[Halifax] The Vuze at South Village (Fenwick) | 106 m | 36/10/8 fl | U/C

[xanaxanax]

I don't really care if Fenwick stayed the same way forever, a city with a few ugly buildings isn't inherently a bad thing. I'm more interested in some infill with this proposal that I think should be taller (make those look nice and move on) I'm hoping the reduction in rental space leads to a demand for a new proposal else where either by the lot Joe owns at Cogswell and Brunswick or by some developer elsewhere. New cladding to a pre-existing building doesn't really benefit anything except to say hey that looks a bit nicer, a real developer in any major city would have simply built around it in this location with towers of equal height before even considering a recladding.

[fenwick16]

It looks to me as though almost all of the concrete precast panels are being removed and replaced with curtain glass wall. Based on what I have read it sounds like it will be stripped down to only the concrete skeleton consisting of structural members that can't be removed. (I wish something similar could be done to the unrelated Welsford at 2074 Robie Street)

I think the contrast in the redone tower versus the current state would be more obvious if the renderings showed the broad sides of the tower (instead of at an angle). This is about the best that I could find from this document - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...nd3DImages.pdf





Just as a sidenote, I have no connection to Fenwick Towers other than living there for a year in 1977-78 and picking fenwick16 as a username 7 years ago thinking that it was an obscure username in most of Canada. I didn't realize that so many people in Halifax considered Fenwick Tower to be an eyesore, so it fits me well

[Metalsales]

I would be very interested in knowing more about the glazing system. The use of the term "Window wall" always catches my eye. This has been used on Kings Wharf and I have heard that there are already leaks and cold spots.
With all the problems related to window wall systems in larger cities, I would hope that developers locally would forego cheaper pricing for quality and durability.

The meeting for this is Thursday? May have to drop in and see more on this project.

[IanWatson]

Am I the only one who is totally okay with the current tower of Fenwick and would be happy if it stayed the same (okay, I wouldn't say no to a power wash)? What I am excited to see is what Templeton does on the ground floor. The street interface and that weed filled concrete lot are the truly atrocious parts of Fenwick.

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Am I the only one who is totally okay with the current tower of Fenwick and would be happy if it stayed the same (okay, I wouldn't say no to a power wash)? What I am excited to see is what Templeton does on the ground floor. The street interface and that weed filled concrete lot are the truly atrocious parts of Fenwick.

Yes.

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

It looks to me as though almost all of the concrete precast panels are being removed and replaced with curtain glass wall. Based on what I have read it sounds like it will be stripped down to only the concrete skeleton consisting of structural members that can't be removed. (I wish something similar could be done to the unrelated Welsford at 2074 Robie Street)

I think the contrast in the redone tower versus the current state would be more obvious if the renderings showed the broad sides of the tower (instead of at an angle). This is about the best that I could find from this document - http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...nd3DImages.pdf





Just as a sidenote, I have no connection to Fenwick Towers other than living there for a year in 1977-78 and picking fenwick16 as a username 7 years ago thinking that it was an obscure username in most of Canada. I didn't realize that so many people in Halifax considered Fenwick Tower to be an eyesore, so it fits me well

Good points - the view of the broad side is a bit better. I hope the finished product reflects this perspective more than the other angle which really looks little different from the existing appearance.

[xanaxanax]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Am I the only one who is totally okay with the current tower of Fenwick and would be happy if it stayed the same (okay, I wouldn't say no to a power wash)? What I am excited to see is what Templeton does on the ground floor. The street interface and that weed filled concrete lot are the truly atrocious parts of Fenwick.

No I feel the same way

[lawsond]

[QUOTE][It's a shame that the new, clean, smooth profile (including the expansion) has been abandoned in favor of a very minor modification to the existing tower. /QUOTE]

I like the newest redo better. The old redo looked too fat and alas...yet another slab on the skyline...and this one the tallest slab from here to QC.
The original shape of FT is just fine. The continuous glass will actually add the appearance of height by enhancing vertical lines.
BTW: Fenwick looked great in 1970. It was as white as snow and lovely to behold...but then I am an unapologetic height slut...size matters etcetc.

[curnhalio]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

I honestly believe that Joe has run out of patiences with this proposal and now realizing that the building still fills every school year is slapping some lipstick on the pig and is moving on.
He's pretty much getting the windows done and putting it back on the market. The secondary building is too small and should step up to this monolithic structure not form some grouping of midgets to a giant.

If the viewplane prevented him from widening the tower, I bet it also prevented him from building the secondary buildings any taller as well.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I just want it done! Its the only real eyesore of height in the city!

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Am I the only one who is totally okay with the current tower of Fenwick and would be happy if it stayed the same (okay, I wouldn't say no to a power wash)? What I am excited to see is what Templeton does on the ground floor. The street interface and that weed filled concrete lot are the truly atrocious parts of Fenwick.

I am with you to an extent. I am really happy that the brutalist form of the building will be maintained and I hope the new cladding will accentuate those tall slender lines. I think this is a better design for it.
Having spent a summer there I can say that the interior definitely needs the overhaul.

[curnhalio]

Halifax developer outlines request to reduce Fenwick Tower project

By Ruth Davenport
Metro
June 26, 2014

It may have been a first in terms of Halifax development, and only a handful of people were there to see it.

The developer behind the overhaul of the Fenwick Tower site spoke to three city staffers and five residents at a public information meeting Thursday evening to outline his request for several reductions to the plans – including the height and footprint of the tower itself.

http://metronews.ca/news/halifax/108...tower-project/


The main reason for the tower staying the shape it is, is because making it longer without being able to widen it would have a negative impact on its structural integrity. Once the viewplane nonsense started, any real expansion of the tower was doomed.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by curnhalio

Halifax developer outlines request to reduce Fenwick Tower project

By Ruth Davenport
Metro
June 26, 2014

It may have been a first in terms of Halifax development, and only a handful of people were there to see it.

