General Updates and News

[Keith P.]

The car haters in urban planning circles (i.e. most of them) are falling all over themselves to agree with the Danish boors, and others with a more realistic perspective will point out that this isn't Denmark and if we wanted to be, we would probably all move there and look for a spot to park our bicycles. The letter was incredibly smug and superior-sounding and deserves the scorn it received - just as any doctrinaire philosophy shoved down people's throats deserves scorn. Show's over folks, nothing to see here, move along.

Use your heads, please.

[Drybrain]

Noticed some (I think?) new scaffolding at the rear of the Pacific Building (http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=5640) today. It looked more like the old protect-the-passersby-from-crumbling-masonry scaffolding Halifax is so fond of (Dennis Building, Armoury, etc.) rather than anything portending facade repair, but though I'd see if anyone knows anything about it.

[counterfactual]

I agree that Canada has a car culture and Halifax does as well, to a point, but I'm not sure why you think that Halifax "in particular" has a car culture. Have you been many other places in Canada? Halifax is one of the least car-oriented cities in the country. More people walk and take transit here than in most of Canada. Do we have more of a car culture than St. John's, than NB's cities, than SW Ontario and the 905, than Northern Ontario, than the Prairies, including their cities, than the BC interior? Having spent time in all of these places, I sincerely doubt it. I'm not trying to be boosty, these places just ARE designed more for cars and less for pedestrians than Halifax is. Just like Halifax is designed more for cars and less for pedestrians than Copenhagen. Can you give an example to back up your claim that "Canada has a car culture, Halifax, particularly so"?

I've been to all the places you've mentioned, and lived in Ontario for a number of years.

But just to be clear-- and not to let this discussion regress into another argument over frames of reference-- I just don't think 905 suburban cities or small bean towns in NB, BC interior or northern Ontario are good comparators for Halifax. When you think to compare Halifax, do you honestly think of Thunder Bay? Brampton? Kamloops? Bathurst?

I don't, and I doubt you sincerely do either. As a capital city and major regional urban centre, my comparators to Halifax are other major city capitals and comparable cities across the country -- Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Quebec City, Hamilton, London, Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, etc.

If our aspirations in Halifax are to been less car-centric than, say, Kelowna BC or Mississauga, Ontario, while we forgo comparisons to Ottawa or Montreal, we've lost the battle before it's begun. As in, we need to aim higher.

Now, don't get me wrong, Halifax doesn't do too bad, in terms of the percentage of people who walk or bike to work. Also, we're good, by comparison to the rest of Canada, in terms of car pooling, which helps.

Now, some data:

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/2011003/c-g/c-g01-eng.gif

So, Halifax is near the bottom of the pack. Slightly better than Victoria, Edmonton, Quebec, but worst than everyone else.

Now, here's a table from Stats Canada on average commuter times for 33 major cities across the country. Though imperfect, I think commute times provide one proxy means of measuring the extent of car culture....

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/2011003/tbl/tbl02-eng.cfm

Our average commute? 23.7 minutes.

That's ranks near the bottom-- it's worse than 23 other cities, out of 33.

That's worse than: Quebec City, St . John's, Moncton, Saint John, Hamilton, Peterborough, London, Kitchen, Brantford, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, Winnipeg, and Victoria.

Now, people will snark, and say-- how many of those cities are based on peninsula? True, but then, wouldn't that lead more people to take public transit, naturally? Ferry across? Bike? Wouldn't that lead to more investment in mass transit? etc. If people are wedded to their cars, then they won't. They'll sit in traffic for longer commutes, as apparently, Haligonians do.

The cities we do better than are vastly larger than we-- Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, etc.

So yeah, beyond the mass of parking lots in the city centre and unnecessary biz parks sucking business and office space from downtown, I think that's at least *some* evidence of a noteworthy car culture.

I don't think suburban growth spiraled out of control, it just continued at more or less the same rate that it had been before the regional plan was implemented. In terms of the growth targets, it seems like a lot of people expected an immediate switch to 25% urban, 50% suburban etc. during the first five years of the regional plan. This isn't really fair or realistic to expect because many subdivisions under construction now were already approved or in the late planning stages when the regional plan was adopted. The flip side is that downtown/infill construction is still logistically difficult (despite HRMbD) and that it takes a while for the market and development/construction industry to adapt to the new paradigm. As development/construction companies get used to working within the constraints of the Peninsula (and Dartmouth) I think we will see an acceleration in the number of projects U/C... in fact this already seems to be happening. I think over the 25-year course of the plan growth will much better reflect (or exceed) the growth targets.

