[Halifax] The Maple | 72 m | 21 fl | Completed

[Phalanx]

I wonder if both sides of the argument (proportions vs height) could have been resolved if it had been oriented in an East/West direction instead of North/South. Having the 'crown' overlook the harbour instead of looking out over downtown. The because of the orientation and surroundings, the profile that most people are going to see is the wide one. if it had been oriented the other way, the narrower sides would have been more visible.

That said, I'm sure this would have posed other problems with the way the lots are divided, natural light in the units, etc etc.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Phalanx

I wonder if both sides of the argument (proportions vs height) could have been resolved if it had been oriented in an East/West direction instead of North/South. Having the 'crown' overlook the harbour instead of looking out over downtown. The because of the orientation and surroundings, the profile that most people are going to see is the wide one. if it had been oriented the other way, the narrower sides would have been more visible.

That said, I'm sure this would have posed other problems with the way the lots are divided, natural light in the units, etc etc.

It's a good point, actually. I recall hearing that the Maritime Centre was built at an angle so that it would provide a minimal obstruction to the view from the Citadel, and it actually looks quite tall and slim from that viewpoint. Now that I think of it, I don't recall anybody complaining that it is too stubby either...

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Phalanx

I wonder if both sides of the argument (proportions vs height) could have been resolved if it had been oriented in an East/West direction instead of North/South. Having the 'crown' overlook the harbour instead of looking out over downtown. The because of the orientation and surroundings, the profile that most people are going to see is the wide one. if it had been oriented the other way, the narrower sides would have been more visible.

That said, I'm sure this would have posed other problems with the way the lots are divided, natural light in the units, etc etc.

Yeah, the current setup really helps preserve the streetscape on Hollis (although we still need a N/S oriented building on the UG site).

That being said, for the skyline E/W would look cooler... but we need to fill in the skyline more before we can worry about layers. Developing the N/S lot with a thin tower in front and a podium that covers the rest of the site would be an idea.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Yeah, the current setup really helps preserve the streetscape on Hollis (although we still need a N/S oriented building on the UG site).

That being said, for the skyline E/W would look cooler... but we need to fill in the skyline more before we can worry about layers. Developing the N/S lot with a thin tower in front and a podium that covers the rest of the site would be an idea.

By this I mean the lower lot next to The Maple that is currently parking.

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

So I've heard a few people say the Maple seems too stubby, and it should have been taller. I've been thinking about it for a while, and think that it's more to do with the fact that the tower is super wide, which throws off the proportions. They got a variation from the DRC to go up to almost 54 m wide. The Downtown Halifax Design Manual normally limits tower width to 38 m.

I finally got around to looking at what a 38 m wide tower would have looked like. Jono, I hope you don't mind me cribbing your photo. Also, I offer no commentary as to whether or not such a tower would have been economically viable or workable from a floor layout point-of-view.

Maple by Ian Watson, on Flickr

Not a problem Ian. Thanks for mocking this up! Really useful. I might in turn now use this to show off this same point if you don't mind.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Part of the problem is that proposals get shot down that go for slender because it automatically implies a height beyond 8-10 stories. Many of the high potential sites for slender are close to NIMBY hoards.

The case of that building on Bayers road... it was proposed at 16 and because it was shot down, its now this elongated building that covers more of the site than necessary.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

I might in turn now use this to show off this same point if you don't mind.

Of course!

[Jonovision]

20161207_130710_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20161207_131309_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20161207_131432_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20161207_131729_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20161207_131842_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20161209_155826_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20161215_162937_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20161219_133818_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20170106_163824_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[alps]

Thanks as usual for the photo updates.

Never thought I'd say this, but I kind of miss the snow...

[Jonovision]

20170112_133508_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20170122_123521_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

While I still hate the curved front of this building, it looks slightly better now that the balcony railings are going in. The view looking back up Hollis however is still my favourite angle for this building.

20170208_162228_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20170208_162119_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20170208_162021_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20170208_161827_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[RoshanMcG]

Source

[fenwick16]

^^^ I think it looks best in black and white.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

^^^ I think it looks best in black and white.

Haha! Yes! I was just going to say the same.

Somehow looks more current AND more retro in B&W.

[someone123]

View looking west a few weeks ago:


Source

[Keith P.]

Left side of the pic is a pretty unimpressive sight. Glad to see progress on the right side.