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

[halifaxboyns]

I agree with someone123 - the functionality of that space is important and how it would look at night is questionable based on the renderings. We need to see some at night to know how it would appear and function.

I agree though about the Calgary example - that stretch is pretty brutal. BUt this space could be improved by using LED lights to help liven up the space (although it will depend on a night time rendering). Once of the things that Calgary Transit has done is used LED lights along the Ctrain platforms, that change colour at night. It's quite pretty - that could be part of making the space more enjoyable. The other thing would be possibly relocating the LED screen (in the renderings) to this location. It seems like a big space in terms of size and there may be ways to make it feel less closed in. Although I liked the previous design that had the much larger atrium. But there are other ways of making it feel open, without it actually being as open.

[Phalanx]

The Calgary comparison isn't really a fair one - the 'roof' appears to be much lower (1 story) when compared to the Nova Centre renderings (2 stories). That, plus the skylights, plus the heavy use of glass in the storefronts, plus making it pedestrian only makes for more/better lighting options, it should make for a much brighter space.

That said, I also preferred the arch in the previous version, but...Something had to go when the convention space got moved up.

[resetcbu1]

I liked what was going on in the older rederings with the "dome " atrium , curved and rounded and all glass....

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by spaustin

Covering Grafton is my one big worry about this project. Turning streets into underground spaces rarely works out. The Philadelphia example is a good demonstration of the pitfalls! In Calgary, 3rd Street Southwest has been covered over by the Eaton/TD Centre and all that keeps it from being truly awful is that it's mercifully short. It's always so much darker and dingier in there. It really makes for a hostile streetscape.

Calgary

The original plan to have a much more airier Grafton by putting the convention centre space underground was probably better.

Well, wtf, everybody argues something different. Nobody is going to like every aspect.

I do like the darker "hostile" aspect of some urban environments... this is such a short section of the street and the towers wouldn't let alot of light in anyway due to their orientation to west and east. Jesus.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I love the new designs. Especially Grafton Plaza (thankfully this was left open to pedestrian traffic).

There are several recent renderings (source: http://buildyourcentre.ca/public-engagement/metro-engagement-2/ )

Looks fine to me. There is nothing wrong with a big city feel

[Halifax Hillbilly]

The problem is that a lot of streets in the area already have the same basic building pattern: large footprint buildings, often taking up the entire block. Metro Centre, Prince George, Cambridge Suites, and the weird warehouse type building on Market are all huge footprint buildings with no street presence. The Metro Centre and hotels are too big too imagine they'll be redeveloped anytime soon. The convention centre is two more block sized buildings in an area that already has too many block sized buildings.

The streetscapes therefore become extra important in my mind, to balance out and repair some of the awfulness around it. Grafton, however, will become a pedestrian mall, which generally haven't worked in North America. It's also covered: I guess we will have to wait and see, but the renderings don't look like a very interesting or welcoming place. Sackville and Prince look like they will be sacrificed to blank walls because the floor plates are big and you can't put much on the steep hills since entrances and windows would be between floors. So we're left hoping Argyle works out, but the garage entrance has to be there. Not very encouraging.

It's way too late, but a lot of these issues could have been avoided by picking a better site. Lots of flat, vacant land on the waterfront. The blocks are too small and the hill is too steep to make this work well, so we're stuck with all these compromises in what is already a pretty dismal area of downtown. Argyle of course works, and soon it will have a parkade entrance and a video screen.

[someone123]

Yeah, I agree about the site selection, and way back when I commented that a waterfront site would be nicer, but it is a done deal now.

One thing to keep in mind however is that these blocks were a mix of bad buildings and empty lots long before anybody started contemplating a new convention centre. Argyle survived with the blank walls of the Herald Building across the street. The Nova Centre probably won't be any worse.

The Grafton canopy could be nice just because it is a covered area. I have a feeling that some details like lighting and the mix of businesses along the plaza will make or break that space. If it feels like an inviting "bridge" between the existing Grafton blocks and has some late-night activity then it could be great, particularly when it's raining. If it's treated like off-limits private property with security guards harassing people after 8 p.m. then it won't become a part of the district and it won't be successful.

