[Halifax] Nova Centre | 65-58-58 m | 16-15-14 fl | Completed [Archive] - Page 5

someone123

Sep 23, 2009, 8:39 PM

Would the Nova Centre be a significant change? Yes. For the better? I'm not so sure... but not because of the size, I just don't like it... but my personal taste is not enough to mean that a legitimate project that fits the planning guidelines.

The thing is, if you don't like the look of it, you should complain about the design and maybe it will be changed since it's still early in the process. It's entirely possible that, if this is built, it will look very little like the original rendering. The fact that the colours are ugly or the cladding is not the best kind doesn't imply that Halifax shouldn't have a new convention centre.

Bev Miller and some of the others appear to have a problem with the city changing and with historic buildings being left in disrepair and being demolished. Change will happen whether they like it or not and this is not the way to protect heritage buildings; the best way would be to have more new development and leverage the additional demand/activity/money that it brings. They are misguided and are not being totally honest when they go on about how buildings should be three storeys so they can have their own little solar panels etc.

The biggest symptom of this intellectual dishonesty is that most of these arguments are either very shaky, totally irrelevant, or just wrong. I don't believe this group is stupid, I believe that they are working backwards, desperately trying to find arguments to fit their ideology rather than first looking at the facts and then coming up with a position that is realistic and good for the city.

Dmajackson

Oct 1, 2009, 7:31 PM

Province, HRM Announce Next Phase of Convention Centre Proposal
Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal
October 1, 2009 2:26 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The province and Halifax Regional Municipality have invited the Rank Group to submit a detailed proposal to develop a new convention centre in Halifax.

"Development of a new convention centre is a major undertaking for both HRM and province," said Bill Estabrooks, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. "We are taking a measured approach to ensure this is the right project and one that Nova Scotians can afford.

"This is an important step forward in that process and will provide the proposed project details we need to make an informed decision."

The Rank Group was selected as the preferred proponent earlier this year through an expression of interest process. A joint team from the province and HRM has developed detailed project requirements for the new convention centre for the request for proposal. In its proposal, Rank will be required to outline a design and facility management plan, financing plan, and price.

"I am pleased that we are taking this positive step together toward the development of a new convention centre that will assist in driving the economy of this region, and indeed, the province," said Peter Kelly, Mayor of the Halifax Regional Municipality. "We have shared interest in ensuring we have a solid proposal that balances affordability with the ability to attract larger conferences to the region."

The proposal is due in February. The province and HRM have hired a consultant to prepare an independent detailed cost estimate to compare with the Rank proposal. The information gathered through both proposals will be used to make a final decision on whether the project will proceed.

The convention centre project, as proposed, fully conforms with the view planes and Citadel ramparts view protection under HRM planning regulations as they have existed for more than 30 years, and does not violate any other existing municipal polices or regulations regarding view planes.

"We will not be part of any project that impinges on protected view planes," said Mr. Estabrooks.

As the proposals are being developed, detailed estimates of economic benefits will be prepared and discussions will continue among all three levels of government about cost sharing for the project. Similar projects in other parts of the country have cost between $100 million and $200 million.

A final decision on whether a new convention centre will be constructed in Halifax is not expected until after March.

Jonovision

Oct 2, 2009, 1:56 PM

Just what Ramia wanted

By ROGER TAYLOR Business Columnist
Fri. Oct 2 - 4:46 AM

IT MAY not have been the declaration everyone has been waiting for, but the developer behind a proposed new convention centre in downtown Halifax says a government request Thursday for more detail was just what he wanted.

Joe Ramia would not have been able to proceed with plans for building a new convention centre unless he received the 500-page request for proposal released by the NDP government after its weekly cabinet meeting.

The proposal requires Rank Inc. to develop a design and facility management plan based on what the government has indicated it wants included, financing for the project and the price.

It has been suggested that the price for a new convention centre could be in the range of $100 million to $200 million, but it all depends on what the government says it wants.

The existing World Trade and Convention Centre facilities have been deemed by trade centre officials to be inadequate for many organizations interested in holding meetings in Halifax, resulting in about 80 per cent of potential convention business seeking accommodations elsewhere.

If a new convention centre is built, it’s proposed that it would be capable of handling more than 2,000 people in its convention hall and, with a major exhibit hall, would qualify to host conventions that are not coming to this region.

The whole Nova Centre Global Trade and Finance project, which also includes private-sector plans for a hotel with residential units, retail complex and financial centre office tower, is projected to cost more than $300 million to build.

Demolition of the former Herald building on Argyle Street and the former home of the Midtown Tavern on Grafton Street should begin this month. Once demolition is completed, Rank may decide to proceed immediately with excavation based on the fact that something will be built on the site, whether or not the convention centre goes as planned.

The plan is to begin pouring concrete in 2010. It should take about three years to complete all aspects of the project.

"The beauty about this project is that it brings thousands of people to downtown, whether there is a convention or not," Ramia, the lead investor in Rank, told me Thursday.

Convention centres in other cities have traditionally been crowded when a convention is in town but a dead zone when there is a lull in business. Ramia says the mixed-use design of the Nova Centre aims to make it a hot spot whether or not there is a convention.

Although most people seem to be enthusiastic about a major new development in the downtown, there are also opponents to Rank’s plan, based on concerns about heritage and maintaining views from Citadel Hill.

Rank insists, however, that it meets all the view plane requirements from Citadel Hill. In fact, the 1970 view plane legislation, aimed at protecting the view of the harbour from the Citadel ramparts, has been included in the city’s new HRM by Design development plan.

Ramia says a strong Halifax is a key economic element for the province and improving the downtown is critical to creating a stronger Halifax. He said the announcement Thursday will provide a much-needed spark for the downtown district, which should have a long-lasting economic impact on the city and the province once construction begins.

The provincial government has given Rank until February to provide the details it wants, and a decision on whether to proceed with the convention centre will be made in March. It is expected the developer and government officials will be negotiating over the details before they are presented to cabinet for a decision.

It will be a surprise if the convention centre isn’t built. The key will probably be Rank’s ability to negotiate an acceptable price tag.

( rtaylor@herald.ca)

Barrington south

Oct 2, 2009, 4:45 PM

what Roger does not mention, is that the provence is seeking a "shadow bid"

Jonovision

Oct 2, 2009, 5:09 PM

A shadow bid?!

sdm

Oct 2, 2009, 8:14 PM

A shadow bid?!

A Shadow bid is conducted by a third party seperate from the developer. The results of the Shadow Bid will be use to confirm that the developers numbers are correct and vaild. This process usually ends up in delays however.

Sad thing is that this is far from a done deal, and in my opinionthe writing is on the wall that it could be squashed altogther come spring.

Time will tell.

Barrington south

Oct 12, 2009, 7:35 AM

I've been told that if Dex and crew screw this up, Ramia will simply revert back to his original plans for the site. So either way it is win-win and a good piece of city building, adding much needed retail at grade, class-A and residential density

I can hear Bev miller now.....What?!! People living Downtown?!! that will ruin the Historic Parking Lots!!:P

sdm

Oct 14, 2009, 10:17 AM

Tower critics send postcards to legislature

By JEFFREY SIMPSON Provincial Reporter
Wed. Oct 14 - 4:46 AM
A group comprised mostly of Halifax residents opposed to highrise buildings downtown used postcards Tuesday to send a message to Province House.

The Coalition to Save the View, which consists largely of several advocacy groups with an overlapping membership, had almost 800 postcards signed by people against the two towers of a proposed convention centre in downtown Halifax.

Peter Delefes, who heads the Heritage Trust, said the province shouldn’t help fund the development if its 14- and 18-storey towers are going to block part of a view of Halifax Harbour from Citadel Hill. "We have serious concerns about that," Mr. Delefes said.

He’s concerned about changes in the land-use bylaw under HRM by Design, which was brought to the legislature Tuesday. The towers wouldn’t contravene rules protecting view planes from the hill, he acknowledged, but would block part of the view.

The group said 69 per cent of people who signed a card were from Halifax and 22 per cent were from outside Nova Scotia.

beyeas

Oct 14, 2009, 2:09 PM

I was really happy to see how that little "Weekly News" supplement reported on the Nova Centre this week. It was only a small little piece about the request to go forward with a proposal, but at the end they made a point of saying that the proposal did not violate any view planes or any municipal planning bylaws, and they gave not a work on the heritage front. Funny that a little rag like that can give a fairer assessment than The Chronicaly Horrible.

Phalanx

Oct 14, 2009, 3:33 PM

worldlyhaligonian

Oct 14, 2009, 4:15 PM

The towers wouldn’t contravene rules protecting view planes from the hill, he acknowledged, but would block part of the view.

What a contradiction... in the same sentence no less.

We wouldn't have a city if "blocking part of the view" was an issue.

Wishblade

Oct 14, 2009, 5:30 PM

Takeo

Oct 15, 2009, 6:28 PM

Why are people even fighting this? If it doesn't fall under a view plane, that should be end of story and it should just simply be built. The heritage advocates should be happy with the current viewplane regulations, because to be honest I think their too generous as it is.

