[Halifax] Skye Halifax (1565 Granville) | 66 m | 2 x 21 fl | U/C

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Yeah, yeah, whatever. You cannot be a slave to a bunch of planners and a restrictive strategy when a new opportunity nobody saw coming suddenly appears.

It's complicated but fundamentally I don't think it's ever correct to create rigid long-term plans. Nobody can predict the future, so nobody can create a perfect plan; the projections they used for HbD are already wrong and we're only a few years out.

HbD is actually somewhat worse than that since many of the requirements were wrong from day 1. A 20 storey maximum for height on a lot with a 27 storey DA issued is not reasonable, for example. There have been other problems like the landscaping requirements that have held back multiple developments (Spring Garden/South Park and Drum condos) for months. It doesn't take a lot of that stuff to bring a plan to the point where it would have been better never to introduce it in the first place.

One fundamental problem with "planning", I think, is that the term conflates a number of activities of varying levels of importance and objectivity. For example, planning for basic services like water and electricity is important. Setting buildings heights at 13 vs. 17 storeys in cases where either building could be accommodated by infrastructure is not nearly as important and is much more subjective.

I think the consequences of bickering over every proposal and constantly dragging developers through the mud are far more severe to the city than the consequences of allowing uncontrolled urban infill would be. Nobody can come up with a clear reason why these buildings would be harmful, but everybody can see the hideous crater that's there right now. We are obviously paying other costs to maintain the city bureaucracy, developers must pay for planning and legal fees, etc.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by Hali87

People in the Canada forum seem to love this proposal (based on the current renderings alone) and are all hopeful that it will be built, and I would guess that most of them don't know much about the ramparts bylaw. It's interesting to hear an outside perspective on things like this.

It has been lightly discussed on the Canada forum for quite some time. Contrary to support, people have also expressed opinions that Skye is "out of context" in Halifax -- and that the city must be "desperate for developments" to permit something so tall near the Citadel.

So yes, the variety of outside perspectives is interesting, even though it's from the same skyscraper forum...

I see that HRM's council is disfunctional, but United Gulf's record is nothing to boast. What if Skye isn't good enough for this developer? After they fought for Twisted Sisters to be approved -- United Gulf bailed...

This could have been Halifax right now, had they not bailed...

[someone123]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

This could have been Halifax right now, had they not bailed...

You are acting as if they can build whatever the city allows them to and are therefore being difficult and ungrateful. This is a common attitude in Halifax but it's not correct.

Developers have to finance their projects somehow. It's unlikely that United Gulf would have been able to finance these buildings on their own, so they would have had to pre-sell a large number of condo units and find financing for a hotel. They created this proposal around 2004 or so and did not get final approval until around 2007 -- in other words, the developer had to fight for three years after winning the bid for this site to get final approval. By late 2008, it was very difficult to obtain any sort of financing and the hotel market in Halifax had significantly worsened. It does not seem unusual to me that after four unsuccessful years they'd decide to go back to the drawing board.

The developer's explanation about the new design being more commercially viable may or may not be correct but nobody seems interested in it.

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Contrary to support, people have also expressed opinions that Skye is "out of context" in Halifax -- and that the city must be "desperate for developments" to permit something so tall near the Citadel.

I didn't see anybody mention the Citadel without being prompted. Few people in the rest of Canada are aware that it exists.

Many people mention that Skye is "out of context" because they think Halifax is a small, backwater town that should aspire to one day be a sort of East Coast Victoria (Halifax already has buildings much larger than Victoria's but not everybody's aware of Halifax's local context, which is why these comments have to be taken with a huge grain of salt). Halifax has that poor reputation because it is an economic underachiever that has historically had a terrible NIMBY-dominated "closed for business" culture. Most cities would love a developer to invest $350M, but in Halifax investment is viewed as a controversy.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by someone123

I didn't see anybody mention the Citadel without being prompted. Many people mention that the building is "out of context" because they think Halifax is a small, backwater town that should aspire to one day be a sort of East Coast Victoria (Halifax already has buildings much larger than Victoria's but not everybody's aware of Halifax's local context, which is why these comments have to be taken with a huge grain of salt). Halifax has that poor reputation because it is an economic underachiever that has historically had a terrible NIMBY-dominated "closed for business" culture. Most cities would love a developer to invest $350M, but in Halifax it's viewed as a controversy.

For the older generations in Halifax this is definitely the case, but any younger (early 20s) person from Halifax that I speak to always nearly gloats about how Halifax is a big city compared to the rest of the Maritimes. There seems to be a big-city mentality in the younger people who are growing up in this larger, newer Halifax. The attitudes between generations seem to be changing, at least from what i've seen.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by GregHickman

For the older generations in Halifax this is definitely the case, but any younger (early 20s) person from Halifax that I speak to always nearly gloats about how Halifax is a big city compared to the rest of the Maritimes. There seems to be a big-city mentality in the younger people who are growing up in this larger, newer Halifax. The attitudes between generations seem to be changing, at least from what i've seen.

