[Halifax] Pavilion (YMCA) and Curve | 2X49 m | 17 & 15 fl | Completed

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Those people can't keep Halifax frozen in time forever. All they will achieve is a delay of the inevitable. Halifax is a growing city and the pressure to develop will eventually win the day.

Pushback for what and from whom?

With the exception of Victoria Park, Sacred Heart School, and very few heritage buildings of which some are protected, there is nothing of architectural or aesthetic value on that stretch of Spring Garden. Looks to be mostly 1980s-vintage condos, some squat commercial buildings and the block near Robie which is mostly going to be torn down for a development in the near future.

What seems to be taking up most of the block and creating a dead zone are the grounds/surface parking for condo buildings and businesses. Not sure if it's even possible to redevelop all of those sites without some major investment.

The only pushback I could see would be from NIMBY condo and business owners who want to see that section of Spring Garden remain frozen in the 1980s...

[Jonovision]

20180316_171802 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180316_171906_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180316_171910 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180316_171958 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180316_172130_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20180331_160204 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180331_155225 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180331_155222 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20180423_195834 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180423_195856_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180423_195900 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180423_195956_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Jonovision]

20180514_210049 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180514_210037 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[mleblanc]

They are wasting no time with this one, and it's quickly becoming one of my favourites in Halifax.

[DT Hfx]

Originally Posted by mleblanc

They are wasting no time with this one, and it's quickly becoming one of my favourites in Halifax.

No doubt, it is the best residential project on the go in terms of attractive design and quality of construction; plus it is in an ideal location.

[someone123]

I like the curved front balconies but there is already pretty significant divergence from one of the renderings:


Source

The rendering shows white cladding and a blue spandrel-like material on the north elevation, but the building seems to have black material surrounding the windows. Part of what's nice about the rendering is that the lines of the balcony are carried across the windows on the north side of the building.

Reminds me a bit of what happened with the Keep! This one does look better so far though.

I've said it before but the massing along South Park is pretty neat. South Park Lofts will add to the row of buildings with substantial podiums too. Too bad the Trillium was built with a podium that is too low; it should have been 5 storeys of brick, not 2 (or 2.5).

[OldDartmouthMark]

I agree with your comments. This and the Keep make me wonder if there is any kind of process involved to ensure that the as-built stays faithful to the renderings that were approved.

I'm guessing there isn't.

[Keith P.]

The difference I see is that white/light-colored surrounds on the windows have apparently been switched to a darker shade (unless that is merely a protective covering to protect them during construction). Do colors typically get specified in a development agreement?

I wonder why the developer would change it in any event given that it would seem to look better in the original finishes. I doubt it would be a cost issue.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The difference I see is that white/light-colored surrounds on the windows have apparently been switched to a darker shade (unless that is merely a protective covering to protect them during construction). Do colors typically get specified in a development agreement?

I wonder why the developer would change it in any event given that it would seem to look better in the original finishes. I doubt it would be a cost issue.

No, they usually don't. Usually it's more vague, like, "mid-toned architectural panel". Which really I guess is kinda fair. It'd be a pretty high level of micro-managing for the city to tell developers exactly what colour their building should be.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

No, they usually don't. Usually it's more vague, like, "mid-toned architectural panel". Which really I guess is kinda fair. It'd be a pretty high level of micro-managing for the city to tell developers exactly what colour their building should be.

I think it'd micro-managing to tell developers what colour to build something, but once something has been rendered and approved, I think it's fair to hold the developer to that. We have a (feeble) design-review process which is intended to address some of these things, but if nothing holds builders to their initial plans, it's kind of pointless, right?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I think it'd micro-managing to tell developers what colour to build something, but once something has been rendered and approved, I think it's fair to hold the developer to that. We have a (feeble) design-review process which is intended to address some of these things, but if nothing holds builders to their initial plans, it's kind of pointless, right?

That is the point I was trying to make. The renderings are more than just sales brochures - they are part of the development agreement and at least a small part of the approval would be based on them (though, to be honest, it doesn't appear that an unattractive rendering would cause approval to be denied, as is evident in a number of buildings that have gone up recently). There must be some process to deal with variances, as changes always happen throughout the process, but it probably doesn't go as deep as details like window frame colour.

[Jonovision]

The renderings like the ones that are shown above are not part of the review or approval process. They might be shown to help give an impression of the development in its context but the actual approval has more to do with the language and the elevation/plan drawings that are presented.

I do agree with the sentiment though. There needs to be better mechanisms to ensure that what is built is what was approved. That being said though, anyone who sees an inconsistency with a building that has been built compared to the documents that were approved can contact the city and have the discrepancy investigated and it could lead to retroactive approvals of what was built or changes to a building that is already completed.

[Jonovision]

A few angles from Citadel.

20180526_205748 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180526_205845 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180526_210157 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20180526_210413 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[someone123]

• Video Link

[hoser111]

The construction cam has been relocated......

https://pavilionsouthpark.ca/webcam/

[someone123]

The latest webcam view:

[beyeas]

I was out for drink at Stillwell yesterday afternoon with my lab, and this one is really starting to make an impact. You could see it starting to make its presence known over the treeline.

[Jonovision]

20180615_195530_HDR by Jonovision23, on Flickr