They fight against it because they fight against everything. The view planes are not enough for them. Compromise is not in their vocabulary. That's how it always is with religious groups.

DigitalNinja

Oct 16, 2009, 2:59 AM

There is one phrase that we need someone to say at the next meeting thing for the application of a highrise.

And that is... Are you ready for it?

Want to be remembered for the great architectural work that we did? Or having nothing to your generations name because you saved crap.

But like seriously, you would rather have a friggen parking lot than a place where people would use.

I really hate society has a whole. Things would be much better if I ruled the world. :P

People bug me to say the least.

Specially theses heritage nuts. There are some buildings that I think are great that we should save. But please invest in these buildings and not just let the brickwork degrade. Some of the smaller buildings on Barrington bring this to mind, like before the TD tower there are some nice small buildings there. But wanting to save everything that is over 40 years old is a bit redic in my opinion.

If I ever went to one of these council open things, I'd be kicked out in a heart beat...

kph06

Nov 10, 2009, 7:43 PM

I drove by today and noticed workers taking off the concrete wall paneling on the South West corner, leaving just the structural steel frame. Must be issues with asbestos as they were in full Tyvex suits. Its nice to see things rolling here though.

worldlyhaligonian

Nov 10, 2009, 10:52 PM

That is good news, the longest journey begins with the first step.

kph06

Nov 25, 2009, 1:15 AM

I noticed there is now a website under construction for the Nova Centre here (http://www.novacentre.ca/). Nothing new, but it might be something to keep an eye on.

sdm

Nov 25, 2009, 1:17 AM

I noticed there is now a website under construction for the Nova Centre here (http://www.novacentre.ca/). Nothing new, but it might be something to keep an eye on.

actually thats been like that for sometime.

Doggard

Nov 25, 2009, 2:26 AM

I have to admit that I was pretty keen on this development when it was first announced, but now I feel differently. I used to think that Halifax was lucky to see any interest in development at all, but after seeing the new proposal renderings for the Roy Building and the recent conceptual drawings for Fenwick, I feel like we should be asking for higher standards from our esteemed architects. (I think) The Fenwick design seems really well thought out and ultimately quite attractive. The Nova Centre design, while still having some very interesting qualities, seems dated and isolated. It appears to be too closed off from prince street and, as always, I just plain hate precast "limestone" (or whatever they appear to be using).
I don't mean to be too critical of architects, and I have a great deal of respect for the individuals who work so hard to design buildings. Working in the design industry myself, I know it can be difficult to work within the restraints of a clients requirements, and I'm sure that designing a building in Halifax that won't get you tarred and feathered by special interest groups or city council is a chore within itself.
Blah blah blah. Anyway, Nova Centre; could it be better?

worldlyhaligonian

Nov 25, 2009, 5:16 AM

It could, however I don't mind how it will interact with the area or spacially. My whole life that part of the street has been the dead zone. I can't even imagine what it will be like with a hotel (likely with a bar) as well as hosting conferences and conventions. I think a paradigm shift could happen in downtown Halifax and Trillium and other residential developments combined with office growth could see this happen. Having a trade centre is vital to investment attraction which drives every muncipality/region that has one.

Depending on how well they do the cladding on the lower levels it could be a disaster. I'm remaining optimistic.

Jonovision

Nov 25, 2009, 4:11 PM

I think it really all comes down to materials. If high end timeless materials are used then this will be a great addition. If they cheap out, then it will be crap. Sure it could be different, but I think it is good.

someone123

Nov 25, 2009, 8:56 PM

The other reality here is that this building probably won't be started for a while. It seems like there's plenty of time for a mostly superficial redesign. It's happened to a lot of other projects before.

Phalanx

Dec 8, 2009, 8:59 PM

Just an article discussing funding for the Nova Centre from today's Herald...

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Columnists/1156616.html

If it can happen in Toronto, can we do it here?

By ROGER TAYLOR Business Editor
Tue. Dec 8 - 4:45 AM

AS STRANGE AS it sounds, the federal government’s decision to designate $20 million from its infrastructure stimulus account to help save Harold Ballard’s footprints is good news for Nova Scotia.

Actually, I’m not sure if the foot and handprints of the cantankerous former Toronto Maple Leafs owner, preserved in concrete at centre ice at Maple Leaf Gardens, are part of the plan to convert the former hockey temple into a combination grocery store and university sports facility, but I wouldn’t be surprised.

It’s good news for Nova Scotia because the makeover of the old Gardens signals to this province that Ottawa is certainly willing to loosen the purse strings for public-private partnerships that have broader community implications.

I’ve read that construction of a giant grocery store was deemed necessary for the downtown Toronto area and that Ryerson University was in need for recreational facilities. So this was a way to accomplish two things at once.

In Halifax, there is a perceived need for a new convention centre in the downtown, twice the size of the existing one. It would not only allow Nova Scotia’s capital to recapture some of the lucrative business it has lost in recent years as conventions went elsewhere in search of larger facilities, but it is also viewed as a unique opportunity to revitalize the downtown area.

Of course, Halifax regional council is gung-ho. But since the bulk of the funding for the convention centre is expected to come from more senior levels of government, the province is being careful to make sure the economics make sense.

The company selected to bid on the project, Rank Inc. of Halifax, has until the end of February to submit a detailed plan. If approved, and if the funding is available, Rank would build Nova Centre, Global Trade and Finance on the site of the former Halifax Herald building on Argyle Street.

Besides the convention centre, the project would include a hotel complex, an office tower, a residential component and retail space. Some people have speculated the cost of the convention centre could be in the range of $100 million to $200 million, but the overall development has an estimated price tag greater than $300 million.

Once it figures out what it wants to do, the province is expected to approach Ottawa to assist in the financing of the project.

Saving Maple Leaf Gardens from the wrecking ball is a valid accomplishment because of its historic significance to hockey fans across the country, but only the outside of the building will remain.

There is a plan for a small museum dedicated to what the building once was, but there won’t be much left inside after the renovations are over.

I can’t help but suggest that if Maple Leaf Gardens were located in Halifax, heritage groups would, in all likelihood, oppose the plan because they would want to keep the building as a hockey stadium and nothing more.

Loblaw Companies Ltd. and Ryerson are partnering on the Gardens project.

Loblaw already owns the building and plans to spend about $25 million to build a 70,000-square-foot grocery store on the first level, with the addition of a giant underground parking garage.

Ottawa will chip in $20 million to help Ryerson pay the estimated $60 million it will take to move the ice surface up a couple of storeys in the building and create recreational space, including a volleyball court and new basketball court.

Hopefully, the federal government will be just as willing to assist in the funding of the new Halifax convention centre when the time comes.

( rtaylor@herald.ca)

worldlyhaligonian

Dec 8, 2009, 10:10 PM

Ugh, for the last time... its going to be more than just a convention centre... its going to be a trade centre.

What is Roger Taylor's background? Did he go to business school?

YOWetal

Dec 9, 2009, 2:20 AM

Ugh, for the last time... its going to be more than just a convention centre... its going to be a trade centre.

What is Roger Taylor's background? Did he go to business school?

What do you mean by trade centre? Offices? and what does this have to do with the article?

terrynorthend

Dec 9, 2009, 12:13 PM

What do you mean by trade centre? Offices? and what does this have to do with the article?

Really. I'm not sure why you are attacking Roger Taylor here, Worldly. He says as much in the article... that it is a mix of uses. I'm also not sure how you mean when you are differentiating between trade center and convention center.

The impression I get from the article is a positive view of how financing may proceed, and a negative view of local heritage wingnuts. A view most of us on this board share.

worldlyhaligonian

Dec 10, 2009, 4:31 AM

I share that view...

I'm just sour because he doesn't really take into account how important this development really is. The difference between it being just a site for conventions and a trade centre is that what we currently have is focused primarly on conventions/trade shows vs. the possibility of real investment attraction through an office facility portion that creates jobs and economic prosperity for the city/province/country.

fenwick16

Dec 10, 2009, 12:05 PM

Jstaleness

Dec 10, 2009, 7:18 PM

I am really looking forward to seeing this convention and trade centre proceed. I wonder which is more important in drawing people to Halifax a new convention/trade centre or new stadium and which will provide more benefit to the people of the HRM. Ideally, it would be best to see both. What do others think?

I would love both too, but right now I believe the new Convention/Trade Center is the better choice. Look at how many past opportunities passed by Halifax in search of larger venue and more space. I know the same could be said about the stadium but from the number of missed conventions I saw that this city could have had really hurt the growth of downtown. The new center should spark more development downtown, something I'm not sure the Stadium could do yet.
That being said I will buy season tickets to all CFL games we ever get here. Go Argos!!!

Phalanx

Dec 10, 2009, 8:04 PM

I think a trade and convention centre will have a more immediate, obvious, and sustained impact.

