[Halifax] Nova Centre | 65-58-58 m | 16-15-14 fl | Completed - Page 3

Keith P. · #41 Posted **Jan 28, 2009, 11:31 PM**

I find it hard to believe that HRM, having fought so hard to successfully derail the Midtown proposal, will endorse this for the same site. And HRM is a key component of TCL's Board.

Wishblade · #42 Posted **Jan 28, 2009, 11:44 PM**

I've just gotta throw this in here. Are there more high rise proposals downtown now than existing high rises? Cuz its sure as hell starting to feel like it...

someone123 · #43 Posted **Jan 28, 2009, 11:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I find it hard to believe that HRM, having fought so hard to successfully derail the Midtown proposal, will endorse this for the same site. And HRM is a key component of TCL's Board.

It's possible that the 17 storey tower could be for the Herald site specifically, one block down. I believe HRM originally asked for a fairly minor reduction in height of the Midtown (which kind of makes you wonder what was wrong with 17 there, but whatever).

Anyway, I will still hold off on commenting until I see what is actually built. My biggest reservation is the whole idea of building over Grafton Street, which is what they would have to do to make this site worthwhile. One busy block will be cut off, unless they do something fairly creative which is sort of beyond my expectations (e.g. connected upper floors and under the street with a canopy).

Barrington south · #44 Posted **Jan 28, 2009, 11:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haliguy

Just heard on Live at 5 that the Herald lands have been selected for the new convention centre

F***

someone123 · #45 Posted **Jan 28, 2009, 11:53 PM**

Just for something interesting, here's the canopy over Pike Street in Seattle built as part of the convention centre there:

by seattlerayhutch45 on flickr

Barrington south · #46 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 12:01 AM**

I am happy there will (hopefully) be two towers...at least it will help add density to the core...and like DJ said, hopefully there will be some good street level retail. With the towers and the possibility of retail it could turn out better then than the monolith I was dreading

spaustin · #47 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 12:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I find it hard to believe that HRM, having fought so hard to successfully derail the Midtown proposal, will endorse this for the same site. And HRM is a key component of TCL's Board.

HRM approved the Midtown. The Midtown died on appeal to the URB.

Agreed, blocking Grafton off would be a big mistake. The Metro Centre certainly didn't do any favours for Market Street.

someone123 · #48 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 12:12 AM**

Does anybody know what the legal process is for a development like this that involves the province? Was there any kind of initial approval and appeal process for buildings like the Metro Centre? What about, say, the office building on the waterfront constructed for the G7, which is much more recent?

I agree that the towers make this sound like a much better proposal than it would be otherwise.

Jonovision · #49 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 12:57 AM**

It sounds interesting. I would get really really pissed off though if they built over Grafton. I would have thought by now after all these years living with the Metro Centre and Scotia Square that the city knows better.
That Seattle example looks amazing, and I would totally support something like that!
I'm gonna watch the news tonight to see what they show.

Keith P. · #50 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 1:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

Does anybody know what the legal process is for a development like this that involves the province? Was there any kind of initial approval and appeal process for buildings like the Metro Centre? What about, say, the office building on the waterfront constructed for the G7, which is much more recent?

I agree that the towers make this sound like a much better proposal than it would be otherwise.

Well, the office building on the waterfront -- if you are talking about Summit Place -- wasn't actually built for the G7. It was there already under a different name when the summit was announced for here.

I am pretty sure that projects led by either the province or the feds are not subject to the municipal development requirements. In this case the city owns the Metro Center, the province owns the existing WTCC, and they are both overseen by a Board that has reps from both levels of government.

Keith P. · #51 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 1:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision

It sounds interesting. I would get really really pissed off though if they built over Grafton. I would have thought by now after all these years living with the Metro Centre and Scotia Square that the city knows better.
That Seattle example looks amazing, and I would totally support something like that!
I'm gonna watch the news tonight to see what they show.

Seattle is such a great city. I just loved it there.

sdm · #52 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 1:54 AM**

there will be a five storey section connecting the two towers built over grafton. Grafton street will no longer exist.

Its funny because i remember when prince geroge was built, it wasn't allowed to go higher then it is now, so how could these two towers be built at the height stated? They are not slender, they are basically from one end of the block to the other, with some slight step in from the streets on the ends.

One thing of interst is in HRM by design the height was given a bonus to a maximum of 9 stories......

From the renderings the project looked nice, but believe if allowed then we will see a flood of calls to axe the view planes.

Barrington south · #53 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 2:09 AM**

SDM...where did you see the renderings?...was it one of your inside connections, or is it somewhere I can access?

Barrington south · #54 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 2:13 AM**

Man, 3 towers proposed for downtown in one day! That's fairly impressive...

Haliguy · #55 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 2:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barrington south

SDM...where did you see the renderings?...was it one of your inside connections, or is it somewhere I can access?

I seen it on the news tonight, I'm not sure where else you can see them.

Barrington south · #56 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 2:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haliguy

I seen it on the news tonight, I'm not sure where else you can see them.

ohh...thanks Haliguy

sdm · #57 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 3:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haliguy

I seen it on the news tonight, I'm not sure where else you can see them.

news as well i have seen them before tonight from a source.

kph06 · #58 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 3:46 AM**

I just saw this on the news, the buildings are a mix of green glass and brick, it was a quick shot of the rendering, but looked decent. I'm pretty sure they said they'd like to have it built by 2011, did I hear that right?

Jonovision · #59 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 3:48 AM**

I just saw them on the news. They are kinda modern looking, slightly curved around the edges. There was a fair amount of red brick for the base. Can't say I'm a big fan of that. That is absolutely horrible news that they will be building on top of Grafton. Although when I saw the renderings it wasn't completely clear. So I will still hope for the best.

sdm · #60 Posted **Jan 29, 2009, 10:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kph06

I just saw this on the news, the buildings are a mix of green glass and brick, it was a quick shot of the rendering, but looked decent. I'm pretty sure they said they'd like to have it built by 2011, did I hear that right?

yeah, question is if the project needs to go through the development agreement process?