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

[Wigglez]

Out of curiosity have they done anything about the trucks going through downtown? Or at least have plants to deal with it?

[someone123]

I'd say the best (only?) plan so far for dealing with the truck traffic is the plan for a third bridge.

So far the argument against the bridge seems to be that it's for cars and cars are bad so the bridge proposal is evil. The reality is much more complicated: the bridge would be user pay, it would deal with the trucks, and it could support a bus/HOV lane. On top of all that there's a big advantage to putting new development on empty land 5 km away from the downtown (Shearwater area) instead of 20 km away in Hammonds Plains or Fall River.

Imagine how much better it would have been had Halifax's regional airport been built at Shearwater and connected to the downtown core with a southern bridge.

[iconrad]

Hi everyone,

I'm working with the Build Your Centre public engagement team and just wanted to say hi and invite you to the events. Great to see you discussing the project and new designs!

Next one is tonight at the Westin 5-7 (also happening is Fusion Halifax's VivaCity 2012 event which you might be interested in).

Details here: http://buildyourcentre.ca/public-engagement/metro-engagement-2/

Tonight we're showing preliminary designs for Grafton Street and a major re-design of the Argyle Atrium.

Looking forward to feedback on the new concepts.

Thanks!
- Ian

[halifaxboyns]

Will this be available on a webcast?

[iconrad]

Yes, it'll be streaming right from the homepage (http://buildyourcentre.ca), and we'll be tweeting as well (https://twitter.com/BuildYourCentre).

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

Another "rad", oh no! :eek:

Welcome to the forums! :tup:

[hoser111]

I'd say the best (only?) plan so far for dealing with the truck traffic is the plan for a third bridge.

So far the argument against the bridge seems to be that it's for cars and cars are bad so the bridge proposal is evil. The reality is much more complicated: the bridge would be user pay, it would deal with the trucks, and it could support a bus/HOV lane. On top of all that there's a big advantage to putting new development on empty land 5 km away from the downtown (Shearwater area) instead of 20 km away in Hammonds Plains or Fall River.

Imagine how much better it would have been had Halifax's regional airport been built at Shearwater and connected to the downtown core with a southern bridge.

I still think the rail cut is an obvious solution to the truck problem and even a transit express route.

[someone123]

The rail cut is another option. There was some talk a while ago of the province contemplating turning part of it into a road but I don't know how realistic that is (can it even fit 2 lanes?).

I don't think it's a great transit route but it makes a lot of sense as a connector between the port and 102, assuming it's possible to fit in both a truck route and the rail. There would of course be some opposition from those living in houses next to the rail cut. There aren't a lot of houses right next to the cut though and, well, it's been an industrial corridor for 100 years.

[resetcbu1]

This project has got me all giddy , can't wait for some pics when the crane(s) go up :cheers:

[worldlyhaligonian]

The rail cut is another option. There was some talk a while ago of the province contemplating turning part of it into a road but I don't know how realistic that is (can it even fit 2 lanes?).

I don't think it's a great transit route but it makes a lot of sense as a connector between the port and 102, assuming it's possible to fit in both a truck route and the rail. There would of course be some opposition from those living in houses next to the rail cut. There aren't a lot of houses right next to the cut though and, well, it's been an industrial corridor for 100 years.

It could probably fit 2-3 lanes with room for bikes on either side... its massive and could be made wider without much expense.

[fenwick16]

Hi everyone,

I'm working with the Build Your Centre public engagement team and just wanted to say hi and invite you to the events. Great to see you discussing the project and new designs!

Next one is tonight at the Westin 5-7 (also happening is Fusion Halifax's VivaCity 2012 event which you might be interested in).

Details here: http://buildyourcentre.ca/public-engagement/metro-engagement-2/

Tonight we're showing preliminary designs for Grafton Street and a major re-design of the Argyle Atrium.

Looking forward to feedback on the new concepts.

Thanks!
- Ian

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/ )

http://buildyourcentre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/30-Sackville-Grafton-1024x548.jpg

[halifaxboyns]

I can't seem to find the link to the video feed.

[someone123]

There was a live feed but I guess it is gone. Maybe they will put up a video later.

I think the Grafton Plaza looks severe and overwhelmed by the upper level. Some of that may be due to the shading in the rendering but partly I think it's also due to the hard angles and the ratio of the width of the street to the height of the "roof" above.

