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

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

One reason for having a convention centre is to get people to come to the city and impress them with the city. Having a convention centre on the outskirts of the city won't accomplish that, in fact it might do the opposite. If Halifax had a good rapid transit system then maybe they could stay in the city and travel back and forth.

It does very much depend on the transportation system. I am staying at a hotel that is in the downtown shopping district and not that far from the historic areas... it is about a 10 km distance from the central station to the conference centre, but given that that equates to only a 9 minute train ride it is no big deal.

[fenwick16]

The reports are available at this link: http://www.tradecentrelimited.com/en/home/abouttcl/convcentreupdate.aspx

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I think that if the convention centre doesn't go ahead at the current site then most likely the HRM won't see another convention centre proposal in the near future. My reasoning is that if it doesn't go ahead, it will be due to lack of funding from the provincial NDP (the new deadline to decide is in July sometime).

The convention centre could always be a stand alone building if built in a different location. I haven't been able to find the viewplanes map and the Pier 21 area is outside the HRMbyDesign maps, so I assume that you are correct. However, I don't believe that it is a choice between the current site or a better site, but instead it is either the current site or nowhere for the next 10 years. (This will be decided by the NDP government).

I don't believe that a large convention centre will be built by private investors - at best we might see smaller convention/meeting centres at locations like King's Wharf. Personally, I feel that not having a large modern convention centre will hurt the HRM. It is not only the rental rates that can be recovered by a convention centre but also the 10% PST (to be included in the 15% HST) that will be charged on hotel rooms and restaurant income that will be lost. When newspapers print facts on such centres they often overlook this PST tax income and only focus on the convention rental rates.

HRM actually has an online mapping program where you can use their GIS to examine property throughout HRM. One of the 'planning layers' which can be applied to the map is the viewplanes. It doesn't provide the coordinate heights that would be off the ZM-17 map from the Peninsula LUB; but it paints where the viewplanes apply and how far out they stretch (from both Halifax and Dartmouth).

You would be amazed at how much of downtown Dartmouth for example is painted by the Brightwood viewplane, yet it's private property - which is why I champion the idea of removing it. If it were removed, you might be able to consider a convention centre over on the Dartmouth side, which would put it near good transit options (Alderney Ferry Terminal and Alderney Transit Bus Terminal) plus it's served by the Link bus.

I just have the map open right now and I was wrong. The entire dockyard of Halifax is painted with 3 viewplanes, not 2.

HRM GIS

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

The reports are available at this link: http://www.tradecentrelimited.com/en/home/abouttcl/convcentreupdate.aspx

Only had the time to skim them, but the 1st three seem quite positive, while the HTL one seems generally positive but with caveats (although it is harder to get a feel for that one since there isn't really a single conclusion section).
Certainly on the whole though the reports are far more positive than negative, particularly if this is what is going to be used to sway things.

One report does note that it does somewhat make the process of negotiating more difficult when there is only one development group that you have agreed to negotiate with. Doesn't exactly give the province/city much of a bargaining position.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I just have the map open right now and I was wrong. The entire dockyard of Halifax is painted with 3 viewplanes, not 2.

HRM GIS

Cool to play with that. It really shows why Cogswell/Scotia Square and the area on either side of Sackville are really the only windows for tallish buildings.

When I see that it reminds me how ticked I am that the Staples/Storage/Parking area were allowed to be developed in that way. What a waste of a potential spot for density. *sigh*

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by beyeas

Cool to play with that. It really shows why Cogswell/Scotia Square and the area on either side of Sackville are really the only windows for tallish buildings.

