[Halifax] Nova Centre | 65-58-58 m | 16-15-14 fl | Completed

[portapetey]

That's why NC is also a good deal... or proportionally an even better deal a whole building with 1/3 of the cost for the city. NC will also recover some of its costs through the property taxes on the private components and the operations.

Now, if only we could get a stadium or transit deal in place! It has to be next on the agenda.

I agree on transit and / or stadium.

I'm neutral on the NC. Any developer could have put similar buildings on that lot without a new CC in it, so the government would not have been on the hook at all. (Or maybe it wouldn't have been approved without that government backing...(see "Thiel".))

I won't weigh in on the value of the CC itself to the city.

I've always been pro-Nova Centre as far as seeing the overall structure get built. But as to the CC portion of the structure - I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[curnhalio]

That's how I look at it too.

But to Keith's point, could we really afford even the $23.7?

It's an interesting question, and like most interesting questions I don't think there's a clean answer.

How do we assess whether we got our money's worth? What's the value of a monumental civic building to the community? Clearly, to some people, there is no value. To others, there's no price too big.

What's the value of it getting airtime on CNN? Or the value of it being listed as one of the top new builds of 2014? Will people decide to come here just to see it? The "interesting questions sans clear answers" are endless. I'm glad it stood out for being pretty as opposed to, say, being nominated for Canada's version of the Carbuncle Cup (which doesn't exist to my knowledge, but should)

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/carbuncle-cup-2015-winner-announced/5077354.article

[Colin May]

We always get our share, we always have projects.
Trudeau has said that provinces and municipalities will decide how the money is spent, implying that federal and provincial politicians will not be deciding what gets done in a town/city. If Trudeau sticks to the promise it will be a major change from previous decades where Liberal/Tory, and occasional NDP, politican/fixer gets his/her way.
Dexter didn't want to fund the library but caved in when John Baird came to town and told the media he was willing to toss in a max of $18,000,000.
In Dartmouth in the first Chretien splurge we were given money for a Sportsplex bingo hall, smoking allowed, sold to the public as a 'wellness centre'.
Apparently Trudeau believes that local people are the best people to decide how to spend infrastructure money, not the local MP and not the main provincial MP.

[Keith P.]

What's the value of it getting airtime on CNN?

None.

Or the value of it being listed as one of the top new builds of 2014?

Nil.

Will people decide to come here just to see it?

No.

[Keith P.]

In Dartmouth in the first Chretien splurge we were given money for a Sportsplex bingo hall, smoking allowed, sold to the public as a 'wellness centre'.



Your tax dollars at work. That would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The waste is simply staggering.

[someone123]

We always get our share, we always have projects.
Trudeau has said that provinces and municipalities will decide how the money is spent, implying that federal and provincial politicians will not be deciding what gets done in a town/city. If Trudeau sticks to the promise it will be a major change from previous decades where Liberal/Tory, and occasional NDP, politican/fixer gets his/her way.
Dexter didn't want to fund the library but caved in when John Baird came to town and told the media he was willing to toss in a max of $18,000,000.
In Dartmouth in the first Chretien splurge we were given money for a Sportsplex bingo hall, smoking allowed, sold to the public as a 'wellness centre'.
Apparently Trudeau believes that local people are the best people to decide how to spend infrastructure money, not the local MP and not the main provincial MP.

I was going to say, that was a big flaw in how the federal government operated. Hopefully it does change. The earmarked cost sharing was great for political points ("Government X is building Y!") but hard on smaller and poorer jurisdictions.

I don't have the source now but I remember reading a paper a while back of the impact of this kind of funding in the 70's and 80's in Canada. It was hugely slanted in favour of provinces like Ontario that were able to participate heavily in every program and slanted against small provinces like PEI and Newfoundland that couldn't. And it's wasteful all around because it encourages jurisdictions to invest in the sexy class of project of the day rather than what is most needed locally.

All that being said, from the perspective of Nova Scotia, it totally makes sense to participate heavily in cost-sharing programs, even if the debt goes up. What matters from the province's perspective is the provincial debt-to-gdp ratio and when the federal government is footing part of the bill it's easy to take on a bit of debt for a good project and watch the ratio go down over time because of the added jobs and, if it's a good project, the long-term economic payoff. It does not make sense for governments to focus singularly on eliminating debt by aggressively cutting back on spending. That's how you end up with slower economic growth, and less economic growth makes the existing debt hard to pay off. It's actually quite different from a lot of household type financing. It's even less related at the federal level where there is indirect control over the money supply.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I was going to say, that was a big flaw in how the federal government operated. Hopefully it does change. The earmarked cost sharing was great for political points ("Government X is building Y!") but hard on smaller and poorer jurisdictions.

I don't have the source now but I remember reading a paper a while back of the impact of this kind of funding in the 70's and 80's in Canada. It was hugely slanted in favour of provinces like Ontario that were able to participate heavily in every program and slanted against small provinces like PEI and Newfoundland that couldn't. And it's wasteful all around because it encourages jurisdictions to invest in the sexy class of project of the day rather than what is most needed locally.

All that being said, from the perspective of Nova Scotia, it totally makes sense to participate heavily in cost-sharing programs, even if the debt goes up. What matters from the province's perspective is the provincial debt-to-gdp ratio and when the federal government is footing part of the bill it's easy to take on a bit of debt for a good project and watch the ratio go down over time because of the added jobs and, if it's a good project, the long-term economic payoff. It does not make sense for governments to focus singularly on eliminating debt by aggressively cutting back on spending. That's how you end up with slower economic growth, and less economic growth makes the existing debt hard to pay off. It's actually quite different from a lot of household type financing. It's even less related at the federal level where there is indirect control over the money supply.

Great post.

[someone123]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CZLu9HNWcAAqH8J.jpg:large
Source (https://twitter.com/jpformat)

[Keith P.]

Great post.

Except for the last paragraph. Increasing the provincial debt for projects that are not a priority just to get some federal crumbs is part of the reason why we have a debt that we have no chance of ever being repaid.

[fenwick16]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CZLu9HNWcAAqH8J.jpg

Nice find. I like that perspective. It will make a good promotional image for the city once the Nova Centre is completed.

