HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #321  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 11:47 AM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 825
First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #322  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 1:31 PM
ns_kid's Avatar
ns_kid ns_kid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?
Does that explain the misspellings and typos that riddle the document?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #323  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 2:15 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by ns_kid View Post
As mleblanc points out, there are more and better renderings in the "Planning Rationale" document. The willow pattern remains on the wall facing Robie Street, although it is perforated metal, not glass.
It helps, but for my tastes the design is too disjointed and busy. The 'multiple boxes stuck on boxes' look is a little overdone IMHO. Plus, not overjoyed by the selection of "precast concrete panel" cladding near street level.

But, as always, I remain optimistic that it will turn out really well, and it will create life and density at that intersection that does not currently exist now. Overall a plus compared to current, and I'm sure some will love it as they do with The Doyle (another project that I am less than enthusiastic about). Ha ha... afterall, it's not all about me...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #324  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 4:37 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,106
Yes, by all means, let's all of us armchair designers condemn a building proposal based on a 640x480 rendering.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #325  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 4:54 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Yes, by all means, let's all of us armchair designers condemn a building proposal based on a 640x480 rendering.
Rela-a-a-ax... just tossing in my 2¢ on a forum about skyscrapers... nobody is going to make decisions based on my opinions.

So... what is your opinion... do you think it's beautiful?

Don't worry, they won't cancel the project if you don't like it...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #326  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 8:07 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Rela-a-a-ax... just tossing in my 2¢ on a forum about skyscrapers... nobody is going to make decisions based on my opinions.

So... what is your opinion... do you think it's beautiful?

Don't worry, they won't cancel the project if you don't like it...
My comment wasn't necessarily related to your opinion of it.

I would need to see much more of it before passing judgement. The one thing I would say is that this is the sort of thing you get when someone has their original building plan sawed off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #327  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 8:18 PM
midasmull midasmull is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson View Post
First time I've seen Geiger Huot architects. Looks like they're from Montreal?
They are - same architects who designed the EQ8 project that the developer is putting up in Montreal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #328  
Old Posted May 27, 2019, 9:40 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
My comment wasn't necessarily related to your opinion of it.

I would need to see much more of it before passing judgement. The one thing I would say is that this is the sort of thing you get when someone has their original building plan sawed off.
Fair enough... I'm just defending 'my' part of it...

And agree on the height reduction. Of all potential building sites in the city, this is one of the most appropriate spots for a tall building IMHO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #329  
Old Posted May 28, 2019, 4:03 AM
teddifax's Avatar
teddifax teddifax is offline
Halifax Promoter!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 825
I agree, make it a really tall building!!! A great spot for the highest building in Halifax - since we can't have it downtown due to the horrible view planes legislation....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #330  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2019, 6:48 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 21,804
Another (more flattering IMO) rendering from the recently-updated planning materials:

__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #331  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2019, 7:25 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,185
As the model said to the Bishop : 'Oh, that is really big'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #332  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 1:10 AM
hoser111's Avatar
hoser111 hoser111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 307
Council OKs $1.8-million extra-storeys deal with Willow Tree towers developer

The Willow Tree Towers developer will provide the municipality a $1.8-million payment instead of building affordable housing units in a proposed 25-storey highrise.
By a 13-2 vote, Halifax regional council on Tuesday endorsed that deal for a development at the corner of Quinpool Road and Robie Street.
George Armoyan of the Armco development group and the municipality have been going back and forth about the proposed building height for more than three years. The developer initially wanted a 29-storey building, the municipality said 20 storeys was the maximum and Armoyan came back with a 25-storey ask.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/ne...eloper-361684/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #333  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 1:40 AM
teddifax's Avatar
teddifax teddifax is offline
Halifax Promoter!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 825
I wonder when this is scheduled to start now?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #334  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 2:59 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoser111 View Post
Council OKs $1.8-million extra-storeys deal with Willow Tree towers developer

The Willow Tree Towers developer will provide the municipality a $1.8-million payment instead of building affordable housing units in a proposed 25-storey highrise...
I do not have faith that HRM would manage the build and implementation of affordable housing well. I have not seen anything confirming how or when this $1.8m will be spent by the Municipality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #335  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 4:54 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,106
HRM cannot build affordable housing or housing of any sort as it is not within their mandate uder the HRM Charter. The pols will tell you that the province, which is the body responsible, does a piss-poor job of it, which may well be true given the debacles that Housing NS have been responsible for in recent years. However to do anything different would mean (a) getting the province to agree to amendments to the Charter, and (b) having HRM take over the entire public housing stock within HRM boundaries at huge cost to taxpayers. Just think of all the duplication of administration and services and the confusion among those in need as to where to go for help. Supposedly they could use the pot of gold from fees like these to subsidize private developers to build affordable housing however that gets defined, but then they are picking winners and losers, and you would have situations where people who are most in need get left out because of what gets built where. This is simply another HRM boondoggle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #336  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 4:57 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastal View Post
I do not have faith that HRM would manage the build and implementation of affordable housing well. I have not seen anything confirming how or when this $1.8m will be spent by the Municipality.
I agree. IMHO there doesn't seem to be any guarantee that this $1.8m will actually be used effectively towards providing good affordable housing.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...sing-1.5314104

Quote:
Coun. Shawn Cleary said the cash offer is a good deal for the municipality.

"Under the new Centre Plan's density bonus formula, this development would actually only pay $841,000, so we're getting a million more," he said.

The money will be put into an affordable housing fund that will allow the municipality to provide grants to housing co-ops or affordable housing projects.
How is this "affordable housing fund" controlled? What method of reporting is used? I don't recall ever hearing much about all the housing they've provided, which isn't to say it doesn't happen - but it sure doesn't receive much fanfare.

Quote:
Coun. Waye Mason remains optimistic about the fund and pointed out the Armco tower money could be spent on a project just down the street.

"I would love to see this $1.8 million and any other money that may come from other Quinpool Road projects go into a site that we carve out of the St. Pat's High site," he said.
Is this the best use for the site? Would this end up being a low-bidder city-funded project that ends up being a blight on Quinpool because of inadequate city maintenance funding combined with a low-quality building? What is the vision here?

I tend to agree with Councillor Outhit's take on it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #337  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2019, 5:04 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 992
It might be best for the affordable housing fund to be used to generate income that the city can use to subsidize rent all over the city... to keep from sending the signal that THAT building is for poor people and this one over here is for rich people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #338  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2019, 7:13 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,106
If they go that route, they need to keep it far far away from those that managed its pension plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #339  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2019, 7:45 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
If they go that route, they need to keep it far far away from those that managed its pension plan.
Membership of the board providing oversight to the HRM plan is restricted to HRM employees or retirees.
The CEO of the pension plan was formerly based in London,UK and a former senior employee responsible for European investments for a large Canadian company.
Meetings are generally attended by more than 20 board members and alternates.
Minutes of the last meeting at Casino Nova Scotia are here :
http://www.hrmpensionplan.ca/files/P...19_-_FINAL.pdf
Previous minutes are here : http://www.hrmpensionplan.ca/index.p...ation/minutes/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #340  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2019, 12:37 AM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,106
I was thinking of those who were part of the State Street debacle around the time of the 2008 financial meltdown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.