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

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

I wonder if they have any storefront tenants lined up and when they will move in?

Curious to see what they do with the "sign" for the building that's supposed to go up on the curved portion of brick up near the top, and the cornice. The top of the facade still looks unfinished.

Another little detail is that seams are visible on some parts of the facade but not others. Presumably the remaining ones will be filled in and won't be very visible.

https://www.instagram.com/TheRoyHalifax/

Agreed that the new façade looks a little sterile compared to the original. Hopefully there will be some more detail coming to make it a little more interesting to look at.

Unfortunately when attempts are made to recreate heritage it often looks a little "faux" unless careful attention is placed to detail. This is a case where I wish they could have maintained the rustic original façade (while removing or improving upon the later add-ons at street level) and spruced it up a little as they have done with the Green Lantern project.

Not to say that this has turned out terribly, it's actually pretty good overall, but I just think they could have done a better job in keeping with the heritage theme of Barrington Street.

For comparison here is a photo originally posted by tribeachpunk on page 9 of this thread:


http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=153784&page=9

[Keith P.]

Well, the old one was hardly something to write home about.

The new one may look "sterile" because it is new, without the patina and wear of something old and beat-up. Not a bad thing IMO.

[Phalanx]

It's not just the patina, it's missing a lot of the detail in the masonry. The new facade is very... flat. It's missing a lot of the step ins and brick work that made the original less slab-like.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Phalanx

It's not just the patina, it's missing a lot of the detail in the masonry. The new facade is very... flat. It's missing a lot of the step ins and brick work that made the original less slab-like.

Yes... this is what I was referring to in my post above, not the fact that the materials are new.

[Keith P.]

The mistake the developers made was doing a homage to the original in the first place. With the stone on the lower floors it was never going to be a replica in any event, so the other differences are understandable. I think the new building's lower floors are far less attractive than they could have been if the designers has started with a clean sheet of paper and not decided to do this sort of "inspired by" design.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Hogwash. They could have made the design more attractive following the current plan had they simply followed the principles alluded to above and given attention to certain details. It's not rocket science - just masonry, a building technique that's been around for centuries.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Hogwash. They could have made the design more attractive following the current plan had they simply followed the principles alluded to above and given attention to certain details. It's not rocket science - just masonry, a building technique that's been around for centuries.

Thank you for that civil response.

The old saying "it's neither fish nor flesh nor good red herring" applies here. If you wanted an exact replica then the stonework on the lower floors needs to go away too. I submit that the homage design we have is the worst of all possible worlds, giving us an uninspired design on the Barrington side thanks to an original building that was pedestrian at best. A far better approach would have been to do neither and provide something original.

[OldDartmouthMark]

LOL... how ironic. Tone is adjusted to poster being responded to. To earn respect one must give respect...

Back to the topic:
I don't think an exact replica is what is being discussed. Though, IIRC, originally the builder said they were going to reuse original materials...

I think the point here is that this reimagining of the Roy façade doesn't look as good as the original, which you describe as pedestrian at best. Absolutely an ornate, well-detailed brick façade in the flavour of the nearby buildings on Barrington would have been welcomed and accepted by most, but that didn't happen here. Given the upscale target of this building, and thus a larger budget for materials that one would expect, it perplexes me that they didn't attempt to go 'over the top' on the part of the building that most people will ever experience - its calling card in a sense.

But it is what it is, which as I've said isn't bad... it's just not great, and not as well done as the original 'pedestrian' building.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The mistake the developers made was doing a homage to the original in the first place...

They pick and choose to what they pay homage: in this case it was streetwall, material types and general arrangement of openings. They did not pay homage to the quality and detail of the original's masonry work.

I think the streetwall/massing was a good call. I appreciate the continuity of material types. The general arrangement of openings - well, I can see it working in the new building. Maybe something else would have been better, but I don't mind the approach to keeping it simple and balanced- should provide a good backdrop to the activity of the street as Barrington becomes more used by people living in the area.

Originally Posted by Keith P.

... I think the new building's lower floors are far less attractive than they could have been if the designers has started with a clean sheet of paper and not decided to do this sort of "inspired by" design.

I think the dumbing down of the masonry is a missed opportunity. Given this, I don't know that a total reimagining of the building would have resulted in much better.

On the whole, I think it's of net benefit. I also think the tower is attractive from afar while not intruding much to the actual experience once you're on Barrington.

Remains to be seen if sales will ever pick up: I hear this one's been a tough sell for the condos.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

Remains to be seen if sales will ever pick up: I hear this one's been a tough sell for the condos.

I am told 50% of are sold.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Colin May

I am told 50% of are sold.

I realize it may be relatively expensive, but my personal observation is that the quality of finishes proposed by the display suite was higher than typical in Halifax. My own theory is that, by getting out of the gate earlier, the Curve captured most of the market that would be interested in an expensive condo

[RoshanMcG]

[OldDartmouthMark]

Nice pic! It looks fantastic from that angle.

[IanWatson]

I really like the choice to do the stairwell in glass. Hopefully you can actually use them rather than it be one of those "fire alarm will sound if you open the door" situations.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I really like the choice to do the stairwell in glass. Hopefully you can actually use them rather than it be one of those "fire alarm will sound if you open the door" situations.

Not that I'd walk ALL the way up or down, but I do like the effect of the clear glass on the stairs.

[RoshanMcG]

[IanWatson]

Have they started taking occupancy on any of the units yet?

I'm happy we're reaching the finish line on a lot of the projects downtown. As much as it's nice to have some of these developments, I'm looking forward to having sidewalks back and roads open.

[Jonovision]

20190115_154519 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

20190115_154603 by Jonovision23, on Flickr

[Keith P.]

I really like how the tower portion looks. I recently was on the street, however, and find the replica portion of the original building on the Barrington side very uninspiring and pedestrian-looking. It really detracts from the overall look. I feel it was a big mistake not to do a modern look all the way to the sidewalk.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I really like how the tower portion looks. I recently was on the street, however, and find the replica portion of the original building on the Barrington side very uninspiring and pedestrian-looking. It really detracts from the overall look. I feel it was a big mistake not to do a modern look all the way to the sidewalk.

Perhaps, or just do the masonry properly, with some depth and detail to the design (as previously discussed).

Look at the difference in masonry between the Roy and the old Eaton's building in Jonovision's pic. The Roy looks to be done in 2D whereas the Eaton's definitely has a third dimension (depth) to it. Makes all the difference in the world IMHO. What they did on the Roy was nowhere close to being a replica of the original building, just lip service to keep attention away from the fact that they took the easy way out and demolished the original Roy facade in the Barrington Street Heritage Conservation District.