[someone123]

Nice find. I like that perspective. It will make a good promotional image for the city once the Nova Centre is completed.

The renovated TD building looks good too. It used to be one of my least favourite downtown office towers in Halifax.

It'll look a lot different once the cladding is up on the Nova Centre and the Roy Building is farther along.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Except for the last paragraph. Increasing the provincial debt for projects that are not a priority just to get some federal crumbs is part of the reason why we have a debt that we have no chance of ever being repaid.

I don't believe that it won't ever be repaid, or at least paid down to a manageable level... and people my age will be burdened by said debt anyway.

[worldlyhaligonian]

The renovated TD building looks good too. It used to be one of my least favourite downtown office towers in Halifax.

It'll look a lot different once the cladding is up on the Nova Centre and the Roy Building is farther along.

I feel like Roy, Maple, and now Alexander are going to be the developments that truly revive downtown. Add NC for bigger scale events and it will be a happening place in the summer.

[someone123]

I feel like Roy, Maple, and now Alexander are going to be the developments that truly revive downtown. Add NC for bigger scale events and it will be a happening place in the summer.

Bishop's Landing had a pretty noticeable effect and the construction happening right now is equivalent to about 3 of those developments. Bishop's Landing was also a bit heavier on retail space and more isolated, so it produced less of a spillover effect.

You can also see the difference between Spring Garden Road and Barrington. Both have similar amounts of retail space and traffic but Spring Garden Road has more residents and Barrington has more office workers. On Spring Garden Road, even when a space isn't rented out to a more regional major retailer it ends up being filled by locally-oriented shops and services. Once Barrington has some more residents it will have a more reliable base like that to draw on. I think we'll also see a bit more foot traffic and retail on the sidestreets, and more chains.

After this construction hopefully there will be another round with the Discovery Centre building, Green Lantern, and maybe something for the United Gulf site. That would really bring up the population density along that stretch. It is hard to have high population density when there are large empty lots. Maple is tall for example but it's equivalent to having maybe 4 storey residential buildings covering the empty space around it. Similarly if you average out Bishop's Landing with the nearby empty or underused waterfront lots the population density is actually quite low. I'm would guess that the rowhouse neighbourhoods near downtown are more densely populated.

[portapetey]

I feel like Roy, Maple, and now Alexander are going to be the developments that truly revive downtown. Add NC for bigger scale events and it will be a happening place in the summer.

Has anyone looked at the numbers of units, numbers of bedrooms per unit, etc. and tried to estimate the number of people who might live in any or all of these new buildings?

I wonder just how much the impact in the downtown population will be? Certainly hundreds...

[someone123]

Has anyone looked at the numbers of units, numbers of bedrooms per unit, etc. and tried to estimate the number of people who might live in any or all of these new buildings?

I wonder just how much the impact in the downtown population will be? Certainly hundreds...

Usually the reports and news coverage include estimates of the number of eventual residents. I think it's just a rough estimate based on the number of bedrooms and existing household sizes in the city.

The estimate for the Maple was 450-500 residents in around 300 units. I think the Alexander is around 200 units and Roy around 150 units. I would guess the estimate population for these three buildings when they're fully occupied would be around 1,000.

For context, the Halifax metro area has averaged 4,000 new residents per year for the past 3 years.

[portapetey]

Usually the reports and news coverage include estimates of the number of eventual residents. I think it's just a rough estimate based on the number of bedrooms and existing household sizes in the city.

The estimate for the Maple was 450-500 residents in around 300 units. I think the Alexander is around 200 units and Roy around 150 units. I would guess the estimate population for these three buildings when they're fully occupied would be around 1,000.

For context, the Halifax metro area has averaged 4,000 new residents per year for the past 3 years.

Thanks. 1000 or so was my rough guess too, but I didn't bother doing any math to confirm it.

This report:

http://theoryandpractice.planning.dal.ca/_pdf/neighbourhood_change/mplan_projects/wgregory_thesis_2014.pdf

puts the "downtown" census tracts bounded by Cornwallis, North Park, Cunard, Robie, and Inglis at just under 15,000 people in 2011, so an increase of 1,000 would be an increase of 6.7% from these three buildings alone - a great start!

[Colin May]

Your tax dollars at work. That would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The waste is simply staggering.
Every province has crazy 'Infrastructure' projects.
In the Sportsplex deal the Liberals on the board were trying to get money for a hockey glove room in an effort to entice the Q league to Dartmouth rather than Halifax.
In the federal infrastructure deal the details went on for pages : all media releases had to be approved by Ottawa, the size of signs were set by Ottawa and the size of the 'Canada' logo was set by Ottawa. Some people think Harper invented the obsession with signs,PR and government recognition; he just did what had previously been done.
Too bad I threw away all my Sportsplex minutes.
My understanding of infrastructure spending is that spending is distributed to each province on a per capita basis. After that the 3 levels get down to arguing over what to fund and the feds,aka the lead cabinet minister in the province/region, usually win.
I think the francophone centre will be near the top of the metro list if there is a suitable site. Top of the list will be any project that can start immediately and therefore the HRM capital budget and the NS capital budget will show where the money goes this year, quite possible we'll see money going towards school construction as well as sewer and water projects.

[RangerNS]

In the Sportsplex deal the Liberals on the board were trying to get money for a hockey glove room in an effort to entice the Q league to Dartmouth rather than Halifax.

To put the sportsplex deal in context (if that context was the Chretien liberals day-1 billion (or 5 billion?) infrastructure spend: at the time, the Dartmouth water system was crumbling. Well, maybe not the pipes, but heavy use of chlorine. As a country well guy, it was undrinkable. I'm sure it met the standards, but it wasn't "good".

Dartmouth gets pennies from God, and they spend it on a bingo hall.

[Colin May]

To put the sportsplex deal in context (if that context was the Chretien liberals day-1 billion (or 5 billion?) infrastructure spend: at the time, the Dartmouth water system was crumbling. Well, maybe not the pipes, but heavy use of chlorine. As a country well guy, it was undrinkable. I'm sure it met the standards, but it wasn't "good".

Dartmouth gets pennies from God, and they spend it on a bingo hall.
One third of the water in the pipes was leaking into the ground. I ca't remember if this was disclosed in public or during an in camera session. I kept a lot of documents for many years but eventually threw them out.