The developer behind the overhaul of the Fenwick Tower site spoke to three city staffers and five residents at a public information meeting Thursday evening to outline his request for several reductions to the plans – including the height and footprint of the tower itself.

http://metronews.ca/news/halifax/108...tower-project/


The main reason for the tower staying the shape it is, is because making it longer without being able to widen it would have a negative impact on its structural integrity. Once the viewplane nonsense started, any real expansion of the tower was doomed.

Quote:

He said there were a few reasons for the redesign, but the adjustments required to eliminate two six-inch protrusions of the tower’s 12th storey into the Citadel viewplane was a big one.

“That created a chain of events and changes of design which blew the budget out,” he said. “I’m not in the business of building buildings, I’m in the business of building homes for people. So this became the solution.”

Save the View Zealot ---> <---- me

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Quote:



Save the View Zealot ---> <---- me

As much as I liked the previous redesign proposal, and hate the new one, and as much as I hate the Save the View fanatics....I find it awfully hard to believe that the developer couldn't have worked a couple of six-inch-deep dents into his design to address the viewplanes foolishness.

Am I only one who reads this and feels he is just stretching for a way to blame Pacey & Ilk for the abandonment of the grander vision and retreat to a cheaper whitewash proposal?

I'd love to hear why the plan couldn't have had such a teeny tiny modification without changing thew whole thing. This just feels like a cop out to me.

(I have to say, I'm REALLY surprised that several people seem to like the building just the way it is, or with the new, cop-out reno. Really surprised. To each his own I guess. :-) )

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by portapetey

As much as I liked the previous redesign proposal, and hate the new one, and as much as I hate the Save the View fanatics....I find it awfully hard to believe that the developer couldn't have worked a couple of six-inch-deep dents into his design to address the viewplanes foolishness.

Am I only one who reads this and feels he is just stretching for a way to blame Pacey & Ilk for the abandonment of the grander vision and retreat to a cheaper whitewash proposal?

I'd love to hear why the plan couldn't have had such a teeny tiny modification without changing thew whole thing. This just feels like a cop out to me.

(I have to say, I'm REALLY surprised that several people seem to like the building just the way it is, or with the new, cop-out reno. Really surprised. To each his own I guess. :-) )

Circumstances have changed and the market isn't what he thought it would be when he bought the building and therefore it is easy to point the fingure at HT.
A lot of product available in metro and not enough customers.

[fenwick16]

(source and full story: http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/1...munity-council)

Fenwick Tower changes get through community council
FRANCES WILLICK STAFF REPORTER
Published February 17, 2015 - 10:07pm

The public was a no-show at a public hearing before Halifax and West community council Tuesday evening.

No one turned up to speak either in support of or against planned changes to the Fenwick Tower property in south-end Halifax.

Community council approved a development agreement that will see the 33-storey tower remain at its current height, but the property will become home to new, smaller buildings.
.
.
.
As part of the redevelopment plan, the tower will be reclad with glass, and architectural detailing will be added to the roof.

The project, which Metlege expects will cost $125 million to $150 million, will now go to Halifax council for final approval.
.
.
.

Phase I (tower re-clad) should be completed within 48 months of the issuance of the building permits, according to the development agreement - http://www.halifax.ca/Commcoun/west/...217hwcc811.pdf.

It will be great to see the old Fenwick Tower refurbished into a glistening glass-clad tower. I think that just modernizing the existing tower was the best choice by developer Joe Metledge.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Good news... I was wondering what was going on with this.

[TheNovaScotian]

Honestly, its a real disappointment that the new buildings aren't large enough to scale the tower down to the rest of the area. It's good to see something happen finally but I really feel this is a missed chance to fix the skyline of the area. He should be allowed build a couple 25 then 20 then 10 with the St. James next door it would scale the area down from the 34th floor a lot less dramatically.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian

Honestly, its a real disappointment that the new buildings aren't large enough to scale the tower down to the rest of the area. It's good to see something happen finally but I really feel this is a missed chance to fix the skyline of the area. He should be allowed build a couple 25 then 20 then 10 with the St. James next door it would scale the area down from the 34th floor a lot less dramatically.

The original proposal for the St. James was 19 storeys. I think a slender, taller tower next to Fenwick would have looked much nicer.

That being said, I also agree that the street level is most important and this block will be pretty decent once these new buildings are constructed. It will have a lot of density too, which is important since a lot of the South End consists of relatively low density heritage buildings that will not be redeveloped. If the Sobeys area were built up to a similar degree and some of the uglier lowrise apartment buildings were replaced then this could become quite a vibrant, interesting area.

[fenwick16]

One thing that I didn't notice prior to looking at the development agreement - http://www.halifax.ca/Commcoun/west/...217hwcc811.pdf - is that not only will the precast concrete panels be removed and replaced with glass and aluminum panels, but also all exposed strucural concrete will be clad in aluminum panels.

In the colour rendering from a year ago (below) the white sections are actually aluminum panels and not the bare concrete that one currently sees. In my opinion, this could turn out to be much better than a modern tower with sheer walls of glass since it will have a unique shape. Even though some people consider the current tower to be an eyesore (I don't) it is still part of Halifax's late 1960's/early 1970's heritage.

(source: http://www.halifax.ca/planning/appli...nd3DImages.pdf)