It would be nice to see some night renderings showing how the lighting will work. The retail will also be important; the plain glass walls look sterile, but presumably there will be stores (ideally some major retailers that will be new to the downtown area -- this isn't far from either Spring Garden Road or Barrington) with signs and stuff in them. Hopefully they'll also get some good public art.

[mcmcclassic]

That new rendering looks very nice. Maybe they should consider replacing that head statue with a LIGHTHOUSE? :)

Hopefully we see a crane on site in the next few months (or at least before it snows too much).

[Keith P.]

That new rendering looks very nice. Maybe they should consider replacing that head statue with a LIGHTHOUSE? :)


I thought it was an igloo.

[fenwick16]

I think the Grafton Plaza looks severe and overwhelmed by the upper level. Some of that may be due to the shading in the rendering but partly I think it's also due to the hard angles and the ratio of the width of the street to the height of the "roof" above.

I was at the Philadelphia Convention Center a couple of years ago and it has a covered street that is only one storey high - http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=philadelphia+convention+center&ll=39.953841,-75.159456&spn=0.003191,0.016512&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&fb=1&gl=ca&hq=convention+center&hnear=0x89c6b7d8d4b54beb:0x89f514d88c3e58c1,Philadelphia,+PA,+USA&cid=0,0,5666902858699612134&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=39.953837,-75.159455&panoid=Dbd34ZvAZVTPOoCZ-Ips1A&cbp=11,21.34,,0,-5.91. It is certainly a dark and unpleasant looking street. Luckily the Nova Centre renderings show a couple of storeys height above Grafton Street. It appears as though the atrium from Argyle Street will allow additional light to get through to Grafton Street.

http://buildyourcentre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/25-Events-Plazza1-1024x662.jpg

[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 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=CAlgary,+AB&hl=en&ll=51.046121,-114.070374&spn=0.00514,0.009645&sll=44.559163,-63.078003&sspn=2.982476,4.938354&t=h&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.046121,-114.070374&panoid=gKhUBHC_TsNW4bGAiNnq8A&cbp=12,73.56,,0,14.12)

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

[Empire]

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 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=CAlgary,+AB&hl=en&ll=51.046121,-114.070374&spn=0.00514,0.009645&sll=44.559163,-63.078003&sspn=2.982476,4.938354&t=h&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.046121,-114.070374&panoid=gKhUBHC_TsNW4bGAiNnq8A&cbp=12,73.56,,0,14.12)

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


It would help if the centre where the half face is was completely open above instead of the same roof openings as the rest.

[someone123]

One thing that doesn't come through very well is the skylights. They might make a big difference, but their impact isn't very apparent from the shading in the rendering. The night time appearance of the street is also very important. If it's well-lit it could actually be a lot more hospitable than surrounding streets, particularly when it's raining.

I think it would be good to have something to break up the "slab" appearance of the floor above Grafton. The old design had an arch. Then again, maybe this design would turn out okay and would have some novelty since there's no other block downtown like it.

[ScovaNotian]

I think it might be more attractive to have a closed atrium with a glass ceiling than a covered, open street. A sunlit atrium would be attractive in winter. This would hinge on the ability to split the convention space upstairs in two chunks that are connected by bridges that cross the atrium rather than being one monolithic block though.

[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]

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 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=CAlgary,+AB&hl=en&ll=51.046121,-114.070374&spn=0.00514,0.009645&sll=44.559163,-63.078003&sspn=2.982476,4.938354&t=h&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.046121,-114.070374&panoid=gKhUBHC_TsNW4bGAiNnq8A&cbp=12,73.56,,0,14.12)

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]

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/ )

http://buildyourcentre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/30-Sackville-Grafton-1024x548.jpg

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

[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. :banana::banana:

[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]

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]

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. :banana::banana:

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.

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7974/novacentreversusphilade.jpg

[worldlyhaligonian]

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 :cool:)... 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]

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.

[someone123]

This may have been posted already, but here's a rendering of the permitted building envelope:

http://contrarian.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Argyle.jpeg
Source (http://contrarian.ca/)

[teddifax]

This may have been posted already, but here's a rendering of the permitted building envelope:

http://contrarian.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Argyle.jpeg
Source (http://contrarian.ca/)

This is just heightening my desire to see the final designs. I can't wait to see what they are....