[someone123]

This report:

http://theoryandpractice.planning.dal.ca/_pdf/neighbourhood_change/mplan_projects/wgregory_thesis_2014.pdf

puts the "downtown" census tracts bounded by Cornwallis, North Park, Cunard, Robie, and Inglis at just under 15,000 people in 2011, so an increase of 1,000 would be an increase of 6.7% from these three buildings alone - a great start!

Thanks for posting that. It's a good report. I think that's a level of detail where somebody can start to understand what's really going on. Drawing up arbitrary boundaries and then just talking about the population total (like in those comparisons between the downtown populations of different cities) does not tell you very much.

If you look at population there has been a net decline since 1951, but the number of housing units has more than doubled during that time. There has been a lot more construction of housing units than the population numbers suggest, and a huge part of the story is the shift from large, often overcrowded families (9.7 per unit in the Cogswell tract in 1951!) to smaller, wealthier households. I definitely would not describe this process as "decline". Areas truly in decline usually have declining populations, fewer occupied housing units, and declining incomes. You also need to consider the shift toward commercial development and the fact that it takes land away from residential uses. They talk about that in the report too. The blocks where, say, the Metro Centre was at one point had housing. I don't think the construction of the Metro Centre was a sign of decline, but it resulted in a lower population.

Another interesting angle is that the idea that the new developments are ultra-crowded or too high density does not hold much water. Crowding, the number of people per units, has gone down. Densities are no higher than they were in 1951.

The difference between overcrowding and high density is one of those things Jane Jacobs tried to clarify back in the 60's. A lot of people get them mixed up. Density is only bad if you don't have the infrastructure to support the population; that is when an area can be said to be overcrowded.

[someone123]

Cushman Wakefield published an article responding specifically to the negativity around the office market in Halifax: http://cwatlantic.com/halifaxs-downtown-office-market-far-from-dead/

They made the same points that have appeared in this thread. Absorption is what matters, not the change in vacancy rates. They also point out that, while there are a couple examples of government offices moving to the suburbs, that trend is less evident in the private sector and vacancy rates in sub-markets outside of downtown are higher than downtown vacancy rates, contrary to what has sometimes been reported in the past (this can go back and forth, but if downtown were in terminal decline that would not be the case).

Turner Drake sent a rebuttal to the publication that shall not be named, but it was pretty weak. For example, they used regional demographic trends to argue about the future prospects for development in downtown Halifax. Switching over to provincial or regional numbers is a time-honoured tradition for those who want to make it seem like the city's doing worse than it is. People also have no idea what the demographics of the region are going to look like in 20 or 30 years; small changes to economic growth or immigration levels can lead to dramatic swings in population growth. Even the birth rate can be hard to predict.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Cushman Wakefield published an article responding specifically to the negativity around the office market in Halifax: http://cwatlantic.com/halifaxs-downtown-office-market-far-from-dead/

They made the same points that have appeared in this thread. Absorption is what matters, not the change in vacancy rates. They also point out that, while there are a couple examples of government offices moving to the suburbs, that trend is less evident in the private sector and vacancy rates in sub-markets outside of downtown are higher than downtown vacancy rates, contrary to what has sometimes been reported in the past (this can go back and forth, but if downtown were in terminal decline that would not be the case).

Turner Drake sent a rebuttal to the publication that shall not be named, but it was pretty weak. For example, they used regional demographic trends to argue about the future prospects for development in downtown Halifax. Switching over to provincial or regional numbers is a time-honoured tradition for those who want to make it seem like the city's doing worse than it is. People also have no idea what the demographics of the region are going to look like in 20 or 30 years; small changes to economic growth or immigration levels can lead to dramatic swings in population growth. Even the birth rate can be hard to predict.

Also... a point I made that nobody responded to... isn't some office in NC already accounted for by the government bodies moving out of the WTCC? And the WTCC will become city offices?

[fenwick16]

Also... a point I made that nobody responded to... isn't some office in NC already accounted for by the government bodies moving out of the WTCC? And the WTCC will become city offices?

I remember seeing some administration office space in the new convention centre plans. However, I believe this is part of the approximately 300,000 square feet of gross space set aside for the convention centre portion of the Nova Centre, not part of the rental office space in the office tower(s).

Once the current WTCC is vacated this will free up additional space that could possibly be used for city offices or it might be put on the private market for sale; how it is deposed of, will depend on its market value and whether the city wants it (from what I remember reading).

[RangerNS]

Once the current WTCC is vacated this will free up additional space that could possibly be used for city offices or it might be put on the private market for sale; how it is deposed of, will depend on its market value and whether the city wants it (from what I remember reading).

As I understand it, the building will be put up for sale on the open market. Requiring extensive renovations, it won't sell, and then HRM becomes obligated to buy it. Then it might, over 5 years or so, be filled up with city offices as leases for where they are now expire.

[Ziobrop]

As I understand it, the building will be put up for sale on the open market. Requiring extensive renovations, it won't sell, and then HRM becomes obligated to buy it. Then it might, over 5 years or so, be filled up with city offices as leases for where they are now expire.

correct - except all city office space is on recently resigned long term leases (Duke Tower) or in already owned buildings. The city doesn't really need the space.

someone might be able to turn it into a data center.. thats really the only use i can think of for that much windowless space - plus it likely has lots of power coming into it already.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Is it considered a separate building to the Scotiabank Centre?

They share infrastructure inside, no?

[fenwick16]

Is it considered a separate building to the Scotiabank Centre?

They share infrastructure inside, no?

I hope that it will be kept by the city if they can get it at a rock bottom price. There will be large events at the Scotiabank Centre such as the Royal NS Tattoo and I imagine it can use more space for performers and visitors.

If in 20 years the city wants a new Metro Centre seating 15,000 plus then the Scotiabank/WTCC site could be used. In 20 years HRM will possibly have 550,000 to 600,000 people if it maintains its steady grow rate.

[RangerNS]

I hope that it will be kept by the city if they can get it at a rock bottom price. There will be large events at the Scotiabank Centre such as the Royal NS Tattoo and I imagine it can use more space for performers and visitors.