I think this is a fair point, although I'm not sure people expected the city to turn on a dime and produce 25% urban growth right away. But I think they were expecting more than the 12% that was apparent half a decade into the life of the plan, which is not unreasonable, either. If you put a plan like that in place, with those sort of goals, you have to take some serious action / major steps to make it work. Not sit back and cross your fingers and do business as usual.

I agree that over the life of the plan, the 25% growth will look better/more feasible. But then there's the bigger argument-- grounded by the Stantec Report-- that 25% is an overly modest goal. And even though suburban growth may have retained the same level, I still think it's legitimate to say it's "spiraling out of control" if it will continue that way for another quarter century. Given our financial situation, the city can't afford more 65% suburban growth over the next 25 years. I actually don't think it can afford 50%.

Anecdotal, but I worked out of Cochrane, Alberta (a suburb of Calgary) for a couple weeks 2 summers ago. It's a sort of Bedford-esque suburb with no public transit. Most people who were younger than me seemed to be in great shape, or at least not overweight, while most people who were older than me seemed to be overweight or obese. My theory was that younger people without cars/licenses had to walk everywhere - and this means long distances - while those with cars never walked anywhere and quickly gained weight.

Interesting! And not surprising.

[counterfactual]

The car haters in urban planning circles (i.e. most of them) are falling all over themselves to agree with the Danish boors, and others with a more realistic perspective will point out that this isn't Denmark and if we wanted to be, we would probably all move there and look for a spot to park our bicycles. The letter was incredibly smug and superior-sounding and deserves the scorn it received - just as any doctrinaire philosophy shoved down people's throats deserves scorn. Show's over folks, nothing to see here, move along.

Use your heads, please.

You don't agree with their observation that we have too many parking lots in the city centre?

It's annoying that two smug European tourists have pointed it out, but it's indelibly true.

[Hali87]

As a capital city and major regional urban centre, my comparators to Halifax are other major city capitals and comparable cities across the country -- Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Quebec City, Hamilton, London, Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, etc.

I haven't been to QC or Hamilton, but London, Edmonton, Calgary and Winnipeg are absolutely more car-centric than Halifax, and Victoria is probably about the same. It's kind of apples to oranges to compare Halifax to Montreal and Toronto since they both have subway systems and commuter rail.

So, Halifax is near the bottom of the pack. Slightly better than Victoria, Edmonton, Quebec, but worst than everyone else.

But the fact that Halifax is near the bottom of the pack in terms of transit usage (out of a limited selection of cities) is offset by the number of people who walk, bike, carpool, etc. in that all of these things, not just transit, mean more vehicles off the road. Also, Halifax is basically on par with Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver once you take the subways/skytrains out of the equation, and it's notable that we're ahead of Edmonton even though they have an LRT system AND we almost certainly have a higher percentage of commuters who walk.


That's ranks near the bottom-- it's worse than 23 other cities, out of 33.

That's worse than: Quebec City, St . John's, Moncton, Saint John, Hamilton, Peterborough, London, Kitchen, Brantford, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, Winnipeg, and Victoria.

Now, people will snark, and say-- how many of those cities are based on peninsula? True, but then, wouldn't that lead more people to take public transit, naturally? Ferry across? Bike? Wouldn't that lead to more investment in mass transit? etc. If people are wedded to their cars, then they won't. They'll sit in traffic for longer commutes, as apparently, Haligonians do.

The cities there that are smaller than Halifax are all also less dense than Halifax in addition to occupying a smaller area. People don't have to travel as far to get to work and they don't encounter as many other commuters along the way. That should make sense.

As for the rest, London and Winnipeg both have street networks centred along wide, straight arterial roads. Kitchener has a well-developed freeway network and multiple downtown cores, as does Thunder Bay on a smaller scale. Hamilton has 4+ lane one-way streets downtown. Basically all of these cities have much more arterial road capacity per area of built-up space than Halifax (I don't have data immediately available to back this up, but having driven in most of these places that's what I observed). Victoria is fairly similar to Halifax (and people there certainly complain about traffic) but its road network is spread out a bit more evenly due to fewer geographic constraints. I've never been to Quebec City and I don't really know what the infrastructure is like there. I think we actually get a lot more municipal investment in public transit than most of those cities as well. Kitchener's LRT system is largely being funded by the province. I seriously doubt that any of those cities, other than maybe Quebec City, get as much municipal investment in transit. MAYBE Winnipeg.

So yeah, beyond the mass of parking lots in the city centre which are pretty much a universal phenomenon across Canada and unnecessary biz parks sucking business and office space from downtown which is pretty much a universal phenomenon across North America I think that's at least *some* evidence of a noteworthy car culture. I don't really think it's noteworthy.

[Keith P.]

You don't agree with their observation that we have too many parking lots in the city centre?