A nice stadium is a good quality of life selling point for bringing people to the city and would probably have a more subtle positive effect over a long period of time (outside of major events)

worldlyhaligonian

Dec 10, 2009, 8:37 PM

A stadium could be THE RESULT of having a new trade centre... and I'm talking about the efforts of trade professionals.

The more investment attraction, corporate offices (even just regional ones) that open up in Halifax the more likely that we would be able to have a stadium and team to boot.

This new space for selling Nova Scotia as a good place to do business is crucial to the future of the city and the region in general.

Its exciting to see companies like RIM, Lockheed etc come to Halifax and if we grow our economic base enough and are able to shed the backwater image, we will be able to build a stadium or support a professional sports franchise.

I think the next 10 years are going to be crucial in terms of how the city adapts to a new economic paradigm. I just wish we did more and better business here.

worldlyhaligonian

Dec 10, 2009, 8:41 PM

Really. I'm not sure why you are attacking Roger Taylor here, Worldly. He says as much in the article... that it is a mix of uses. I'm also not sure how you mean when you are differentiating between trade center and convention center.

The impression I get from the article is a positive view of how financing may proceed, and a negative view of local heritage wingnuts. A view most of us on this board share.

Lol, and I wasn't trying to attack Roger, I just find he discusses points inaccurately in his articles.

I like your usage of "wingnuts"... it totally describes the heritage posse.

Dr SweetLove

Dec 15, 2009, 11:28 PM

puttin some of the scalfolldin up on argyle side

worldlyhaligonian

Dec 16, 2009, 5:14 AM

Dr SweetLove

Dec 17, 2009, 6:05 PM

They aren't moving super quickly, but they are taking the herald building down piece by piece. I honestly think its going to be great for downtown, especially in these winter months due to the atrium.

this will be good for de MOJO of halifax and prolly bring lots' of hot convention chicks to town:P

Wishblade

Dec 17, 2009, 6:08 PM

I have to ask what the status on this project is. Is it a go yet or is the provincial government still contemplating it?

sdm

Dec 17, 2009, 8:18 PM

I have to ask what the status on this project is. Is it a go yet or is the provincial government still contemplating it?

Won't know till March when the two budgets (shadow & developer) are completed.

Jonovision

Dec 30, 2009, 1:07 PM

This picture was printed in the Herald today.

http://halifaxchronicle.can.newsmemory.com/newsmemvol1/canada/halifaxchronicle/20091230/ch_mb_12-30-09_a06.pdf.0/img/Image_1.jpg
Work continues in the razing of the former Halifax Herald building on Argyle Street. The site will be used for a new convention centre.

(PETER PARSONS / Staff)

-Harlington-

Dec 30, 2009, 3:21 PM

sdm

Dec 31, 2009, 12:34 AM

has this even been approved yet?
because if it doesnt get approved theres just gonna be a big vacant lot probly used for ugly parking. but i really hope if there demolishing these buildings it gets approved.

nope no approval yet. I doubt we will know for months. If its a no go there i've been told there is a plan B, which from what i know i would rather see that built

spaustin

Dec 31, 2009, 3:37 AM

nope no approval yet. I doubt we will know for months. If its a no go there i've been told there is a plan B, which from what i know i would rather see that built

I almost hope the province doesn't go forward. A new convention centre is great and all, but I'm not wild about this spot as the location. Convention Centre's are such all or nothing places that have either tons of activity or are completely dead and this area of Town already has that with the Metro Centre and existing Trade Centre. I feel this spot would be better suited to some mixed commercial, residential and retail development that is more likely to be consistently lively and build on Argyle's strengthes. I would rather a new convention centre down on the Cogswell or on any of the other vacant lots down by the waterfront to spread things out a little more. Good to know there is a Plan B in the cards and that if the Convention Centre doesn't get approved and that the lots aren't likely to just become yet more parking.

Jonovision

Feb 16, 2010, 5:55 PM

A random picture from todays paper.

http://halifaxchronicle.can.newsmemory.com/newsmemvol1/canada/halifaxchronicle/20100216/ch_pe_02-16-10_a03.pdf.0/img/Image_3.jpg

Dmajackson

Feb 16, 2010, 8:22 PM

^I tried to get a photo of the demolition on my phototour over the weekend but after 15 minutes of not finding a parking spot anywheres downtown I gave up and left. :haha:

Jstaleness

Feb 17, 2010, 3:21 PM

^I tried to get a photo of the demolition on my phototour over the weekend but after 15 minutes of not finding a parking spot anywheres downtown I gave up and left. :haha:

Always check near 1580 Grafton St. I have never failed to find a spot there.

kph06

Feb 23, 2010, 1:16 AM

There is an article in today's Herald (http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1168926.html) about the demolition. They have moved on from the slow, hand and small machine work to demolition with excavators. There are currently two on site, a smaller Komatsu 220 with a bucket and grapple, probably for debris. A larger Komatsu 400 has a large Jaws of Life-like attachment and is doing most of the demo. They are already to street level of part of the north garage section.

===============================================================

Demolition closes streets

Mon. Feb 22 - 4:54 AM

The demolition of the former Chronicle Herald building on Argyle Street in Halifax is entering the next phase with a series of planned street closures.

Dexter Construction, which has the contract to pull the building down, says demolition activities are set to start.

Work to take apart the interior of the building began in December.

Pedestrians will still be able to walk through the area while the streets are closed to vehicles.

The list of affected streets and dates are:

•Grafton Street between Prince and Sackville streets. Street closure, starting Monday and ending Friday.

•Prince Street between Argyle and Grafton streets. Street closure, Wednesday to Friday.

•Intersection of Prince and Argyle streets, which will result in the closure of Prince from Barrington Street to Grafton Street and Argyle Street from Carmichael Street to Sackville Street, Sunday until March 3.

•Argyle Street between Prince and Sackville streets. Street closure, Sunday until March 5.

•Grafton, Prince, Argyle and Sackville streets. Periodic disruptions and traffic stoppages until the end of April.

Jonovision

Feb 23, 2010, 3:35 PM

From todays Herald.

http://halifaxchronicle.can.newsmemory.com/newsmemvol1/canada/halifaxchronicle/20100223/ch_pe_02-23-10_c01.pdf.0/img/Image_3.jpg

Demolition workers hammer away on the fourth floor of the former Chronicle Herald building in downtown Halifax on Monday. The building is being taken down section by section and the site cleared to make way for a new world trade and convention centre that is still awaiting funding from the provincial government.

Conventional approach to business

ROD CAMERON may not be expecting it, but the convention centre expert from Vancouver is likely to become a focal point for an anti-P3 campaign in Halifax this week.

Cameron is set to deliver the ninth annual Carmichael lecture on Thursday at the World Trade and Convention Centre and is expected to present the case for conven tion centres as instruments for a broader economic devel opment strategy.

No matter how positive his message may be, however, it may be blurred a bit by a campaign launched by the Canadian Union of Public Employees to block all future public-private partnerships.

The union argues that the contracts to build P3 schools in Nova Scotia were flawed and therefore all such part nerships are suspect.

But it isn’t fair to prejudge all public-private projects, based on a bad experience in the past, without knowing the details of the agreement.

The new Nova Centre, pro posed by developer Rank Inc.

for the former Chronicle Herald

lands in downtown Halifax, will include a larger and more modern convention facility, if governments agree to help fund that part of the approxi mately $300-million complex.

Construction of the conven tion centre portion alone has been estimated to cost about $100 million.

Cameron is the president of a management and marketing consultancy called Criterion Communications Inc. , is exec utive director of Convention Centres of Canada and the international development director for the International Association of Congress Cen tres in Belgium.

Public-private partnerships bring in a wide range of choic es, he told me in a phone con versation Monday.

There are many different models for P3s, but Cameron said the most successful are those where project devel opment is separate from facil ity mana g ement.

“I’m saying that simply because the kinds of expertise required to do a good devel opment are not often found in the same place where you also find the expertise to be suc cessful marketers and oper ators for the final product."

Cameron said the conven tion business has become intensely competitive.

“A large part of the reason for that is the more enlight ened of governments have figured out that having a con vention centre isn’t simply all about filling up hotel rooms . . . the folks that are thinking it through now are realizing that a convention centre should be an integral part of an overall economic development strategy."

A convention centre can be used to suppor t broader aspi rations to become a hub for all kinds of activities — business, industrial, academic and profes sional — and that realization has encouraged many juris dictions to invest in convention centres, he said.

Therefore, any city that wants to remain competitive in the convention business needs to be prepared to invest.

“Because there is so much product available right now, if you fall behind, if you’re sub standard, you simply get by passed by the market."

More than anything, Cam eron said, communities need to g et their expectations straight in terms of what they want to get out of a convention centre.

“Having a centre means you have the opportunity to attract the type and to host the type of businesses that you want, but you still have to be very active, going out there and getting it and being able to compete effec tively in order to get it."