If in 20 years the city wants a new Metro Centre seating 15,000 plus then the Scotiabank/WTCC site could be used. In 20 years HRM will possibly have 550,000 to 600,000 people if it maintains its steady grow rate.

* The price will be fixed at , I suspect, WTF ever PVSC thinks it is worth... Just over $21 million today.
* Wherever a new tier 1 hockey rink will be built whenever the Metro center needs replacing, it won't be where the Metro Center is. Halifax "can't" just not have that facility for 5 years of demolition/construction.

[Keith P.]

The existing WTC would probably be a good structure to covert into a hotel. Great location, lots of ballroom space, restaurant kitchen there already. The one thing it lacks is convenient parking but maybe they could do a deal with Scotia Square.

[Haliguy]

The existing WTC would probably be a good structure to covert into a hotel. Great location, lots of ballroom space, restaurant kitchen there already. The one thing it lacks is convenient parking but maybe they could do a deal with Scotia Square.

Ceilings would be a bit high..but it could work

[fenwick16]

* The price will be fixed at , I suspect, WTF ever PVSC thinks it is worth... Just over $21 million today.

This is covered in section 5 of the following document - http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/120710ca1119.pdf . HRM has the option of buying it at market value (based on a 3rd party offer). If a 3rd party is not interested then HRM would buy it at "book value".

What is your source of $21 million dollars?
* Wherever a new tier 1 hockey rink will be built whenever the Metro center needs replacing, it won't be where the Metro Center is. Halifax "can't" just not have that facility for 5 years of demolition/construction.


In 20 years the Scotiabank Centre will be almost 60 years old. Unless the HRM has an NHL team at that time then there is no reason to think that Halifax couldn't use the Forum for a couple of years. It should not take 5 years for demolition and construction. Can you name one major arena that took that long to build?

[musicman]

correct - except all city office space is on recently resigned long term leases (Duke Tower) or in already owned buildings. The city doesn't really need the space.

someone might be able to turn it into a data center.. thats really the only use i can think of for that much windowless space - plus it likely has lots of power coming into it already.

It does have a large amount of power already in it, however probably not enough for a data center. But when it comes down to it what else could it be used for? To bad they couldn't move the data center on the Maxwell's block over to the old WTCC and redevelop that site..

[RangerNS]

What is your source of $21 million dollars?

In 20 years the Scotiabank Centre will be almost 60 years old. Unless the HRM has an NHL team at that time then there is no reason to think that Halifax couldn't use the Forum for a couple of years. It should not take 5 years for demolition and construction. Can you name one major arena that took that long to build?

pvsc.ca is the source for the assessed value. Personally, I'd love to see HRM argue that that *isn't* FMV.

I can't cite 5 years, I just made it up. The flip side is - and I'm no sports fan - I can't think of any arena that directly replaced an arena. Construction time from "empty land" or "hole in the ground" is gonna be very different then from where step 1 "asbestos removal in existing building".


And re: Data Center

Not going to happen. The data center on Sackville (beside the ex-CBC building) can't get clients because it is *too close* to downtown. Risk analysis that has existing data centers go offline also wipes out everything within kilometers.

[curnhalio]

I can't cite 5 years, I just made it up. The flip side is - and I'm no sports fan - I can't think of any arena that directly replaced an arena. Construction time from "empty land" or "hole in the ground" is gonna be very different then from where step 1 "asbestos removal in existing building".

Madison Square Garden in New York had its entire interior renovated over three or four summers without major interruption to the playing schedules of the Knicks and Rangers. This wouldn't be feasible for the Metro Centre because any proper renovation would have to include rotating the rink 90 degrees so a proper seating bowl could be built, with luxury boxes that don't hang down and obscure 10 rows of seats with already bad views.

[LordGarak]

Why would anyone put a data center downtown or even in old construction period? If anyone is going to build a data center in HRM it will be in burnside or any one of the other industrial parks.

The big problem wouldn't access to power, its getting rid of the excess heat.

The old convention centre should continue to be a convention centre, just not a full service facility. They should just reduce the staffing down to minimal 9-5 staff and have contractors supply services as needed for clients. Even the cleaning should be contracted out. The place will be empty 95% of the time and there is no need to run major events back to back(which requires lots of expensive 24hr staffing).

Conventions generally all happen at the same time. So I don't think we could ever have too much capacity. And its not just conventions, its community events, live entertainment, fundraisers, etc...

Reducing services and running the place lean and mean should also make it more accessible to the community and not just the wealthy businesses.

[musicman]

Why would anyone put a data center downtown or even in old construction period? If anyone is going to build a data center in HRM it will be in burnside or any one of the other industrial parks.

The big problem wouldn't access to power, its getting rid of the excess heat.

The old convention centre should continue to be a convention centre, just not a full service facility. They should just reduce the staffing down to minimal 9-5 staff and have contractors supply services as needed for clients. Even the cleaning should be contracted out. The place will be empty 95% of the time and there is no need to run major events back to back(which requires lots of expensive 24hr staffing).

Conventions generally all happen at the same time. So I don't think we could ever have too much capacity. And its not just conventions, its community events, live entertainment, fundraisers, etc...

Reducing services and running the place lean and mean should also make it more accessible to the community and not just the wealthy businesses.

I agree 100%. This what should happen to the old center. However we all know that will not happen because it will be "competition" for the new center. Besides conventions are a dying industry right?......:shrug:

[worldlyhaligonian]

Why would anyone put a data center downtown or even in old construction period? If anyone is going to build a data center in HRM it will be in burnside or any one of the other industrial parks.

The big problem wouldn't access to power, its getting rid of the excess heat.

The old convention centre should continue to be a convention centre, just not a full service facility. They should just reduce the staffing down to minimal 9-5 staff and have contractors supply services as needed for clients. Even the cleaning should be contracted out. The place will be empty 95% of the time and there is no need to run major events back to back(which requires lots of expensive 24hr staffing).

Conventions generally all happen at the same time. So I don't think we could ever have too much capacity. And its not just conventions, its community events, live entertainment, fundraisers, etc...

Reducing services and running the place lean and mean should also make it more accessible to the community and not just the wealthy businesses.

That's how its currently run... but the facility is appropriate size for the larger events. I feel like they could operate both, with the events that are too big for WTCC being in the NC (which will be many new events that were not possible).

