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

[Dmajackson]

Rendering:



Name: Bank of Canada Redevelopment
Height: 66m
Floors: 21 floors
Status: Proposed
Location: 1583 Hollis Street (near Sackville Street)
Approval Date: N/A
Developer(s): Southwest Properties
Architect(s): Unknown
Uses: Residential + Ground Floor Commercial
Timeline:

2012.10.24 - Project Announced at VivaCity

---

Downtown apartment complex planned
October 24, 2012 - 7:05pm BY REMO ZACCAGNA BUSINESS REPORTER

An artist's rendering of a 21-storey mixed-use building that Southwest Properties plans to build on Hollis Street in Halifax.

Haligonians may soon notice yet another construction crane dotting an evolving downtown skyline.

Southwest Properties Ltd. unveiled plans at Wednesday night’s VivaCity development forum to construct a 21-storey mixed-use building at 1583 Hollis St. that will accommodate nearly 300 apartment units and 450 to 500 people.

“It will be the biggest apartment building ever built downtown,” said chief executive officer Jim Spatz. “It’s exactly (the height that) we’re allowed to build under the HRM bylaws.”

---

Originally Posted by kph06

Just got back from the VivaCity gathering, there two highlights for me. The Southwest proposal for Hollis St. looks great (I imagine images will be in the press soon, so I didn't bother grabbing a poor quality cellphone picture). Equally as exciting, Dexel (the Vic, City Centre Extension) were the ones who bought the land at the corner of Pepperell and Robie near the Atlantica - they are working on conceptual massing options.

Originally Posted by Phalanx

Already there

Downtown apartment complex planned

Originally Posted by cormiermax

Wow the Southwest proposal looks fantastic.

Originally Posted by kph06

Source: Halifax Herald

Too bad the rendering doesn't show the top, it has an interesting open feature.

Originally Posted by Keith P.

"21 storeys? Across the street from another massive high-rise if we ever get someone who is allowed to build on the Tex-Park site??? People will be blown down Hollis Street and into the harbour by the wind!!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! We must make this no more than 8 floors tall!!!" - some HRM Council members

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

If they build this, how will I be able to get my daily recommended amounts of vitamin D when I walk down Hollis St.??? I suppose it won't matter because the wind will sweep me away anyways!

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

Wow that does look good - can't wait to see the rest of the renderings for the building.

Originally Posted by teddifax

Yes, please let us see the entire building!!!!

[someone123]

The nice thing about this development is that it squarely addresses some of the biggest problems downtown. The first is a lack of residents near Barrington and the second related problem is the big cluster of empty lots around Hollis/Sackville/Salter.

This building might have 400 or 500 residents in it when it's done. If there were 10 more of these downtown the difference would be like night and day. There would be far more pedestrian traffic and retail would be dramatically more successful. If the city were to also spend some more money on things like streetscape improvements and transit Halifax would have a very successful downtown district. Businesses would want to locate there and it would have more to offer visitors.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by someone123

The nice thing about this development is that it squarely addresses some of the biggest problems downtown. The first is a lack of residents near Barrington and the second related problem is the big cluster of empty lots around Hollis/Sackville/Salter.

This building might have 400 or 500 residents in it when it's done. If there were 10 more of these downtown the difference would be like night and day. There would be far more pedestrian traffic and retail would be dramatically more successful. If the city were to also spend some more money on things like streetscape improvements and transit Halifax would have a very successful downtown district. Businesses would want to locate there and it would have more to offer visitors.

I agree completely - but this (along with a bunch of other projects) proves (at least to me) that HbD seems to be working. It isn't perfect, no plan is. But since it's been adopted, a lot of new interest and thought had been occuring in the downtown and that was part of the goals.

The fact that we're seeing the Citadell redevelopment occur (through HbD) and this project meets HbD and soon Nova Centre - these are all great incremental steps forward to making downtown better. I don't know if it's quite time to say for certain that HbD is a complete success, but it's creating buzz and interest and that's important in of itself.

