Chronicle Herald Voice of the People, March 13, 2010

Tall trade centre order

Judy Haiven, Halifax

The $100 million that you suggest Nova Scotia taxpayers put into a new trade centre ("Conventional wisdom: A stimulus for Halifax," March 8 editorial) will allow for the heights of the buildings on that property to double, from seven and nine storeys to 14 and 18 storeys. In a little-known codicil of Halifax By Design, any level of government funding for buildings on that site will trigger the doubling of their heights. This will mean the view of the central harbour from Citadel Hill will be obscured.

In addition, the new trade centre is a public-private partnership or a P3 contract. One month ago, our province’s auditor general, Jacques Lapointe, warned that the Department of Education was "failing its duty to taxpayers" as well as to students because of the public-private partnership contracts which built more than 24 schools provincewide.

Starting in 1999, maintenance and other operations for 20 years were leased to private companies. Two of the private companies turned around and leased some of their operations back to the regional school boards! This ends up leaving taxpayers on the hook for $52 million more than they paid for the services in the first place! Do we need another P3 deal like that one?

And one last thing: The Chronicle Herald likely sold its downtown building with the knowledge that Rank was planning a new trade centre for the site. For the Herald to be boosting the idea of a new trade centre on that site seems a bit self-serving to me.

Letters to the Editor - Chronicle Herald, Oct/09

A new convention centre is a necessity, not a luxury, for this region. The capital district and the region as a whole have been penalized for too long by not having the convention facilities necessary to attract what other major cities take for granted.

Our new provincial government, to its credit, has acknowledged the value of this form of economic development and has demonstrated its support of this project. Our municipal government continues its positive approach to development of this key convention facility. As business leaders, we encourage the continued positive review and sound constructive opinions from our leadership that are needed to move this project forward.

Without positive economic development, we move ever closer to the have-not, hand-out status that a small minority of citizens would seem to prefer. We need to be positive, progressive and proactive as a community if we are going to succeed in this new world economy. Our leadership now needs to hear from the silent majority about why they believe a new convention centre in Halifax is important. Be a part of our future and communicate your support.

Tim Olive, Executive Director,
Downtown Dartmouth Business Commission

Responses, Friday Nov 6

Technology of the past

Re: Tim Olive’s Oct. 29 letter "Centre a necessity." It is interesting, and a bit puzzling, that many people seem to regard highrise buildings as the way to modernize and revitalize Halifax.

Highrise buildings are the technology of the past century. When liberated, by the invention of steel skeletons with hanging walls, from the height limitations of reliance on compressive strength to support tall buildings, architects and builders became enamoured of making structures taller and taller, just to show they could. This "contest" has not yet ended (e.g. southeast Asia). But buildings suitable for tropical climates might not be the best for high latitudes; it has been shown that tall buildings are energy-inefficient, and thus environmentally unfriendly in our climate.

If Halifax truly wants to lead the way into the future, we should begin by putting meaningful green requirements, which will probably include height limitations, on all new construction.

Sifford Pearre, Halifax

Market overbuilt

Tim Olive says the new Halifax convention centre is a necessity, not a luxury, that will attract what other cities take for granted. What other cities? Outside of Orlando and Las Vegas, I cannot find another city that has built a new convention centre space that has remotely approached the numbers presented in the pre-construction economic analysis.

The North American convention centre square-footage has expanded so much in the last 15 years that we have an overbuilt market. Occupancy rates are down more than 20 per cent from predictions and very few centres receive a full rate, some giving away space for much less than cost, some free. Boston’s centre in 2004 was predicting 300,000 attendees and got 50,000, and that was in boom times. Dallas and others offer over-generous rebates on hotel rates. It’s a price war subsidized by the public.
The other factors that can’t be measured are civic pride and city image. They cannot be excluded, but the argument regarding job-creation and outside spending doesn’t stand up to economic science. This has more to do with the politics of land development. That is fine, but not until you can prove it is a worthwhile investment for the taxpayer dollar.

Miles Tompkins, Antigonish