The expectations of conven tion planners, he said, have changed quite a bit and often a 20-year-old facility like the one in Halifax cannot adapt to con sumer demands.

“Redevelopment or construc tion of a new facility helps to make a community competitive again in a world where you’ve got to be competitive in order to survive."

(rtaylor@herald.ca)

Keith P.

Feb 23, 2010, 4:57 PM

Troubling and disturbing statements in NDPer Ralph Surette's column in the Saturday Herald:

A broad coalition is fighting a MacDonald-era plan for a new convention centre in downtown Halifax. They’ve appealed to the auditor general to get involved. It’s a public-private project (P3). The AG has just slammed P3s in schools as a terrible deal. The AG in British Columbia has just slammed a similar convention centre in downtown Vancouver, where costs doubled.

The project will block view planes in downtown Halifax and is out of step with development in other cities with a historic downtown core. And even if it goes ahead, there are places to put it without blocking view planes.

The group has met with NDP ministers where, they complain, they have been "listened to, but not heard." The letter was signed by Peter Delefes, a former NDP MLA and president of the Heritage Trust of Nova Scotia. By definition, the vast majority of the members of this coalition would be traditional NDP supporters.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1168491.html

Undoubtedly this opposition is being led by Howard Epstein, who is at loose ends in this govt at the moment. One hopes that Dexter & co. continue to not listen, but it would not surprise me in the least if the upcoming provincial budget put a hold on the project, using the provincial finances as an excuse.

fenwick16

Feb 23, 2010, 5:36 PM

Troubling and disturbing statements in NDPer Ralph Surette's column in the Saturday Herald:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1168491.html

Undoubtedly this opposition is being led by Howard Epstein, who is at loose ends in this govt at the moment. One hopes that Dexter & co. continue to not listen, but it would not surprise me in the least if the upcoming provincial budget put a hold on the project, using the provincial finances as an excuse.

It would be good if the political forces in the Halifax area would simply hold a special vote so that residents can decide if they want view planes bylaws. This is just an excuse to block one development after another and I really wonder how many residents even think that such bylaws are necessary; it is just an obstacle to development. Why does Halifax have to be stuck with a bunch of short stubby buildings if it is just a minority that want it?

Barrington south

Feb 23, 2010, 9:00 PM

what remains clear however is A: the towers do not obstruct any protected view planes and B: Convention center or no convention center... development on these lands is going ahead regardless, which is awesome for downtown

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 24, 2010, 2:30 AM

The way that these individuals are acting is suspect...

Heritage Nazis is an appropriate term... they aren't using democratic channels here or really showing their intent.

This is truly sad and I don't know how downtown Halifax will look with all of these empty lots.

Keith P.

Feb 24, 2010, 3:48 PM

Article today in allnovascotia.com says that the anti-development group issued a press release asking the Auditor-General (!) to look into the project. Clueless, as (a) he is quite busy these days and (b) the AG does not do assessments of projects before they are underway.

It also identifies the bunch behind the opposition. It is led by NDPer Peter Delefes and the Heritage Trust, along with fellow travelers Howard Epstein and Lenny Preyra. Then you have a whole bunch of groups that make you wonder why these people don't have anything better to do: Community Coalition to End Poverty in Nova Scotia (huh?); CUPE; Ecology Action Center; Friends of the Halifax Common; Peninsula South Neighborhood Association, and the Sierra Club. There is also a Facebook group referenced called Save the View.

Beyond ridiculous.

Barrington south

Feb 24, 2010, 6:11 PM

don't know how downtown Halifax will look with all of these empty lots.

if I remember correctly the lands will be developed with or without the convention center component, so even if the anti-development folks win, we will still get a couple of towers on a huge podium with retail~commercial at grade.....it will still be a massive shot in the arm for the core :cheers:

sdm

Feb 25, 2010, 2:12 AM

if I remember correctly the lands will be developed with or without the convention center component, so even if the anti-development folks win, we will still get a couple of towers on a huge podium with retail~commercial at grade.....it will still be a massive shot in the arm for the core :cheers:

Negative

If the convention centre isn't build the maximum height is only 8 stories i believe. Maybe less.

That to me is the better option, do residential and retail and get people living near the true CBD

spaustin

Feb 25, 2010, 3:05 AM

Negative

If the convention centre isn't build the maximum height is only 8 stories i believe. Maybe less.

That to me is the better option, do residential and retail and get people living near the true CBD

hmm good point. I just went looking and this proposal wasn't grandfathered, it was specifically set out in HRM By Design. HRM By Design reads

HRM shall, through the land use by-law, establish provisions and requirements to enable the development of a new publically-sponsored convention centre together with retail, hotel, residential or office, and underground parking space on the two blocks bounded by Argyle Street, Prince Street, Market Street and Sackville Street.

So if there is no convention centre, it would seem there are no exemptions and the 28 m (unless they get a bonus) would presumably be in full force.

I actually agree with you. I have never been keen about this location for a new convention centre. I would be more excited to have it down at Pier 21 or the Cogswell then here.

Halifax Hillbilly

Feb 25, 2010, 3:26 AM

I actually agree with you. I have never been keen about this location for a new convention centre. I would be more excited to have it down at Pier 21 or the Cogswell then here.

Pier 21 might be good, but is there space?

I'd rather see this land stay smaller scale residential as well. Convention centres may add huge activity at some times but residential would provide less activity but much more often.

Barrington south

Feb 25, 2010, 3:48 AM

Negative

If the convention centre isn't build the maximum height is only 8 stories i believe. Maybe less.

That to me is the better option, do residential and retail and get people living near the true CBD

ohhh to bad

I prefer the smaller option with residential and retail too...

the core desperately needs residents....they will bring the life back to Barrington

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 25, 2010, 7:33 AM

sdm

Feb 25, 2010, 11:04 AM

ITS NOT JUST A CONVENTION CENTRE!!!!

Guys, its a fricking trade centre... sure trade shows go on there, but it is supposed to be a hub for investment attraction so that we can economically progress.

Honestly, everybody who opposes this doesn't know the impact these sorts of developments have on entire cities and regions.

Our current operation is a joke... it needs to be separate from the metro centre and have more offices for trade professionals.

If you want to know how jobs/companies come to exist in a market, look no further than trade centres.

Jobs and companies don;t come to markets because of trade centres.

As a person working in the industry with these companies, i can tell you first hand that their reasoning to locate here is dependant on items like business taxes, employement pool, and quality of life.

Having the site as residential would do far more good for the core then the convention centre.

Keith P.

Feb 25, 2010, 1:14 PM

Pier 21 might be good, but is there space?

Pier 21 sucks as a location for events other than the fact that they have space. It is isolated from the downtown core bars and restaurants along with all hotels except the Westin, and even that is not in walking distance in the typically bad weather we get. Access is bad with ridiculous traffic tie-ups due to the asinine way the Port Authority manages the parking lot and the fact that there is only one street. Big changes would need to be made to make that a good location for such a facility.

planarchy

Feb 25, 2010, 2:47 PM

Pier 21 sucks as a location for events other than the fact that they have space. It is isolated from the downtown core bars and restaurants along with all hotels except the Westin, and even that is not in walking distance in the typically bad weather we get. Access is bad with ridiculous traffic tie-ups due to the asinine way the Port Authority manages the parking lot and the fact that there is only one street. Big changes would need to be made to make that a good location for such a facility.

Maybe this is exactly the opportunity needed to push through big changes in the Pier 21 area. Overall this location is far superior for this type of program.

The current design is mediocre at best, and is a terrible fit. As others have said, the best thing that can happen here is a two separate projects, retaining the current street layout, moderate scale 5 - 8 stories, fine grain, no setbacks, etc. Super dense, but without the height, superblock and dead walls that go with the current design.

Not only is there opportunity for big changes around the Pier 21 site, there are lots of opportunities to have a more interesting design, tie-ins to Garrison Brewery, Westin Hotel - the push needed to renovate the area around conrwallis park and the south end of Barrington. As well - with the NSPI building, and improvement of boardwalk connection, this site will not be isolated - if it is at all - for very long.

fenwick16

Feb 25, 2010, 3:01 PM

Just to throw in my two cents; I think that this project looks great and I hope that it proceeds as it is. It will look great on the skyline since it is at a fairly high elevation. I don't understand the desire for short buildings. They just end up having a larger bulk and in the end, look worse than a tall building. When the renderings first came out for this project the response was almost completely positive on this forum.

This is just a couple blocks from the current trade centre which has been a successful venue so I don't see why it would be a poor location.

planarchy

Feb 25, 2010, 3:40 PM

I don't understand the desire for short buildings. They just end up having a larger bulk and in the end, look worse than a tall building.

This is a bizarre blanket statement. Short does not equal worse just as density does not equal tall. It isn't a desire for short buildings, it is a desire for infill that creates activity at the street level, especially at this part of the city centre. This can be achieved with a tall building/podium style - ubiquitous in Vancouver - but the proposed design offers no such thing. Fat towers on a large, impressively bad podium design. On a site like this, the city is much better off with super-dense low-rise (<8 stories).