[Empire]

Sat. Chronicle Herald
http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/167412-ramia-eyes-ibm-as-tenant

[halifaxboyns]

That's a very interesting massing model...shows just how much of an effect the slope causes.

I hope IBM moves into Nova Centre - drives the knife that much further into the back of STV. :)

[kph06]

There's some serious gear on site now, five excavators an a drill rig. The water main on graftin looks like its been decommissioned.

[teddifax]

There's some serious gear on site now, five excavators an a drill rig. The water main on graftin looks like its been decommissioned.

Pictures, please!!!

[kph06]

Pictures, please!!!

I'll try to go up tht way Friday.

[isaidso]

This may have been posted already, but here's a rendering of the permitted building envelope:

http://contrarian.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Argyle.jpeg
Source (http://contrarian.ca/)

Has this building been chopped at an angle or is that just to depict height in the diagram? I'm assuming its the latter or they're building a tower on that end of the lot to properly fill in the block?

[fenwick16]

Has this building been chopped at an angle or is that just to depict height in the diagram? I'm assuming its the latter or they're building a tower on that end of the lot to properly fill in the block?

There is a viewplane. It is shown on the 9th page of this slideshow - http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/buildyourcentre/nova-centre-engagement-oct-3/2

[SekishikiMeikaiHa]

Pictures, please!!!

Ask and you shall receive :):

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8199/8191259373_cae8b66470_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8063/8191258901_51a99119f4_b.jpg

[fenwick16]

Thank you SekishikiMeikaiHa.

[cormiermax]

Thanks for the update, I hope all those horrible 80's red brick buildings that surround the site get redeveloped in the near future.

[teddifax]

Ask and you shall receive :):

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8199/8191259373_cae8b66470_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8063/8191258901_51a99119f4_b.jpg

Thank you and thank you for always getting us these weekly updates.

[SekishikiMeikaiHa]

My pleasure!

[Pete Crawford]

Are we sure that Nova Centre will be constructed all at once?.. or is there a chance that there will be a staged development where one of the towers may be held off/delayed/thrown into an abyss?

[RyeJay]

Are we sure that Nova Centre will be constructed all at once?.. or is there a chance that there will be a staged development where one of the towers may be held off/delayed/thrown into an abyss?

I suppose there's always a chance, but this development is a joint effort using private and public funds. Halifax's unemployment rate is low, and our economy is gaining momentum.

Given the amount of proposals we're beginning to see in other areas of the downtown, and more broadly the entire peninsula, I don't think the chances of a major delay are that great.

[kph06]

Here is a photo I got yesterday of the pile driving process.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8199/8196132419_25e0b0ff49_b.jpg

[Empire]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8063/8191258901_51a99119f4_b.jpg[/QUOTE]

The Prince George Hotel has to be the ugliest building downtown. The STV is ruining our historic city.

[fenwick16]

Here is a photo I got yesterday of the pile driving process.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8199/8196132419_25e0b0ff49_b.jpg

This is an interesting picture. It looks like they will have to excavate at least 30 - 40 feet at this location since there is supposed to underground parking. Are they are driving piles to see how deep they can excavate before hitting rock?

Here is a sketch from this document - http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/buildyourcentre/nova-centre-engagement-oct-3/2. On the Market Street side (highest ground elevation) it appears as though they will have to excavate at least 70 feet deep, assuming the Exhibition Hall height is 30 feet and there will be three levels of underground parking (plus at least 10 feet of ground above the Exhibition Hall).

http://imageshack.us/a/img803/7813/novacentresketch.jpg

[kph06]

This is an interesting picture. It looks like they will have to excavate at least 30 - 40 feet at this location since there is supposed to underground parking. Are they are driving piles to see how deep they can excavate before hitting rock?

I suspect they are making a sheet pile wall to support the sidewalk/Prince St. so they excavate right up to it.

[fenwick16]

I suspect they are making a sheet pile wall to support the sidewalk/Prince St. so they excavate right up to it.

Thanks. That makes sense.

[musicman]

That whole area is rock when you get just under the surface... Not sure why they would need a retaining wall at all....

[sdm]

Are we sure that Nova Centre will be constructed all at once?.. or is there a chance that there will be a staged development where one of the towers may be held off/delayed/thrown into an abyss?

there is no contractural committments to develop the private section of the development. Therefore there is always a possibility the private section will be staged, which is likely to happen.

