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

halifaxboyns · #**1281** Posted **Sep 24, 2010, 11:12 PM**

The NDP government is very hard to read - I agree with the article that WH posted.

Parks Canada can ask the developer to redesign until they are blue in the face; in the end it will be up to council to approve it. The additional bonus here is that it could fall under provincial planning powers if need be. Personally, if I were the minister of SNSMR and the decision was to move forward and a number of players started causing trouble; I'd try to do an end run around them and exempt it from the Municipal Planning process and make it approval by cabinet. But that's just me...I like to be mean sometimes.

worldlyhaligonian · #**1282** Posted **Sep 25, 2010, 1:51 AM**

The most rediculous part about all of this is that it is happening now... Parks Canada had ample time to comment on this project. This last minute stuff should not be permitted.

halifaxboyns · #**1283** Posted **Sep 25, 2010, 4:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

The most rediculous part about all of this is that it is happening now... Parks Canada had ample time to comment on this project. This last minute stuff should not be permitted.

It happens all the time though; trust me. I've done planning for almost 8 years now; it happens a lot.
Back before I moved to the job I'm in now and was dealing with rezoning applications; I can't count on my hands how many in a year would have last minute demands from residents or community associations. You just have to look it over and move on...

phrenic · #**1284** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 6:29 PM**

http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/arch...sts-city-will-be-asked-to-pay-57-million

Wishblade · #**1285** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 8:01 PM**

Did council really think HRM wasnt going to have to pay anything towards this? Wow....

I have to say, that article does make me a bit nervous about this.

fenwick16 · #**1286** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 8:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phrenic

http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/arch...sts-city-will-be-asked-to-pay-57-million

This stinks of politics - you have people who have been against the convention centre from the start saying that they were in favour but now consider to be too rich. One of politicians in this story has been listed on the Save the View Facebook site for months but is now pretending to have been in favour. The other sickening thing about this article is that certain politicians are now pretending to be in favour of a new stadium whereas they were completely silent over the past few months. EDITED - to be fair to Councillor Dawn Sloane she has always stated that she is in favour of a stadium.

The other puzzling thing about this article is that I keep hearing that it is a leasing arrangement - so what is the true story? Are they paying for it up front or are they leasing?

Again a politician, Howard Epstein is mixing height arguments with economics.

beyeas · #**1287** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 8:06 PM**

yeah this does not bode well when 2 of the 3 levels of government are now musing about backing out.

2 questions:
1. How much was the original funding formula? I can't remember what the heck was said before for the CC part.
2. Where does Epstein get off leaking this to the Coast?! I can't imagine that this was cleared for public release. If not, I hope he gets in crap... which he won't I know. @#$%

someone123 · #**1288** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 8:35 PM**

Looks like another hatchet job article from Tim Bousquet. He always interviews the same handful of people who always say the same things.

I would imagine that the provincial government will not be too happy with Epstein given how Bill Estabrooks and others have declined to comment. It is very bad form.

fenwick16 · #**1289** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 9:03 PM**

I think Howard Epstein should elaborate on this statement.

Quote:

“I think the Trade Centre Limited has played kind of a scandalous role here,” says Epstein. “They’ve put out documents that pretend to be serious studies of what the market potential is for a larger convention centre, but their studies have built into them such dubious assumptions and blue-sky optimistic assumptions. They have no credibility with me, and I hope they have no credibility with my colleagues.”

Is he an expert on convention centre economics ? There were 4 independent studies conducted, so why does he consider the Trade Centre Corp to have played a scandalous role for wanting a larger convention centre that will create jobs for Nova Scotian?

It sounds as if certain people are concerned that this might be approved and therefore are trying to encourage HRM residents to oppose it.

Phalanx · #**1290** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 9:12 PM**

It may help explain why he was shut out of cabinet when everyone else who's served as long as he has was given a seat...

midasmull · #**1291** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 9:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Is he an expert on convention centre economics ?

Convention centre economics? That article has me questioning whether the man has a grasp of basic economics. "I think in fact it’s going to ruin business on Argyle Street."

How would an influx of (presumably) several hundred to one thousand+ conventioners, on top of thousands of office workers and hotel guests, to an area across the street from these businesses be bad for business? I could understand the argument about the height and design (it's his personal preference), but the fact that he's trying to lump in BS business arguments only weakens his position.