Haliguy

Feb 25, 2010, 4:44 PM

This is a bizarre blanket statement. Short does not equal worse just as density does not equal tall. It isn't a desire for short buildings, it is a desire for infill that creates activity at the street level, especially at this part of the city centre. This can be achieved with a tall building/podium style - ubiquitous in Vancouver - but the proposed design offers no such thing. Fat towers on a large, impressively bad podium design. On a site like this, the city is much better off with super-dense low-rise (<8 stories).

Taller slinder buildings are much better than wide short buildings. low rise short builings are like large walls on a streetscape and block more of the sky and sun light.

fenwick16

Feb 25, 2010, 6:10 PM

This is a bizarre blanket statement.

This is just personal preference. I have always liked tall buildings. I would love to see a 30 - 40 storey office tower in downtown Halifax. I don't think it would have any negative effect on the Citadel Hill (which I also like). I am pro-development and pro-hertitage, I just prefer it is in the right proportion. I think that the two can go together very well and it provides a much more interesting city than either alone.

On a site like this, the city is much better off with super-dense low-rise (<8 stories).

I don't want to turn this into an argument but I just don't see why.

planarchy

Feb 25, 2010, 6:33 PM

Taller slinder buildings are much better than wide short buildings. low rise short builings are like large walls on a streetscape and block more of the sky and sun light.

It doesn't quite work this way. We are talking about two different things. I'm not suggesting the site is better off with an 8 story office building with one entrance in the middle of the block. I'm suggesting a building(s) with retail at grade, divided in similar proportions to the original plot sizes of the city centre. Which for Halifax, on average, is about 40 feet - still quite apparent on Barrington, Blowers, parts of Argyle, etc.

Anything higher than 4 stories will have some affect on sunlight, but any tower, no matter how thin on top, will have some sort of podium base of at least 4 stories as well. Height is not so much the problem here, its the relationship it has to the street. Something like 1801 Hollis, may look ok from a distance, but it is crap at grade. This can also be said for many others , like the Royal Bank building etc. that have offer two entrance, an ill-conceived plaza at grade and little else.

With the width of the block in this area, a project is more likely to be successful (for those who actually live in or move through the city in any other way than by car) if it repects the original plot size - as this is what the grid system was designed for. This part of the city needs street level activity - so much has already been removed due to poorly designed buildings with blank walls galore. Nova Centre proposes building over the road because the building is too big and bulky for the blocks as they are now, and the program they are proposing - convention centre floors - require more room!

planarchy

Feb 25, 2010, 6:44 PM

For those interested:

ROD CAMERON TO SPEAK AT THE 9TH ANNUAL CARMICHAEL LECTURE PANEL DISCUSSION

2010 02 11

Guest speaker Rod Cameron, President of Criterion Communications Inc., a strategic management and marketing consultancy based in Vancouver with an extensive practice in international convention and exhibition centre management, will discuss how convention centres can be the catalyst for downtown revitalization at the 9th Annual Carmichael Lecture. The lecture will take place on Thursday, February 25, 6:00-8:00 pm, at the World Trade and Convention Centre, Room 200E, 1800 Arygle Street. The event is free and open to the public on a first-come, first-served basis.

“With the new convention centre beginning construction as soon as this summer, the topic is timely,” said Paul MacKinnon, Executive Director of the Downtown Halifax Business Commission. “The centre will have a profound impact on downtown, reinforcing the concept of our core as an economic hub for the city and the province.”

Following Cameron’s talk, a panel will discuss how opportunities can be maximized with the city and province. Panelists includes: Paul Kent of the Greater Halifax Partnership, Stephen Lund of Nova Scotia Business Inc. and Cheryl Stewart of FUSION Halifax. The evening will end with questions from the audience.

The Carmichael Lecture was created to honour the DHBC’s former Executive Director, Kate Carmichael, and her passion for urban renewal. Invited lecturers speak on topics designed to inform and educate on key issues that create a thriving Downtown.

The lecture is presented by the Downtown Halifax Business Commission, in partnership with Destination Halifax, Downtown Dartmouth Business Commission, Grafton Connor Group, Greater Halifax Partnership, Halifax Seaport, Halifax International Airport Authority, Hotel Association of Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Business Inc., Spring Garden Area Business Association and Tourism Industry Association of Nova Scotia.

About Rod Cameron:

Rod Cameron is President of Criterion Communications Inc., a strategic management and marketing consultancy based in Vancouver with an extensive practice in international convention and exhibition centre management, marketing and development as well as association management. He currently serves as Executive Director of Convention Centres of Canada and Director, International Development for the Brussels-based International Association of Convention Centres.

Cameron brings a broad perspective to the development, management and marketing of destinations and convention centres, having developed and managed projects and programs for industry clients including: convention centres, meetings destinations, convention and visitor bureaus, hotel chains and both national and international convention centre associations. He has also established long-standing partnerships at provincial, national and international levels for project and market development. He has experienced the destination and convention development environment from a variety of perspectives including: operations, marketing, new project development, meeting planning and industry development.

Halifax Hillbilly

Feb 25, 2010, 9:47 PM

It doesn't quite work this way. We are talking about two different things. I'm not suggesting the site is better off with an 8 story office building with one entrance in the middle of the block. I'm suggesting a building(s) with retail at grade, divided in similar proportions to the original plot sizes of the city centre. Which for Halifax, on average, is about 40 feet - still quite apparent on Barrington, Blowers, parts of Argyle, etc.

Anything higher than 4 stories will have some affect on sunlight, but any tower, no matter how thin on top, will have some sort of podium base of at least 4 stories as well. Height is not so much the problem here, its the relationship it has to the street. Something like 1801 Hollis, may look ok from a distance, but it is crap at grade. This can also be said for many others , like the Royal Bank building etc. that have offer two entrance, an ill-conceived plaza at grade and little else.

With the width of the block in this area, a project is more likely to be successful (for those who actually live in or move through the city in any other way than by car) if it repects the original plot size - as this is what the grid system was designed for. This part of the city needs street level activity - so much has already been removed due to poorly designed buildings with blank walls galore. Nova Centre proposes building over the road because the building is too big and bulky for the blocks as they are now, and the program they are proposing - convention centre floors - require more room!

All good points, I agree with you completely.

Barrington south

Feb 25, 2010, 10:08 PM

I also agree.......also now there is 3 full size excavators on site

fenwick16

Feb 25, 2010, 10:48 PM

Except the part about 1801 Hollis being crap; I think it is very attractive office building (my favorite).

I think the problem isn't that developers aren't planning these developments properly but it is just that office buildings can't support very much retail so that is why it isn't incorporated. It certainly has been tried in the past with Scotia Square and the Maritime Centre but these developments couldn't support the retail component (since office workers tend to go home to the suburbs at night and don't do much shopping during the day). So additional residential buildings are required to support additional retail and keep the city vibrant but why should it be low-rise dense residential instead of high-rise dense residential? Maybe it should be a mix of both.

I don't really see the need of viewplanes bylaws; I think these go back over a hundred years to when the Citadel was required for defense of the city and had to have a clear view of the harbour (from my understanding). If this is the case then the viewplanes bylaws exist simply because nobody had the courage to say that they were no longer required. Personally, whenever I went to the Citadel, it was for a view of the fortress and the city (including the city buildings).

PS: There was a thread on whether most residents are for or against high-rise building that can be found at http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=149843 . There seems to be quite a bit of dispute regarding which is preferential, personally I like both if well designed (the problem is that this has a different meaning to different people).

Keith P.

Feb 25, 2010, 11:55 PM

I don't really see the need of viewplanes bylaws; I think these go back over a hundred years to when the Citadel was required for defense of the city and had to have a clear view of the harbour (from my understanding). If this is the case then the viewplanes bylaws exist simply because nobody had the courage to say that they were no longer required.

While one might logically presume that such would be the case in most places, sadly, here in Halifax the viewplanes are a product of the 1970s. They were a creation of the City of Halifax after intense lobbying by the Heritage Trust and the usual suspects involved in such things. Foolishly, council of the day passed them. Thus began the anti-development obstructionism that we have seen ever since.

planarchy

Feb 26, 2010, 12:04 AM

I think the problem isn't that developers aren't planning these developments properly but it is just that office buildings can't support very much retail so that is why it isn't incorporated. It certainly has been tried in the past with Scotia Square and the Maritime Centre but these developments couldn't support the retail component (since office workers tend to go home to the suburbs at night and don't do much shopping during the day).

This is exactly my point! Scotia Square and the Maritime Centre are a similar type of development to what is proposed for Nova Centre! They are the type of urban renewal projects that have been proven to be massive failures throughout the western world! They do not attract people downtown to shop. Why would anyone come to a mall in the city with fewer shops and no free parking when they can go to MicMac Mall, etc. Except in very large cities, city centre malls are most often failures. Using these examples tell me that you can't visualize what I'm talking about or that I'm not explaining it very well. As far as housing, I think everyone on here will agree that much high-density residential is needed downtown, towers or not.