I could also see some sheltered patios along Argyle working well if they're done properly. Here in Vancouver there are patios that operate year-round. The mild climate helps but our winter temperatures are only about 0-6 degrees. The design is more important than the climate. The same thing is true with problems like snow removal. In Halifax people have this idea that they are living in a harsh environment and must suffer. In Sapporo, where they get 4 times as much snow, they have modern infrastructure like heated sidewalks and it is a non-issue in downtown areas.

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Well, wtf, everybody argues something different. Nobody is going to like every aspect.

I do like the darker "hostile" aspect of some urban environments... this is such a short section of the street and the towers wouldn't let alot of light in anyway due to their orientation to west and east. Jesus.

Well wtf is the point of a forum if it's only for yes men? Just offering up my thoughts on a part of the project that to me, has major potential for failure. And make no mistake, the default for covered streets across North America is failure. Yes, if the street was open to the air it would be shaded by the nearby towers, but there is a big difference between shade and being covered. Hillbilly hit the nail on the head that this is really the wrong spot for the convention centre. We could have done something bold and used the convention centre to tear down the Cogswell, but instead we settled for what was a less than perfect site because it was "cheap" and expedient. The Nova Centre designers have their work cut out for them here. I hope they're taking account of the good points that someone made and that it works out since it seems to be a done deal at this point.

[Wishblade]

I don't understand why it being in North America is reason for this to be destined to fail. If it is done correctly it should work here or anywhere. Is it a cultural thing?

[someone123]

In Europe many of the old covered streets were purposefully built as retail arcades. The designers of an arcade must make the covered streets inviting in order for the shops to be successful. In the convention centre cases the covered streets are an afterthought; they are built only to satisfy a technical requirement to preserve a public right of way. It's not surprising that, typically, the convention centre streets don't tend to come out looking as nice.

That being said, I do think that the Nova Centre architects are making a real effort to create a good street level design. I'm looking forward to seeing the final designs in November. I also think that a larger-scale public art contest could add a lot to this, particularly if they come up with a more animated installation (water, lights, whatever).

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Halifax Hillbilly

The problem is that a lot of streets in the area already have the same basic building pattern: large footprint buildings, often taking up the entire block. Metro Centre, Prince George, Cambridge Suites, and the weird warehouse type building on Market are all huge footprint buildings with no street presence. The Metro Centre and hotels are too big too imagine they'll be redeveloped anytime soon. The convention centre is two more block sized buildings in an area that already has too many block sized buildings.

The streetscapes therefore become extra important in my mind, to balance out and repair some of the awfulness around it. Grafton, however, will become a pedestrian mall, which generally haven't worked in North America. It's also covered: I guess we will have to wait and see, but the renderings don't look like a very interesting or welcoming place. Sackville and Prince look like they will be sacrificed to blank walls because the floor plates are big and you can't put much on the steep hills since entrances and windows would be between floors. So we're left hoping Argyle works out, but the garage entrance has to be there. Not very encouraging.

It's way too late, but a lot of these issues could have been avoided by picking a better site. Lots of flat, vacant land on the waterfront. The blocks are too small and the hill is too steep to make this work well, so we're stuck with all these compromises in what is already a pretty dismal area of downtown. Argyle of course works, and soon it will have a parkade entrance and a video screen.

I just wanted to post a screen capture of the Philadelphia Convention Center versus the Nova Centre (below). The Philadelphia Convention Centre is a "super block" that only the Scotia Square in Halifax can rival. (this isn't intended to be a put-down on the size of the Nova Centre - I think it is the right size for Halifax).

I have seen quite a few convention centres and as convention center's go, the Nova Centre is an interesting design, in my opinion.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by spaustin

Well wtf is the point of a forum if it's only for yes men? Just offering up my thoughts on a part of the project that to me, has major potential for failure. And make no mistake, the default for covered streets across North America is failure. Yes, if the street was open to the air it would be shaded by the nearby towers, but there is a big difference between shade and being covered. Hillbilly hit the nail on the head that this is really the wrong spot for the convention centre. We could have done something bold and used the convention centre to tear down the Cogswell, but instead we settled for what was a less than perfect site because it was "cheap" and expedient. The Nova Centre designers have their work cut out for them here. I hope they're taking account of the good points that someone made and that it works out since it seems to be a done deal at this point.

