[Halifax] The Vincent Coleman | ? m | 9 fl | Completed

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Now we need some renders

They are on this page:







I'm not normally one to diss an architect but that is seriously one ugly peice of sh*t

Maybe council will learn the tallers one look sexy while short ones are bulky and turn out like this.

[Phalanx]

The colours shown certainly don't do it any favours. It looks like they at least tried to do something interesting by making it look like two otherwise generic buildings are passing through each other.

Could be worse... Could be a lot better, too, but... could be worse.

[Jonovision]

I will say it could have been much much worse. I'm not that unhappy with it. Sure a tower would have been nicer of course. But it looks like there will be a large rooftop terrace. The colours could still use some tweaking however.

[kph06]

I noticed driving by today that there is an excavator on site with a breaker, looks as though they might tackle the concrete slab in the middle of this site.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ

They are on this page:



I'm not normally one to diss an architect but that is seriously one ugly peice of sh*t

Maybe council will learn the tallers one look sexy while short ones are bulky and turn out like this.

Living in the Toronto area, I must be starting to getting tired of seeing redundant glass condo towers, because to me this looks very unique and interesting. I am not just trying to be positive; I like the variety of new buildings in the Halifax area. I especially like the Nova Centre and the Saint Joseph proposal.

Just because there are a lot of glass condos in the Toronto and Vancouver area it doesn't mean that they are architecturally superior. Isn't part of architectural design uniqueness and having a building that fits into its surroundings?

[kph06]

I drove by again tonight and it definitely seems like things are a go. The site is now fenced off and there are three excavators on site, with progress already well under way.

[sdm]

the windows look like a bunker, no natural light.

the design is a take off of elements of Gladstone, 5800 South, and the apartment building on the corner of Robie and North.

Guess thats what we get when council limits heights and forces the developer to make the project economical.

Its better then expected. Anyone know the material choices for the exterior? Precast or ?

[alps]

Great, a huge swath of blank wall facing the street, not like there's enough graffiti around there. I like how they call it a "landscape podium green roof" rather than "massive, ugly, horribly-positioned one-storey garage with sod on top"

Nice work, NIMBYs

Toronto and Vancouver glass condo towers might be a bit boring, but at least they're attractive. I'm sure people here would be more open to highrise development if new developments weren't all as ugly and unpleasant as this and the two newer buildings on South Street. Dunno what the fetish for (fake) brick here is all about.

That said, I am happy for increasing density in this area (this and the redevelopment of the Bayers Road Shopping Centre).

[fenwick16]

Perhaps this is an abstract representation of the Imo and Mont Blanc collision.

I really think this is an interesting building.

[someone123]

Towers may not necessarily have been better. The fact is that they could also have designed a nice 9 storey development that would have been fine for the area.

This probably won't be too bad, but it doesn't relate well to the street and is a lost opportunity. A better development would have had some retail space out in front along the sidewalk with a couple of floors of office above then some residential set back away from the street. Parking could have gone in behind; there was plenty of land to work with for this development.

Infill is better than nothing but I really wish they'd force developers to move away from old suburban-style site planning. More thought needs to be spent on making walking, biking, and transit more convenient. In many cases these can be accommodated with little or no cost and no drawback for drivers.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

Towers may not necessarily have been better. The fact is that they could also have designed a nice 9 storey development that would have been fine for the area.

This probably won't be too bad, but it doesn't relate well to the street and is a lost opportunity. A better development would have had some retail space out in front along the sidewalk with a couple of floors of office above then some residential set back away from the street. Parking could have gone in behind; there was plenty of land to work with for this development.

Infill is better than nothing but I really wish they'd force developers to move away from old suburban-style site planning. More thought needs to be spent on making walking, biking, and transit more convenient. In many cases these can be accommodated with little or no cost and no drawback for drivers.

I don't see how this can be classified as suburban-style planning. I have never seen anything like this before and I have been fortunate enough to have been to many of the major cities in North America. I hope that it will be as interesting once complete as it is in the renderings. I actually like the colour scheme since is clearly breaks it into two buildings. Have you ever seen anything similar to this anywhere else? This is not meant to be sarcastic, I think that this really is unique. I wonder how they will incorporate this dual-building design into the floor plans?

If this is actually built to this design, I think that you will see a lot of it on the internet due to its uniqueness.

[JET]

Looks a bit like a hospital that's been added on to a few times. JET

[Jonovision]

I think what he meant by suburban-style planning is that the building is built away from the street with a driveway and a large redundant open grass area surrounding it. Most of the buildings up in Clayton Park are built this way and it makes for a very poor urban environment. It does nothing to reinforce the street line or to help people move along the site.

[hfx_chris]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

...to me this looks very unique and interesting.

I have to agree, I think this looks quite nice. In fact I really like it, I just wish the balconies were a bit bigger.

Originally Posted by JET

Looks a bit like a hospital that's been added on to a few times. JET

Maybe this is what I like about it, it does look rather institutional.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I would have preferred the big tower... but this will have to do.

[alps]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I don't see how this can be classified as suburban-style planning. I have never seen anything like this before and I have been fortunate enough to have been to many of the major cities in North America. I hope that it will be as interesting once complete as it is in the renderings. I actually like the colour scheme since is clearly breaks it into two buildings. Have you ever seen anything similar to this anywhere else? This is not meant to be sarcastic, I think that this really is unique. I wonder how they will incorporate this dual-building design into the floor plans?

If this is actually built to this design, I think that you will see a lot of it on the internet due to its uniqueness.

What makes this unique?

It's suburban in the sense that there is no effort to accommodate those not traveling by car, as well as the way it (doesn't) relate to the street. It's essentially Gladstone Ridge with no attempt to integrate into the neighbourhood, with uglier materials, and with the the towers smooshed into each other (the only thing remotely interesting about this project). I know I'm being really negative, but we have such low expectations. I have no doubt that wall running the length of Bayers is going to do something wicked to the wind for the people waiting for the bus, and people will jump on this project in the future in the same way they use Scotia Square or Maritime Centre as evidence that all highrises are bad, even though it's just a matter of our history of particularly bad design. Rambly I know, but I need to rush off now.

[fenwick16]

It could have been two separate buildings and then it would have been two rather uninteresting buildings. Or, they could have simply connected them in an L shape which again would have been boring. To me, the fact that they blended the two together in an interesting manner is what makes it unique. However, you can prove me wrong by posting some images of other similar buildings.

At the risk of offending somebody, my definition of uninteresting would be the Horizon Court buildings in Dartmouth. These are simply highrises with no unique features.

[DigitalNinja]

I don't think everyone is seeing the 1story garage on the left of it. As people are saying a big green open space... Yeah there is, but 1 story up ontop of a huge garage.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

I don't think everyone is seeing the 1story garage on the left of it. As people are saying a big green open space... Yeah there is, but 1 story up ontop of a huge garage.

I missed this garage section. Are you saying that it is good or bad? I see it now; are they really planning to plant grass on it?

[DigitalNinja]

Well it leaves a long blank wall around 75% of the property.