Since they are mostly full every day and it is difficult at times to find parking downtown, I fail to see how they are unnecessary.

It's annoying that two smug European tourists have pointed it out, but it's indelibly true.

As OldDartmouthMark pointed out, the lots are transitional, and all have plans for development. What will they say then? They will remain critical because we don't have elevated bike lanes, bike t-bars for the uphill stretches, and windmills at the mouth of the harbor. They are jerks. The letter demonstrates that fact.

[Ziobrop]

ugh.
We came to Canada and discovered its not like Denmark.

yep. Honestly, if i went to Denmark and discovered it was like Canada I'd wish I went somewhere else.

Say what you will about 18 lanes of 401 traffic - but you have to admit, its impressive to look at, due to its shear volume and quantity of infrastructure. and that's something you can only see in North America.

[Drybrain]

I haven't been to QC or Hamilton, but London, Edmonton, Calgary and Winnipeg are absolutely more car-centric than Halifax, and Victoria is probably about the same. It's kind of apples to oranges to compare Halifax to Montreal and Toronto since they both have subway systems and commuter rail.

...

But the fact that Halifax is near the bottom of the pack in terms of transit usage (out of a limited selection of cities) is offset by the number of people who walk, bike, carpool, etc.

Statscan has active transportation data comparing cities (http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/2011003/tbl/tbl1a-eng.cfm) that shows this to be true-ish. Halifax does only okay with cycling: 1.1% of us cycle to work (I'm a bit shocked that we have fewer bike commuters than Calgary.)

But Halifax blows almost everyone away when it comes to people commuting on foot: 8.5%. Which I assume is due to the compact nature of the peninsula/Dartmouth. A much larger proportion of our population lives within walking distance to the downtown employment district than the same proportion in Calgary or Toronto or Montreal, etc. The only city with a greater percentage of pedestrian commuters is Victoria (which also has by far the most bike commuters). That squares with my experience—I lived in a downtown-ish area in Toronto and still commuted by subway, because it was a 90-minute walk to my office. Now I commute by foot because I live a half-hour walk from the office.

ALSO:

As usual, I think Halifax's uniquely stupid jurisdictional boundaries make our numbers look worse than other cities. These Statscan figures include the far-flung parts of HRM. where pretty much nobody commutes by foot or bike, thereby driving down our stats. I bet if our urban boundaries were scaled to national norms (no other city has an equivalent to our ludicrously distant District 1, for example) our numbers would improve even further—and they're already great for pedestrians, decent for cycling. It'd probably boost transit numbers a bit too.

[mcmcclassic]

I think if they travelled to other countries outside North America, they will find many similar things to here. From my experience living in New Zealand, they had many of the same problems we have: car-centric cities, poor public transit overall, and lots of fat people (proportionally more than Canada btw). Not even the $2.20 a litre we paid for gas stopped anyone!

Empty lots in city centres isn't that rare where I lived (Dunedin). This is one block from the city centre (note Countdown is their version of Superstore):https://maps.google.com/?ll=-45.873121,170.505866&spn=0.000015,0.016512&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=-45.873121,170.505866&panoid=7UZ8AUjV9ukfCWzGkE5H7g&cbp=12,171.36,,0,0

Their version of the 401: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Auckland,+New+Zealand&hl=en&ll=-36.842246,174.746926&spn=0.000034,0.033023&sll=-45.873121,170.505866&sspn=0.006394,0.016512&oq=auckland&t=h&hnear=Auckland,+New+Zealand&z=16&layer=c&cbll=-36.842485,174.747013&panoid=c_q2RPLVtj-aNTxyg7LRig&cbp=12,102.42,,0,0

And for those who like the Lord of the Rings, here's one from Hobbiton:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hobbiton,+Matamata,+Waikato,+New+Zealand&hl=en&ll=-37.808684,175.77061&spn=0.000017,0.016512&sll=-36.842486,174.747012&sspn=0.014699,0.033023&oq=hobbit&t=h&hq=Hobbiton,+Matamata,+Waikato,+New+Zealand&z=17&layer=c&cbll=-37.808684,175.77061&panoid=f6Xl9856OG34yNNk8kAAqg&cbp=12,83.01,,0,0

At the end of the day, Halifax (and most other places in Canada) are getting better at being more transit and pedestrian oriented.

[JET]

ugh.
We came to Canada and discovered its not like Denmark.

yep. Honestly, if i went to Denmark and discovered it was like Canada I'd wish I went somewhere else.