I understand that, but what frustrates me is how polarized everybody is on aspects like where the convention centre component should be... but the reality is that this whole development (as said well by someone123) will likely be a success because the herald building was simply blank walls and the world didn't come to an end. That area felt less like a warzone and the Herald building was a mess at the end.

I don't think every covered street in north america is a failure and I don't think every one in europe is great. I live in Europe... Halifax's convention centre will actually be world class and comparisons to existing developments in the city are sort of a stretch given the planned usage of glass on ground floors.

What may be more important is what is inside the convention centre and its internal layout... general placement or natural light vs no natural light are somewhat moot because they conflict. At least not having it underground gives more options for natural light, but its not even a big factor due to the need for darkness for most all presentations and convention events. That being said, light blockers would need to be in place above ground. Ultimately, there are pros and cons that essentially cancel eachother out which have been discussed at length.

I think the footprint would be too big for Cogswell and I see that area as more of a slender tower, private sector area utilizing non-tower space for public spaces.

Overall, the site selection is important because it fixes the problem of a giant whole in the middle of downtown (like twisted sisters would have )... where I think Cogswell can wait because its on the fringe of downtown.

[RyeJay]

I'm not fretting how Grafton Street will turn out. The development process seems to be putting a considerable amount of effort into planning its success.

- Pedestrian only.
- Ceiling height of two floors.
- Natural and artificial sources of light. ***The Sackville Street portions of this development are going to receive sunlight for most of the day because the Sackville side faces south. There are no buildings in the way to block the sun, since the Nova Centre is at a relatively high elevation. Since there isn't a fourth tower, due to the viewplane, this means the sky windows of Grafton will at least somewhat receive this natural light for most of the day as well, through the large windows of the convention space itself, correct?***
- Lots of glass.
- Art work.
- Sculptures.
- Water fountains.
- Extensive outdoor landscaping, with appropriate species of trees and shrubs for areas of full-sun around Sackville Street, and full-shade around Prince Street.
- Performance space.
- Retail and restaurants.

I think Halifax is in for a treat!

[Halifax Hillbilly]

I really dislike the fact that so many people defend mediocre developments with "but they're replacing a hole in the ground." That's no excuse for not doing a good job. That's no excuse for the lazy, no-vision, behind closed doors site selection process that went into this convention centre. A hole in the ground is a blank slate - we could do something amazing. The quality of what you build matters greatly in creating places where people want to live, work, play or learn 24/7.

It seems like people think we should be 'grateful' or 'thankful' that any development is happening downtown. Maybe 10 years ago that would have rung true, but look at the projects under construction, approved, or in the works. Even without the Nova Centre there will be tens of millions of dollars going into downtown in the next few years alone. Lots of people want to live downtown again, for the first time in decades. We shouldn't feel the need to applaud just because shovels are hitting the ground. I've been bullish on downtown for years, but honestly I'm shocked at how many projects are on the go and proposed. The scale of redevelopment is blowing me away as well: we're tearing down crappy mid-rise buildings (Citadel Hotel, Bank of Canada Building, CD Plus) and replacing them with stuff that's miles better. We have a real chance not just to fill in holes but to repair or renovate lots of the junk buildings that deaden so many downtown streets. This is why I get so frustrated by projects that make so many big mistakes: those mistakes are going to be the difference between a good downtown and a great downtown.

Lots of big players, in cities all across the world, get suckered into thinking things aren't going right because there is a lack of development. Usually it's the other way around: there is a lack of development because things aren't going right. What isn't going right in downtown Halifax is mediocre accessibility (mostly a lack of rapid transit), too little residential, too few good public spaces and good streetscapes, and too few night time activities that don't involve getting smashed. The market will take care of the residential component, but it's going to have to be government tackling other big issues. Instead we get lazy and say: "if we build something big, it will fix the lack of development that's holding downtown back." Well if the big thing you build also addresses the core problems that's great. But the Nova Centre project puts 150 million dollars of public money into downtown, but doesn't directly address the major issues that government has to fix. Sure it will bring people downtown on some nights, but it looks like the streetscapes and massive building footprints are going to be pretty underwhelming. So +1 for night time activity, -1 for street life.

