[Halifax] Parkland at the Common (6009 Quinpool) | 78 m | 25 fl | U/C

[ILoveHalifax]

The first renditions of this proposal were impressive and I really liked the willow pattern on the glass; now this is looking way too bulky and seems the willow pattern is gone. I don't see anything interesting about this image - how sad that such a beautiful proposal has been turned into this.

[Drybrain]

Yikes. That's an eyesore. Whatever gets built here will likely be a local landmark for decades to come; this isn't good enough.

[OldDartmouthMark]

It will go well with the "beauty" planned for the other end of the block, at Robie and Cunard.

I argued that there should be some way to demand better architecture in prominent, visible areas such as these, but I guess the general idea is that as long as density is added it's all good.

Besides, I don't know how you would create a specification for "good architecture", as everybody would have a different idea of what it is, and it would be difficult to quantify. And to be honest, from what I've seen lately, I don't think there are many architects who know how to design an attractive building (just my opinion).

I agree in that I liked the earlier renderings better, but they are just renderings... often the final product doesn't look like the renderings anyhow.

So, this will be a "meh" for me, but at least it will look better than what is there now...

[ns_kid]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

The first renditions of this proposal were impressive and I really liked the willow pattern on the glass; now this is looking way too bulky and seems the willow pattern is gone. I don't see anything interesting about this image - how sad that such a beautiful proposal has been turned into this.

As mleblanc points out, there are more and better renderings in the "Planning Rationale" document. The willow pattern remains on the wall facing Robie Street, although it is perforated metal, not glass.

[IanWatson]

First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?

[ns_kid]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?

Does that explain the misspellings and typos that riddle the document?

[midasmull]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?

They are - same architects who designed the EQ8 project that the developer is putting up in Montreal.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by ns_kid

As mleblanc points out, there are more and better renderings in the "Planning Rationale" document. The willow pattern remains on the wall facing Robie Street, although it is perforated metal, not glass.

It helps, but for my tastes the design is too disjointed and busy. The 'multiple boxes stuck on boxes' look is a little overdone IMHO. Plus, not overjoyed by the selection of "precast concrete panel" cladding near street level.

But, as always, I remain optimistic that it will turn out really well, and it will create life and density at that intersection that does not currently exist now. Overall a plus compared to current, and I'm sure some will love it as they do with The Doyle (another project that I am less than enthusiastic about). Ha ha... afterall, it's not all about me...

[mleblanc]

I find the picture posted above to be one of the worse ones on the list. The other renderings in the plans look a little better.

[Keith P.]

Yes, by all means, let's all of us armchair designers condemn a building proposal based on a 640x480 rendering.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Yes, by all means, let's all of us armchair designers condemn a building proposal based on a 640x480 rendering.

Rela-a-a-ax... just tossing in my 2¢ on a forum about skyscrapers... nobody is going to make decisions based on my opinions.

So... what is your opinion... do you think it's beautiful?

Don't worry, they won't cancel the project if you don't like it...

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Rela-a-a-ax... just tossing in my 2¢ on a forum about skyscrapers... nobody is going to make decisions based on my opinions.

So... what is your opinion... do you think it's beautiful?

Don't worry, they won't cancel the project if you don't like it...

My comment wasn't necessarily related to your opinion of it.

I would need to see much more of it before passing judgement. The one thing I would say is that this is the sort of thing you get when someone has their original building plan sawed off.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

My comment wasn't necessarily related to your opinion of it.

I would need to see much more of it before passing judgement. The one thing I would say is that this is the sort of thing you get when someone has their original building plan sawed off.

Fair enough... I'm just defending 'my' part of it...

And agree on the height reduction. Of all potential building sites in the city, this is one of the most appropriate spots for a tall building IMHO.

[teddifax]

I agree, make it a really tall building!!! A great spot for the highest building in Halifax - since we can't have it downtown due to the horrible view planes legislation....

[someone123]

Another (more flattering IMO) rendering from the recently-updated planning materials:

[Colin May]

As the model said to the Bishop : 'Oh, that is really big'

[hoser111]

Council OKs $1.8-million extra-storeys deal with Willow Tree towers developer

The Willow Tree Towers developer will provide the municipality a $1.8-million payment instead of building affordable housing units in a proposed 25-storey highrise.
By a 13-2 vote, Halifax regional council on Tuesday endorsed that deal for a development at the corner of Quinpool Road and Robie Street.
George Armoyan of the Armco development group and the municipality have been going back and forth about the proposed building height for more than three years. The developer initially wanted a 29-storey building, the municipality said 20 storeys was the maximum and Armoyan came back with a 25-storey ask.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/ne...eloper-361684/

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by hoser111

Council OKs $1.8-million extra-storeys deal with Willow Tree towers developer

The Willow Tree Towers developer will provide the municipality a $1.8-million payment instead of building affordable housing units in a proposed 25-storey highrise...

I do not have faith that HRM would manage the build and implementation of affordable housing well. I have not seen anything confirming how or when this $1.8m will be spent by the Municipality.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

I do not have faith that HRM would manage the build and implementation of affordable housing well. I have not seen anything confirming how or when this $1.8m will be spent by the Municipality.

I agree. IMHO there doesn't seem to be any guarantee that this $1.8m will actually be used effectively towards providing good affordable housing.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...sing-1.5314104

Coun. Shawn Cleary said the cash offer is a good deal for the municipality.

"Under the new Centre Plan's density bonus formula, this development would actually only pay $841,000, so we're getting a million more," he said.

The money will be put into an affordable housing fund that will allow the municipality to provide grants to housing co-ops or affordable housing projects.

How is this "affordable housing fund" controlled? What method of reporting is used? I don't recall ever hearing much about all the housing they've provided, which isn't to say it doesn't happen - but it sure doesn't receive much fanfare.

Coun. Waye Mason remains optimistic about the fund and pointed out the Armco tower money could be spent on a project just down the street.

"I would love to see this $1.8 million and any other money that may come from other Quinpool Road projects go into a site that we carve out of the St. Pat's High site," he said.

Is this the best use for the site? Would this end up being a low-bidder city-funded project that ends up being a blight on Quinpool because of inadequate city maintenance funding combined with a low-quality building? What is the vision here?

I tend to agree with Councillor Outhit's take on it.

[eastcoastal]

It might be best for the affordable housing fund to be used to generate income that the city can use to subsidize rent all over the city... to keep from sending the signal that THAT building is for poor people and this one over here is for rich people.