[Halifax] The Roy Halifax | 71 m | 22 fl | Completed - Page 8

JET · #**141** Posted **Nov 26, 2009, 5:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Not everything can be high quality, you have to start somewhere, and every city needs a mix of high and medium quality buildings.
This would be a step up from the current Roy building which was built between the late 1800's up to 1949

Anyway it's a decrepit piece of crap. It wouldn't be worth it to renovate and starfish thought they were doing a favor by re creating it. Which would probably look better than what is there now.

The Roy building is actually quite a neat building inside, with a wide range of interesting people and services. People want an interesting vibrant downtown and this building is filled with these people. The stairs, the offices and the people make a great community. Shame to lose all that. Too bad it couldn't remain as it is and build above it. Probably not possible, but too bad all the same. JET

kwajo · #**142** Posted **Nov 26, 2009, 5:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeo

I don't understand the point of the re-do to be honest. If you're going to demo the building anyway... design something brand new. Sure... it can be a three story masonry base of some kind to fit in with the scale and character of the streetscape... but just start over. Make it new and modern. Sure it might HINT at the original building. But do something new. Don't make a disney version of the old building. What is the point of that? You're not saving it. You're demolishing it. And you're not creating something new either. I just don't get it. A re-creation seems pointless and dishonest. Save it... for real. Or do something NEW... for real. Just make it real. Real is the key word here. Not "quality". Quality is about thoughtfulness. Not price.

I agree with this sentiment, I just don't see the point of re-creating the old facades if you're tearing the whole thing down in the first place. Either save the old structure entirely or if it's being torn-down then get creative with the space and design something new. I would love to see the building replaced on Barrington by a very modern take on the neighbouring facades, sort of like what Gehry did on the Dancing House in Prague. Then you could top it with a fairly generic glass tower if you wanted, but at least go all-new from the ground level upward. I'm tired of this trend of putting set-back new towers on old facades, it's lazy and uninteresting, and Halifax deserves better.

Phalanx · #**143** Posted **Nov 26, 2009, 7:16 PM**

Aren't most of these compromises (rebuilding facades, set-backs etc.) an attempt to make the construction more palatable to the heritage community? (And in doing so make it more likely to get approved... in theory, anyway)

I don't know if it's possible to actually do anything without compromise (within the limits of HBD and sympathetic to its surroundings, of course) on Barrington these days. Especially if it means demolishing an existing building.

beyeas · #**144** Posted **Nov 26, 2009, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Not everything can be high quality, you have to start somewhere, and every city needs a mix of high and medium quality buildings.
This would be a step up from the current Roy building which was built between the late 1800's up to 1949

Anyway it's a decrepit piece of crap. It wouldn't be worth it to renovate and starfish thought they were doing a favor by re creating it. Which would probably look better than what is there now.

True... and like I said, I have basically supported this. I guess my thinking has drifted in part because I worry that the more low/medium quality projects go ahead, the fewer high quality ones that will also go ahead because of the limited condo demand and financing. I fear we may just end up with the majority of projects being the low/mid, with very few high quality in the downtown core. That is, unfortunately, how development in Halifax has gone in the past (to be cynical) with the city "settling" for things that are just ok, and losing out on many high end projects that just go by the wayside. I don't think this is a BAD proposal, I would just rather see other ones get the go-ahead well before this, and this one going ahead may in fact mean that a better one dies.

sdm · #**145** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by beyeas

True... and like I said, I have basically supported this. I guess my thinking has drifted in part because I worry that the more low/medium quality projects go ahead, the fewer high quality ones that will also go ahead because of the limited condo demand and financing. I fear we may just end up with the majority of projects being the low/mid, with very few high quality in the downtown core. That is, unfortunately, how development in Halifax has gone in the past (to be cynical) with the city "settling" for things that are just ok, and losing out on many high end projects that just go by the wayside. I don't think this is a BAD proposal, I would just rather see other ones get the go-ahead well before this, and this one going ahead may in fact mean that a better one dies.

the other approved projects are being held due to market conditions and economic climate. This one will be no different, and if it does go ahead it will have an effect on some of the projects approved, but if a tenant is looking for the level of say a International Place they probably won't consider this development.

Personally i don't care for the proposal presented.

I rather see the majority of height allowed to be closer to the water and not higher up the hill.

sdm · #**146** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 12:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phalanx

Aren't most of these compromises (rebuilding facades, set-backs etc.) an attempt to make the construction more palatable to the heritage community? (And in doing so make it more likely to get approved... in theory, anyway)

I don't know if it's possible to actually do anything without compromise (within the limits of HBD and sympathetic to its surroundings, of course) on Barrington these days. Especially if it means demolishing an existing building.

I believe council made a mistake in grandfathering this proposal, and it should have been forced to go through the HBD process.

fenwick16 · #**147** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 1:14 PM**

This one looks very good to me. I think that it will be a good addition.

worldlyhaligonian · #**148** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 9:04 PM**

Its better than waterside... the building looks like shit right now.

Wishblade · #**149** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 11:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Its better than waterside... the building looks like shit right now.

Waterside or the Roy? I don't think waterside looks all that bad. Atleast its glass lol.

fenwick16 · #**150** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 11:20 PM**

The new renderings of the Roy building have mostly glass on the upper exterior. The first set of renderings didn't look so great but I think the new design looks great.

sdm · #**151** Posted **Nov 27, 2009, 11:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Its better than waterside... the building looks like shit right now.

I've seen some new renderings of Waterside and there has been some changes that make it look better IMO.

Not really fair to compare the two as one has a significantly larger foot print while the other doesn't (probably like 3/4's less). On top of that the buildings at Waterside are Heritage buildings, while the Roy it is not so therefore less can be accomplished.

worldlyhaligonian · #**152** Posted **Nov 28, 2009, 1:35 AM**

I meant the Roy building in its current state is terrible... its falling apart and than metal retaining wall is ugly as sin.

That is great news on changes to the Waterside Centre that will make it more attractive...

sdm · #**153** Posted **Nov 28, 2009, 11:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I meant the Roy building in its current state is terrible... its falling apart and than metal retaining wall is ugly as sin.

That is great news on changes to the Waterside Centre that will make it more attractive...

from what i can remember the changes are significant set back on top floor creating large roof top patios.

And the curtain wall facing the harbour has a small change as well.

Dmajackson · #**154** Posted **Nov 28, 2009, 7:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdm

from what i can remember the changes are significant set back on top floor creating large roof top patios.

And the curtain wall facing the harbour has a small change as well.

The DA shows the setback area being used not only for the larger patios but also for a green roof (grass and flowers)

Dmajackson · #**155** Posted **Jan 8, 2010, 8:44 PM**

A little bump in the road for this and the Discovery Centre proposal;

http://www.halifax.ca/council/agenda...0112ca1113.pdf

Keith P. · #**156** Posted **Jan 8, 2010, 10:28 PM**

Bureaucracy at its best...

sdm · #**157** Posted **Jan 9, 2010, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Bureaucracy at its best...

yup, everyone knew this was going to happen didn't they.

spaustin · #**158** Posted **Jan 9, 2010, 4:00 AM**

Seems like a routine correction to a minor oversight. What's the big deal?

fenwick16 · #**159** Posted **Jan 9, 2010, 1:06 PM**

I just read the HRM link quickly, but it doesn't sound like this is a delay to construction (but maybe I missed something). I would like to see this one proceed since it looks like a positive development.

Dmajackson · #**160** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 8:34 PM**

For about the fourth time in as many months this is going before the PAC and HAC tonight.