SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=223)
-   -   [Halifax] Promenade Robie South | 90 m | 31 & 30 fl | U/C (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=233806)

Jonovision May 26, 2018 8:41 PM

[Halifax] Promenade Robie South | 90 m | 31 & 30 fl | U/C
 
This is one of the 19 that was originally proposed to go for a DA prior to Centre Plan.

The design has been refined somewhat.
Public meeting taking place Monday, June 4th, 2018, beginning at 6:30 p.m. at St. Andrew’s United Church, 6036 Coburg Road.

More info:
https://www.halifax.ca/business/plan...arlton-streets

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/885/2...f148086c_b.jpgRobie and College 1 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1727/...032fb10a_b.jpgRobie And College 2 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1742/...33635dbf_b.jpgRobie And College 3 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1753/...77b1f935_b.jpgRobie and College 4 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/878/4...fb7df283_b.jpgRobie and College 5 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

DigitalNinja May 26, 2018 9:04 PM

Those renderings make it look like a really good high quality development. Has anything been approved yet?

Drybrain May 26, 2018 9:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja (Post 8200759)
Those renderings make it look like a really good high quality development. Has anything been approved yet?

It makes the sidewalks look nice and animated, and I like the townhouses used to transition away from the main corner. But the faux-historic elements really rub me the wrong way. There's no way all that stone is going to actually be high-quality cut stone, and the mix of classical elements with a gothic archway and earth-toned po-mo towers? Super tacky stuff.

mleblanc May 27, 2018 1:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drybrain (Post 8200786)
It makes the sidewalks look nice and animated, and I like the townhouses used to transition away from the main corner. But the faux-historic elements really rub me the wrong way. There's no way all that stone is going to actually be high-quality cut stone, and the mix of classical elements with a gothic archway and earth-toned po-mo towers? Super tacky stuff.

Look at the towers around this proposal. Earth tones and grey brick is king in this area.

All in all, this looks incredibly solid.The high quality stone is the one thing about the Alexander I enjoy, so it is feasible for it to be done.

Drybrain May 27, 2018 2:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mleblanc (Post 8201155)
Look at the towers around this proposal. Earth tones and grey brick is king in this area.

At least those buildings are uniform, colourwise; this thing will have five separate surface colours/finishes on each building.

I really think this is a complete dog, aesthetically. The scale is right, the architectural is eccentrically bland early '00s suburban GTA. It's a jumble of fakey architectural embellishments and clashing colours, and nothing about it looks very contemporary. It's worse than the Trillium and its little hat.

connect2source May 27, 2018 3:20 PM

Although nice materials, the design of the podium looks 20 years old with the faux-heritage-regal facade. That will look dated the moment it's complete. We stopped doing similar designs here in Metro-Vancouver over a decade ago, trend now is to simpler, more modernist and timeless which will ultimately age better. Halifax needs to dump faux-heritage immediately, it never works.

Drybrain May 27, 2018 3:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by connect2source (Post 8201224)
We stopped doing similar designs here in Metro-Vancouver over a decade ago, trend now is to simpler, more modernist and timeless which will ultimately age better.

Exactly. The Roy, Maple, YMCA, and South Park Lofts are all unabashedly contemporary in design, are much more attractive, and with the exception of the Maple (kind of massive and at street level bulky) all look like they'll fit into their immediate environs much better than this thing does.

scryer May 27, 2018 4:22 PM

Unpopular Opinion: I kind of like the design.

I like the podium a lot.

I feel like there is such a thing as having too many glass tower cities. We don't need every city looking like Vancouver and I think that in comparison to the rest of the country that this is a very bold design that goes against the glass tower trend. Faux heritage has its place, and although I personally think that faux heritage designs are better served by mid-rise and townhouse designs, I'm really not irked with this tower.

I would like to see more renders.

Nouvellecosse May 27, 2018 6:10 PM

I can't say I'm all that impressed with the design, but then again it's a lot harder to get me excited about a proposal if it's a redevelopment than requires demos of some decent buildings rather than of a more poorly utilized site such as a parking lot or strip mall. The lowrise apartment building isn't much of a loss, but I hate losing Victorian-era houses.

But specifically in terms of the design, I don't see anything about the design language that connects it to the aesthetics or architectural heritage the city, province or neighbourhood. Stepping away from modern/contemporary design trends is fine - good even - as long as the result is something that integrates with and plays homage to its location. But then again, those type of design dues aren't actually a departure from contemporary design trends are they? Seems to be quite prevalent in contemporary populist design.

Keith P. May 27, 2018 6:19 PM

Far too many cyclists in those renderings for me to believe the finished product will look anything at all like that. :haha:

I need to look at that block as it is today before I pass judgement on this one.

Colin May May 27, 2018 7:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8201327)
Far too many cyclists in those renderings for me to believe the finished product will look anything at all like that. :haha:

I need to look at that block as it is today before I pass judgement on this one.

Bicycles without a bell.... par for the course in HRM.

Jonovision May 27, 2018 8:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse (Post 8201321)
I can't say I'm all that impressed with the design, but then again it's a lot harder to get me excited about a proposal if it's a redevelopment than requires demos of some decent buildings rather than of a more poorly utilized site such as a parking lot or strip mall. The lowrise apartment building isn't much of a loss, but I hate losing Victorian-era houses.