[sdm]

That whole area is rock when you get just under the surface... Not sure why they would need a retaining wall at all....

In order to keep the street from being undermined.

[fenwick16]

Another Public Consultation is being held on Wednesday, November 21st - http://buildyourcentre.ca/public-engagement/metro-engagement-3/#.UKsQAmelv2A. Maybe they will have some more recent renderings? The final public consultation will be December 5th.

[bluenoser]

One corner of the site as it looked in the WWII years. That (water?) tower is totally in a viewplane.

http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/318851_469036253146560_323909007_n.jpg
http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/318851_469036253146560_323909007_n.jpg

[isaidso]

There is a viewplane. It is shown on the 9th page of this slideshow - http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/buildyourcentre/nova-centre-engagement-oct-3/2

Thanks for the information, but good grief! I go up to the Citadel to see the fortress and the city, not the water. If I want to see the water, I'll go to the waterfront. View plane? Where is the view plane of the skyline?

:whatthefuck:

[fenwick16]

Thanks for the information, but good grief! I go up to the Citadel to see the fortress and the city, not the water. If I want to see the water, I'll go to the waterfront. View plane? Where is the view plane of the skyline?

:whatthefuck:

They certainly got carried away back in the 1970's when Halifax introduced these viewplanes.


(source: http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/buildyourcentre/nova-centre-engagement-oct-3/2)
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/ncstreetscape-121004092447-phpapp02/95/slide-9-1024.jpg?1350004612

[someone123]

I think the viewplanes and ramparts bylaws also interact in a really bad way. The viewplanes wouldn't be as limiting if it were possible to have taller in the areas that aren't covered. It will be a real waste if Cogswell is all limited to 83 m or so because of the ramparts bylaw.

[Empire]

They certainly got carried away back in the 1970's when Halifax introduced these viewplanes.


(source: http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/buildyourcentre/nova-centre-engagement-oct-3/2)
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/ncstreetscape-121004092447-phpapp02/95/slide-9-1024.jpg?1350004612

One thing that the Skye exercise has brought to light is that the viewplanes need to be reviewed. Even though Skye just missed VP6 the Rampart viewplane was blown away.

It isn't reasonable to have downtown held hostage with 75% viewplane coverage. The viewplanes that now have harbour view blocked should be abolished. The rampart viewplane should be abolished from Duke St. northward.

[halifaxboyns]

Did anyone happen to see the news reports on the Auditor General's comments about the Nova Centre? What's up with that?

[sdm]

Did anyone happen to see the news reports on the Auditor General's comments about the Nova Centre? What's up with that?

Yup.

Simply put, business plan is inflated and he is suggesting that all partners to expect significantly lower revenue(loss) then projected. Recommends a independent study (all previous studies were conducted through TCL).

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/185617-ag-calls-for-second-look-at-convention-centre

[Keith P.]

Did anyone happen to see the news reports on the Auditor General's comments about the Nova Centre? What's up with that?

It is Lapointe doing his usual routine of making headline-grabbing accusations that are often unsupported by any actual facts or common sense. This govt would do well to examine his appointment and terms of reference of his office, as he seems to be completely off the rails in his assignment selection and methodology.

[fenwick16]

Yup.

Simply put, business plan is inflated and he is suggesting that all partners to expect significantly lower revenue(loss) then projected. Recommends a independent study (all previous studies were conducted through TCL).

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/185617-ag-calls-for-second-look-at-convention-centre


Here is a list of the reports and links - https://conventioncentreinfo.com/reports-news/reports/ . Reports were commissioned through the TCL and the province (Nova Scotia Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal). So it is not correct to state that they were all done through the TCL. Thumbs up to Premier Dexter for pointing this out in the Chronicle Herald story:

Premier Darrell Dexter, however, said the Crown corporation’s figures came from eight separate studies and because of that, the government doesn’t see the need for another review.

“Those studies were ... based on information that came about independent of the Trade Centre by respected market analysis companies,” Dexter told reporters at Province House.

“So I have no reason to disbelieve those projections.”

I normally vote Conservative but in this case Premier Dexter is showing leadership and the Tories and Liberals are just playing politics in stating their support but wanting another study.

