[Halifax] The Roy (1650 Granville) | 71 M | 22 FL | Completed - Page 31

OldDartmouthMark · #**601** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 2:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

tieing down the Vogue Building
photos from http://theroy.builthalifax.ca/
Drill

Insert Tieback

then Grout, tension, and bolt.

also heard starfish is trying to buy the little Mysteries building, current owner apparently doubled his price.

I'm guessing that stone foundation is part of the old Roy building? How does this tying down process work?

They sure don't build them like that anymore... can't help but imagine the hard work put in by the original builders as that would all have been done by hand.

Also, I noticed all the mortar on the face of the Vogue's bricks. It almost looks to me as they were trying to "glue" the walls together with mortar during the building process, or maybe it was just that the excess mortar couldn't be wiped due to the proximity of the Roy as they were laying bricks for the Vogue (D'Allard) building.

Great photos - thanks for sharing them with us!

Wondering if there has been any archeaological activity going on at the site? I'm sure below the Roy's foundation there would be a high chance of finding some 19th century (or earlier) artifacts.

Ziobrop · #**602** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I'm guessing that stone foundation is part of the old Roy building? How does this tying down process work?

They sure don't build them like that anymore... can't help but imagine the hard work put in by the original builders as that would all have been done by hand.

Also, I noticed all the mortar on the face of the Vogue's bricks. It almost looks to me as they were trying to "glue" the walls together with mortar during the building process, or maybe it was just that the excess mortar couldn't be wiped due to the proximity of the Roy as they were laying bricks for the Vogue (D'Allard) building.

Great photos - thanks for sharing them with us!

Wondering if there has been any archeaological activity going on at the site? I'm sure below the Roy's foundation there would be a high chance of finding some 19th century (or earlier) artifacts.

i have a post coming on tiebacks on Builthalifax - its half written.
Basicly, you drill a hole, put the tieback in, grout it in place, then tension it with a hydrulic jack, and bolt a plate on. the tieback then anchors everything into the rock bellow.

there was an archeologist on site - he said they did boreholes, and found 2 voids. they were just soil - the rest of the roy sits right on bedrock.

as for the mortar - i believe its excess. it was all cleaned of the Johnston building, before it was re-parged on the shared wall.

OldDartmouthMark · #**603** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 6:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

i have a post coming on tiebacks on Builthalifax - its half written.
Basicly, you drill a hole, put the tieback in, grout it in place, then tension it with a hydrulic jack, and bolt a plate on. the tieback then anchors everything into the rock bellow.

there was an archeologist on site - he said they did boreholes, and found 2 voids. they were just soil - the rest of the roy sits right on bedrock.

as for the mortar - i believe its excess. it was all cleaned of the Johnston building, before it was re-parged on the shared wall.

Thanks! Looking forward to your post.

Really appreciate your info on this. As much as it pains me to see the building torn down, the info gained from its deconstruction gives us a window into building techniques of the past that would otherwise not be seen.

Ziobrop · #**604** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thanks! Looking forward to your post.

Really appreciate your info on this. As much as it pains me to see the building torn down, the info gained from its deconstruction gives us a window into building techniques of the past that would otherwise not be seen.

Here we go:
http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2014/09/digging-a-foundation/
expect it to expand/ be reworked.

I need to rework my concrete post - I have better non spanning slab photos.
http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2014/06/the-quick-guide-to-concrete-construction/

OldDartmouthMark · #**605** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 7:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

Here we go:
http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2014/09/digging-a-foundation/
expect it to expand/ be reworked.

I need to rework my concrete post - I have better non spanning slab photos.
http://halifaxbloggers.ca/builthalifax/2014/06/the-quick-guide-to-concrete-construction/

Excellent! Thanks!

Ziobrop · #**606** Posted **Sep 28, 2014, 2:12 AM**

does anyone know when the DA Was signed? going through the thread, it was approved by council in may 2011, and expires in 3 years if construction of the parking levels hasent started, and if building permits arnt issued.

i was told they still don't have a general contractor (bird, elis don, PCL etc)chosen, and am thinking they dont have a lot of time left to get a hole dug and something started.

fenwick16 · #**607** Posted **Sep 28, 2014, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

does anyone know when the DA Was signed? going through the thread, it was approved by council in may 2011, and expires in 3 years if construction of the parking levels hasent started, and if building permits arnt issued.

i was told they still don't have a general contractor (bird, elis don, PCL etc)chosen, and am thinking they dont have a lot of time left to get a hole dug and something started.