Say what you will about 18 lanes of 401 traffic - but you have to admit, its impressive to look at, due to its shear volume and quantity of infrastructure. and that's something you can only see in North America.

some large highways, including a video of the Circumfrential.


http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1085911&page=2

[counterfactual]

I haven't been to QC or Hamilton, but London, Edmonton, Calgary and Winnipeg are absolutely more car-centric than Halifax, and Victoria is probably about the same. It's kind of apples to oranges to compare Halifax to Montreal and Toronto since they both have subway systems and commuter rail.

No more apples to oranges than comparing Halifax to, say, Winnipeg or London, neither of which have a compact land form like we do on the peninsula, which may lead to more walking over cars, as Dry points out.

Also, I think the absence of subways or commuter rails doesn't obviate comparisons; I think this is also suggestive of a stronger car culture.

We've talked for years about commuter rail in Halifax, usually hand wringing about the costs, and it never happens. Meanwhile, we earmark about many times more the estimated cost of an LRT for massive road projects like Bayers Road widening.

You may not find that noteworthy, but I think you're wrong.

And just to pre-empt the expected reply that Halifax is too "small" to support commuter rail, there are a number of much smaller urban centres in North America with commuter rails, or have systems being built:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commuter_rail_in_North_America


But the fact that Halifax is near the bottom of the pack in terms of transit usage (out of a limited selection of cities) is offset by the number of people who walk, bike, carpool, etc. in that all of these things, not just transit, mean more vehicles off the road. Also, Halifax is basically on par with Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver once you take the subways/skytrains out of the equation, and it's notable that we're ahead of Edmonton even though they have an LRT system AND we almost certainly have a higher percentage of commuters who walk.

Taking subways/sky trains out of the equation is not a valid way to crunch the numbers. As I said above, lack of investment in mass transit is arguably an indication of car culture. If you don't build it, you don't get the windfall it offers in terms of reducing car culture and commute times. Spend the money and you do. Removing significant non-automobile based transit from an equation meant to measure car culture turns this exercise on its head.


The cities there that are smaller than Halifax are all also less dense than Halifax in addition to occupying a smaller area. People don't have to travel as far to get to work and they don't encounter as many other commuters along the way. That should make sense.

Not really. It can explain some of the cities, but not all that beat Halifax on commute times. Moreover, all of these explanations equally apply to cities who we *best* on commute times, which are far bigger than us. So, perhaps, when we take those considerations into account, we may not fair better than even bigger cities.

As for the rest, London and Winnipeg both have street networks centred along wide, straight arterial roads. Kitchener has a well-developed freeway network and multiple downtown cores, as does Thunder Bay on a smaller scale. Hamilton has 4+ lane one-way streets downtown. Basically all of these cities have much more arterial road capacity per area of built-up space than Halifax (I don't have data immediately available to back this up, but having driven in most of these places that's what I observed). Victoria is fairly similar to Halifax (and people there certainly complain about traffic) but its road network is spread out a bit more evenly due to fewer geographic constraints. I've never been to Quebec City and I don't really know what the infrastructure is like there. I think we actually get a lot more municipal investment in public transit than most of those cities as well. Kitchener's LRT system is largely being funded by the province. I seriously doubt that any of those cities, other than maybe Quebec City, get as much municipal investment in transit. MAYBE Winnipeg.

This is all very speculative, and I'm skeptical, but I don't have any data to back up my skepticism, either. So, I'll leave it.

Except to say: Quebec City is a nice comparator to Halifax, in that it has a very compact and historic downtown ("Old Quebec") with very tight road grids but then, a large mass of sprawl building out from that. Downtown is also on a peninsula, with the Riviere Saint-Charles and the Saint Lawrence, bordering it on two sides. Quebec also doesn't have city transit.

So with comparable land forms and 530,000 in the city of Quebec, and 700,000+ metro, we should be easily beat them on commute times, based on sheer smaller population numbers alone.

We don't. Why? Because we looooooove our cars, Hali. :D (See Figure 1).

FIGURE 1: MORE EVIDENCE - TYPICAL HRM DRIVER BEFORE HEADING INTO MORNING COMMUTE

http://www.kiplinger.com/quiz/cars/T063-S001-10-ways-to-save-on-car-maintenance-quiz/images/can-you-tell-sound-advice-from-shibboleth-even-as1.jpg

[Empire]

Here is a building I would like to see resurrected as part of the Cogswell rebuild. The pedway from Purdy's would have to be relocated or have it go down through the basement. I would like to see 20% of the Cogswell lands dedicated to rebuilding buildings that have been demolished. The customs house would qualify as well although I would like to see it rebuilt where it stood, on the corner of Bedford Row and George.


