[Halifax] The Roy Halifax | 71 m | 22 fl | Completed

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Empire

The design calls for complete demolition of this building and a cheap knockoff rebuilt like O'Carrol's and the Roy Building. This is much worse because the building is so much a part of Halifax and you will not get that level of sandstone and detail again, not to mention the replacement would be cheap concrete panels called sandstone like material. The plan calls for 8-9 floors so the existing structure could not accommodate the extra floors so the only plan is to demolish it. This is what happens when HRM doesn't care about quality heritage buildings.

Or when the Heritage folks spend their time and money fighting for years (and basically kill) a project that would replace a parking lot.

[Takeo]

Originally Posted by Empire

The design calls for complete demolition of this building and a cheap knockoff rebuilt like O'Carrol's and the Roy Building. This is much worse because the building is so much a part of Halifax and you will not get that level of sandstone and detail again, not to mention the replacement would be cheap concrete panels called sandstone like material. The plan calls for 8-9 floors so the existing structure could not accommodate the extra floors so the only plan is to demolish it. This is what happens when HRM doesn't care about quality heritage buildings.

Unbelievable. That's downright criminal. How could they demo that building? That's horrible. I don't believe that it's not possible to save. They could save the facade at least. It you ask me... this is a nicer building that the historic building at the "Waterside" site.

[Doggard]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but;
Fighting against the demolition of the BMO building could be a good move for the Halifax Development Coalition as far as getting some media attention goes... Assuming that this development is actually on the table.

[someone123]

Seems like it would be good to wait until the actual public hearings and details are released before getting too worked up over this. It seems unlikely that the developer would opt not to preserve the stone facade. Isn't this the same developer that preserved the wooden facade of that apartment building on Summer Street?

[sdm]

Originally Posted by someone123

Seems like it would be good to wait until the actual public hearings and details are released before getting too worked up over this. It seems unlikely that the developer would opt not to preserve the stone facade. Isn't this the same developer that preserved the wooden facade of that apartment building on Summer Street?

Yes same developer.

[JET]

When you say "saved the facade on summer st"; all they were required to do and all they did was save the thickness of 1" board on the face of the building. Everything on the front was gone, and everything behind was gone. It was really bizarre to see. However, the building as it now stands is a remarkable duplication of how the original looked. I'm not recommending only saving facades, since most of the heritage is lost. A good example of a saved facade is granville mall, but then all the stone work was saved.
I like the BMO building, there should be a way to save that corner and add on something nice behind. JET

[sdm]

Originally Posted by JET

When you say "saved the facade on summer st"; all they were required to do and all they did was save the thickness of 1" board on the face of the building. Everything on the front was gone, and everything behind was gone. It was really bizarre to see. However, the building as it now stands is a remarkable duplication of how the original looked. I'm not recommending only saving facades, since most of the heritage is lost. A good example of a saved facade is granville mall, but then all the stone work was saved.
I like the BMO building, there should be a way to save that corner and add on something nice behind. JET

Just so we are clear, granville mall was tore down and rebuilt right?

i believe founders square is the best example of facade retenion with addition on top in the city.

[hfx_chris]

Correct, the only original part of Granville mall that I'm aware of are the facades. I can assure you the Delta wasn't original

[dartmouthian]

I'm pretty sure that the other side of granville mall is original.

[hfx_chris]

The side that everybody always forgets about? I dunno. Is that even called Granville Mall? I thought the signs above the doors to the mall called it something different.

[ZET]

"Granville Mall .. Destroyed by fire in 1859, the buildings on this block at the end of Granville Street were rebuilt in the Italianate style.
When the Delta Barrington Hotel was built on the west side of the plaza, the original building facades were disassembled and then carefully restored in order to preserve the historical significance of this area."

Granville mall incorporates the pedestrian mall/plaza and the buildings on either side. There is reference to Granville mall having 17 historic buildings.

The hotel facade though reconstructed was done really well, and the stone work is the original material. The garden crest apartment has really nothing of the original except some 1" thick sheathing boards. ZET

[alps]

Heres how it goes - can you tell I'm having a bit too much fun with bird's eye view?

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by hfx_chris

The side that everybody always forgets about? I dunno. Is that even called Granville Mall? I thought the signs above the doors to the mall called it something different.

Granville Mall is the street, not the shops.

Soooo the Roy Building? I Have to say, I hope it never gets built in its most current incarnation. It's too bloody high (never mind the aching aesthetic problems). Sure, the developer will say that they need the additional height to pay for the restoration of the historic parts, but if they were not allowed to build that high (and they wouldn't be if they weren't grandfathered in to pre-HRMbyDesign rules), then they would be forced to develop in a way that was considerate to the city first, rather than their pocket books. I would rather see the Roy Building torn down, with something new and modern and WELL SCALED AND WELL CONSIDERED built in its place, than see this awkward abortion of urban design.

To be clear though, I'd rather see the existing maintained, with a FEW additional floors on top.

[ZET]

alps, very nice. A picture does say a thousand words. ZET

[hfx_chris]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

Granville Mall is the street, not the shops.

Not quite. The shops, at least on the west side, are called The Shops of Granville Mall... or something to that effect.

[Dmajackson]

The HRM Information page has been updated; Case 01172

New renderings; Case 01172 Renderings

And this is moving along to HAC and District 12 PAC recommendations next week.

[Keith P.]

I like it, though the recreation of the original facade on Barrington looks pretty uninspired.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Are they planning to use the original brick? If so, it should be fine.

[spaustin]

I would feel so much better about this one if they were going to retain the Barrington Street facade. Hopefully they'll at least recycle the brick to avoid that awful faux heritage look. On the plus side, in the latest renderings I really like how they've changed the concept on the Granville side. I was never against the wavy glass, but I thought that carrying the Roy back, replicating it and streatching it beyond what's there today was silly. I like the more modern brick treatment and lines on the back.

[fenwick16]

I like everything about this development. The new look and the incorporation of the original structure. I have really been hoping that this one would go ahead.