Halifax Needs a Robert Moses

[Keith P.]

It seems to me that as Halifax grows with no end it sight, and with no significant roadway projects planned to keep pace, we will soon be faced with a crisis. What we need is someone with vision and power to make things happen, like a modern-day Robert Moses. Let's set aside for the moment the practical problems of money, NIMBYs, etc. and think about what might be possible if such a person magically appeared. What are the top 5 or 10 transportation projects we should undertake in HRM?

Let's start by looking at the choke points: the two bridges and their associated approaches; the Armdale Rotary; the Windsor street exchange; the Woodland/Victoria/Bridge plaza area; North St./Chebucto Rd.; the Bedford Highway; the 102 to the 101; the Cole Harbour Rd/Portland St mess; and Burnside/Magazine Hill. Add the Cogswell Interchange replacement as a project. What would fix these?

Some solutions are obvious. A third harbor crossing in the south end; a Northwest Arm crossing; a Burnside expressway. But what of others? Would it make sense to bite the bullet and build proper multilane connections with proper interchanges to get to the MacDonald bridge on the Dartmouth side, and to move traffic along North St and Chebucto Rd with properly widened multilanes?

It would be interesting to get opinions on what non-transit projects would solve our traffic problems. Not to diminish transit effects on traffic, but we are so far behind that we need to play catchup in a big way with our roadways and I am seeking views on what road projects would have the biggest impact.

[someone123]

Many road projects don't really make sense because of the damage they would cause. The North Street widening you mentioned would be such a project, and the span itself has only three lanes anyway.

I think a lot of traffic problems mostly handle themselves since businesses eventually locate themselves to compensate. The whole attitude of destroying neighbourhoods to allow more traffic to flow through is kind of dubious. I'd rather just have a nice peninsula with whatever amenities it can support than something torn up and turned into a kind of office park that can accommodate as many cars as possible. Office parks capable of handling lots of cars can be and are being built in the suburbs.

[kool maudit]

something tells me the francklyn street / yacht squadron bridge might be unpopular with the wrong people.

[Keith P.]

Many road projects don't really make sense because of the damage they would cause. The North Street widening you mentioned would be such a project, and the span itself has only three lanes anyway.

I think a lot of traffic problems mostly handle themselves since businesses eventually locate themselves to compensate. The whole attitude of destroying neighbourhoods to allow more traffic to flow through is kind of dubious. I'd rather just have a nice peninsula with whatever amenities it can support than something torn up and turned into a kind of office park that can accommodate as many cars as possible. Office parks capable of handling lots of cars can be and are being built in the suburbs.

The fact of the matter is that neighborhoods like North St and Woodland Ave are destroyed anyway with the constant heavy traffic. In no way can they be considered "nice". You are not facing reality. The cars are not going to go away and need to be accommodated. The question is not "why" but "how".

[alps]

Here's something I think should be a priority, we'll have to build it some time...

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l217/halps00/ThirdBridge.jpg

Any thoughts? Also, since they're getting rid of the golf course in Dartmouth anyway, they should try to use the land to somehow let bridge traffic bypass Woodland Ave. I don't know how much this would cost, and I assume you'd have some NIMBY troubles, but here's a short tunnel idea:

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l217/halps00/WoodlandBypass.jpg

Edit: Also, nimbys be damned, that reversible lane project on Chebucto near the Armdale rotary should go through.

[someone123]

The fact of the matter is that neighborhoods like North St and Woodland Ave are destroyed anyway with the constant heavy traffic. In no way can they be considered "nice". You are not facing reality. The cars are not going to go away and need to be accommodated. The question is not "why" but "how".

Well, it is a subjective issue. North Street has a lot of well-kept little Victorian houses that I would consider nice and that people probably wouldn't appreciate being kicked out of. I'm not convinced that widening North Street would help anyway since the bridge itself is only three lanes, and it would cost a lot. The same thing goes for most road widening projects on the peninsula. The easy stuff has been done already for the most part.

If a new bridge were built over the Northwest Arm I think it would go from South Street, which goes all the way down to the water, over to Fleming Park. The approaches would probably be kind of difficult though. It's possible that some houses would have to be removed in order for a reasonable bridge to be built.

[adam-machiavelli]

Robert Moses became one of the most hated mayors of New York. Do you really want another Moses anywhere?

[Keith P.]

Robert Moses became one of the most hated mayors of New York. Do you really want another Moses anywhere?