Pentagon Building - flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8196721247_006b93dc20_o.jpg
Source (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdb466/8196721247/in/pool-1922523@N25/)[/QUOTE]

Customs- the stone building - Vintage Halifax Photos

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/537924_514997151883803_1102211918_n.jpg

[Drybrain]

Here is a building I would like to see resurrected as part of the Cogswell rebuild. I would like to see 20% of the Cogswell lands dedicated to rebuilding buildings that have been demolished. The customs house would qualify as well although I would like to see it rebuilt where it stood, on the corner of Bedford Row and George.


Pentagon Building - flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8196721247_006b93dc20_o.jpg
Source (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdb466/8196721247/in/pool-1922523@N25/)[/QUOTE]

I'd love to see that too—a few of the more significant demolished buildings rebuilt amid an otherwise very contemporary district. More than a few and we'd run the risk of Disneyfication, but doing a handful could set an extraordinary example for other North American cities trying to repair the civic wounds inflicted by the 20th century.

And there are precedents of cities doing exactly this after wars and fires. Why not after foolish, over-eager demolitions?

But, given that we're having a hard enough time retaining important old structures we already have (Infants Home, Dennis Building, probably the BMO block on SGR) and keeping others in a state of good repair (most notably a host of Barrington buildings in various states of lingering decay, from the Green Lantern to the Pacific and now maybe the Khyber), I wouldn't hold out much hope. I'm just hoping the contemporary development we get, when it happens, is of high, high, high quality.

[Keith P.]

Don't we have enough stubby faux-Victorian replica buildings already?

Having said that, I always liked the Pentagon but if anyone was to aspire to build something as a homage, make it 20 floors tall with Pentagon inspiration in the shape and detailing.

[Keith P.]

some large highways, including a video of the Circumfrential.


http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1085911&page=2

But this is more typical of today's Nova Scotia roads and traffic. I hear a roundabout is going in soon at the intersections shown to back things up even more.

YSD-jsYfN2c

[Drybrain]

Don't we have enough stubby faux-Victorian replica buildings already?


Well, I think the difference is that it wouldn't be faux—it'd be something to build with real brick and stone, not precast concrete and foam detailing and the like.

I get the concern about being fake-y though. There's a good argument not to rebuild demolished buildings. I fall on the pro-reconstruction side, but only when used sparingly. Otherwise the city becomes a sort of fake-y landscape and you don't know what's original and what's a replica. And of course I want to see modern buildings too.

I think it's a pretty academic discussion in Halifax though, having never heard of any suggestions in this regard beyond this board.

[Empire]

Well, I think the difference is that it wouldn't be faux—it'd be something to build with real brick and stone, not precast concrete and foam detailing and the like.

I get the concern about being fake-y though. There's a good argument not to rebuild demolished buildings. I fall on the pro-reconstruction side, but only when used sparingly. Otherwise the city becomes a sort of fake-y landscape and you don't know what's original and what's a replica. And of course I want to see modern buildings too.

I think it's a pretty academic discussion in Halifax though, having never heard of any suggestions in this regard beyond this board.

The discussion should reach beyond this forum. What a great make work project. Nova Scotia granite, NS sandstone etc. Maybe the feds would like to help restore some history. I think the Pentagon could be stretched to 15 -20fl. and still have a very authentic appeal.

[portapetey]

The discussion should reach beyond this forum. What a great make work project. Nova Scotia granite, NS sandstone etc. Maybe the feds would like to help restore some history. I think the Pentagon could be stretched to 15 -20fl. and still have a very authentic appeal.

Yes a 17ish story flat-iron style building might be cool, if thoughtfully designed.

[kph06]

Hate to get away from this captivating conversation but has anybody see a bunch of brand new red tower crane sections around the city? Was on my way to NB last thursday evening and saw probably 25 or so trucks drive by with this nice shinny new red tower crane. Had what looked like a very light grey or white cab.

I drove by the Lead Formwork yard in Goodwood and there is a new to Halifax red and white Potain flat top tower crane in pieces in the yard just like the third crane at the Nova Centre. This is the fourth new or nearly new crane for them in about a year and a half.

[OldDartmouthMark]

The discussion should reach beyond this forum. What a great make work project. Nova Scotia granite, NS sandstone etc. Maybe the feds would like to help restore some history. I think the Pentagon could be stretched to 15 -20fl. and still have a very authentic appeal.

I think that would be very cool. Make it absolutely 100% (well... 95%) authentic on the outside, but modern and useful on the inside.

That said, won't happen in this day and age because (a) it would take too long to build with much handwork involved, and most importantly (b) it would be too expensive.

Nice idea though.

[counterfactual]

Here is a building I would like to see resurrected as part of the Cogswell rebuild. The pedway from Purdy's would have to be relocated or have it go down through the basement. I would like to see 20% of the Cogswell lands dedicated to rebuilding buildings that have been demolished. The customs house would qualify as well although I would like to see it rebuilt where it stood, on the corner of Bedford Row and George.