I don't think this will be a failure, but I don't think it will be great. It will be 'meh'. Argyle will likely be fine, but it works already. There's some good components to the project (modern office space, retail, hotel) but you could put anything on the site and add square footage. I think this project is a perfectt example of the 'Edifice Complex', where a bunch of big-wigs want to leave their legacy with a big, whopping building. It's also a perfect example of Edward Gleaser's use of the Edifice Complex in Triumph of the City: trying to fix underdevelopment and underinvestment by building something, anything. The lack of development downtown is a sympton, not the disease.

[someone123]

I agree with you about the political desire to build impressive buildings. It is the same with elaborate, "sexy" bids like the Commonwealth Games. The three levels of government were there with $765M or so to build all kinds of inessential infrastructure, but once the bid was dead they wouldn't even fund a bare-bones stadium. Council traditionally hasn't even considered transit projects involving more investment than, say, the ice rink complex in Bedford. Publicly-subsidized ice surfaces should clearly be a lower priority than maintaining a good transportation system.

The "we'll take what we can get" attitude appears to be fading now that people see the what is happening. Partly I blame media like the Herald for pushing an uninformed "dying downtown" narrative (and printing garbage along the lines of "there hasn't been a development downtown in 20 years!") long after it made sense. An impressive number of projects are happening downtown right now. When the dust settles areas like Barrington will probably look a lot better. The big remaining pieces now as you say are factors like streetscaping and transportation, and the private sector can't do anything about those. We will see what City Hall does in the coming months.

Like I said, the convention centre site selection happened years ago. Many people were unhappy about it but they've since moved on. All I can say about that is that the in camera meetings and lack of public consultation were a major issue in the last municipal election and the new mayor has claimed that he wants to move past that style of governance.

[halifaxboyns]

I have to agree with Someone123 - I find that as cities reach certain growth points, there is an evolution in the attitude towards development. Fort McMurray for instance really didn't have any consideration for design of buildings; it was simply a matter of get it built we need housing. Now, there is way more thought being put into design and urban design. HRM is experiencing that now considering the population growth that's been occurring and coming down the pipe. The rules and processes now have a much greater emphasis on urban design and seeking out proposals that look good, although I realize that term is subjective.

I'll say this - I think it's great that so many of us are expressing opinions on any development. It helps keep the discussion going and if it can be used to make improvements on something that is still very much on paper; great. There is no doubt in my mind we all want to see Nova Centre succeed, if for the only reason that it will stick in the craw of those STV crowds.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Halifax Hillbilly

I really dislike the fact that so many people defend mediocre developments with "but they're replacing a hole in the ground." That's no excuse for not doing a good job. That's no excuse for the lazy, no-vision, behind closed doors site selection process that went into this convention centre. A hole in the ground is a blank slate - we could do something amazing. The quality of what you build matters greatly in creating places where people want to live, work, play or learn 24/7.

It seems like people think we should be 'grateful' or 'thankful' that any development is happening downtown. Maybe 10 years ago that would have rung true, but look at the projects under construction, approved, or in the works. Even without the Nova Centre there will be tens of millions of dollars going into downtown in the next few years alone. Lots of people want to live downtown again, for the first time in decades. We shouldn't feel the need to applaud just because shovels are hitting the ground. I've been bullish on downtown for years, but honestly I'm shocked at how many projects are on the go and proposed. The scale of redevelopment is blowing me away as well: we're tearing down crappy mid-rise buildings (Citadel Hotel, Bank of Canada Building, CD Plus) and replacing them with stuff that's miles better. We have a real chance not just to fill in holes but to repair or renovate lots of the junk buildings that deaden so many downtown streets. This is why I get so frustrated by projects that make so many big mistakes: those mistakes are going to be the difference between a good downtown and a great downtown.