Reading through the original Development Agreement (DA) for this project, it requires that construction must begin within 3 years of the date of registration of the Agreement at the Registry of Deeds or Land Registry Office - http://www.halifax.ca/boardscom/Dist12PAC/documents/RoyBuildingReport.pdf . Often the DA say that a project must start 3 years from the signing of the development agreement whereas this one is worded slightly differently. Does anyone know how to check to see when the agreement was registered at the Registry of Deeds or Land Registry Office?

counterfactual · #**608** Posted **Sep 28, 2014, 5:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Reading through the original Development Agreement (DA) for this project, it requires that construction must begin within 3 years of the date of registration of the Agreement at the Registry of Deeds or Land Registry Office - http://www.halifax.ca/boardscom/Dist12PAC/documents/RoyBuildingReport.pdf . Often the DA say that a project must start 3 years from the signing of the development agreement whereas this one is worded slightly differently. Does anyone know how to check to see when the agreement was registered at the Registry of Deeds or Land Registry Office?

Reznick just registered it last week!

(I'm joking. I don't know).

hokus83 · #**609** Posted **Sep 28, 2014, 8:02 PM**

Do pre sales count? they seem really serious about this project I find it hard to believe they would just let the deadline slide and have this be scrapped .

And are you sure a general contractor haven't been hired yet. I've seen 6 or 7 people in construction outfits onsite in the last few days standing around talking.

Ziobrop · #**610** Posted **Sep 28, 2014, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hokus83

Do pre sales count? they seem really serious about this project I find it hard to believe they would just let the deadline slide and have this be scrapped .

And are you sure a general contractor haven't been hired yet. I've seen 6 or 7 people in construction outfits onsite in the last few days standing around talking.

I have a good source. As of Friday nothing was awarded.

IanWatson · #**611** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 12:11 PM**

Signed October 20th, 2011 and registered October 28th, 2011

Ziobrop · #**612** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 12:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Signed October 20th, 2011 and registered October 28th, 2011

so if i understand the DA Correctly they have until October 28th to get permits, dig a hole and pour a footing.. or ask for an extension.

i don't think they have enough time... without an extension.

JET · #**613** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

so if i understand the DA Correctly they have until October 28th to get permits, dig a hole and pour a footing.. or ask for an extension.

i don't think they have enough time... without an extension.

Wouldn't the three Moes, with a couple of shovels, meet the start criteria? also, it shouldn't take them very long.

Keith P. · #**614** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JET

Wouldn't the three Moes, with a couple of shovels, meet the start criteria, also it shouldn't take them very long.

It's the Five Guys Named Moe, and they are all busy not finishing the Q Loft condos.

Ziobrop · #**615** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 1:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JET

Wouldn't the three Moes, with a couple of shovels, meet the start criteria? also, it shouldn't take them very long.

the DA reads start construction on the parking level. I guess technically starting the hole is Starting construction, though nothing is actually built...

I haven't seen new drawings either for the building, since the 2011 proposal.

JET · #**616** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

It's the Five Guys Named Moe, and they are all busy not finishing the Q Loft condos.

Too bad that they are 'busy' at Q; with five of them they'd be able to dig a pretty good hole, given a little bit of time.

Drybrain · #**617** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:12 PM**

The DA says "commencement of development shall mean the installation of the founding for the building."

But am I to understand from comments here that while they had a demolition permit for the original building, they didn't have a permit to begin construction on the new one, which is the cause for concern? That issuing permits will take too long for the Oct 28th deadline to be met?

(Anyway, I have to agree that while I'm curious as to what's going on, I find it pretty unlikely they'd take such a deliberate and circuitous route to get to this point, only to "Whoops, DA expired. Oh well." Maybe it's just ego: They assume, probably correctly that the city isn't going to deny them an extension of the agreement if they ask for it, especially now that the original Roy is gone.)

OldDartmouthMark · #**618** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 2:55 PM**

So if the old DA expires, what does that mean? A new DA has to be approved? Perhaps one where there is no longer a requirement for original materials to be used in the new façade, since it was "accidentally" disposed of?

I dunno, it all sounds a little strange to me. I'm sure there is a good explanation.

halifaxboyns · #**619** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 3:50 PM**

I thought there was an extension of the DA? I remember there being a decision by Council to do so and wasn't it appealed by our friends at the HT? Or was it one of the dt developer?

Ziobrop · #**620** Posted **Sep 29, 2014, 4:38 PM**

im not aware of an extension - and starfish explicitly wrote a letter against extending the DA for the discovery center - basically saying they were ready to go, and it would be unfair if they stalled for 2 more years.

Both these projects are PRE HRMxD. therefore if the DA Expires, they have to start over from scratch.