Pentagon Building - flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8196721247_006b93dc20_o.jpg
Source (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdb466/8196721247/in/pool-1922523@N25/)

Customs- the stone building - Vintage Halifax Photos

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/537924_514997151883803_1102211918_n.jpg[/QUOTE]

Thanks, Empire. These are awesome.

The Pentagon building reminds me of the Flatiron in New York or the Gooderham Building in Toronto. A similar landmark building, though Halifax style.

I mean, that shot first shot looks like some picture of Lower Eastside Manhattan.

Customs House was beautiful too.

What a waste to demolish these buildings for that ugly monstrosity at Cogswell. Mindblowing that this was seen as "progress" in the 1960's.

Mad men, indeed.

[counterfactual]

Well, I think the difference is that it wouldn't be faux—it'd be something to build with real brick and stone, not precast concrete and foam detailing and the like.

I get the concern about being fake-y though. There's a good argument not to rebuild demolished buildings. I fall on the pro-reconstruction side, but only when used sparingly. Otherwise the city becomes a sort of fake-y landscape and you don't know what's original and what's a replica. And of course I want to see modern buildings too.

I think it's a pretty academic discussion in Halifax though, having never heard of any suggestions in this regard beyond this board.

I think it could be done with the right carrots for developers. It would be expensive, yes, so you need to provide some compensation for that added cost. If we made a strict condition of selling the land to a developer that a serious re-build of the Pentagon would be required for any proposal *but* as a compensation or allowance for that requirement, the developer could, elsewhere on the Cogswell land assigned, build higher/taller than usual, with a couple towers. *That* might entice a developer.

Of course, notice how an idea like this is being tossed around on a board that is explicitly named for debating "skyscrapers" and is not growing out of the Nova Scotia Heritage Trust's lively online discussion forum, which, we can all rest assured, would be bustling with similar such ideas, if someone were to actually create it... Maybe once the last few legal cases work their way through the system? Maybe...

[Empire]

Customs- the stone building - Vintage Halifax Photos

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/537924_514997151883803_1102211918_n.jpg

Thanks, Empire. These are awesome.

The Pentagon building reminds me of the Flatiron in New York or the Gooderham Building in Toronto. A similar landmark building, though Halifax style.

I mean, that shot first shot looks like some picture of Lower Eastside Manhattan.

Customs House was beautiful too.

What a waste to demolish these buildings for that ugly monstrosity at Cogswell. Mindblowing that this was seen as "progress" in the 1960's.

Mad men, indeed.[/QUOTE]


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8196721247_006b93dc20_o.jpg
Source (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdb466/8196721247/in/pool-1922523@N25/) Pentagon Building - flickr

We rebuilt the church at Africville and the apartment buildting on Summer St. shown below from scratch so it could be done. As well, the round church on Brunswick was 80% rebuilt after a fire.

As Counterfactual points out there could be some serious bonusing for a developer. Build the Pentagon where it used to sit, similar size maybe a few more floors and then allow extra height for another parcel for the same developer. Or, allow a 5 year tax holiday to compensate for an original rebuild.

Summer St. rebuilt from scratch.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.642233,-63.583898&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.642233,-63.583898&panoid=232wWK6jOhkxJybCAkSJ-g&cbp=12,216.4,,0,0

St George's Round Church on Brunswick St.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.65316,-63.582795&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.653222,-63.5827&panoid=06itC2KP7VHqnceKx_G17g&cbp=12,314.27,,0,0

[JET]

We rebuilt the church at Africville and the apartment buildting on Summer St. shown below from scratch so it could be done. As well, the round church on Brunswick was 80% rebuilt after a fire.

As Counterfactual points out there could be some serious bonusing for a developer. Build the Pentagon where it used to sit, similar size maybe a few more floors and then allow extra height for another parcel for the same developer. Or, allow a 5 year tax holiday to compensate for an original rebuild.

Summer St. rebuilt from scratch.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.642233,-63.583898&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.642233,-63.583898&panoid=232wWK6jOhkxJybCAkSJ-g&cbp=12,216.4,,0,0

St George's Round Church on Brunswick St.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.65316,-63.582795&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.653222,-63.5827&panoid=06itC2KP7VHqnceKx_G17g&cbp=12,314.27,,0,0[/QUOTE]

Summer Street was not a complete rebuild from scratch, technically they were required to maintain a 'one inch' thickness of board depth for the facade, nothing in front and nothing behind, most bizarre.

[OldDartmouthMark]

We rebuilt the church at Africville and the apartment buildting on Summer St. shown below from scratch so it could be done. As well, the round church on Brunswick was 80% rebuilt after a fire.