Lots of big players, in cities all across the world, get suckered into thinking things aren't going right because there is a lack of development. Usually it's the other way around: there is a lack of development because things aren't going right. What isn't going right in downtown Halifax is mediocre accessibility (mostly a lack of rapid transit), too little residential, too few good public spaces and good streetscapes, and too few night time activities that don't involve getting smashed. The market will take care of the residential component, but it's going to have to be government tackling other big issues. Instead we get lazy and say: "if we build something big, it will fix the lack of development that's holding downtown back." Well if the big thing you build also addresses the core problems that's great. But the Nova Centre project puts 150 million dollars of public money into downtown, but doesn't directly address the major issues that government has to fix. Sure it will bring people downtown on some nights, but it looks like the streetscapes and massive building footprints are going to be pretty underwhelming. So +1 for night time activity, -1 for street life.

I don't think this will be a failure, but I don't think it will be great. It will be 'meh'. Argyle will likely be fine, but it works already. There's some good components to the project (modern office space, retail, hotel) but you could put anything on the site and add square footage. I think this project is a perfectt example of the 'Edifice Complex', where a bunch of big-wigs want to leave their legacy with a big, whopping building. It's also a perfect example of Edward Gleaser's use of the Edifice Complex in Triumph of the City: trying to fix underdevelopment and underinvestment by building something, anything. The lack of development downtown is a sympton, not the disease.

The purpose of such a building is not in any way how you describe it and the quality of this development is possibly higher than anything in Halifax's history and is above par for Canada and even many world cities.

One of the points of the hotel component is so that visitors can experience Halifax by foot... the way it was meant to be.

The transit issues are unrelated to this particular development and there is a lack of political will to involve LRT as an option in Halifax. Buses don't cut it regardless. If they wanted to invest $150 million in transit that wasn't bus oriented, I'd be down.

What's wrong with big developments that are done well? This isn't a 1970's, scotia square do-over like some think.

[worldlyhaligonian]

And honestly, Halifax should be grateful they are getting all of these federal dollars to do this. Its once in a blue moon and this development will be great in so many ways.

Any argument talking about the "public funds" aspect is moot. The NS government just bailed out a paper mill. That money could have gone to help support small businesses that have real future potential instead of a large employer in a sunset industry that will continue to fail on a cyclical basis.

[Jringe01]

In reading this last page of comments I happened upon this comment by worldlyhaligonian

I don't think every covered street in North America is a failure and I don't think every one in Europe is great.

I think this touches on an interesting point, namely that there have been developments liked (or pretty much accepted) that have floundered, even died while there have been those derided (even condemned) that have later gone on to become respected and liked by the community at large.

In of itself, meaning if the Nova Center was the only new development happening in this section of downtown, then I would probably have to lean towards agreeing with those that don't like it because it does have the potential to become an enormous dead zone...however I choose to be the optimist.

Halifaxhillbilly said:

but honestly I'm shocked at how many projects are on the go and proposed. The scale of redevelopment is blowing me away as well: we're tearing down crappy mid-rise buildings ... and replacing them with stuff that's miles better. We have a real chance not just to fill in holes but to repair or renovate lots of the junk buildings that deaden so many downtown streets.

I agree with this 100% and would urge all to consider this: That the Nova Center could be a catalyst to future developments in it's immediate area that help to either tie it in with the rest of downtown or perhaps create an entirely new space with it's own vibe (like in downtown Montreal with at least, as I count them, 6 such distinct areas) Rather than shoot down the Nova Center, use it as an excuse to hope for, urge and even push for complimentary development in the area.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Halifax is literally booming right now. What many of us have continually discussed is downtown apartments.

For that reason, this BoC proposal sounds just right to bring in density there.

One good thing about the Nova Centre and the covered street is even if it was the worst thing to ever happen to that lot for pedestrians (which it won't be given the list one of the forumers posted above) is that it will be surrounded on at least 3 corners with the bar districts... this creates a better degree of cohesion versus the barren wasteland that exists and will make the street life seem more vibrant. If its not congested in the day, this may be a good thing. Its not overly a long stretch either... but some level of natural light is definitely key. I'd like to see overhead LED lighting at night.