[Halifax] The Sister Sites | 2X29 m | 2X9 floors | Completed

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

overhead utilities are still allowed in downtown projects

That's such a weird one on this building: they undergrounded along Queen and part of Clyde, but not the whole way. Why half do it? Was there something about that Clyde section that was more expensive than the other frontages?

Also, the green. Man that green does not do it for me.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

There's a lot more than that to bug someone about this thing. I am continually astounded how this, the icon of central planning under HRMxD, Andy Fillmore's opus, something that was touted as a revitalization for the area, a project that so many people at HRM oversaw, turned out so horribly, unspeakably, awfully bad. It is simply a disaster.

I would say that, in general, HRM-owned sites seem to turn out worse than privately-owned sites. Provincially-owned land is even worse, and most of those sit in limbo for years. The Sister sites were in planning limbo for a long period of time.

There's lots of development happening in Halifax and most of it is least of OK quality. The reports, studies, and general planning activities around these publicly-owned sites don't seem to improve anything. I guess from a NIMBY perspective there is some improvement because heights are usually artificially reduced below what is optimal in the market and on top of that most of the sites sit empty, reducing feared traffic congestion, etc. Unfortunately that is not good for tax purposes or for making the city vibrant and interesting. In aggregate the underused public land must be a big drag on the city's attractiveness, vibrancy, and overall economy.

[Jonovision]

And to add insult to injury there is yet another hidden colour/pattern in the terraces. I also really don't like how the developer failed to put in window blinds meaning instead of a more uniformed and organized window treatement you have some units with really nice blinds and others with tatered sheets.

20161126_161558 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[IanWatson]

Okay, question for architects: Why the heck are all the buildings being built now hyper-articulated and covered in a million different materials? I think I counted 14 different materials on this building last time I walked by.

Is this a response to the long, blank walls of the 1980s? We were so strongly turned off by those buildings that we feel the need to go in the complete opposite direction? It feels like the pendulum has swung too far. Simple designs are okay if they're done with a bit of skill for working in tiny accent details.

[TheGreenBastard]

So ugly.

I made the mistake of telling one of my buddy's friends who did some design work on this how bad it is. He wasn't happy haha. I can't believe the designers actually defend this.

[Phalanx]

I'm kinda interested in hearing what his defense is. There are just way too many things going on with this one.

[OliverD]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Okay, question for architects: Why the heck are all the buildings being built now hyper-articulated and covered in a million different materials? I think I counted 14 different materials on this building last time I walked by.

Is this a response to the long, blank walls of the 1980s? We were so strongly turned off by those buildings that we feel the need to go in the complete opposite direction? It feels like the pendulum has swung too far. Simple designs are okay if they're done with a bit of skill for working in tiny accent details.

I think this is a symptom of the perception that more details and materials make it look fancier.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

And to add insult to injury there is yet another hidden colour/pattern in the terraces. I also really don't like how the developer failed to put in window blinds meaning instead of a more uniformed and organized window treatement you have some units with really nice blinds and others with tatered sheets.

I think the use of random chipboard panels scattered throughout the development is some designer's commentary on the importance of our Canadian forests.

[counterfactual]

Many buildings require window coverings to have a consistent color (eg white) across an entire apartment. If you buy some curtains, you have to be sure they are color consistent. Seems like they should be doing that here. Too much variation.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Many buildings require window coverings to have a consistent color (eg white) across an entire apartment. If you buy some curtains, you have to be sure they are color consistent. Seems like they should be doing that here. Too much variation.

I'm surprised they are not doing that here, either. Though I have to say even if it did have uniform window coverings the building would still not be attractive, at least for my tastes.

Oh well, it is added density for the area, just like that eyesore that is being built over at Doyle...

[Hali87]

Untitled by Hali87, on Flickr

[eastcoastal]

Good Lord! STILL with the plywood finish for some panels on balcony railings? Something unusual must be going on.

[IanWatson]

AllNS had a puff piece the other day (ice makers on the fridges!) and the developer does have a quote in there about things going well, except the snags with getting balcony glass installed (no mention of specifics though).

[Jonovision]

20170317_163517 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Keith P.]

Still a few pieces of chipboard instead of glass on the balconies. Unreal.

[fenwick16]

Why did they add the green panels, it looks so bad on grey; otherwise the rest of the building ins't too objectionable (except the chipboard, which will be gone eventually). Also the round windows look kind of hokey.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Why did they add the green panels, it looks so bad on grey; otherwise the rest of the building ins't too objectionable (except the chipboard, which will be gone eventually). Also the round windows look kind of hokey.

As some wag said to me, "It looks like the architect threw up on the plans and they built that by mistake".

[mr.wheels]

[QUOTE=Keith P.;7744377]As some wag said to me, "It looks like the architect threw up on the plans and they built that by mistake". [/Quote

my complaint is finding parking. but to be fair to the archtiect, he did not choose the exterior materials. the developer Banc did and they normally make their own decisions on building material purchases. they also manage and contract out labor. This is common with developers. On the other hand, with govt., commercial or instutional projects, architects get involved directly with the specification of the exterior and there is much more control off and on-site. there is also an argument that this adds to the cost as Unions get more involved.

[fenwick16]

I wonder how many units have been rented so far? Hopefully they will start on the Margaretta soon, which looks better to me - https://www.wmfares.com/margaretta

[isaidso]

Way too much going on with this building.