As Counterfactual points out there could be some serious bonusing for a developer. Build the Pentagon where it used to sit, similar size maybe a few more floors and then allow extra height for another parcel for the same developer. Or, allow a 5 year tax holiday to compensate for an original rebuild.

Summer St. rebuilt from scratch.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.642233,-63.583898&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.642233,-63.583898&panoid=232wWK6jOhkxJybCAkSJ-g&cbp=12,216.4,,0,0

St George's Round Church on Brunswick St.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=44.65316,-63.582795&spn=0.000004,0.003476&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=44.653222,-63.5827&panoid=06itC2KP7VHqnceKx_G17g&cbp=12,314.27,,0,0

As Jet points out, all that remains of the Summer Street apt. is part of the original façade. If you compare what is there now to the original building (which I couldn't find a photo of) you will see that there is little of the character of the original building left. A very poor job that is more "faux heritage" than anything, IMHO.

Here is a link to the Halifax History website that shows how little of the original building was used:

http://www.halifaxhistory.ca/GardenCrest.htm

The other structures mentioned are wooden structures and in some cases the rebuild occurred largely due to donation funding.

St. John's Anglican in Lunenburg was an amazing rebuild of the wooden structure, but again funding mostly from donations at a cost of around $7 million.

http://www.stjohnslunenburg.org/restoration/index.html

I don't know what the cost would be to do a stone structure, but in this day and age, the skillset required to do it properly has all but disappeared, because modern building techniques have streamlined the process and made it much cheaper in the process. Builders don't do stone structures anymore.

I don't like to be the negative guy, because truth be told if they actually did do a project like this I'd probably be one of the happiest guys on this forum.

Anybody have an idea of the cost of building from stone vs glass, steel and concrete these days?

[Keith P.]

Customs House was beautiful too.

What a waste to demolish these buildings for that ugly monstrosity at Cogswell. Mindblowing that this was seen as "progress" in the 1960's.

Mad men, indeed.

Customs House demo had nothing to do with Cogswell.

IIRC, the Feds knocked it down to create the parking lot/loading bay area for the Dominion of Canada building.

[Ziobrop]

I drove by the Lead Formwork yard in Goodwood and there is a new to Halifax red and white Potain flat top tower crane in pieces in the yard just like the third crane at the Nova Centre. This is the fourth new or nearly new crane for them in about a year and a half.

Wonder if this one is bound for the Roy? or the Maple? or both.

[JET]

Interesting thread: The Canadian Destroyed Buildings Thread II, including some local conrtibutors http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=194156

[musicman]

If it was the crane that i saw on the way to NB last week there were more than enough pieces to put up 2 tall cranes or 3 or 4 somewhat shorter... i may have missed a cab or 2 as well i was at the Big Stop for a bit

[Empire]

Customs House demo had nothing to do with Cogswell.

IIRC, the Feds knocked it down to create the parking lot/loading bay area for the Dominion of Canada building.

Then it's settled! We get the Feds to rebuild the Customs House................

[kph06]

Wonder if this one is bound for the Roy? or the Maple? or both.

Probably a good bet to see it up at the Maple. Ellis Don is the General Contractor and they used Lead for both the Nova Centre and TD Building. A contract like the Maple would be a good way to justify the expense of a new crane to replace older stock. Lead has also taken over more ground in Goodwood, a couple of the older, orange cranes are stored across Mills Rd. from their usual lay down yard.

[Keith P.]

Interesting thread: The Canadian Destroyed Buildings Thread II, including some local conrtibutors http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=194156

Browsed that, interesting. Actually made me feel better. Nothing close to the kind of losses that other Canadian cities experienced is at risk in Halifax currently. The only thing close is the Dennis Building, which is a lousy building but I can understand why some like the look of it. But really, when you compare the losses in places like Winnipeg, Hamilton (!), Montreal and Toronto with our crummy little 2-storey wood boxes you can see we are not so badly off.

[JET]

Browsed that, interesting. Actually made me feel better. Nothing close to the kind of losses that other Canadian cities experienced is at risk in Halifax currently. The only thing close is the Dennis Building, which is a lousy building but I can understand why some like the look of it. But really, when you compare the losses in places like Winnipeg, Hamilton (!), Montreal and Toronto with our crummy little 2-storey wood boxes you can see we are not so badly off.

It's good to see that you're looking on the bright side of things. :)

[counterfactual]

Browsed that, interesting. Actually made me feel better. Nothing close to the kind of losses that other Canadian cities experienced is at risk in Halifax currently. The only thing close is the Dennis Building, which is a lousy building but I can understand why some like the look of it. But really, when you compare the losses in places like Winnipeg, Hamilton (!), Montreal and Toronto with our crummy little 2-storey wood boxes you can see we are not so badly off.