Besides, how could these towers be worse than the monolithic abandoned building that stood there prior?

terrynorthend · #**1292** Posted **Sep 27, 2010, 9:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

Looks like another hatchet job article from Tim Bousquet. He always interviews the same handful of people who always say the same things.

That's some rag he edits. I guess Savage Love is the only thing left worth reading in The Coast. Its a shame, I did enjoy the paper under Kyle Shaw and Bruce Wark. Still a bit leftist at times, but way more balanced.

Keith P. · #**1293** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 1:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Is he an expert on convention centre economics ?

You have to understand this about Der Kommissar Howard Epstein: he considers himself an expert on everything. At least those things he disagrees with.

worldlyhaligonian · #**1294** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 1:50 AM**

Yeah, its crazy the tactics of these people and saying that TCL is to blame.

The whole development is only 150 million!!! We just built 4 rinks that contribute nothing to the city has a whole for 40 million!!

The funny thing is... they are putting out all this propaganda, but none of what they are saying is based in any kind of fact. This whole round-about lying is stupid... I would have a bit of respect for them if they were honest.

Its undemocratic what the anti-development people are doing.

worldlyhaligonian · #**1295** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 2:00 AM**

Yeah, and where did the sudden interest in a stadium come from???

Stop lying to us and making excuses... let your honest opinion be known, you don't want this built because its tall. Period.

fenwick16 · #**1296** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 2:09 AM**

Do they even consider that this could create several hundreds of person years of work between the construction jobs and full time employment jobs over 25 years.

I guess preventing tall buildings from being built is more important to them then people eating and paying their mortgages. The ones against this must live a charmed life whereby they can throw away so many jobs. The annoying thing about all of this obstructionism is that the majority of people in the HRM are not against tall buildings (according to surveys).

fenwick16 · #**1297** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 2:34 AM**

In the allnovascotia.com, Estabrooks blasted Epstein and even stated that it is no wonder that he is not in cabinet

. Allnovascotia.com is speculating that this is being made public because Epstein is concerned that he is losing the battle against the convention centre.

I certainly liked the allnovascotia story more than The Coast story. The allnovascotia.com story was unbiased - good for them to do a fair story on this situation.

halifaxboyns · #**1298** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 2:54 AM**

I hate to say it; but I saw this coming. I figured the momment someone said that the caucus was talking about it - that Epstein would blurt something out. This didn't surprise me at all and as soon as he did; of course Tim wrote about it (yet again no big surprise).

This is why Epstein will never get in cabinet - because now he won't be trusted. If this isn't a reason to get the party whip after him in someway; I don't know what would be. Personally; I'd expell him from the party on the grounds of releasing information to the public that was to be discussed in confidence and that he couldn't be trusted.

This actually still leaves me believing that the party is on the fence on this one and so I can't read them. Wait and see I guess...

beyeas · #**1299** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 11:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phalanx

It may help explain why he was shut out of cabinet when everyone else who's served as long as he has was given a seat...

VERY interesting that Estabrooks made the same comment, quoted in AllNS!

More interesting (if we are reading tea leaves) is that he said that it is clear Epstein felt he was losing the internal battle over this with caucus and said "If you don't win, you don't go public and cry about it". Curious comment eh?

EDIT: Oops, just noticed that Fenwick had already pointed this out!

Jstaleness · #**1300** Posted **Sep 28, 2010, 11:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Do they even consider that this could create several hundreds of person years of work between the construction jobs and full time employment jobs over 25 years.

I guess preventing tall buildings from being built is more important to them then people eating and paying their mortgages. The ones against this must live a charmed life whereby they can throw away so many jobs. The annoying thing about all of this obstructionism is that the majority of people in the HRM are not against tall buildings (according to surveys).

I work in IT and I am in and out of the downtown offices everyday. I ask everyone of the people that work there about their thoughts of the projects nearby. Almost all of them are excited and pro development. The people in Purdy's are glad to see Kings Wharf. It gives them something to look at. 1801 Hollis people want the waterside tower to be built. The other day I posted that pic from 1718 Argyle showing the Nova Centre's home. They as well wanted it built even though when complete they would be staring at a glass panel. "Better than a hole in the ground".