Nova Scotia spends millions of dollars a year to promote itself as a tourist destination. The Tories and Liberals should show some faith in the province to attract convention goers as Premier Dexter is doing. The Auditor General seems to doubt that Halifax can draw as many delegates as Ottawa or Quebec City. I think that Halifax can compete with Ottawa and Quebec City for convention goers. This is the "culture of defeat" that Prime Minister Harper spoke about.

[sdm]

Here is a list of the reports and links - https://conventioncentreinfo.com/reports-news/reports/ . Reports were commissioned through the TCL and the province (Nova Scotia Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal). So it is not correct to state that they were all done through the TCL. Thumbs up to Premier Dexter for pointing this out in the Chronicle Herald story:

Premier Darrell Dexter, however, said the Crown corporation’s figures came from eight separate studies and because of that, the government doesn’t see the need for another review.

“Those studies were ... based on information that came about independent of the Trade Centre by respected market analysis companies,” Dexter told reporters at Province House.

“So I have no reason to disbelieve those projections.”

I normally vote Conservative but in this case Premier Dexter is showing leadership and the Tories and Liberals are just playing politics in stating their support but wanting another study.

Nova Scotia spends millions of dollars a year to promote itself as a tourist destination. The Tories and Liberals should show some faith in the province to attract convention goers as Premier Dexter is doing. The Auditor General seems to doubt that Halifax can draw as many delegates as Ottawa or Quebec City. I think that Halifax can compete with Ottawa and Quebec City for convention goers. This is the "culture of defeat" that Prime Minister Harper spoke about.

Oh i am believe the first few years there will be an attraction, but as the AG is pointing out, the growth targets increase year over year. It is doubtful that these projections are fact.

I don't agree Dexter is showing leadership here. If he is so positive it is a worthwhile investment then whats the risk of an independent study?

[fenwick16]

Oh i am believe the first few years there will be an attraction, but as the AG is pointing out, the growth targets increase year over year. It is doubtful that these projections are fact.

If he stated this, then the Auditor General should re-read the reports. The projections seem to be quite conservative and are based on data from other convention centres. Here is a screen capture of page 14 from this Gardiner Pinfold report - https://conventioncentreinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Gardner-Pinfold-EIA-Report.pdf

http://imageshack.us/a/img545/1272/imagefromgardnerpinfold.jpg

I don't agree Dexter is showing leadership here. If he is so positive it is a worthwhile investment then whats the risk of an independent study?

I like Premier Dexter's statement in the allnovascotia.com - "He said the AG's recommendation only makes sense if you believe nine studies are better than eight" (Story title - Convention Projections Flawed: Auditor General, author Brian Flinn, Wed, Nov 21st, 2012 edition)

[fenwick16]

It isn't reasonable to have downtown held hostage with 75% viewplane coverage. The viewplanes that now have harbour view blocked should be abolished. The rampart viewplane should be abolished from Duke St. northward.

I agree. The ramparts maximum just seems like an unnecessary by-law, especially when so much of the downtown is covered by viewplanes.

I am sure that as soon as people get to the entrance of the Citadel courtyard they will notice that they are surrounded by modern highrises. Few tourists will overcome that psychological trauma by the time they get within the Citadel courtyard (sarcasm intended).

[halifaxboyns]

I agree about the viewplane and ramparts provisions. Personally (and I'm putting my urban planner hat on now), I'd like to see a chronology of events occur:


First - get the regional centre plan and land use bylaw completed, approved and in operation. Provide reports back to council every year on development that has been approved each year within the regional centre (value of building permits, type of developments, etc). On the second, fourth and fifth years provide a house keeping amendment to the plan and bylaw to keep it up to date, correct mistakes etc. Then report back every 5 years, but do housekeeping as needed.
Then begin a study on the effects of the ship building contract and oil exploration and examine the population increases over the last 10 years and chart the projected trends. Use this information, economic projects and other information to convince council to support either a significant 'overhaul' of the regional plan or a complete scrapping of the current one and doing a new one (I'll talk more about this in a second). Start out with a visioning exercise and once council approves that vision, write a regional plan to implement it with clear targets and implementation strategies to see the plan achieved (you know - the helpful things like having a regional transportation plan with your regional plan so you can tie land use and transportation decisions together!). It would be at this stage, we ask the tough questions about viewplanes. Then based on public feedback - include it in the vision and the RP.
While a regional plan is done, begin work on a consolidated, regional land use bylaw. This can be as one bylaw, or one bylaw in two parts - rural and urban (regional centre and suburban). The Bylaw would be designed to implement the approved regional plan and vision for HRM. Here is where the viewplanes would change in terms of regulations.


