[Halifax] The Meridian (1567 Hollis) | 66 M | 21-11-6 FL | U/C - Page 7

terrynorthend · #**121** Posted **Jul 4, 2024, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

I think if it's already approved, there's not much impetus for the developer to pay to have renderings created *just* to keep the public in the loop. When it comes to the point they'll be trying to sell/lease space, we'll probably see images released.

One of the drawbacks of as-of-right development

kph06 · #**122** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 2:49 PM**

New Name: The Meridian
Website: The Meridian
Rendering:

Source

Empire · #**123** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 4:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06

New Name: The Meridian
Website: The Meridian
Rendering:

Source

Not a bad urban streetwall but unfortunately rounds out the tabletop skyline.

someone123 · #**124** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 5:19 PM**

It looks like a basic residential building. Nothing wrong with it but I wonder what the point of the earlier planning exercise was. The atriums and oddly shaped buildings were clearly dropped because they are more expensive and these buildings are built up to the modest municipal planning max so there isn't much meaningful debate or planning about that either.

All that being said this development is in the middle of a blob of parking lots and mediocre 2000's development and so will be a net big positive compared to what's there now. It would be good if the MetroPark is someday replaced but the viewplane makes a redevelopment there less profitable.

Saul Goode · #**125** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 5:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empire

Not a bad urban streetwall but unfortunately rounds out the tabletop skyline.

As will the two Skye Halifax towers, also 21 storeys - assuming they're ever built, that is.

LikesBikes · #**126** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 5:36 PM**

Boooring

bluenoser · #**127** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 7:14 PM**

So short though. For some reason it appears even shorter than the Maple next door. I've never fully understood whether the height limits here are due to the 'ramparts' bylaw (as max. building height should increase with distance from the citadel, especially considering the change in elevation), or tall buildings would detract from historic buildings (?) in the area, or we just don't want even moderately tall buildings downtown.

I guess I just held out some irrational hope that this or Skye would somehow break the arbitrary limitations of the tabletop.

A silver lining for me is that the Lower Water building creates a bit of a terraced effect, which I think adds interest and diminishes the stubbiness. Also the Lower Water building and tower facade seem to be on an angle; I guess this is kind of interesting?

The LW/Salter corner treatment is pretty disappointing. And yes all those planning studies seem like a waste of time now. Having said that, I agree that this is much better than an empty lot, and I have sympathy for developers given the challenges in making projects feasible given the restrictions on top of construction costs.

https://universalgroup.ca/new-properties/the-meridian/photos

Wannabe Economist · #**128** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 8:14 PM**

Add it to the list of identical and uninspiring new builds. In this location I really expected something more creative. Even the new King's Wharf building at least has a unique podium.

Empire · #**129** Posted **Sep 10, 2024, 8:40 PM**

So 3x21 is 1x21?

connect2source · #**130** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 11:25 AM**

The tower portion is absolutely terrible, I'm getting a bit of The Cunard vibes with the cheap pops of coloured spandrel, very Vancouver 2012. We have way too many of these types of towers here and they look even worse once completed. Glad it's blocked and surrounded, in part, by better portions of this development. The greatness of downtown Halifax deserves better.

Keith P. · #**131** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 12:16 PM**

Compared to the 4 alternative designs for the site originally produced by Canada Lands, this is atrocious. As was asked, why even bother with that exercise if this is the result? Any of those 4 would be an improvement over this, which looks like a design from the '80s.

According to the web site, the architect is Architecture49, which is a branch of a large national firm with a good-sized Halifax branch located in the rear of the Cambridge suites building on the Market St side. The staff seem mostly youngish. Hard to believe they would have proposed this on their own, though the company doesn't seem to do much residential work like this. Hugely disappointing.

eastcoastal · #**132** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 1:10 PM**

The "courtyard" space seems like it will be absolutely dismal, except on the nicest of days: narrow and deep. Who is going to spend time there?

It really feels like a colossal waste of energy given the planning that's been put into this to-date.

Drybrain · #**133** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 1:15 PM**

It looks like a perfectly fine, mid-range background building in an area that's becoming clustered with them. Very Cunard-y. But the whole exercise with the design concepts and presented a few years ago seems to have been wasted time. No wonder people often feel cynical about the outcome of such exercises.

Arrdeeharharharbour · #**134** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 1:20 PM**

It's mostly a fail for my eyes. The tower looks like an office building conversion to apartments. I particularly dislike the tabs of cement sticking out the side of the tower as balconies. The bright spot of the whole development might be the pathway that cuts through the buildings between Hollis and Lower Water.

ArchAficionado · #**135** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 1:52 PM**

While I like the varied massing and the mid-block passthrough with the interior courtyard concept, I agree with others that the appreance of this is plainly drab, and a big letdown for such a large and prominent space. The only other space of this size that is as-of-yet undeveloped in downtown is Cogswell, and given how these new projects on Hollis are turning out I expect Cogswell to probably look much like a 1990s office block once completed.

This could easily be much better with a taller tower that looks like it was conceived in this century. I agree with others - why the multi year delay for architectural studies if they just end up with the most vanilla as-of-right solution at the end of the day anyway?

Jethro Bodine · #**136** Posted **Sep 11, 2024, 3:36 PM**

I'll add my two bits.

I'm always loath to speak negatively of a building or project. I understand that architecture is in the eye of the beholder and that it's very subjective in nature. However, these buildings (the whole project really) looks like something past its prime, something that is ready to be torn down for something more modern, even before it's been built. Considering the prime location and it's importance to the waterfront, I'm really surprised how poorly it's been handled. I expected so much better.

Jethro

MastClimberPro · #**137** Posted **Sep 12, 2024, 1:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Compared to the 4 alternative designs for the site originally produced by Canada Lands, this is atrocious. As was asked, why even bother with that exercise if this is the result? Any of those 4 would be an improvement over this, which looks like a design from the '80s.

According to the web site, the architect is Architecture49, which is a branch of a large national firm with a good-sized Halifax branch located in the rear of the Cambridge suites building on the Market St side. The staff seem mostly youngish. Hard to believe they would have proposed this on their own, though the company doesn't seem to do much residential work like this. Hugely disappointing.

I have scrolled back through this thread and haven't found more than a couple of renderings and my googling chops don't seem up to the task of finding the 4 proposed alternatives to this that you mention. Would be very interested to se a side by side comparison. Anyone able to provide some links or create a comparative post?

(And agree that this is generally a disappointing result for something that will be a prominent feature from the water)

Keith P. · #**138** Posted **Sep 13, 2024, 12:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MastClimberPro

I have scrolled back through this thread and haven't found more than a couple of renderings and my googling chops don't seem up to the task of finding the 4 proposed alternatives to this that you mention. Would be very interested to se a side by side comparison. Anyone able to provide some links or create a comparative post?

(And agree that this is generally a disappointing result for something that will be a prominent feature from the water)

Go back to pages 1 through 3 of this thread and you will see the original CLC concepts on page 1 and then on page 3 more detailed design options.