I don't really see the need of viewplanes bylaws; I think these go back over a hundred years to when the Citadel was required for defense of the city and had to have a clear view of the harbour (from my understanding). If this is the case then the viewplanes bylaws exist simply because nobody had the courage to say that they were no longer required. Personally, whenever I went to the Citadel, it was for a view of the fortress and the city (including the city buildings).

The view planes legislation was enacted in the 1970s after a series of bad developments (one being Maritime Centre). The viewplanes certainly have some merit, but are terribly outdated and far too rigid. Here is an image of existing viewplanes:
http://www.canadianarchitect.com/common_scripts/xtq_images/86157-56108.jpg

Finally, I agree that design can be subjective (like everything else in this world), but that there are good and smart urban design principles and techniques that nearly all agree on - and Nova Centre seems to ignore many of them. The city can do a much better job and defining design principles, but a huge problem is the lack of young, innovative design/architecture offices in the city - we have the same people design the same things (just look at all these condos in Bedford or take a drive down Parkland). On top of that, developers here are not pressured to spend money on design, instead looking at it as an afterthought. They seem to think that engineers are architects. Most are certainly not (not in Canada anyway). We don't build here for context, rarely consider topography - developers build to code, engineers design to code. This is a huge part of the problem.

Keith P.

Feb 26, 2010, 12:25 AM

The view planes legislation was enacted in the 1970s after a series of bad developments (one being Maritime Centre).

Maritime Center came along after the viewplanes. That is why it sits at an angle to the street; that lets it avoid the viewplanes -- a fine example of the absurdity of such laws.

planarchy

Feb 26, 2010, 12:36 AM

Maritime Center came along after the viewplanes. That is why it sits at an angle to the street; that lets it avoid the viewplanes -- a fine example of the absurdity of such laws.

Yes, my mistake. The viewplanes were proposed in 1973, Maritime Centre built in 1977. But the viewplanes legislation was proposed exactly because of developments (proposals) like this - it just didn't work well! Development on this lot/Capital Theatre was first proposed in 1973, Capital theatre torn down in 1974 (I may be a year off, but something like this)

But I agree, It's outdated, too rigid, and too easy to work around. HRMbyDesign's pseudo form-based code approach is more practical, but not executed well.

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 26, 2010, 12:45 AM

Jobs and companies don;t come to markets because of trade centres.

As a person working in the industry with these companies, i can tell you first hand that their reasoning to locate here is dependant on items like business taxes, employement pool, and quality of life.

Having the site as residential would do far more good for the core then the convention centre.

You basically just defined what investment attraction is and made my point as to why this is important.

I work in the industry too and have worked for the Australians who do an incredible job at investment attraction via promotion of the metrics you indicated. Just look at how many consumer products have been brought international... they don't have any more creative resources than we do... they just know how to bring their products to international markets via support from government.

They don't even need to have trade offices in their convention centre developments for them to be ulitmately successful... they help spur retail spending in the areas in which they exist.

http://www.mcec.com.au/About.html
http://www.scec.com.au
http://www.cairnsconvention.com.au

I have also lived/worked in europe and see how every city there promotes themselves in terms of investment attraction. Its staggering... even the small cities (particularly in eastern europe) have strong investment attraction strategies. Their strategy isn't corny videos showing their region (see every invest in NS video I have ever seen... which is ironic that they would feature the fisheries so prominantly, as it is a sunset industry IMO), its the promotion of strong numbers such as payroll taxes.

Halifax has some of the most competitve tax regimes in Canada, but nobody knows this because its not widely made known. Saskatchewan is doing a way better job than we are.

We are too afraid of investing in our future... the ROI isn't just greater prosperity, its great internationalization which spurs future growth.

Halifax actually has many competitive advantages, we just have weak trade promotion. Our DFAIT office is pretty small compared to the size our city/region and most people working for the feds aren't Nova Scotian. NSBI is about as grassroots as it gets from what I have seen. (I have worked moreso in an international capacity.)

If we don't have proper facilities than we lose out on attracting large scale events in the international/Canadian business environments.

Prove me wrong.

fenwick16

Feb 26, 2010, 12:53 AM

I agree with what you are saying, except that the Maritime Centre was actually a product of the viewplanes bylaws and was designed at such an angle so as not to interfere with the viewplanes bylaws. I remember this when it opened and when it was expanded from 12 storeys to the current height. It had a great retail component also, with a food court on the lower floor. This building had a very impressive interior lobby back in the late 70's. (I haven't been in it since). I actually like the appearance of this building.

There are some mistakes in the Halifax area but these aren't simply because of highrises and in some cases a much better development could have been built if higher buildings were allowed (I don't think that I am disagreeing with you here?). One example is Scotia Square; this could have been one 30 - 40 storey highrise office tower and built similar to Founders Square so as to incorporate as many of the older buildings as possible and to keep the street grid. The Cogswell Interchange never should have been built. If only someone could go back in time.

A big part of the problem in the Halifax area is that developers can't charge enough per square foot to build elaborate buildings. In spite of this Halifax has several great developments (in my opinion - 1801 Hollis, Purdy's Wharf, Founders Square and others).

One way to overcome the problems that you have specified is to have more mixed use buildings - hotel/residential/office all in one. However, in my opinion, the new convention centre should be built close to the city attractions that visitors will want to see. Perhaps a residential component should be included though. I am not in the construction industry so I can't really comment on the point about engineers and architects but both have to design buildings based on fire codes and both have to build based on the money available. Also, if everything is designed by architects then you might have a lot of these buildings in downtown Halifax - http://www.flickr.com/photos/digitalparadox/2618110979/ - source Flickr - DigitalParadox . This is an interesting building but it wouldn't be allowed in Halifax (fortunately). There are some great buildings in the Toronto area but there are also a lot of very unsightly buildings. Architects and engineers have to work together to come up with buildings that will be acceptable in the Halifax area based not only on architectural design but economics and regional tastes (maybe this is what you have already stated in other words). All in all, I like the new convention centre design.

PS: I can't type fast enough. Once I typed this post in, I saw that the Maritime Centre was already discussed.

This bothers me ( http://www.savetheview.ca/ ). It states that 91% of the population is against the convention towers and shows people looking off the citadel hill supposedly at the harbour. If it were me up there I would be looking at the downtown buildings. Many of the pictures that I have seen on Flickr that are taken from the Citadel are of the downtown buildings and are described as such.

planarchy

Feb 26, 2010, 1:01 AM

Also, if everything is designed by architects then you might have a lot of these buildings in downtown Halifax - http://www.flickr.com/photos/digitalparadox/2618110979/ - source Flickr - DigitalParadox . This is an interesting building but it wouldn't be allowed in Halifax (fortunately).

Ha. You mean you don't want to see the OCAD building in Halifax? Bring it on! It would look quite nice perched on the side of Citadel Hill. Or maybe something like Libeskind's ROM addition bursting out of the drumlin ? :tup:

http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/photos/2007/05/3_ROM_Crystal_9115_square.jpg

fenwick16

Feb 26, 2010, 1:08 AM

Ha. You mean you don't want to see the OCAD building in Halifax? Bring it on! It would look quite nice perched on the side of Citadel Hill. Or maybe something like Libeskind's ROM addition bursting out of the drumlin ? :tup:

:previous: This actually looks interesting. i would love to have this in Halifax - but not directly on the Citadel. How about down near the waterfront.

sdm

Feb 26, 2010, 2:24 AM

You basically just defined what investment attraction is and made my point as to why this is important.

I work in the industry too and have worked for the Australians who do an incredible job at investment attraction via promotion of the metrics you indicated. Just look at how many consumer products have been brought international... they don't have any more creative resources than we do... they just know how to bring their products to international markets via support from government.

They don't even need to have trade offices in their convention centre developments for them to be ulitmately successful... they help spur retail spending in the areas in which they exist.

http://www.mcec.com.au/About.html
http://www.scec.com.au
http://www.cairnsconvention.com.au

I have also lived/worked in europe and see how every city there promotes themselves in terms of investment attraction. Its staggering... even the small cities (particularly in eastern europe) have strong investment attraction strategies. Their strategy isn't corny videos showing their region (see every invest in NS video I have ever seen... which is ironic that they would feature the fisheries so prominantly, as it is a sunset industry IMO), its the promotion of strong numbers such as payroll taxes.

Halifax has some of the most competitve tax regimes in Canada, but nobody knows this because its not widely made known. Saskatchewan is doing a way better job than we are.

We are too afraid of investing in our future... the ROI isn't just greater prosperity, its great internationalization which spurs future growth.

Halifax actually has many competitive advantages, we just have weak trade promotion. Our DFAIT office is pretty small compared to the size our city/region and most people working for the feds aren't Nova Scotian. NSBI is about as grassroots as it gets from what I have seen. (I have worked moreso in an international capacity.)