[worldlyhaligonian]

I agree 100%. This what should happen to the old center. However we all know that will not happen because it will be "competition" for the new center. Besides conventions are a dying industry right?......:shrug:

Lol... so they held a series of conventions to say the convention industry was "dying".

By dying, they somehow tried to dodge the numbers that show there are more conventions more frequently and they are larger... but that doesn't fit into the narrative of some (who just didn't want tall buildings downtown).

[someone123]

Lol... so they held a series of conventions to say the convention industry was "dying".

I found that pretty hilarious. Nobody meets up in person anymore! Come to Dr. Heywood Sanders' travelling show and hear all about it! :)

[musicman]

Madison Square Garden in New York had its entire interior renovated over three or four summers without major interruption to the playing schedules of the Knicks and Rangers. This wouldn't be feasible for the Metro Centre because any proper renovation would have to include rotating the rink 90 degrees so a proper seating bowl could be built, with luxury boxes that don't hang down and obscure 10 rows of seats with already bad views.

Rotation of the surface would never happen. The arena is not structured properly for this to happen, it would basically be a new build if this was to happen. Easier and cheaper to build a new one.

[Jonovision]

Facade work is progressing and it has officially topped. All of the flying formwork is being taken down.

http://41.media.tumblr.com/e1cf8daf4f7ba3b82c100e7ae7331b43/tumblr_o1vgn5stZ81sk8kjeo1_1280.jpg

http://40.media.tumblr.com/9b46d9c0fc8171d51dd926d7ff94ad0a/tumblr_o1vgne9G1o1sk8kjeo1_1280.jpg

[Jonovision]

https://40.media.tumblr.com/72d3878c50db0b1fff6451be62dbcc68/tumblr_o1zplp0SIy1sk8kjeo4_1280.jpg

https://41.media.tumblr.com/7fa1a08b24379ee4e6e1c0c2d2d6783f/tumblr_o1zplp0SIy1sk8kjeo3_1280.jpg

[fenwick16]

They are making good progress installing the curtain glass. It looks good.

[kph06]

Work has begun to remove the Sackville St. crane.

[Jonovision]

I have a backlog of pics from this week, but tumblr is not cooperating with my phone. Once it sorts itself out I will post the pics.

[teddifax]

How do you post pictures? I used to know but have forgotten how!

[Dmajackson]

I have a backlog of pics from this week, but tumblr is not cooperating with my phone. Once it sorts itself out I will post the pics.

I had the same problem this week. I ended up transferring my photos to my laptop where tumblr was working.

[fenwick16]

How do you post pictures? I used to know but have forgotten how!

Here is a list of BB codes for the Skyscraperpage forum with example usages - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/misc.php?do=bbcode. The simplest method is explained as follows: (note "value" is your image link which is normally a *****.jpg or *****.png or *****.gif _file.

Images
The tag allows you to embed images within your posts...

Usage [img]value

Example Usage http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/page/images/transamericapyramid.jpg
Result: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/page/images/transamericapyramid.jpg


Have fun posting pictures on skyscraperpage forum
:)

[teddifax]

Thank you, I will keep a copy of this for future reference.

[Keith P.]

Thank you, I will keep a copy of this for future reference.

Above the box in which you type your reply there is an icon that is a square with a rendition of a mountain and a sun in one corner. Just click that and it prompts you for the image URL.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Above the box in which you type your reply there is an icon that is a square with a rendition of a mountain and a sun in one corner. Just click that and it prompts you for the image URL.

Yes, or you can always surround the image URL by the HTML tags: imageurlhere

[fenwick16]

Above the box in which you type your reply there is an icon that is a square with a rendition of a mountain and a sun in one corner. Just click that and it prompts you for the image URL.

That is the easy explanation :)

[fenwick16]

I haven't seen any pictures showing glass being installed on the hotel tower. Has a hotel brand been announced yet?

[RoshanMcG]

I didn't realize how different the two tones of glass were until I looked at it from further away. Here it is from the top floor of the library.

http://i68.tinypic.com/24lq5o8.jpg

[fenwick16]

I didn't realize how different the two tones of glass were until I looked at it from further away. Here it is from the top floor of the library.

http://i68.tinypic.com/24lq5o8.jpg

The pointed southern corner of the Nova Centre does seem to be a different tone. I don't see any need for the two tones, especially for such a small area that is part of the same office tower (it almost looks like they got a good deal on some of the 1801 Hollis Street glass).

[IanWatson]

I know I might be crucified for saying it... but the Nova Centre is shaping up to be pretty darn ugly. It looks oooook when viewed from the north or south, but when viewed from the water or citadel hill it is just a big slab of a wall with a mish-mash of glass colours and tones.

[kph06]

The greenish checkered glass looks pretty bad. I was hoping the webcam wasn't showing it's true colors. I have concerns, hopefully it will all come together.

[kwajo]

It does look checkered in the renderings, although with not nearly as much contrast between tones as it looks from certain angles.

http://i63.tinypic.com/34oehck.jpg

I will reserve judgement until it is done however, as I still recall how much discussion went on about the glass at the library during installation and it turned out fine.

[connect2source]

Wow, not liking the glazing at all!! Looks terrible, mismatched and hodgepodge...and somewhat 80's. Hope it will look better once complete.

[OldDartmouthMark]

I know I might be crucified for saying it... but the Nova Centre is shaping up to be pretty darn ugly. It looks oooook when viewed from the north or south, but when viewed from the water or citadel hill it is just a big slab of a wall with a mish-mash of glass colours and tones.

I've been thinking it ever since I first saw it topped-out in concrete, but that's just my opinion and I don't want to take away anybody's enthusiasm for the project.

When you think of it, for any type of 1970s-style blockbuster project like this, there will have to be a profile or two that just looks massive and awkward, unless it is designed with a large, low podium and a series of slim towers. :2cents:

[eastcoastal]

It does look checkered in the renderings, although with not nearly as much contrast between tones as it looks from certain angles.

http://i63.tinypic.com/34oehck.jpg

I will reserve judgement until it is done however, as I still recall how much discussion went on about the glass at the library during installation and it turned out fine.