I was talking only about how people in the rest of Canada view Halifax. The situation is somewhat complicated of course because everybody has a different opinion. My sense is that Halifax's average reputation has improved a lot, but that Canada has a lot of parochial hometown type bias. People tend to have a bloated sense of their own region's importance and view other places in terms of where they live. That's why you have people thinking Halifax is some kind of subpar Victoria or London, Ontario. Actually many Maritimers are much more correct and down to earth because they view their region as being unimportant to the rest of Canada, which is the truth. Westerners on the other hand often seem to feel wronged when they get less attention than Ontario or Quebec, even though they are in a much smaller region.

I haven't heard many people gloat about Halifax. Not many people I know in Halifax talk about the rest of the region or other cities in the Maritimes much. Moncton, on the other hand, is often promoted a lot by local media (often to ridiculous degrees).

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by someone123

I haven't heard many people gloat about Halifax. Not many people I know in Halifax talk about the rest of the region or other cities in the Maritimes much. Moncton, on the other hand, is often promoted a lot by local media (often to ridiculous degrees).

Definitely true in regards to Moncton. Maybe I get a negative feel from people due to where i'm from.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by GregHickman

Definitely true in regards to Moncton. Maybe I get a negative feel from people due to where i'm from.

Saint John used to have a very negative reputation because of heavy industry, which is the sort of thing people will talk about long after mills close down or environmental standards improve or whatever. A lot of people will hold strong beliefs that are ultimately based on almost zero information.

Another part of it is that Saint John is small compared to Halifax, just like Halifax is small compared to Calgary or Toronto.

[q12]

Skye Halifax (height approx.) from Mount Hope Interchange on the Circ.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by someone123

You are acting as if they can build whatever the city allows them to and are therefore being difficult and ungrateful. This is a common attitude in Halifax but it's not correct.

Developers have to finance their projects somehow. It's unlikely that United Gulf would have been able to finance these buildings on their own, so they would have had to pre-sell a large number of condo units and find financing for a hotel. They created this proposal around 2004 or so and did not get final approval until around 2007 -- in other words, the developer had to fight for three years after winning the bid for this site to get final approval. By late 2008, it was very difficult to obtain any sort of financing and the hotel market in Halifax had significantly worsened. It does not seem unusual to me that after four unsuccessful years they'd decide to go back to the drawing board.

The developer's explanation about the new design being more commercially viable may or may not be correct but nobody seems interested in it.

Upon Halifax's recovered hotel market, I think even a return to the drawing board would not motivate the creation of a proposal so extremely beyond the previous controversy. Skye is not a modest adjustment to compensate for a shifted market.

Council would have given an extension for Twisted Sisters, even if their design had moderate modifications. Council wants this site developed, but cannot go beyond the rampart bylaws; and United Gulf knows this and is playing this game for all its worth.

I doubt United Gulf's intensions for building anything there at all.

Originally Posted by someone123

I didn't see anybody mention the Citadel without being prompted. Few people in the rest of Canada are aware that it exists.

Many people mention that Skye is "out of context" because they think Halifax is a small, backwater town that should aspire to one day be a sort of East Coast Victoria (Halifax already has buildings much larger than Victoria's but not everybody's aware of Halifax's local context, which is why these comments have to be taken with a huge grain of salt). Halifax has that poor reputation because it is an economic underachiever that has historically had a terrible NIMBY-dominated "closed for business" culture. Most cities would love a developer to invest $350M, but in Halifax investment is viewed as a controversy.

Halifax's controversial stance is akin to type of controversy that we'd behold if Old Quebec had a $350M carrot in front of its face.

Backwater? Halifax is seen as overly orange, actually.

With a successful economy and high quality of living standards and available jobs, Halifax's apparently nimbimatised skyline would be seen the same as today: quaint.

Similar to Victoria? Coastal capital cities -- sure. I don't see anyone claiming Victoria's mini-skyline an economic hindrance. Vibrant Victoria's reputation is via its living standards, powered by its economy and abundance of local and provincial resources. Halifax's vibrance is coming, despite its quaint skyline.

[RyeJay]

Much better

[fenwick16]

There was a story in the allnovascotia.com tonight in which Navid Saberi insists that he has no intention of selling the TexPark site. He stated that "This is one of the projects that I am going to do and I want to do." (source: allnovascotia.com Navid Saberi Insists He Can Finance Towers February 23rd edition, 2012, by Andrew MacDonald)

[someone123]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Halifax's controversial stance is akin to type of controversy that we'd behold if Old Quebec had a $350M carrot in front of its face.