The problem we have with the viewplanes is that there hasn't been a good visioning exercise that has asked the tough questions about what we want to be as a city, when we grow up (so to speak). HbD and the regional centre plan are great pieces of work, but it's very easy for staff to say it's not part of the scope of an exercise (I've done it countless times, so I'm definitely the pot calling the kettle here). But I think we all seem to agree, at some point the question of the viewplanes and the rules around them (and their value) has to be asked.

So why not ask those questions when doing a new vision for the city? Take advantage of this new optimism and look at a new regional plan. No plan is perfect and the plan that is in place is okay but it didn't foresee the ship building contract. That begs the question of whether we tweak the old one or overhaul it. Plus not having a transportation plan, with your regional plan, is a significant missed opportunity because transit $ may not be being spent the land use would be the most intense.

I'll get off my soap box, but that's my feeling on the viewplane issue. The question should be asked and if there is a clear opinion from consultation that some aspects aren't worth value - then maybe we do get rid of them? I suspect most people don't know about the rampart rule.

The other side of the coin is, if certain things have value - do we have to do it the same was as we are doing now? Meaning - if we don't want buildings up against a viewplane - is there a different way of protecting those views and not boxing them in rather than just simply saying no? Like say a setback as you go up in height?

[teddifax]

I agree with all the comments made on the viewplanes and the restrictions on developments they cause.

I do think maybe another thread on viewplanes and general development problems or issues should probably be established as this issue would cover multiple projects and work and comments may be duplicated.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Oh i am believe the first few years there will be an attraction, but as the AG is pointing out, the growth targets increase year over year. It is doubtful that these projections are fact.

I don't agree Dexter is showing leadership here. If he is so positive it is a worthwhile investment then whats the risk of an independent study?

What's your problem sdm? If you don't believe in it you're part of the problem in Halifax.

Progress is possible... no place would ever get ahead with your mentality.

[sdm]

What's your problem sdm? If you don't believe in it you're part of the problem in Halifax.

Progress is possible... no place would ever get ahead with your mentality.

Ease up. I am sharing my opinion, and if you care to read i say "if he believes its a worthwhile investement then whats the risk of an independent study?" meaning why not go ahead with the study in order to settle this once and for all. By his stance he actually hurts the public opinion on the project.

And please be careful on me being part of the problem statement.

[Hali87]

Good news in today's Herald:

And, on Wednesday, developer Joe Ramia said the parking garage entrance could be moved from Argyle Street to another location.

Source (http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/188263-taylor-nova-centre-not-the-time-to-turn-back-the-clock)

[Hali87]

Also, was anyone at the public meeting last night?

[someone123]

Ramia also talked about the garage entrance relocation in the video from the last consultation that is up on the website. Apparently they brought in a consultant who thinks they can manage to put the entrance elsewhere and they will present the new plans on December 5.

It is really nice to see that some tangible improvements have been made to the design as a result of the consultations. It is good for everybody -- the city gets better buildings and the public's impression of developers improves so there is less knee-jerk negative sentiment and obstructionism.

The interior renderings are again pretty rough but I think they look good. In particular it seems like the building will be quite open along Argyle and provides an easy path up to Grafton. I am looking forward to the next set of renderings.

[Duff]

I'm really happy to hear they found a way to get the parking entrance away from Argyle Street. I believe a lot of people have a vision for Argyle to be pedestrian only one day, and that would have been ruined forever if they didn't find this solution.

[someone123]

I'm really happy to hear they found a way to get the parking entrance away from Argyle Street. I believe a lot of people have a vision for Argyle to be pedestrian only one day, and that would have been ruined forever if they didn't find this solution.

I am not a big fan of pedestrian-only streets (unless there is a lot of pedestrian activity for most of the day and night) but I do like streets with limited vehicle lanes and wider sidewalks. Granville Street in Vancouver now has this sort of hybrid approach and the part before Robson is similar to Argyle.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_tTCyS07dYVs/S2CN8Vibi5I/AAAAAAAACdQ/OXWSUAoeyok/s640/Granville+Street+Vancouver.JPG
Source (http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2010/01/first-look-the-new-granville-street/)

One big advantage Argyle has is that it's not an important traffic artery and it's not used for transit. Some traffic still needs to get through but it could easily be accommodated in 2 small lanes plus some places to pull over.