If we don't have proper facilities than we lose out on attracting large scale events in the international/Canadian business environments.

Prove me wrong.

I believe we might not be understanding each other.

A convention centre (call it a trade centre) does bring people to town but provides only short term benefits.

What i am talking about is having people stay here, invest and provide economic support to the region.
surely you will agrue that this helps attract people, of which i tend to agree. But the existing proposal, along with location is a more negative impact to the city longer term in my opinion.

Convention centres are very 1980-90's and if we didn't have one then i will completely agree. However we do have one that attacts the majority of conventions (small to medium). Why do we need to biggest ones? and what will make this centre out do other larger cities?

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 26, 2010, 7:02 AM

I believe we might not be understanding each other.

A convention centre (call it a trade centre) does bring people to town but provides only short term benefits.

What i am talking about is having people stay here, invest and provide economic support to the region.
surely you will agrue that this helps attract people, of which i tend to agree. But the existing proposal, along with location is a more negative impact to the city longer term in my opinion.

Convention centres are very 1980-90's and if we didn't have one then i will completely agree. However we do have one that attacts the majority of conventions (small to medium). Why do we need to biggest ones? and what will make this centre out do other larger cities?

80's - 90's? Last time I was in europe I saw convention/trade-related developments going up in about 4 cities. As far as I know, this development won't be specifically for conventions, but for all of the WTCC services and the hotel (revenue generating). Correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, it isn't necessarily just "short term" benefits... the constant turnover of new people in a part of town that is currently empty lots can be outstanding. Many of these people will be looking to sample the local flavour and likely have a higher income than that of the average Haligonian.

A whole part of the economy of cities in europe is due to these sorts of developments in downtowns, especially ones that incorporate public spaces. Additionally, the people that will be working in the building will need to eat lunch... I think a residential development could potentially contribute less, especially if you have issues with the density of this proposal. ( I personally like tall buildings, especially when they are in proximity to other tall buildings... this is a skyscraper forum)

Other residential developments (Trillium, Trinity, Starfish, UG, Salter, list goes on) will be an excellent cushion around the CBD which I consider to extend as far as the herald lands and further south to the east.

Why would the bigger conferences come to Halifax? Because we have a beautiful city, strategically located close to large centres, and it has allure that would be signficantly better with more infrastructure other than the sub-par we have now. I love Halifax and find it hard to be proud of our lack of infrastructure.

I'm not debating the merit of the design of the building here, I just don't think we have a facility good enough to be competitive.... isn't that what cities are all about? competitiveness in comparison to other cities in terms of art, culture, and commerce?

Or, we could just keep the status quo and put a faux historic building on this site like the Cambridge Suites. I prefer two modern towers.

fenwick16

Feb 26, 2010, 2:04 PM

There was an article in the Chronicle Herald today:

Convention centre project might perk up whole province

By ROGER TAYLOR Business Columnist
Fri. Feb 26 - 4:53 AM

THE REVITALIZATION of downtown Halifax hinges on construction of a new convention centre, but the implications go far beyond Nova Scotia’s capital.

Scott Ferguson, president and CEO of Trade Centre Ltd., the provincial government agency that manages the current World Trade and Convention Centre, told me on Thursday that the benefits of having a larger facility would be important to the whole region.

He says the current convention centre isn’t adequate for the demands of professional convention planners who cater to organizations that hold meetings of about 2,000 delegates.

The Halifax centre can barely handle a convention of 1,000, Ferguson says, and as a result, his agency has been turning business away. He has calculated that Halifax has lost about 70 conferences over the past three years because the centre couldn’t accommodate the convention requirements.

"We’ve extrapolated that and figure it represents about $80 million (in direct business) and about $4 million in provincial tax," he says.

Those numbers don’t include conventions lost because planners simply didn’t consider Halifax as a location as they knew the facilities wouldn’t meet their needs, he says.

"We have hosted conferences of 1,000 but the vast majority of conferences with approximately 1,000 delegates have requirements that we can’t even meet," Ferguson says. "Some are OK with using the arena as the exhibit floor; some are OK with using halls that have multiple pillars and low ceilings — many of them aren’t."

While some people are concerned that the convention business is about to dry up, replaced by teleconferencing, convention expert Rod Cameron of Vancouver company Criterion Communications Inc. said it appears the opposite is true.

Fewer people are attending conventions to learn what’s new in a specific field, he said Thursday, but they have been replaced by people wanting to network and make connections face to face.

Based on the positive feedback he gets about Halifax as a destination, Ferguson says the city is perfect for hosting conferences. And with the proper infrastructure in place, he believes the city could once again become a popular convention destination.

For example, he says, about 7,000 international congresses are held each year and 3,000 of those could be held in Canada. International conventions are more lucrative than domestic ones, but Halifax rarely attracts international conventions now because the field is highly competitive and accustomed to very high standards.

A new, larger convention centre would become an important cog in the province’s economic strategy because it would attract influential professionals, experts and decision makers, Ferguson says.

Trade Centre Ltd. has calculated that the average convention delegate spends up to four times as much as the average tourist, engages in pre- and post-convention travel, and may plan return visits with family.

The provincial government built the current convention centre in 1984 for $40 million. Its replacement, estimated to cost about $100 million, would be part of the $300-million Nova Centre, also including hotel, office and retail space.

Private developer Rank Inc. is to build it on the former Herald property.

The most exciting thing about the Nova Centre — it’s right downtown and surrounded by infrastructure.

The project would create about 1,500 jobs during construction. When it’s completed, the current convention centre complement of 90 full-time staff and 300 part-timers would be significantly increased, Ferguson says.

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 27, 2010, 12:54 AM

Exactly. This guy knows what he is talking about.

I wonder what the economic spinoff of those 70 turned down conferences would amount to for local businesses?

I find that everybody arguing against this is doing so with a hidden agenda against tall buildings and this has nothing to do with the benefits.

If you were against the previous midtown proposal you are probably against this...

The "view" (which currently is of alot of ugly roof equipment I might add) isn't worth not more having the buildings there generating activity. If this can be done through a public/private partnership, I say bring it on.

Its all on Dexter at this point, I hope he can be an NDPer that isn't swayed by a rediculous heritage members of his party who contradict their own views on the environment by contributing to low density.

How are all of these groups against this when they seemingly contradict eachother? Heritage homes (which I respect and adore) are some of the worst energy consumers in the city. Also, being against tall buildings is actually anti-environment which has been evidenced through the urban expansion of Halifax. There are cities with higher populations that have smaller footprints.

fenwick16

Feb 27, 2010, 5:13 AM

I have to agree with you worldlyhaligonian.

The purpose of a convention centre is to get people to come to Halifax and I think that first time visitors will be pleasantly surprised. (This has been the case with first time visitors from the Toronto area that I have known). Even though the convention/trade centre might not generate enough direct revenue to justify the expense (or maybe it will) it has the potential of getting first time visitors to come to Halifax and then some of them will return and in some cases rich developers and business owners will even invest in the Halifax area. In my opinion this is the biggest potential for a new convention/trade centre.

I have been fortunate enough to attend several conventions throughout North America and most are cities that I would not have gone to other than to attend the convention. I have had some pleasant surprises - for example, Baltimore is an interesting city that has gone through a transformation similar to Halifax over the past few decades. San Francisco is a fantastic city but that is no surprise. Halifax pulls way above its size.

For proof, check out these reviews at virtualtourist.com: http://members.virtualtourist.com/vt/z/2/ddcce/

And here is a great photo tour by Andy6: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=154310

Another one by Isaidso: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=724898

And none of these people seem to hate the tall buildings.

I really hope that Halifax will build a suitable stadium in the near future. This will have a similar effect to the convention/trade centre by giving Halifax the capability to host national and international events. Like a convention/trade centre, it will bring first time visitors to the city. It will also be an instrument in promoting Halifax throughout the country. I hope that Halifax area residents will eventually stop thinking of a suitable stadium as a unnecessary expense and see it in the same light as a convention centre.

Keith P.

Feb 27, 2010, 1:03 PM

I can add that, as someone who has been involved with events and bringing conventions here on occasion, that the existing WTCC is simply obsolete. It is too small for some of the things I have been involved with, and is becoming dated in terms of facilities and features. The only alternative is the Cunard center and while they do a decent job of taking what amounts to a warehouse building and turning it into an events venue, it is lacking in many areas and is in a location that is not convenient. A new facility would be a boost to the downtown and the economy.

That "savetheview" website referenced earlier is simply infuriating and a collection of false information.

Halifax Hillbilly

Feb 27, 2010, 1:13 PM

I find that everybody arguing against this is doing so with a hidden agenda against tall buildings and this has nothing to do with the benefits.

If you were against the previous midtown proposal you are probably against this...