Downtown Halifax is mostly modern buildings and probably has more land covered with empty lots than heritage structures. The United Gulf site is surrounded by modern highrise buildings like the Maritime Centre. It's not at all comparable to Quebec's historic district, regardless of how the Heritage Trust like to present the situation. It makes far more sense at this point to embrace the idea of having a mix of old and new in downtown Halifax than it does to chase away investment so we can pretend that it is something it's not.

--

Edit: I found this photo of a building proposed in London. We should contact them immediately and let them know that they're making a big mistake by building something that's taller than everything else around it!


Source

[someone123]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

There was a story in the allnovascotia.com tonight in which Navid Saberi insists that he has no intention of selling the TexPark site. He stated that "This is one of the projects that I am going to do and I want to do." (source: allnovascotia.com Navid Saberi Insists He Can Finance Towers February 23rd edition, 2012, by Andrew MacDonald)

It was an interesting story. It still seems like a stretch to me, but we'll see how it plays out. 300 units in each tower is a lot of condos for Halifax. Perhaps the plan is to start by pre-selling one of the two towers..?

If somehow 600 units were filled at that site it would make that area a lot more vibrant.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

It was an interesting story. It still seems like a stretch to me, but we'll see how it plays out. 300 units in each tower is a lot of condos for Halifax. Perhaps the plan is to start by pre-selling one of the two towers..?

If somehow 600 units were filled at that site it would make that area a lot more vibrant.

Hopefully the developer isn't taking on more than he can handle. I keep thinking of what happened during the construction of Fenwick Towers. The original developer went bankrupt and the tower had to be finished by Dalhousie University. Such a situation would be a disaster if the skeleton of a 48 storey building sits unfinished for years in downtown Halifax.

I would be more satisfied see several 15 - 25 storey buildings in downtown Halifax. It certainly needs the people.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by someone123

Edit: I found this photo of a building proposed in London. We should contact them immediately and let them know that they're making a big mistake by building something that's taller than everything else around it!


Source

London can build an ugly glass pyramid if it so desires. The process is now free of ancient Egyptian slave labour!

The pointy and nearly standalone building makes this part of the London skyline look like a ring toss game.

And for Halifax -- maybe since the Citadel's value is gone to many, we could try recovering this by building a pyramid inside of it. This way the hill would get at least some usage, acting as a big ass sundial.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

And for Halifax -- maybe since the Citadel's value is gone to many, we could try recovering this by building a pyramid inside of it. This way the hill would get at least some usage, acting as a big ass sundial.

Just because the ramparts bylaw might be revisited doesn't mean that the Citadel has lost its value. I see no reason why the Citadel would not continue to be a major defining characteristic of the city, Quebec City's Citadelle and San Fransisco's Presidio are both internationally-recognized fortified parks similar in character to our own Citadel; but each of them is only one of many landmarks in either city. Quebec City's few modern office high rises are visible from the Citadelle:

(Source: Wikipedia)

I don't think Citadel Hill would lose significance if we let the city grow, it would remain an equally impressive landmark, downtown would just be more impressive overall. There's no reason why it can't have several focal points.

Building a pyramid in the Citadel would obviously be out of the question (though fundamentally there's no reason for it to be) but I think it would be interesting if an observation deck of some sort could be integrated into the signal mast in the centre, to give visitors a better view than what's currently available while using structures that are "historically correct"

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Halifax has changed significantly in the last 5 years and to put an opportunity on indefinite hold while doing another round of navel gazing for several years is simply not realistic. Besides, such a review may conclude that we need to widen main arteries into the city and then where will we be except in another round of hand-wringing and debate by the members of the flat earth society that will freeze advancing any new planning policy for years.

Or, such a review may conclude that by allowing significant height and increasing downtown residents, there will be both the need and tax base available for increased transit options (or more likely/realistically, a combo of transit and road). I do agree with you that it doesn't make sense to have a gut reaction of "no. it doesn't fit the plan." for something that wasn't anticipated.

In terms of approving the public meeting, my cynical immediate thought when I saw the vote result was that this is an over-compensation by those who saw the public reaction to the Prince Albert situation. There will be many on council who voted to let the consultation go forward so that they can make the political case that they tried, but have no plans to vote for this if the development case were to actually come to a vote.

If I want to be REALLY cynical, there may be some who in fact want this to go to public debate so that they help provide Pacey et al with a forum for decrying such developments.

[FuzzyWuz]

Originally Posted by someone123

....

Edit: I found this photo of a building proposed in London. We should contact them immediately and let them know that they're making a big mistake by building something that's taller than everything else around it!


Source

Proposed? Um, it's getting near completion. Edit: It's called "The Shard" btw.

[Pete Crawford]

I live right across the Thames (river) from the Shard, you'd be surprised how nice it is and how well it fits into the London skyline. Though, London's skyline is basically just an assortment of random crap anyway.

[Hali87]

Extremely random; the only common feature is that everything is of very high quality. I like how many parts of the city look both historic and outright futuristic at once.