On the library: the orange is OK, in my opinion. The leaf print is not.

On Nova Centre: I am less a fan of the glazing pattern the more I see it (from a distance)... on the streets a few blocks away, I feel like it's pretty exciting. On the streets adjacent, it feels massive (I'm not decided if massive is good or not yet).

[Phalanx]

I don't think the mottled effect will be quite so noticeable once the interior structure is in place. Right now everything is dark and cavernous, which makes it stand out against the comparatively light looking spandrels. Once the interior walls (presumably white) are in place, it will lessen the effect.

[portapetey]

I've been thinking it ever since I first saw it topped-out in concrete, but that's just my opinion and I don't want to take away anybody's enthusiasm for the project.

When you think of it, for any type of 1970s-style blockbuster project like this, there will have to be a profile or two that just looks massive and awkward, unless it is designed with a large, low podium and a series of slim towers. :2cents:

I think this has become a pretty common opinion. Many people I know that were enthusiastic supporters (including myself) have come to question what we hath wrought. I recently sat at Lot Six with a few friends, several of whom are development types who were very much in support, and almost unanimously they all looked across the street and wondered aloud just what they had been thinking...

I was going to post a comment reflecting that at the time, but I decided to quiet my fingers :-)

Why this became such a 70s blockbuster is the big question. I saw early in the construction that this had the potential to be another Scotia Square, and I wondered what happened to the idea of three more-or-less separate towers. And I think public input - design-by-committee - might be the answer!!

I think there are going to be a lot of "I told you sos" coming from the "Friends of..." crowd.

[portapetey]

The greenish checkered glass looks pretty bad. I was hoping the webcam wasn't showing it's true colors. I have concerns, hopefully it will all come together.

This is probably a stupid question, but might there be a layer missing? Is there a darker blue that goes outside what's there? I dunno. I really hope this isn't the final finish.

[someone123]

I think the "Friends of..." are perhaps the biggest contributing factor to the design flaws of this development. The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives. The design rules make it hard to build a slender tower downtown with hundreds of thousands of square feet of space.

In this instance I think it would have been a great trade-off to have a slender office tower somewhat visible from inside the Citadel (it would complement the 70's buildings that are already visible). However, I still think this is a positive development for the city and I suspect it will work out a lot better than Scotia Square in terms of its impact on adjacent properties. Its footprint is much smaller and it is much more permeable for pedestrians. If it turns out well the covered street and interior path down to Argyle could be really interesting.

[Phalanx]

I think the biggest contributing factor to the monolithic 'blockbuster' feel is the relocation of the convention floor from below ground to above ground. It went from light glass arch connecting two blocks to one massive slab making it one huge, effectively unified block.

I definitely preferred the glass arch to what we ended up with, and since that change was largely driven by public input, then I that could be at least partially to blame.

That said, I agree that having 3 towers vs the 2 that we ended up with would have gone a long way toward helping.

[portapetey]

I think the "Friends of..." are perhaps the biggest contributing factor to the design flaws of this development. The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives. The design rules make it hard to build a slender tower downtown with hundreds of thousands of square feet of space.

In this instance I think it would have been a great trade-off to have a slender office tower somewhat visible from inside the Citadel (it would complement the 70's buildings that are already visible). However, I still think this is a positive development for the city and I suspect it will work out a lot better than Scotia Square in terms of its impact on adjacent properties. Its footprint is much smaller and it is much more permeable for pedestrians. If it turns out well the covered street and interior path down to Argyle could be really interesting.

Agreed on all points. It just looks so monolithic when you're in the historical buildings along Argyle. Oh, well, we'll see how it turns out!

[portapetey]

I think the biggest contributing factor to the monolithic 'blockbuster' feel is the relocation of the convention floor from below ground to above ground. It went from light glass arch connecting two blocks to one massive slab making it one huge, effectively unified block.

I definitely preferred the glass arch to what we ended up with, and since that change was largely driven by public input, then I that could be at least partially to blame.

That said, I agree that having 3 towers vs the 2 that we ended up with would have gone a long way toward helping.

Yeah, I still don't really get why the supposed two towers along Argyle had to be connected to one another all the way up, making them effectively one large wide facade. Even a gap of a few metres between them would have made the block look more airy.

[worldlyhaligonian]

In the end, its probably better that the convention space is above ground.

I think its turning out better than expected. The convention space reminds me of the library and the overall form is not 70s in my opinion. The glass might be the most interesting bit and isn't finished.

I like how it ties Halifax's disparate glass aesthetics together and the building itself makes the downtown seem more cohesive (I like how the podium height matches several of the surrounding hotel heights... if there are any bars in the development on the Argyle side, its going to have a very interesting night life scene down in there).

[Keith P.]

I am going to reserve judgement until it is finished. However I have no doubt that the public consultation and design-by-committee features demanded by the "Friends of" obstructionists resulted in a poorly-designed and less aesthetically-pleasing building.

[lawsond]

Wow, not liking the glazing at all!! Looks terrible, mismatched and hodgepodge...and somewhat 80's. Hope it will look better once complete.

That is very high quality glazing. Smooth not too much spandrel. There are two tones to he define the separate structures. It will work. At least it's not like the skanky Wall Centre where they literally ran out and used totally different hue.

[counterfactual]

From what I've seen, I think it looks good. I think the disparate glass will have a "shimmering" effect once done.

[IanWatson]

The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives.

I think in this case the view planes are responsible for the most redeeming architectural feature of the building, which is the angled corner at Sackville and Argyle.

The design rules make it hard to build a slender tower downtown with hundreds of thousands of square feet of space.

The very frustrating thing in this case is that HRMxDesign has design rules to prevent the worst part of this building, which is the monolithic slab along Argyle. If the design rules--or at least those related to maximum tower width--had been followed I think this building would be much improved.

[Drybrain]

I didn't expect to like the building much at all, and generally I'm a big advocate of the much-derided (on here) human scale in architecture. But I am sort of enjoying the massiveness of it, which is amplified by the fact that it is, unquestionably, out of scale for the immediate area, and situated on narrow streets.

