Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain
A few years ago--the quality of new designs seems to be head distinctly upward, at least.
But this is why it irks me to no end that developers are allowed to tear down perfectly good old buildings on the one hand, and put up new construction at this incredibly unacceptable level on the other. There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about the city's built environment, but I'm completely okay with citizen activists and City Hall demanding better from the development community, when so many of its members are developing so irresponsibly and poorly.
And sure, people will moan and complain about NIMBYism and Halifax's "anti-business" or "anti-development" atmosphere, or whatever, but aside from the viewplanes, Halifax has far fewer constraints on developers than most Canadian centres. It wouldn't have been NIMBYism for North Enders to tell the developers of those Falkland condos to go back to the drawing board and try harder.
|
I think there should be a Design Review Committee that addresses the design specifically. Once setbacks, height and all requirements for a DA or plan amendments are addressed the actual design would be reviewed. Materials, quality, shape, built form, relationship with surroundings etc. would be considered. The public could have input through a website or a public meeting. A report would be prepared and delivered to the developer. Any changes to the design in the report would be in the form of a recommendation only. This way really poor designs that meet all requirements for a building permit may get design improvements through some base recommendations. This in a way is what happened with the Convention Centre.
This forum could no doubt provide all of the design review most developments would need.