Moses was never mayor of New York. He was the "master builder" and yes, he did not do everything that was universally loved. It was his tactics as much as anything that brought disdain upon him. And, of course, the anti-car urban planning types think he was the worst thing on the face of the earth -- that's fine, they can keep on vilifying him. But he got stuff done, and created many of NYCs most important landmarks and infrastructure. If you try to appease every interest you end up with nothing, which is exactly what HRM has done over the past several decades, and why we are in the mess we are in. You need someone willing to make the bold moves.

[Jonovision]

On the issue of traffic projects...i was driving into Dartmouth yesterday on the 102 beside Dartmouth Crossings. And I came to realize what they did with the new interchange and diverting Halifax bound traffic off the main highway is a really good idea. I'm certain though that it was a private development and hrm traffic planners had no say in the design.

[someone123]

Another point to consider is that Moses had funding sources available to him that the HRM simply doesn't. Many highway projects in the US are or were 90% funded by the federal government. The same thing goes for a lot of transit improvements, which is why many mid-sized cities have heavily subsidized lines with relatively low ridership.

Anyway, I agree with you about the appeasement and the fact that it is holding the city back, but a lot of road projects on the peninsula would have a very high upfront cost while generating relatively small (and usually highly diminishing) returns. I think that it makes a lot more sense to simply allow the population of the peninsula to grow, cutting back on the number and length of trips required. Transit projects could also help a lot, along with things like alternating lane systems and toll structures that allow existing infrastructure to be used more efficiently.

[Keith P.]

In our little fantasy world here, don't worry about the cost or the funding. Pretend it's like the CWGs.

I disagree with the idea that increasing density on the peninsula would solve the problems we have. It won't. We are on a growth curve and the number of trips on and off the peninsula isn't going to go down. It will increase. So we need to fix our roadway infrastructure. Halifax is woefully deficient particularly in east-west roadway infrastructure. Let me pick my top priorities:

1. Armdale Rotary/Chebucto Rd: I don't think we need an Arm bridge as much as we do a redesign of the existing setup. Certainly Chebucto must be widened and proper interchange-type ramps need to be built. This would be a lot less expensive than a bridge.

2. MacKay approaches/Windsor St exchange: blow it up. Build a proper interchange for Windsor St/Bedford Hwy and extend the multilane to hook up with the 102 to get that traffic off Joe Howe. Not much displacement of residents because most of the land needed is industrial or underused.

3. The aforementioned Dartmouth connection from the Circ to the MacDonald bridge.

4. The aforementioned 3rd harbor crossing, either a bridge or tunnel. The cost of this would not be an issue as it would be self-supporting with toll revenue.

5. Multilane Bedford Highway (surprise!!)

[someone123]

I agree about the MacKay approaches. The city also needs to do something about Seaview Park (heh) and the land that it owns.

The Bedford Highway has already been widened. I don't see how it could be widened further without causing problems. Many parts already have high retaining walls, etc. or have new buildings nearby. Maybe something could be built by infilling the basin.

Tearing up the rotary area would be cheaper than a bridge over the Arm but much more disruptive. I'm not even convinced that the rotary itself is that bad, and I live right next to it.

[Keith P.]

The Bedford Highway has already been widened. I don't see how it could be widened further without causing problems. Many parts already have high retaining walls, etc. or have new buildings nearby. Maybe something could be built by infilling the basin.

The Bedford highway was only widened in spots, and widened stupidly at that. Most of it is still just 2 lanes. It wouldn't be that hard to widen it in most places. Certainly a lot easier than Chebucto Rd.

Tearing up the rotary area would be cheaper than a bridge over the Arm but much more disruptive. I'm not even convinced that the rotary itself is that bad, and I live right next to it.

I think you could fix most of the problems by addressing the Chebucto Rd accesses. People would complain because they don't want to lose the view up the Arm from Dutch Village, but that's ridiculous. Imagine overhead ramps from Chebucto to the Bay Rd and Herring Cove Rd. How many problems would that solve?

[SLC Projects]

speak on it. :yes:

[sdm]

an idea i had was to relocate the following

Hal term (near park)
Train station

Therefore you could use the rail tracks for a number of ways, be it tear up the tracks and pave it for use with signaling to allow both lanes to be used for one direction of flow during rush hours. The other is to use the tracks for rail/ subway train service out of downtown.

Just one of the thoughts, but the traffic problem is not getting better but only worse.

On another note, everyone should take the time to really research this commonwealth games bid. From my sources the projects planned by HRM with regards to roads will be brought forward from the 2020 projected start to 2010. However, the money for such projects is not included in the price of the bid and the source of funds is unknown. I hope some other city gets this cause the last thing we need is that much debt.

