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

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by Empire

It would be nice to see The Centennial Group swap lots with Rank Inc. This waterfront lot would be spectacular for a combo Performing Arts Centre and Convention Centre. This could then be cost shared. The waterfront lot is approx. 20% larger than the Herald/Midtown lot.

I was first going to post my comment without checking - good thing I did look. I pulled up the site on HRM's GIS system. I had thought there were viewplanes on the site, but apparently there are not.

So it would be very interesting if the put it here - they'd have the advantage of being at almost 0 for height above sea level - so they'd actually get more benefit out of the grade change.

The blue colour of the building would blend in well with the water; now that it's cleaner! LOL

[Empire]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I was first going to post my comment without checking - good thing I did look. I pulled up the site on HRM's GIS system. I had thought there were viewplanes on the site, but apparently there are not.

So it would be very interesting if the put it here - they'd have the advantage of being at almost 0 for height above sea level - so they'd actually get more benefit out of the grade change.

The blue colour of the building would blend in well with the water; now that it's cleaner! LOL

Maybe change the office component to more hotel or residential. A conference centre with close-up harbour views would be an attraction on its own.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by Empire

Maybe change the office component to more hotel or residential. A conference centre with close-up harbour views would be an attraction on its own.

It's funny you say that, because I was stuck in traffic on Lower Water the other day going down to Purdy's to pick up my girlfriend... and as I was sitting there I looked out at the Tugs Pub site and thought "That would be an awesome site for a performing arts centre"!

[fenwick16]

Having a convention centre on the waterfront makes a lot of sense. The visitors would be very impressed by being right on the harbour with the cruise ships close by.

[kph06]

This is a retraction posted in The Coast about a previous article by Tim Bousquet. At the time I read it, it reeked of Heritage Trust propaganda and now they coast is admitting they (Tim) basically put no research into the article. Good reporting Tim, unfortunately it appears they did not suspend his pen or keyboard.

Apology to Corporate Research Associates Inc. and Don Mills

Posted by Kyle Shaw on Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM

A recent blog post, written by Tim Bousquet and published at thecoast.ca May 26, was unfair to local polling company Corporate Research Associates and its president, Don Mills. The bulk of the blog post repeated excerpts from a press release from the citizens’ group Save the View. That press release claimed that a CRA poll on the proposed convention centre for downtown Halifax “included a confusing double negative,” but that’s simply incorrect: We’ve checked the poll questions, and they are straight-forward and direct. Save the View was wrong to claim otherwise, and The Coast was wrong to unquestioningly reprint the allegation without verfication of the facts. Moreover, the same blog post was headlined “Is CRA push-polling the convention centre?” Push-polling is a serious and damaging allegation, and if demonstrated would injure the professional reputation and integrity of a company in the market research and public opinion polling business. But while the headline raised the suggestion that Mills was push-polling, there was no effort made to contact him or otherwise ascertain the facts behind the accusation. This was simply bad reporting. Furthermore, there was no truth to such an allegation. For these failures, both The Coast and Tim Bousquet whole-heartedly and without reservation apologize to Mills and CRA for this false and damaging allegation. There is nothing at all to suggest that they have been push-polling or using confusing language in their polls, and we regret suggesting otherwise. The original blog post has been taken offline.

[fenwick16]

Thanks for posting kph06. The fact that The Coast issued this retraction likely indicates that they were threatened with a law suit by Corporate Research Associates Inc. (just my wild guess based on the language that they used). Hopefully, the Save the View group will also be forced to issue a retraction or, if not, I hope they will get sued. I really enjoy seeing such groups get caught twisting the truth.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by kph06

This is a retraction posted in The Coast about a previous article by Tim Bousquet. At the time I read it, it reeked of Heritage Trust propaganda and now they coast is admitting they (Tim) basically put no research into the article. Good reporting Tim, unfortunately it appears they did not suspend his pen or keyboard.

Apology to Corporate Research Associates Inc. and Don Mills

Posted by Kyle Shaw on Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM

A recent blog post, written by Tim Bousquet and published at thecoast.ca May 26, was unfair to local polling company Corporate Research Associates and its president, Don Mills. The bulk of the blog post repeated excerpts from a press release from the citizens’ group Save the View. That press release claimed that a CRA poll on the proposed convention centre for downtown Halifax “included a confusing double negative,” but that’s simply incorrect: We’ve checked the poll questions, and they are straight-forward and direct. Save the View was wrong to claim otherwise, and The Coast was wrong to unquestioningly reprint the allegation without verfication of the facts. Moreover, the same blog post was headlined “Is CRA push-polling the convention centre?” Push-polling is a serious and damaging allegation, and if demonstrated would injure the professional reputation and integrity of a company in the market research and public opinion polling business. But while the headline raised the suggestion that Mills was push-polling, there was no effort made to contact him or otherwise ascertain the facts behind the accusation. This was simply bad reporting. Furthermore, there was no truth to such an allegation. For these failures, both The Coast and Tim Bousquet whole-heartedly and without reservation apologize to Mills and CRA for this false and damaging allegation. There is nothing at all to suggest that they have been push-polling or using confusing language in their polls, and we regret suggesting otherwise. The original blog post has been taken offline.