It's not just height. The biggest problem with this proposal, whether it's five stories, eight stories or 18 stories are the podiums that each take up an entire block. Planarchy explained this problem quite well, better than I can, but buildings with footprints this big are very awkward on Halifax's hills - take a look at the Prince George or Cambridge Suits. Sure you can wrap some retail around the base of some streets but you're not really solving the problem just hiding it a bit.

The benefits of this type of building happen at best a few times a week, when a convention or event is happening. What does a convention centre contribute to the activity on streets around it when not in use - very little. The area already has one use, the Metro Centre, that already functions like this. It only brings people into town on game nights. This area doesn't need more concentrated big draws it needs residents.

I'm not entirely against a convention centre, I'm against a convention centre on this site. This site was the default easy choice, not the right choice. If this gets built its going to be there for fifty years, we should have taken a real look at alternative sites.

fenwick16

Feb 27, 2010, 2:03 PM

The city is made up of various types of buildings and although I agree that the downtown core could use more residential construction that is not what is being proposed. This is a convention centre not residential. No one has proposed residential for that site and a low rise building is not required there.

I like tall buildings like Purdy's Wharf and 1801 Hollis Street (and I think most people do). I am 51 years old and despite the opinion that older people dislike tall buildings, I can say for a fact that based on the people that I have known who are my age and older, it simply is not true (it is only a minority that dislike tall buildings). Even if the argument is that it should be resident, then why not have a well designed 30 storey residential building (other than the viewplanes bylaws which is just an artificial barrier to development that never should have been adopted)? I think some people are saying that a building like a convention centre and ones like 1801 Hollis are a blank wall but you can't propose retail at ground level if the downtown core cannot support it.

Although my opinion regarding heritage buildings has changed over the years - as I grew older, I began to see the importance of keeping heritage buildings - I have not started to dislike tall buildings only poorly designed buildings.

sdm

Feb 27, 2010, 2:47 PM

It's not just height. The biggest problem with this proposal, whether it's five stories, eight stories or 18 stories are the podiums that each take up an entire block. Planarchy explained this problem quite well, better than I can, but buildings with footprints this big are very awkward on Halifax's hills - take a look at the Prince George or Cambridge Suits. Sure you can wrap some retail around the base of some streets but you're not really solving the problem just hiding it a bit.

The benefits of this type of building happen at best a few times a week, when a convention or event is happening. What does a convention centre contribute to the activity on streets around it when not in use - very little. The area already has one use, the Metro Centre, that already functions like this. It only brings people into town on game nights. This area doesn't need more concentrated big draws it needs residents.

I'm not entirely against a convention centre, I'm against a convention centre on this site. This site was the default easy choice, not the right choice. If this gets built its going to be there for fifty years, we should have taken a real look at alternative sites.

Very well said.

A convention centre would be nice, but it won't save the downtown in my opinion.

I rather this be built in an alternate location, as if you were to look from the water towards this development it would dominate the downtown and will cast a very large shadow towards the water as it blocks the sun setting in the west. Don't take this as me against tall building, i am pro that. Just slender towers are better, not a big blockly one like that of which is proposed.

The centre, if everyone concludes we need one, should have been built down along the waterfront.

I for one am still for seeing the existing trade centre expanded into the metro centre, and then have a new stadium built. I am fearful that if a new one comes on line that we will have to contend with the operation shortfall of the old complex. Coupled with this the requirements for a new arena/stadium and well we simply can't afford to do everything.

Keith P.

Feb 27, 2010, 3:44 PM

Very well said.
I for one am still for seeing the existing trade centre expanded into the metro centre, and then have a new stadium built. I am fearful that if a new one comes on line that we will have to contend with the operation shortfall of the old complex. Coupled with this the requirements for a new arena/stadium and well we simply can't afford to do everything.

I don't disagree with this position. There seems to be some logic in doing it, in fact. Unfortunately nobody is proposing such a project. Is the Herald/Midtown block big enough for a new arena (not stadium, I assume you meant arena)? I would think so but dunno for certain.

spaustin

Feb 27, 2010, 4:59 PM

It's not just height. The biggest problem with this proposal, whether it's five stories, eight stories or 18 stories are the podiums that each take up an entire block. Planarchy explained this problem quite well, better than I can, but buildings with footprints this big are very awkward on Halifax's hills - take a look at the Prince George or Cambridge Suits. Sure you can wrap some retail around the base of some streets but you're not really solving the problem just hiding it a bit.

The benefits of this type of building happen at best a few times a week, when a convention or event is happening. What does a convention centre contribute to the activity on streets around it when not in use - very little. The area already has one use, the Metro Centre, that already functions like this. It only brings people into town on game nights. This area doesn't need more concentrated big draws it needs residents.

I'm not entirely against a convention centre, I'm against a convention centre on this site. This site was the default easy choice, not the right choice. If this gets built its going to be there for fifty years, we should have taken a real look at alternative sites.

Couldn't agree more! We should have used the Convention Centre to redo something that otherwise wouldn't happen like the Cogswell. It's a missed opportunity to do something strategic with government money. As Planarchy said, a fine grain of mid-rises on these blocks with residential that keeps the existing street grid would be a lot better. From the few comments to the media from months ago, Rank does have a Plan B which involves a mix of uses (maybe residential). Being against this project for me isn't about being against the Convention Centre, it's about being against it in this location which has been my feeling ever since Rank was announced as the winner.

planarchy

Feb 27, 2010, 5:32 PM

Couldn't agree more! We should have used the Convention Centre to redo something that otherwise wouldn't happen like the Cogswell. It's a missed opportunity to do something strategic with government money.

Exactly. This is an opportunity to make a strategic or tactical intervention in the city - it is an investment in the future. To drop it into the confines of this site would be a wasted opportunity. The proposed program does not match the potential and limitations of the site. Huge opportunity for this in Pier 21 area - this is not as remote as some people seem to think it is - or cogwell area.

As Worldly discussed about convention centres in Europe as a trigger for urban development, etc. - this is true, but this is often accomplished by building in areas of future expansion - WTCC in Amsterdam along the south axis is a great example, or in reclaimed industrial dockland areas - Hafencity in Hamburg is a good example of this.

This project must be given the respect it deserves - and it must be used in a way that maximizes its potential as far as economic spin-offs, and as a way to structure and direct future urban growth.

fenwick16

Feb 27, 2010, 6:01 PM

I wonder how many are strongly opposed to this project versus how many feel it isn't an ideal project. An ideal project will vary greatly from person to person. My idea of an ideal project would be a combination stadium/convention centre with 100,000 square feet of exhibition space ( the approximate size of a football field) with a retractable roof. If such a development were proposed then the Rank site would not be large enough. However, I know that this isn't going to be built due to the cost. The Cogswell interchange project likely wasn't chosen because of the cost of tearing down the interchange.

worldlyhaligonian

Feb 28, 2010, 3:01 AM

As Worldly discussed about convention centres in Europe as a trigger for urban development, etc. - this is true, but this is often accomplished by building in areas of future expansion - WTCC in Amsterdam along the south axis is a great example, or in reclaimed industrial dockland areas - Hafencity in Hamburg is a good example of this.

Those are two that I was indirectly referring to! :cheers: Especially the WTC in Amsterdam has revitalized a previously dead area.

I don't think the super block is going to be an issue because its being designed differently than other buildings in the past. It will have more rooftop spaces and the location is perfect for people from out of town... its in the heart of everything.

I love the atrium concept. I don't really like the way the podiums are faux heritage and I would like to see the whole thing done in glass... but I don't really have an issue with the composition... I would rather have high rise in there regardless.

I totally would love to see slender towers, but the way it is organized won't likley be as bad as it is made out to be.

Ultimately, what scares me is more wasted land downtown... I think squandering this opportunity makes the opportunity cost of not doing other things even greater.

Its better than nothing and I think it has a real chance to provide serious economic benefts.

If they missed out on 70 conventions in the last year (during a recession) than I think its plausible that this centre could host a convention a week on average in perpetuity.

DigitalNinja

Feb 28, 2010, 4:16 PM

planarchy

Feb 28, 2010, 7:00 PM

I'd like to see this go through as is. I think it is something that we really need and there shouldn't be any argument about it. Not everything can be designed by a great architect as pointed out before. I think that most people should support this, the current convention center is to small, and I think the old one should eventually be torn down and used to extend the stadium.

Thinking like this is the problem.

Attention to aesthetic design must be considered just as important as engineering design. This isn't about getting a starachitect to design this - and they certainly don't always produce the best work - often they project their ego on place rather than reflect the context of the place itself. This about doing something well and moving beyond mediocrity in this city. Design competitions are used constantly in Europe for almost any public building being constructed. This is a guaranteed win. You get great ideas for minimal cost (prize money - and there are lost of desperate architects around the globe willing to put in long hours for even minimal prizes). It is also a great exercise in seeing how outsiders, as well as locals, interpret Halifax.

I completely agree that this can be good for the city and I support the project and program. But I don't support the short-sighted approach, the developer-led design process for a building partially funded by govn't, and the complete lack of a broader, long-term development strategy that must accompany an urban project of this scale.