[someone123]

The rail cut thing is basically a non-starter. First of all, container terminals cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to build. The container terminal is not owned by the HRM, nor is the rail line. The line itself is owned by CN and they don't really care what the HRM wants.

The other major limitation is the size of the rail cut. It was constructed for two railway tracks. You could fit in maybe two narrow highway-type lanes through the narrowest parts. Go to the end of South Street someday and have a look. Widening the trench would be extremely expensive and disruptive.

So, basically, we've got huge expense coupled with major aesthetic, etc. drawbacks for a very marginal benefit of 2-3 lanes.

I could see maybe building elevated roadways or railways above the existing track, but again that's really expensive and would be ugly and not that useful. If that much money is going to be spent then there are better things to do with it.

[sdm]

The rail cut thing is basically a non-starter. First of all, container terminals cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to build. The container terminal is not owned by the HRM, nor is the rail line. The line itself is owned by CN and they don't really care what the HRM wants.

The other major limitation is the size of the rail cut. It was constructed for two railway tracks. You could fit in maybe two narrow highway-type lanes through the narrowest parts. Go to the end of South Street someday and have a look. Widening the trench would be extremely expensive and disruptive.

So, basically, we've got huge expense coupled with major aesthetic, etc. drawbacks for a very marginal benefit of 2-3 lanes.

I could see maybe building elevated roadways or railways above the existing track, but again that's really expensive and would be ugly and not that useful. If that much money is going to be spent then there are better things to do with it.

i was following keiths idea of money being no object, hence the idea.

[Keith P.]

The rail cut thing is basically a non-starter. First of all, container terminals cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to build. The container terminal is not owned by the HRM, nor is the rail line. The line itself is owned by CN and they don't really care what the HRM wants.

Halterm is on land leased from the Port Authority, who would love to get them out of that location so they could redevelop it into the area's highest-end residential community. There is also a fairly well-advanced set of plans on file to move the whole thing to Bedford Basin. The feds were committed to several hundred millions back in the late 1990s when it looked like this was going to happen. CN is indifferent, but money talks and they could be convinced to play ball for the right sum.

I could see maybe building elevated roadways or railways above the existing track, but again that's really expensive and would be ugly and not that useful. If that much money is going to be spent then there are better things to do with it.

Again, there is a set of plans for this very project kicking around somewhere in the bowels of govt. Who's to say what those better things are? At this stage I'd be happy for any major road projects around here.

[lawsond]

SOME IDEAS:
-a bridge from the dartmouth end of the circumferential to halterm coninuing with a highway recessed into the cnr cut with exits at mumford rd and continuing right over the tracks to the bedford highway with a ramp connecting to the bihi.
-a cross town tunnel from the end of the bihi with exit ramps on north street and cunard by the commons.
-a tunel under the arm from the end of robie street connecting to northwest arm drive on the spryfield side. this could easily be an at grade highway with lights and development on the spryfield side.
-a loop beginning at the 103 directly to the west of exit 5, continuing around to an interchage at the 101, arching in back of beaverbank to an interchange near the airport on the 102 and continuiing east and south to the 107 east of dartmouth. this would allow people to access the airport from the 103 the 101 and the 107 without hitting the city.
-a grand loop starting at the 103 at hubbards, cutting through to the 101 west of mount uniacke and exiting at the 102 near stewiacke. this would allow access from southern nova scotia from 103 and 101 to exit the province without a metro bottleneck of any kind.
also, both these loops would spur development in a more rational form evenly around the city in an arc instead of the tendrils now stretching west and north.

btw: robert moses got into trouble for ramming expressways through built urban environments. these are alternate ways to reduce pressure while building on mostly undeveloped or railway lands.

[someone123]

Halterm is on land leased from the Port Authority, who would love to get them out of that location so they could redevelop it into the area's highest-end residential community. There is also a fairly well-advanced set of plans on file to move the whole thing to Bedford Basin. The feds were committed to several hundred millions back in the late 1990s when it looked like this was going to happen. CN is indifferent, but money talks and they could be convinced to play ball for the right sum.



Again, there is a set of plans for this very project kicking around somewhere in the bowels of govt. Who's to say what those better things are? At this stage I'd be happy for any major road projects around here.

I know that they want to build a new terminal along the Bedford Basin, but I think the railcut itself would be really marginal for anything other than rail simply because it is so small.

[alps]

Something reasonable they should do is allow trucks to exit the port using one side of the rail cut. They'd only have to pave over the unused half of it, and build a ramp out somewhere near Halifax Shopping Centre, or the Bedford Highway.