minds when they are torn down). OK, I have resigned myself to the idea that these Victorians are probably dumps now (though likely still have good bones), but still think that a prominent corner next to the Commons should be held to a higher standard architecturally. If this was being built in Clayton Park West, I would think it's fine, for example. But it still resonates with me how we all seem to think it's great, as long as it's better than the long-neglected buildings that it's replacing (that should not have been allowed by the city to be neglected, as mentioned in a recent thread). Maybe if it were allowed to be taller it wouldn't look so bad, but I'm sorry to say this one just doesn't do much for me. I wish 'the city' had some will to improve standards in our more prominent/interesting areas. https://images.thestar.com/PBx79IgIT...building21.jpg https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019...een-light.html |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
You certainly have a talent for pointing out the folly of council... keep 'em on their toes! |
Quote:
I actually (as usual) think this one is too short if anything. IMO these developments bring the opportunity to enhance the urban park feel of the Commons; to encompass and define the area with a bit of a Central Park character, for which this lot could be a cornerstone. Anyway, I do agree that it's an improvement! |
Quote:
You may be surprised by this but I agree with you here for the most part. I already gave my opinion of the architecture of this proposal in my original post so I won't repeat that. And I would not argue that the store on the corner or the structures immediately adjacent to it should be saved. However, I am dismayed that this building is going to disappear: https://i.imgur.com/wZ7ypN0.jpg Now, I have no idea what it is like inside nor what its use is. Being an older building I have little doubt it needs some work. However it always struck me as being reasonably well maintained and somewhat handsome in design, unlike its neighbors. To me this is an unfortunate loss for the area. It's a shame it could not somehow be incorporated into the development as was done with the less attractive building (to me at least) adjacent to the ordinary-looking Lotus Point development on Ochterloney in Dartmouth |
For some reason, I hadn't realized this building will take up the entire block. I agree that is very disappointing, especially considering the Robie/Compton house.
At the risk of both over-simplifying the issue and sounding like a broken record: I have long believed that if developers were allowed to build taller, they would not build as wide, requiring the demolition of entire blocks of heritage buildings to make an investment worthwhile (enter the BMO building on SGR). Moreover, the resultant one-building-per-block approach to development (again, see the Doyle) is far less desirable for a variety of reasons, so we end up losing on both ends. |
Quote:
Actually that particular building is the one that drew me in and I agree that it would have been nice to incorporate it into the design. It is a well-preserved example and has interesting lines. |
Quote:
|
I might be in the minority, but I am totally okay with most buildings being average when it comes to architecture. There are only so many ways to skin a cat, and when buildings try to stand out or be unique it just kinda gets overwhelming. I basically want my buildings to be:
(a) Cohesive (b) Non-offensive (c) Honest (i.e. not trying to "ape" other designs or architectural features--such as unnecessary columns or fake little peaked dormers) (d) Quality materials Beyond that I couldn't really give a crap, except in some high-profile locations. Great cities come from the people, the businesses, and the spaces inbetween. |
Quote:
Building housing is how you get affordable housing. The idea that there's a special alternate form of housing called affordable housing that needs to be included in every single development is mostly harmful. There are higher and lower end buildings and neighbourhoods, and buildings tend to move downmarket over time. Maybe if this is built it'll be affordable housing in 2050. |
Quote:
My main problem with the existing buildings along that block on Robie is that they are fairly small/plain and have gaps. The little bay window house at the southern end is nice but it's hard to adapt a building like that to a midrise commercial area. Houses like this are character defining for the city but it also might not make sense to keep them along major streets in central areas. |
Quote:
I agree that the city should be the ones setting the rules, but disagree that this should be perceived as a "kickback" or "corruption", especially since the person suggesting it would have nothing to gain from it. The fact is, lower priced housing will be razed to create more expensive housing, and while that is not a bad thing entirely, the net effect is that some low cost housing will be eliminated, and that people who need it don't have 30 years to wait for the building to deteriorate and become undesirable so they can afford it, if that would even happen. The idea seemed to have some merit as the proposal doesn't fit within the current rules, and thus it would not seem unreasonable for the city to require some low cost units in exchange for the concession. The developer does not owe anything to anybody, and the (perceived) arrogant response indicates that they already feel they are doing us a favour. I guess the east coaster in me reacts negatively to (perceived) arrogance... :) Anyhow, it didn't seem like a horrible idea to me... |
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.