[Halifax] Mount Royale

[Keith P.]

I maintain my position that this is a horrible development.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I have to reiterate the Commie Block reference comrades although these rinky dink gables are a bit of extra whimsey from our world class developers.

If they were taller, I think the angles would be more attractive. They are dealing with a pretty crazy site though.

[Wishblade]

Does anybody know what the density is on this development? It altleast seems fairly high even if it does look terrible.

[RyeJay]

This development looks like Clayton Park with Tourette's syndrome.

[kph06]

Photo's by me:

[q12]

Originally Posted by kph06

Photo's by me:

That is a lot of apartments...

I'm not sure where they are going up faster, Larry Uteck or Mount Royale.

[Aya_Akai]

Originally Posted by kph06

Photo's by me:

That first one to me just looks like some god awful modernized "communist block" apartments lol

That second one, I love how you can see where they were like "derp!, we need more parking inside.. lets just cover up these windows and convert the bottom floor and pretend nothing ever happened here.."

[someone123]

I still feel like this is a "worst of both worlds" development, along with most of Clayton Park. Aesthetics aside, the densities and building types are pretty close to what you find in a nicer mixed use development (transit-oriented development or "new urbanist" development). Unfortunately, the separation of uses and road network are such that most of the advantages are lost. Part of the problem of course is that there are no strong transit services in suburbs like this to build around. Instead, everything's built around roads, so transit sucks, and the whole cycle perpetuates itself.

I'm hoping they won't make the same mistakes with the Motherhouse lands. The suburbs don't have to be like this.

[cormiermax]

Could someone explain why suburban developments always seem to have curvy roads?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by cormiermax

Could someone explain why suburban developments always seem to have curvy roads?

They don't everywhere. Some cities for example have grids of major roads and then suburban cul-de-sacs off of those.

I don't know about this particular case but sometimes hilly terrain dictates where the roads can go or where it's cheapest to build them. They also follow natural features with some of the lots -- if there's a little ravine they can't build on for example they'll arrange the road network so the house lots back on to it because that is more desirable.

I think the worst aspects of this style of lazy suburban design are the huge tracts set aside for single uses and the lack of attention paid to pedestrians. Building placement alone can have a huge impact on walking distances and on how pleasant it is to get around on foot. It's pretty standard to have, say, a bus stop that is a little concrete pad surrounded by soggy grass berms and acres of parking.

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by HaliStreaks

That first one to me just looks like some god awful modernized "communist block" apartments lol

The 263rd Congress of Halifax Regional Commissioners decries it shall be named "Pyotr Kellysov Prospekt"!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by terrynorthend

The 263rd Congress of Halifax Regional Commissioners decries it shall be named "Pyotr Kellysov Prospekt"!

...and Der Kommissar Howard Epstein gets passed over yet again...

[HI6HRI5E]

there sure milking the hell out of theses buildings.

[teddifax]

Just drove up by there and there are so many buildings virtually on top of one another. Couldn't these have been built with a bit of space between them. I can't stress enough how close these are together. I know someone who was looking at one of the newest buildings, just opened and was told about the view he would have as they looked outside to see another building under construction which has now taken any view this building may have had. If these buildings would've been planned properly with maybe some height higher on the hill, allowing the buildings to the forefront to maybe have been built differently, but this is a moot point now! This has to become the most densely populated part of Halifax, once this is all completed and inhabited. There isn't much height in this grouping but there are a LOT of buildings going up there.


DSCF0538 by teddifax57, on Flickr

[DigitalNinja]

Density. <3

[goosnarrggh]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I maintain my position that this is a horrible development.

I recall a conversation I had with a technician at the CBC transmitter site (I forget his name). His comment was basically that he spent most of his days working in a specifically shielded environment; he would not want to spend any significant amount of time in the area without that.

He couldn't understand why anybody would choose to live in the existing housing developments near Dunbrack & Main, much less any of the new, much closer development that was (at the time) in the planning stages in the area. It was all outside the required legal limits with respect to human health, but he anticipated that the RF noise that would be injected into nearby everyday electronic devices would cause extremely annoying interference with their normal operation.

[kph06]

Photos by me:

[visualman57]

Originally Posted by kph06

Photos by me:

Great photos, but as I look at them, I keep thinking how much more urban this whole area could have been if the 4 identical buildings had just been stacked on top of each other to make a 30 story tower with lots of open space around it. More "iconic tower" and less "Moscow, circa 1960".

[Jstaleness]

Isn't it gross. None of them seem to complement each other at all. I'll still wait until all exteriors but it doesn't look good.

[teddifax]

DSCF0752 by teddifax57, on Flickr