[someone123]

The faster approval times and design guidelines seem to be a huge improvement. It's hard to say what can be attributed to HbD because the economy and culture of the city also play a huge part, but I think the trade-off of some flexibility for faster development is a good one. I would much rather see half a dozen 20 storey buildings actually built than have a ten year fight over 40 storey buildings (which may or may not be better) that may never even materialize. The old attitude of "waiting for the perfect development to come along" that some people seem to have is completely absurd. Those perfect developments don't exist. Nothing can make everybody happy. The city needs to move forward at a reasonable pace by taking some of the imperfect choices that are actually available. The same thing is true with transit and everything else.

One thing I've also noticed is that there's a lot more awareness of the importance of building designs than in the past, and a wider group tends to take part in planning now than ten years ago. I think we're going to see a continued shift in interest toward urban living in the future.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I agree completely - but this (along with a bunch of other projects) proves (at least to me) that HbD seems to be working. It isn't perfect, no plan is. But since it's been adopted, a lot of new interest and thought had been occuring in the downtown and that was part of the goals.

The fact that we're seeing the Citadell redevelopment occur (through HbD) and this project meets HbD and soon Nova Centre - these are all great incremental steps forward to making downtown better. I don't know if it's quite time to say for certain that HbD is a complete success, but it's creating buzz and interest and that's important in of itself.

I agree. HbD, though criticised often for the height limits it embraces, is at least giving developers stability to a clear and speedy path for approval.

And despite the critics, as you've mentioned, the Citadel redevelopment (three towers), the Nova Centre (another three towers), and now this Hollis residential tower (pending approval) is bringing much desired density and height to the downtown, embracing what the skyline already has!

A more apt criticism may be the lack of attention the plan brings to streetscapes.

[Antigonish]

I wish they would be a bit more flexible to allowing 2 or 3 buildings to exceed the height limits to complete the skyline a bit more, similar to what Vancouver is doing. Other than that HbD seems fine with me.

[someone123]

Cogswell might provide an opportunity for some signature towers, particularly since it's publicly-owned land. I'd love to see, say, a transit terminal with some towers going up to 120 m. That extra density could have a clear public benefit in terms of funding public infrastructure and encouraging transit use. It's less reasonable to arbitrarily pick 2 or 3 private sites and give certain property owners rights worth millions of dollars while excluding everybody else.

Originally Posted by RyeJay

A more apt criticism may be the lack of attention the plan brings to streetscapes.

Do you mean street-level building designs or the design and maintenance of the streets and sidewalks themselves? I think the Capital District Task Force was originally meant to take over the streetscape projects but they have been stalled due to lack of funding. It's pretty pathetic since the projects are in the single-digit millions of dollars.

[halifaxboyns]

I agree, I think it's too soon to say for certain that HbD is a total success. But the change in rules to HbD certainly can be said to be a catalyst. Because of its simplified process and easier rules related to appeals (or lack there of) I think there is a lot more interest.

Something tells me many of these developers have been sitting on stuff for a while and were waiting for HRM to approve HbD. Now, the applications are coming out of the wood work. I can only hope this is just the start and that we'll start seeing more on the Dartmouth side.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by NISH89

I wish they would be a bit more flexible to allowing 2 or 3 buildings to exceed the height limits to complete the skyline a bit more, similar to what Vancouver is doing. Other than that HbD seems fine with me.

There is no consideration given to to the skyline. Planters, sidewalks, trees, streetscape, wind, sun, windows, pedestriians, brick vs precast, plazas but never skyline. Because of STV and HRMxD we are creating a boring Ottawa, Victoria and to some extent Vancouver skyline....."a tabletop" The TD expansion will break the flattop look a bit but the skyline is an important feature and goes completely unnoticed by planning. Our big chance is to have the Cogswell site allow 30-40 storeys so the big box / block like skyline can have a bit of pizzazz.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Empire

Because of STV and HRMxD we are creating a boring Ottawa, Victoria and to some extent Vancouver skyline....."a tabletop".

This is subjective. You're the first person I have encountered to claim Vancouver's skyline as boring. All people with whom I've spoken about the three cities you've mentioned think their skylines are quite beautiful.

#firstworldproblems.

[Antigonish]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

This is subjective. You're the first person I have encountered to claim Vancouver's skyline as boring. All people with whom I've spoken about the three cities you've mentioned think their skylines are quite beautiful.

#firstworldproblems.

