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

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by Waye Mason

Human scale can also mean meeting generally accepted minimum tower separation. I think you will find the tower sep on these is pretty low. I was told Vancouver set the tower sep standard based on "so if I walk out of my bathroom nekkid what can my neighbours see?" I think these kinds of things are important, eh?

By that argument, Waye, my two storey townhouse should have a min sep from my neighbours too as I also like to wander around my home "nekkid".

I think the regulatory regime in HRM permits 3m to the property line? I'm not bragging or anything, but that allows some pretty hi-def views!

[Waye Mason]

Amazing how some people on this board will talk glowingly and longingly about Calgary, Vancouver, Toronto, New York and then as soon as those places do something the posters don't like, discard that example.

[pblaauw]

Originally Posted by Waye Mason

Amazing how some people on this board will talk glowingly and longingly about Calgary, Vancouver, Toronto, New York and then as soon as those places do something the posters don't like, discard that example.

[someone123]

Not sure if this has been posted before, but this PDF contains a few more renderings of the building: http://cwatlantic.com/wp-content/upl...g-Package1.pdf

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by someone123

Not sure if this has been posted before, but this PDF contains a few more renderings of the building: http://cwatlantic.com/wp-content/upl...g-Package1.pdf

Wasn't this originally 28 floors? What happened to the... 20 floors?

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by someone123

Not sure if this has been posted before, but this PDF contains a few more renderings of the building: http://cwatlantic.com/wp-content/upl...g-Package1.pdf

Isn't this a different development (6112 Quinpool)?

Here's the original revised proposal (6009 and 6017 Quinpool).

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agenda...610ca11112.pdf

[someone123]

Oops! You are right, wrong thread.

[Duff]

Updated proposal for this one. - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...kageforHRM.pdf

[hokus83]

Originally Posted by Duff

Updated proposal for this one. - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...kageforHRM.pdf

What the heck happend. I think this actually deceased in quality by 80%

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by hokus83

What the heck happend. I think this actually deceased in quality by 80%

Heh, that's funny. I think it INCREASED in quality by 80%.

The previous iteration, with the fussy podium and the blocky massing, etc, really felt a bit on the dull side, and quite dated.

This isn't perfect (too busy to be really graceful,and some design elements clash) but I think it's a much more impressive building overall.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Duff

Updated proposal for this one. - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...kageforHRM.pdf

Thanks for posting the renderings. This could turn out well if the materials used are decent quality. Hopefully they won't use any corrugated-metal-like metal panel, although composite aluminum panel looks ok.

I am worried about how they are mixing glass and other materials in a somewhat ad-hoc manner. I assume this is being done to break up the massing of the building but there is the potential that it could turn out bad.

The tower looks impressive, however, it is too wide for my liking. I don't have a problem with the height but I would prefer that it be slimmer.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Thanks for posting the renderings. This could turn out well if the materials used are decent quality. Hopefully they won't use any corrugated-metal-like metal panel, although composite aluminum panel looks ok.

I am worried about how they are mixing glass and other materials in a somewhat ad-hoc manner. I assume this is being done to break up the massing of the building but there is the potential that it could turn out bad.

The tower looks impressive, however, it is too wide for my liking. I don't have a problem with the height but I would prefer that it be slimmer.

I believe they massed the tower this way, so it would cast a more narrow shadow onto the Commons.

I think more shade on the Commons would be a benefit.

[Phalanx]

Yeah, I have to say that I think this is definitely an improvement.

[JET]

Well he did say DECEASED in quality, so perhaps he sees it as dead in the water, or maybe he's channeling the demise of the funeral home?

[bluenoser]

^Haha, good call.

I don't mind it. I have to say, I do love the height

I almost wish it could incorporate a big sweeping curve like the Atlantica, making a big symmetrical & pronounced entrance to Quinpool, although I suppose that's not feasible on the lot. Could also look corny, I don't know.

In any case, I think that if all these proposals get built in this area, it's going to be pretty awesome - really bookending the commons from downtown.

[portapetey]

Looks great to me, depending on the materials of course. Now if this and the one next door could just go forward! Keepin' my fingers crossed.

[counterfactual]

Excellent looking proposal.

I really like the contrast of the towers on one side, and commons on the other. Has a Central Park West feel to it.

BUILD IT NOW.

[Hali87]

Looks very Edmonton. I'm not sure how I feel about it, to be honest - I kinkd of liked the original concept with 2 main buildings. I think the colours will make or break this one.

[Nouvellecosse]

This is one site where I think we could actually push the height envelope a little. I think as much as 110m could be interesting.

[someone123]

Yeah, it would be interesting to see some taller buildings in the middle of the city but outside of the ramparts-restricted area.

I think a few towers like this are more or less necessary for this part of town to work well, because there's so much open space, the existing neighbourhoods are fairly low density, and there are few opportunity sites to develop.