When I see that it reminds me how ticked I am that the Staples/Storage/Parking area were allowed to be developed in that way. What a waste of a potential spot for density. *sigh*

Well frankly, I agree with you. But I do see the staples as creating an interesting precident for bringing big box commercial onto the peninsula, close to downtown. So I don't see it as 100% negative, but it could've been done better. I think I've talked about it in the hypothetical discussion but that could've been a mixed use site, with the staples on the bottom and then residential above - granted, if you use the GIS - one layer is also the height precincts component of the ZM-17 map. So I think the maximum height on that site (regardless of the C-2 zone) is 50'. So you wouldn't have gotten much out of it - that's why the guy doing the developments on Gottingen needs the ZM-17 map changed, because the height precincts along Gottingen are 40 and 50'.

It's a great resource map; but I wouldn't call it 100% accurate. Really the maps from the LUB are the ultimate resource.

One commenter on CBC about this convention centre mentioned putting it where the CBC/YMCA is - but I'd actually not put it there and allow that to become more high density residential like the martello tower.

I think if you were to get rid of the brightwood viewplane - this could very easily fit into the Dartmouth downtown quite well and compliment the King's wharf project. Plus it would spur new investment in Dartmouth, which I'm sure has been lacking since I was a kid - so that would be 20 years!

[fenwick16]

Once against the Coast is twisting the facts. Here is their storey below. By doubling the square footage of the convention centre they have managed to double the cost estimate (interesting how math works). Tim Bousquet is using a square footage of 300,000 - 340,000 square feet (I have heard 125,000 - 150,000 square feet).

Convention centre costs: up to $170 million without furnishing and equipment
Hidden price estimates are about twice previously stated amount
Posted by Tim Bousquet on Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 3:31 PM
Until today, the public discussion about a proposed convention centre in downtown Halifax revolved around a government expenditure of about $100 million. That amount would pay for the public portion of the proposed complex---that is, the convention centre proper. Construction of the adjoining hotel and office complex would be paid for by the private developer, Rank, Inc.

Readers will recall that I've criticized the government for releasing only redacted copies of four reports that analyzed the business case for the convention centre. To his credit, provincial infrastructure minister Bill Estabrooks reversed that decision, and today all four reports were put live on the internet.

Still, while the documents placed on the internet are a vast improvement from the earlier released versions, there were still some redaction. In particular, key clauses in a report compiled by Criterion Communications Inc. were blackened. But, those blackened reports can be read by simply copying them and pasting them into a Word document, which reveals the redacted text as simply text. One passage, in particular, is the "money quote":

Recent experiences in North America suggest a construction cost for a centre incorporating a mix of exhibit, meeting and ballroom spaces in the range of $400 to $500 CDN per sf., depending on the proportion of various spaces with different degrees of finishing. For a 300,000 - 340,000 sf centre this would correspond very roughly to a construction cost in the range of between $120 and $170 million CDN, exclusive of design, furnishings and equipment costs.

There's no indication what the costs of "design, furnishings and equipment" will be, but a safe guestimate would be $30 million, so let's just call it an even $200 million for the public costs of the convention centre---TWICE that previously discussed.

Update, 5pm Friday: After The Coast announced the work-around for the redacted Criterion report, the report has been un-redacted.

Here's a screenshot of the original redaction:

[Keith P.]

That's our boy, Tim Bousquet, at it again. Math is not his strong suit.

[fenwick16]

I copied this from the Deloitte Report - Figure 5, page 14 of the report: (http://www.tradecentrelimited.com/site-tcl/media/tradecentrelimited/Deloitte%20Report.pdf). I chopped the top so that it would be easier to see. I think this is actually a very unique structure. It looks like the curved roof over Grafton Street is part of the support structure for the convention centre portion. The other amazing thing about this complex is how deep it is. On the Market Street side it is close to 90 feet deep. On the Argyle side it is a little bit over 50 feet deep. Is there anything else that has been built in Halifax that is this deep?

One other thing that I like is that there is room for expansion in the future, according to the report. Also, I like all the retail on Grafton Street.

The other interesting note is that the office tower appears to be only 12 office storeys above Market Street, with the rest being buried.

[sdm]

Glad to see the reports and get a feel for what insiders have been looking at.