[Hali87]

That has to be one of my favourite streets in Canada. I'm a huge fan of that neon clock.

[Waye Mason]

This is exactly what is proposed for Argyle - pedestrian priority rather than pedestrian only, and easily converted for closed street events (sunken bollards in the road type thing).

Great renderings here (no where near final, more conceptual)

http://ceu.architectureandplanning.dal.ca/pro-argylestreetscape.php

[eastcoastal]

This is exactly what is proposed for Argyle - pedestrian priority rather than pedestrian only, and easily converted for closed street events (sunken bollards in the road type thing).

Great renderings here (no where near final, more conceptual)

http://ceu.architectureandplanning.dal.ca/pro-argylestreetscape.php

I am somewhat skeptical that this city can approach the vision expressed in that planning and design exercise for Argyle. I'd love to be proven wrong... I like that the proposal to enhance street-use is not founded on banning (vehicular) use of the street.

[someone123]

I guess this will be a test for regional council: will they follow through or will this just be another plan that gathers dust somewhere?

I hope the city also implements the Barrington and Spring Garden improvements.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Ease up. I am sharing my opinion, and if you care to read i say "if he believes its a worthwhile investement then whats the risk of an independent study?" meaning why not go ahead with the study in order to settle this once and for all. By his stance he actually hurts the public opinion on the project.

And please be careful on me being part of the problem statement.

Mostly because Halifax is all "studies", I don't encourage that thinking. If we took half the money we put into these studies we'd have been able to do a high end streetscape project on every street in the city. Cripes.

The convention centre is a facilitation method... regardless of the numbers we get its something we need to have. It really doesn't matter that a proportionally small amount of money is going toward this... people seem to think that public money is theirs, but its everybody's. That's why people who are single pay taxes for other people's kids to go to these newly developed schools, etc. Its a public good, and isn't Ramia taking on the risk of the private side anyway?

[worldlyhaligonian]

I am somewhat skeptical that this city can approach the vision expressed in that planning and design exercise for Argyle. I'd love to be proven wrong... I like that the proposal to enhance street-use is not founded on banning (vehicular) use of the street.

Uhh, yeah... where are all the "what about parking" people right now? I think the plan is great, but they should go more along the lines of just making it a permanently narrower street like in Europe.

[Keith P.]

Uhh, yeah... where are all the "what about parking" people right now? I think the plan is great, but they should go more along the lines of just making it a permanently narrower street like in Europe.

Europeans don't drive F-150s.

[cormiermax]

Europeans don't drive F-150s.

Who living in an urban centre in their right mind drives around in an F-150? :haha:

[Dmajackson]

Who living in an urban centre in their right mind drives around in an F-150? :haha:

Never been to Calgary I'm guessing! 1/2 the cars here are pickup trucks, Another 1/4 is Hummers and FJ's, and the remainders are the Smartcars that Car2Go owns. :haha:

EDIT: Since Grafton is two way there should be no parking IMO.

[Jonovision]

Went by the site today, didn't think to grab a pic but Market st is now closed off and they were working on taking down the retaining wall holding the street up on the Argyle side.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Never been to Calgary I'm guessing! 1/2 the cars here are pickup trucks, Another 1/4 is Hummers and FJ's, and the remainders are the Smartcars that Car2Go owns. :haha:

EDIT: Since Grafton is two way there should be no parking IMO.

Hahaha, yeah... Calgary and the west is crazy with the trucks. Its not really an issue in Halifax as much. I wonder how much parking Nova Centre will be adding? It would be a good venue to leave a vehicle and walk to any restaurant in that part of downtown.

[Keith P.]

I wonder how much parking Nova Centre will be adding? It would be a good venue to leave a vehicle and walk to any restaurant in that part of downtown.

That probably guarantees there will be zero public parking.

[fenwick16]

I wonder how much parking Nova Centre will be adding? It would be a good venue to leave a vehicle and walk to any restaurant in that part of downtown.

I think the original proposal from a couple of years ago was for 500 - 600 parking spaces.

[SekishikiMeikaiHa]

Went by the site today, didn't think to grab a pic but Market st is now closed off and they were working on taking down the retaining wall holding the street up on the Argyle side.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8059/8233913390_c65d83b9bf_b.jpg