It reminds me a bit of the TIFF Lightbox across from Toronto's King West restaurant strip (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6463049,-79.3910129,3a,75y,82.59h,101.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdUUzezQB79EEae3CdQOh-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Though in Halifax's case, the street is narrower and the restaurant strip is more patio-oriented, which changes the dynamic.

Anyway, the effect on Argyle remains to be seen, but I can't imagine it being worse than when the Herald building was there, empty and un-used.

Hopefully we don't have any of the falling panes of window glass that have plagued Toronto window walls.

[TheGreenBastard]

I didn't expect to like the building much at all, and generally I'm a big advocate of the much-derided (on here) human scale in architecture. But I am sort of enjoying the massiveness of it, which is amplified by the fact that it is, unquestionably, out of scale for the immediate area, and situated on narrow streets.

It seems much taller than it really is on the Argyle side. I really like that effect.

[counterfactual]

I think the "Friends of..." are perhaps the biggest contributing factor to the design flaws of this development. The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives. The design rules make it hard to build a slender tower downtown with hundreds of thousands of square feet of space.

In this instance I think it would have been a great trade-off to have a slender office tower somewhat visible from inside the Citadel (it would complement the 70's buildings that are already visible). However, I still think this is a positive development for the city and I suspect it will work out a lot better than Scotia Square in terms of its impact on adjacent properties. Its footprint is much smaller and it is much more permeable for pedestrians. If it turns out well the covered street and interior path down to Argyle could be really interesting.

Very well said, and I agree.

[connect2source]

That is very high quality glazing. Smooth not too much spandrel. There are two tones to he define the separate structures. It will work. At least it's not like the skanky Wall Centre where they literally ran out and used totally different hue.


Not true about the Wall Centre. in 1999 when One Wall Centre was being built there was a dispute between Busby, the Architects, and Peter Wall, the owner/developer, Busby wanted clear, Wall wanted dark tinted so they compromised , the hotel portion ( lower floors ) would be dark and the condos clear. After 15 years of no tint, and oppressive heat from the sun, the condo voted to re-glaze, as it had been many years, the original manufacturer of the lower portion was no longer in business so they had to settle for a close match, which IMO looks terrible.

Glad to hear the Nova Centre glazing is of high quality but one shade or tone would have looked far more cohesive.

[eastcoastal]

I think the "Friends of..." are perhaps the biggest contributing factor to the design flaws of this development. The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives. ...

This project was excluded by HRMbyDesign's rules. I'm not saying they would have protected it, but this is still the product of previous rules.

It may very well be that the massing of this thing is driven by the floorplates required for the convention pieces. If this is the case, then perhaps such a large floorplate is inappropriate for smack in the middle of downtown... or would be better below grade - I realize that the convention components were originally below grade, but public consultation decided that conventions were better served with access to views.

[eastcoastal]

I am going to reserve judgement until it is finished. However I have no doubt that the public consultation and design-by-committee features demanded by the "Friends of" obstructionists resulted in a poorly-designed and less aesthetically-pleasing building.

agreed

[fenwick16]

I noticed this video on the Halifax Convention Centre website - http://www.halifaxconventioncentre.com/ . What I find interesting is that it gives interior renderings of the Exhibition Hall and Ballroom. The finishing touches will be rather spartan with exposed girders in both the Exhibition Hall and Ballroom, which I think was a prudent choice since it should minimize construction cost.

Hopefully the spartan finishes will allow the convention centre to be finished in 2016.

m1-71W-nPNA

[worldlyhaligonian]

I really hope there are some new bars on the Argyle sections as the renderings suggest...

[connect2source]

I really hope there are some new bars on the Argyle sections as the renderings suggest...

Would make a good location for Halifax's first location for one of the power-restobar chains like Cactus Club, Joey's or Earls.

[Drybrain]

Would make a good location for Halifax's first location for one of the power-restobar chains like Cactus Club, Joey's or Earls.

Honestly, I really hope not. The seating capacity and frontage one of them could command would probably drain the life out of the much more interesting row of businesses one the other side of the street.

I don't love all the Argyle bars (I've thought about the possibility that some, especially the student-focused ones, may go out of business if the Nova Centre shifts the street in a more upscale direction). But the strength of the street is in the small frontages and eclectic mixture of businesses. If the street goes more upscale, it'll be better off, and a more interesting destination for visitors, conventioners, and of course locals, if that's driven by unique, independent businesses, rather than a bunch of mediocre chain mega-bars slinging pints of Rickard's and $14.99 chicken-wing plates.

Usually I think franchises can co-exist with local businesses (I think seeing national chains opening on Barrington is great, for example) but in this case I think it would just tip the balance too much, and we'd see everything good about Argyle get bum-rushed off the street.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Honestly, I really hope not. The seating capacity and frontage one of them could command would probably drain the life out of the much more interesting row of businesses one the other side of the street.

I don't love all the Argyle bars (I've thought about the possibility that some, especially the student-focused ones, may go out of business if the Nova Centre shifts the street in a more upscale direction). But the strength of the street is in the small frontages and eclectic mixture of businesses. If the street goes more upscale, it'll be better off, and a more interesting destination for visitors, conventioners, and of course locals, if that's driven by unique, independent businesses, rather than a bunch of mediocre chain mega-bars slinging pints of Rickard's and $14.99 chicken-wing plates.

Usually I think franchises can co-exist with local businesses (I think seeing national chains opening on Barrington is great, for example) but in this case I think it would just tip the balance too much, and we'd see everything good about Argyle get bum-rushed off the street.

I was thinking more of a lounge/nightclub with a patio during the day. It would more directly compete with The Argyle down the street or, shudder, the Toothy Moose.

I think having more people down there will help all of the businesses.

[someone123]

Honestly, I really hope not. The seating capacity and frontage one of them could command would probably drain the life out of the much more interesting row of businesses one the other side of the street.

I have thought about this too but I'm less convinced that the chains would be negative for the street.

The convention centre, offices, and hotels, are going to grow demand for nearby bars and restaurants to the point where there could be at least a couple of new ones without really hurting the old ones at all. The convention space itself is actually somewhat unusual in terms of how well-connected it will be to adjacent blocks; a lot of them are walled-off compounds that discourage conference goers from getting out and exploring. On top of this there are going to be more residents in the area in a couple of years too.