Hopefully there is a business case to be proven here.

looks like there has been design changes to to the original rendering

[sdm]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

That's our boy, Tim Bousquet, at it again. Math is not his strong suit.

Actuall his math is not that far off. The convention centre is projected to be 150,000 useable space. Construction costs are done of gross area, which is closer to 250,000 sqft.

His math is off, but not double as he seems to think.

[sdm]

looks that statically that the majority of the lost business is in the 600-800 delegates size range,

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by sdm

Actuall his math is not that far off. The convention centre is projected to be 150,000 useable space. Construction costs are done of gross area, which is closer to 250,000 sqft.

His math is off, but not double as he seems to think.

Based on the lot size, it doesn't look like there can be more than 90,000 square feet per floor times two. I have read 125,000 square feet for the net space. So it might be 180,000 square feet gross. I think he is also including the two levels of parking, but that shouldn't be $500 per square foot.

Won't it be difficult to go that deep on Market Street?

[sdm]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Based on the lot size, it doesn't look like there can be more than 90,000 square feet per floor times two. I have read 125,000 square feet for the net space. So it might be 180,000 square feet gross. I think he is also including the two levels of parking, but that shouldn't be $500 per square foot.

its in the reports, 200,000-250,000 gross square feet.

500 per foot would be a blended cost over the entire development (convention only). In halifax to do 90 feet below grade is costly as it will require blasting and there will likeley be shale and other associated elements that require special attention.

In the end costs are costs, question is the business spin off.

[fenwick16]

Is there part of the harbour that can be filled in? That will be a lot of material to remove. Being that close to the Citadel, would quite a bit of it be relatively soft shale/soil (as opposed to granite)?

[sdm]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Is there part of the harbour that can be filled in? That will be a lot of material to remove. Being that close to the Citadel, would quite a bit of it be relatively soft shale/soil (as opposed to granite)?

After a certain depth i would suspect it to be very tough shale, which won't be known till they do the geotechincal study. Shale lately has been shipped out to the Waterfront development corp lands in bedford.

[planarchy]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Is there part of the harbour that can be filled in? That will be a lot of material to remove. Being that close to the Citadel, would quite a bit of it be relatively soft shale/soil (as opposed to granite)?

I think it is slate, which means disposal is difficult and expensive due to acid rock drainage.

[sdm]

Originally Posted by planarchy

I think it is slate, which means disposal is difficult and expensive due to acid rock drainage.

shale and slate is throughout the downtown.

[kph06]

From what I have heard the company doing the earthwork is ready to go whenever they get the green light. They will be blasting to dig the hole. The pyritic slate has to be taken to certain sites, the infill in the basin is one as the salt water neutralizes the acids. If not there, it can be stored anywhere with known "contamination" of pyritic slate as the acids won't be spread further. As far as contamination goes, pyritic slate is much easier to work with than heavy metals - they can only go to a select few remediation facilities. Considering all this fill has to be trucked out anyway, I doubt the fact it is slate will affect the cost too much because finding a suitable site is fairly easy (there is lots of pyritic slate in HRM). Its the volume of material that will make it difficult, and that would be a problem slate or no slate.

[someone123]

What, exactly, will the cost sharing agreement be between the developer and government? It seems like Tim Bousquet is jumping the gun by making some simple calculation using numbers from other cities that assume an independent convention centre development. Then again, his articles are often propaganda-like; clearly he is not simply concerned with providing balanced information.

The rendering in the Deloitte report look nicer than the initial Nova Centre rendering. Hopefully it will be further improved for the July report. Specifically, I would like to see a better design when it comes to the sloped sidestreets, even if it is something as simple as adding little display windows.

The report mentions expansion possibilities 15-20 years down the road. I wonder how they would accommodate this at the Nova Centre site? This seems like one of the shortcomings of the current WTCC - lots of cities have simple renovated their 80s convention centres to bring them up to modern standards but that's not really a possibility in this case.