Nice...hope see more of this

[hfxtradesman]

haven't been around much on the job due to vacations but what i did find out this week was the NDP was already asking questions about the project and will have an answer by the end of Aug. still 50/50

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by hfxtradesman

haven't been around much on the job due to vacations but what i did find out this week was the NDP was already asking questions about the project and will have an answer by the end of Aug. still 50/50

Thanks for the info hfxtradesman. Do you have any info on the Waterside project? Several of us are wondering if it is being delayed?

[hfxtradesman]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Thanks for the info hfxtradesman. Do you have any info on the Waterside project? Several of us are wondering if it is being delayed?

don't know just yet, alot of people from some of these projects are off also. All i know about this one, is that not one worker has been inside for a long time.

[fenwick16]

Although it is just my personal view, I can't imagine the Waterside Project being delayed because of the increased downtown vacancy rate. Such things are cyclic and by the time it is built things will likely be improving. The only thing that I can think of is that time is required to do a detailed design of the restoration work (or maybe they are trying to get a subsidy for the restoration work that they are doing?)

[halifaxboyns]

I find it very interesting that this retraction in the Coast from the Editor. Very interesting.
I take it that someone probably served them with papers advising that they were in a very bad position and they were prepared to take the matter to court.

I've not seen any such statements on the STV website - but it may be coming. Or they may not do it and feel they have a good case in court. All I can say is; it's about time developers start standing up for themselves. Progress is not a bad thing to say the least.

[fenwick16]

Has anyone had a chance to look at the Save the View website lately? It now looks like a cheap tabloid with one-sided information and trumped up news headlines - http://www.savetheview.ca/ . They are even trying to get sympathy votes with a news headline stating that convention centre boosters crashed their news conference (that news still bring a smile to my face).

[JustinMacD]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Has anyone had a chance to look at the Save the View website lately? It now looks like a cheap tabloid with one-sided information and trumped up news headlines - http://www.savetheview.ca/ . They are even trying to get sympathy votes with a news headline stating that convention centre boosters crashed their news conference (that news still bring a smile to my face).

It's always been a terribly amateurish website.

I love how those photos (the ones that show their fake buildings blocking out the view) look like they're taken by someone sitting on the ground so it makes it look even more dramatic. It's absolutely laughable.

This also cracked me up:

91% of the public are opposed to the two Convention Centre towers
73% of the public surveyed preferred to keep the existing view. The survey has a margin of error of 7%, 95 times out of 100
--

These numbers are so inaccurate it's insane. 91% of the public is opposed to this? I've heard very little outrage and most of the people I talk to think these STV people are nuts. Is there even any doubt that these numbers were completely made up or that they polled their Heritage Trust buddies? LOL I mean come on. At least make it a belivable number.

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by JustinMacD

It's always been a terribly amateurish website.

I love how those photos (the ones that show their fake buildings blocking out the view) look like they're taken by someone sitting on the ground so it makes it look even more dramatic. It's absolutely laughable.

This also cracked me up:

91% of the public are opposed to the two Convention Centre towers
73% of the public surveyed preferred to keep the existing view. The survey has a margin of error of 7%, 95 times out of 100
--

I'm sure what they did was plant a person with a clipboard atop Citadel Hill, with that rendering of the blacked-out mess superimposed on the photo, showing it to Citadel visitors and saying something to the effect of- "Its a lovely view today isn't it, don't you think it would be a shame if it looked like this instead?"

[phrenic]

Originally Posted by JustinMacD

It's always been a terribly amateurish website.

If we're going to be grading web sites, take a look at www.novacentre.ca

It's nothing but gross basic html except for the analytics javascript. In terms of design, www.savetheview.ca wins.

[Phalanx]

Kind of curious that an organization so in favour of 'democracy' (or their version of it, anyway) and has such 'obvious' overwhelming support doesn't allow public commentary or feedback on their 'news'.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by phrenic

If we're going to be grading web sites, take a look at www.novacentre.ca

It's nothing but gross basic html except for the analytics javascript. In terms of design, www.savetheview.ca wins.

I will pick the one that just sticks to facts - in other words the Rank website.

[Jringe01]

www.savetheview.ca also says that
"The proposed Convention Centre towers fly in the face of current best practices in the world’s great historic cities like London, Paris, Jerusalem, Vienna, Charleston and Quebec City. These great cities are tightening design controls and blocking the erection of towers in their city centres. Shouldn’t Halifax, a great Canadian historic city, be doing the same?"

However I would surmise that they haven't taken a real good look at the towers currently under construction (and proposed) in the City and in Westminster/Lambeth etc...it also helps cities like London and Paris is that they have set aside areas specifically for high-rise construction because they have the space, money, economy and political will do do so...where would they propose building "LaDefense" in Halifax???

[Jringe01]

The Halifax Chamber of Commerce and Mayor Peter Kelly have voiced their enthusiasm, and an online petition backing the convention centre amassed more than 1,600 signatures.

Anyone have the link for this petition. I'd like to sign it if it's still an option. :-)