The Cactus Club type places are probably not going to want to locate in the smaller older buildings nearby, so as long as those stick around they will probably still work for local businesses (this is one of the reasons why heritage buildings are good). A certain number of people will go to the local places to avoid generic chains. The generic bars will be hit harder, but I don't consider them to be as big of a loss.

Overall I'm guessing it's going to be 80% complementary rather than directly competitive. Time will tell but if I had to hazard a guess I'd predict that the Argyle Street area is going to be busier and more successful in the future.

[Drybrain]

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't be terribly upset to see joints like the Toothy Moose, etc., disappear.

Nonetheless, but I think there's a real risk of the strip's character being diminished rather than enhanced by that kind of business. (But then, having spent my youth in Alberta, maybe I'm just predisposed against the megapubs, etc.)

[worldlyhaligonian]

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't be terribly upset to see joints like the Toothy Moose, etc., disappear.

Nonetheless, but I think there's a real risk of the strip's character being diminished rather than enhanced by that kind of business. (But then, having spent my youth in Alberta, maybe I'm just predisposed against the megapubs, etc.)

Well, maybe it will lead to more of those suburban types spending money downtown? I'm amazing that BP seems to do so well downtown...

Personally, those places have no appeal to me and I don't think a chain will take away customers from the places that have character. I think issues more relate to similar independent places cannibalizing eachother.

[lawsond]

Not true about the Wall Centre. in 1999 when One Wall Centre was being built there was a dispute between Busby, the Architects, and Peter Wall, the owner/developer, Busby wanted clear, Wall wanted dark tinted so they compromised , the hotel portion ( lower floors ) would be dark and the condos clear. After 15 years of no tint, and oppressive heat from the sun, the condo voted to re-glaze, as it had been many years, the original manufacturer of the lower portion was no longer in business so they had to settle for a close match, which IMO looks terrible.

Glad to hear the Nova Centre glazing is of high quality but one shade or tone would have looked far more cohesive.

Did not know that about the Wall. Thanks. I think it will look fine when done. But we shall see. I,love the orange section of the new library so I am willing to allow that it could look good when completed.

[worldlyhaligonian]

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1559/24789361270_4a3eb41f2c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DLxXsw)Halifax storm clouds (https://flic.kr/p/DLxXsw) by davicday (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21989395@N03/), on Flickr

[kph06]

Now that the crane is gone, you can see a strip of blue glass that breaks up the green checkered glass.

http://images.novascotiawebcams.com/novacentre/2016/02/19/19/novacentre_20160219-190218_axLSxbGmg1rj6BL9.jpg

NS Webcams - Nova Centre (http://www.novascotiawebcams.com/en/webcams/nova-centre/)

[Jonovision]

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1559/24789361270_4a3eb41f2c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DLxXsw)Halifax storm clouds (https://flic.kr/p/DLxXsw) by davicday (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21989395@N03/), on Flickr

I've noticed this from a couple of viewpoints but I cannot tell if its an optical illusion or not. Is the roofline slanting up towards the Sackville corner of the building?

[fenwick16]

Now that the crane is gone, you can see a strip of blue glass that breaks up the green checkered glass.

http://images.novascotiawebcams.com/novacentre/2016/02/19/19/novacentre_20160219-190218_axLSxbGmg1rj6BL9.jpg

NS Webcams - Nova Centre (http://www.novascotiawebcams.com/en/webcams/nova-centre/)


I noticed this also (the blue strip behind the crane). Just that bit of blue glass is an improvement since it seems to tie in the different tones of glass and break up the green checkered area.

[worldlyhaligonian]

I've noticed this from a couple of viewpoints but I cannot tell if its an optical illusion or not. Is the roofline slanting up towards the Sackville corner of the building?

Not sure... it isn't my pic... but it might be the Roy crane in front? Or it could be slanted. Tough to tell.

[fenwick16]

I've noticed this from a couple of viewpoints but I cannot tell if its an optical illusion or not. Is the roofline slanting up towards the Sackville corner of the building?


Based on drawings in this document - http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/140401ca1141.PDF - presented to the Design Review Committee, the roof really is slanted.

[counterfactual]

I think the "Friends of..." are perhaps the biggest contributing factor to the design flaws of this development. The viewplanes and ramparts bylaw are what shaped the massing of this building. Developers are just going to build what fits, and when it comes to large multi-use complexes like this there aren't many alternatives. The design rules make it hard to build a slender tower downtown with hundreds of thousands of square feet of space.

In this instance I think it would have been a great trade-off to have a slender office tower somewhat visible from inside the Citadel (it would complement the 70's buildings that are already visible). However, I still think this is a positive development for the city and I suspect it will work out a lot better than Scotia Square in terms of its impact on adjacent properties. Its footprint is much smaller and it is much more permeable for pedestrians. If it turns out well the covered street and interior path down to Argyle could be really interesting.

One day, we'll have a provincial politician or city mayor with guts who will take on the absurd ramparts/view planes laws.

This was a perfect opportunity to do so, but instead, we end up with short, squat, wide massing development.

They did their best with what they have. Surely someone will realize eventually, however, that ALL viewplanes, nor ramparts requirements without exception, are not necessary to preserve a nice view from Citadel Hill.

[lawsond]

Based on drawings in this document - http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/140401ca1141.PDF - presented to the Design Review Committee, the roof really is slanted.

Great renders in that document. They show the slant but also clearly show the checkerboard pattern contrasted with the smooth blue. And it looks great. I think it is going to look fine. From every angle except Citadel Hill. Many many smaller cities in North Anerica would be thrilled to see this development in their downtown.

[someone123]

Based on drawings in this document - http://www.halifax.ca/council/agendasc/documents/140401ca1141.PDF - presented to the Design Review Committee, the roof really is slanted.

The Martello roof is slanted in the same way. I figured this was done to conform with the ramparts requirement.

[RangerNS]

The Martello roof is slanted in the same way. I figured this was done to conform with the ramparts requirement.

Or is just consistent with the "vaguely looks like a ship" thing they are going for, with the "pointed bow" on the SE corner.

[someone123]

I think the cladding looks pretty good in this shot:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cb2DUXkWwAEjuWf.jpg:large
Source (https://twitter.com/SBTSHalifax/media)