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

[someone123]

Originally Posted by portapetey

This report:

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

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

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

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

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

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

[someone123]

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

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

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

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by someone123

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

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

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

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

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

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

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

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

[RangerNS]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

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

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

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by RangerNS

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

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

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

[worldlyhaligonian]

Is it considered a separate building to the Scotiabank Centre?

They share infrastructure inside, no?

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

Is it considered a separate building to the Scotiabank Centre?

They share infrastructure inside, no?

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

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

[RangerNS]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

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

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

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

[Keith P.]

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

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

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

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

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by RangerNS

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

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

What is your source of $21 million dollars?

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

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

[musicman]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

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

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

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

[RangerNS]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

What is your source of $21 million dollars?

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

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

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


And re: Data Center

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

[curnhalio]

Originally Posted by RangerNS

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

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

[LordGarak]

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

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

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

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

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

[musicman]

Originally Posted by LordGarak

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

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

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

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

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

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

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by LordGarak

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

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

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

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

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

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

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by musicman

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

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

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

[someone123]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

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

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