But specifically in terms of the design, I don't see anything about the design language that connects it to the aesthetics or architectural heritage the city, province or neighbourhood. Stepping away from modern/contemporary design trends is fine - good even - as long as the result is something that integrates with and plays homage to its location. But then again, those type of design dues aren't actually a departure from contemporary design trends are they? Seems to be quite prevalent in contemporary populist design.

From what I read a I think all but one of the heritage buildings on the site were being moved to the Carleton St end of the site.

I really like the podium as well. I am an eternal optimist and hope that the material would be more than bad precast. I could lose that weird pergola on the roof though. And I don't think just because it has stone cladding it is faux heritage. There are a lot of contemporary designs that use stone and traditional window forms. I don't see it as trying to replicated anything or be something that it is not (aside from that pergola) And those deep inset balconies in the stone facade are definitely contemporary in nature.

The towers however are a whole other story. Too many materials and the setbacks do not look fully resolved. I like towers that are have modular components and towers that gradually set back as they rise, but this seems to be trying to do both at the same time and its just not working.

Keith P. May 27, 2018 9:50 PM

I looked at the site in Streetview to refresh my memory as to what is there now.

Most of the buildings affected by this are large Victorians that were undoubtedly impressive at one time, but which appear to have been cut up into many apartments in recent years. No idea what they are like inside but I suspect most of whatever grandeur they had has been lost. The exception may be on Carlton St but it is impossible to tell what their current use may be.

This is an interesting case in that the scale of the proposal is very large and would undoubtedly add a lot to the property tax base of the city. The price is that many potentially restorable buildings of a type that are simply no longer built now will go away.

someone123 May 27, 2018 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8201482)
This is an interesting case in that the scale of the proposal is very large and would undoubtedly add a lot to the property tax base of the city. The price is that many potentially restorable buildings of a type that are simply no longer built now will go away.

Unfortunately I think this is a symptom of the city's obsession with preserving single family dwelling neighbourhoods, something that is common to many Canadian cities. It would be better to preserve the historic parts of town and redevelop inner suburban areas like parts of the West End.

Developing parking lots is great but the city's supply of empty lots is dwindling fast. Most underused sites in the city today are owned by some level of government or a major public institution and are hard for private developers to build on. The giant empty lot behind the library is an example of this.

someone123 May 27, 2018 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonovision (Post 8201449)
I really like the podium as well. I am an eternal optimist and hope that the material would be more than bad precast.

I like the podium too, and I am not sure it will turn out badly. Also not a fan of the towers.

This is another one of those developments that looks to me like it is part of a vision of a larger city. It is proposing to turn what is currently a quiet medium density residential stretch of Robie into what looks like part of a major commercial artery. I think that's a huge improvement over the old tower-in-the-park or similar stuff built on sites like this that added density but not vibrancy.

JET May 28, 2018 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P. (Post 8201482)
I looked at the site in Streetview to refresh my memory as to what is there now.

Most of the buildings affected by this are large Victorians that were undoubtedly impressive at one time, but which appear to have been cut up into many apartments in recent years. No idea what they are like inside but I suspect most of whatever grandeur they had has been lost. The exception may be on Carlton St but it is impossible to tell what their current use may be.

This is an interesting case in that the scale of the proposal is very large and would undoubtedly add a lot to the property tax base of the city. The price is that many potentially restorable buildings of a type that are simply no longer built now will go away.

30 years ago I had a basement apartment at 1465 Carlton St. A family lived above, and it was very well maintained. Since it was sold and made into more apartments the decline is painful to see. There should be laws that maintain the Heritage Street Scape. In some parts of the US all changes to historic houses must be approved and buildings maintained. I expect that this will never happen in Halifax. I had hoped that Wade and Sam might do something about maintaining historic heritage, but disappointingly no. :(

Drybrain May 28, 2018 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JET (Post 8201898)
30 years ago I had a basement apartment at 1465 Carlton St. A family lived above, and it was very well maintained. Since it was sold and made into more apartments the decline is painful to see. There should be laws that maintain the Heritage Street Scape. In some parts of the US all changes to historic houses must be approved and buildings maintained. I expect that this will never happen in Halifax. I had hoped that Wade and Sam might do something about maintaining historic heritage, but disappointingly no. :(

I think Jonovision is right, though, that all but one of the Victorians will be preserved and moved to one end of the block. So we might lose one house, which I think is a fair trade-off for the big shot of density. I feel the loss of Victorians keenly, but that doesn't seem so bad.

As for what Waye and Sam can do, it's rally a provincial matter. The city's hands are pretty tied when it comes to strengthening the province's heritage act, which is very weak and in bad need of improvement.

IanWatson May 28, 2018 1:17 PM

What the rendering doesn't show is the Dexel proposal at the corner of Spring Garden and Robie. Those towers are going to be tight together!

I'm not too optimistic about the materials. Kassner Goodspeed's favourite cladding is pre-cast. In fact, I can't think of any buildings they've designed that's not been pre-cast. The Doyle rendering appeared to show fancy marble cladding, and it ended up as pre-cast.

eastcoastal May 28, 2018 3:00 PM

Well - it gets points for integrating those heritage buildings at College/Carelton (including the relocation of one)... and the massing seems decent. I can't say that I'm a fan of the style yet.

eastcoastal May 28, 2018 3:10 PM

... and I see there are sunken courtyards at the heritage buildings. Not sure that'll be a nice space/garbage pit.


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.