To be fair it was a bit boring before they built Living Shangri-La building, e.g. the "table top" look, which is why they approved it in the first place. Aesthetically though, Vancouver is the #1 skyline in my books.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by NISH89

To be fair it was a bit boring before they built Living Shangri-La building, e.g. the "table top" look, which is why they approved it in the first place. Aesthetically though, Vancouver is the #1 skyline in my books.

Yes, Ottawa Victoria and Vancouver are beautiful cities but Ottawa in particular has a block appearance due to height restrictions. Vancouver has a rich mix of styles and a great natural setting and now more height is allowed so the level look is disappearing. Halifax viewed from the bridge has a block look that will change a bit with TD and perhaps the Nova Centre but the Cogswell site holds the most potential to break up the skyline a bit.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Originally Posted by Empire

Yes, Ottawa Victoria and Vancouver are beautiful cities but Ottawa in particular has a block appearance due to height restrictions. Vancouver has a rich mix of styles and a great natural setting and now more height is allowed so the level look is disappearing. Halifax viewed from the bridge has a block look that will change a bit with TD and perhaps the Nova Centre but the Cogswell site holds the most potential to break up the skyline a bit.

How high exactly is rampart maximum on the Cogswell sites?

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by NISH89

To be fair it was a bit boring before they built Living Shangri-La building, e.g. the "table top" look, which is why they approved it in the first place. Aesthetically though, Vancouver is the #1 skyline in my books.

Was the displeasure of the city's plateau skyline the main reason behind the approval of Shangri-La? I thought it was the developer wanting more density -- despite Vancouverites wanting to protect their mountain views?

It's built, so obviously there was enough support behind it. I certainly don't think that its completion led to a declaration that Vancouver's skyline was finally beautiful...

Again, this is very subjective.

I prefer Toronto's skyline, personally. I enjoy the height of the CN Tower because it is an observation tower, as opposed to being a single, taller-than-the-rest residential, commerical, or office tower.

Height has been a major source of criticism in Toronto, such as the 'Wall of Condos'. Developments so close to the waterfront, many believe, should not be that tall, in order to protect views for present and future developments of the downtown more inland.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Empire

Yes, Ottawa Victoria and Vancouver are beautiful cities but Ottawa in particular has a block appearance due to height restrictions. Vancouver has a rich mix of styles and a great natural setting and now more height is allowed so the level look is disappearing. Halifax viewed from the bridge has a block look that will change a bit with TD and perhaps the Nova Centre but the Cogswell site holds the most potential to break up the skyline a bit.

Not all buildings of downtown Halifax are the same height, old and new. The RBC Waterside Centre currently under construction will not contribute to the 'table top' look for personally dislike, as it'll only be 9 storeys.

Ottawa's buildings have more fully used the available envelopes, which is a major reason behind the somewhat block appearance. It looks unique and structured. I don't see this as unattractive. The strictness of Ottawa's downtown looks very capital-like.

[someone123]

I don't really care that much about it but I find Vancouver's skyline pretty boring. The height is one part of that but so are the dozens and dozens of nearly-identical glass buildings. Thankfully there seems to be a bit more architectural diversity in newer proposals in Halifax.

Ottawa's downtown has really suffered from poorly thought out planning rules and boring government office blocks. The "must not be taller than X" rules don't actually make much sense when you think about it; the views and streetscapes are what's important, not the height of the buildings per se.

[Dmajackson]

http://www.halifax.ca/boardscom/drc/...1108drc000.PDF

This project just gets better everytime more is revealed.

It's blurry but it looks like the building height on the main facade (Hollis Street) is 65.7m

[someone123]

Here are a few images from the report:



View from the Citadel. Nova Centre is not shown:



Site plan:

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

http://www.halifax.ca/boardscom/drc/...1108drc000.PDF

This project just gets better everytime more is revealed.

It's blurry but it looks like the building height on the main facade (Hollis Street) is 65.7m

Very interesting how the last rendering includes the Twisted Sisters, instead of Skye Halifax...

Does Southwest Properties know something we don't know?

*sigh*
I'd be teasing myself if I entertained the thought of United Gulf re-submitting the Twisted Sisters (or something like it) for approval.

[gm_scott]

Looks great. But what is with the North-South pedestrian link? I'm wondering if its supposed to line up with Bedford Row? I'm just wondering if its necessary, or they decided to put it in because they didn't need a bigger building footprint.