Hamilton was absolutely ludicrous. By far the worst. Forget buildings, they bulldozed countless entire city blocks, with really nothing replacing...

Vancouver, Toronto, Victoria, pretty bad too.

That said, Halifax should thank its lucky stars that the Cogswell waterfront express was stopped. Massive chunks of historical properties would have been destroyed had it gone through. We'd look much, much, worse on that thread.

[counterfactual]

Customs House demo had nothing to do with Cogswell.

IIRC, the Feds knocked it down to create the parking lot/loading bay area for the Dominion of Canada building.

A parking lot? :breakcomp:

[Duff]

Wonder if this one is bound for the Roy? or the Maple? or both.

I'm not sure where it's going but I heard that they will painting it yellow to match the rest of their new cranes before putting it up. Apparently it was shipped in from Portugal.

[Keith P.]

A parking lot? :breakcomp:

This:

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll229/keith_p/customs_zps5fe4129d.jpg

[Keith P.]

Hamilton was absolutely ludicrous. By far the worst. Forget buildings, they bulldozed countless entire city blocks, with really nothing replacing...

Vancouver, Toronto, Victoria, pretty bad too.

That said, Halifax should thank its lucky stars that the Cogswell waterfront express was stopped. Massive chunks of historical properties would have been destroyed had it gone through. We'd look much, much, worse on that thread.

We traded off the tourist-trap Historic Properties, which by all accounts has been a massive failure commercially, for decades of air pollution and noise from tied-up traffic. When you look at Water St south of Duke there isn't anything particularly historic there except for one building used by the MMA. My jury is still out as to what we've saved versus what we've lost.

[Drybrain]

We traded off the tourist-trap Historic Properties, which by all accounts has been a massive failure commercially, for decades of air pollution and noise from tied-up traffic. When you look at Water St south of Duke there isn't anything particularly historic there except for one building used by the MMA. My jury is still out as to what we've saved versus what we've lost.

Well, I'm writing this from the fourth floor of the Collins Bank Building, where my company maintains a very cool and very effective (thoroughly modern) office space. I wouldn't trade a great historical space like this for a sleek office tower, though I guess some would.

Anyway, the Properties have not been a "massive" failure commercially, though I definitely agree they tend to the kitschy/cheesy side of things, and they could do with a big-time refresh of both the retail mix and the interior design. But destroy the buildings, and you destroy that potential. Also important is that the warehouse buildings really do provide a physical link to a seafaring/privateering past that simply would not exist otherwise. They're an important physical manifestation of one of the city's most important historical roles. Pretty much every other building tied to that trade is gone.

And I don't think most Haligonians would agree the jury is still out on Cogswell/Harbour Drive. The overall consensus is that Cogswell was bad, and Harbour Drive would've been worse. Forget the buildings on Lower Water (indeed, most of them are gone anyway) and simply consider the incredibly successful waterfront stroll, which would be impossible had we built Harbour Drive. That IS a hugely successful piece of civic infrastructure.

[counterfactual]

We traded off the tourist-trap Historic Properties, which by all accounts has been a massive failure commercially, for decades of air pollution and noise from tied-up traffic. When you look at Water St south of Duke there isn't anything particularly historic there except for one building used by the MMA. My jury is still out as to what we've saved versus what we've lost.

I agree Historic Properties could be doing better, but that's not the buildings fault. It's crappy planning and the lack of any new *residential* development downtown, nor mass transit to bring more people into that area beyond tourist season.

Now that there is a chance for more people living on and around Barrington, right in the core, I think Historical Properties has a much better chance, for mixed retail, not just tourist stuff.

[counterfactual]

And I don't think most Haligonians would agree the jury is still out on Cogswell/Harbour Drive. The overall consensus is that Cogswell was bad, and Harbour Drive would've been worse. Forget the buildings on Lower Water (indeed, most of them are gone anyway) and simply consider the incredibly successful waterfront stroll, which would be impossible had we built Harbour Drive. That IS a hugely successful piece of civic infrastructure.

Pretty much. You know when we say "history will judge...." well, in this case, history has adjudged Cogswell a disaster and, using our faculties of common sense and reason, harbour drive would have been even more of a disaster.

We'd have the equivalent of Hamilton's crappy as hell "York Blvd" right through the downtown core; an ugly suburban-like multi-lane.

[someone123]

I think the Historic Properties area is less successful than it could be because Cogswell is right there. It's a strange time in general to judge the health of the downtown; I suggest checking back in a couple of years since so much is changing right now.

[xanaxanax]

I always think they should put the buskers around Historic Properties and Granville to draw these people to local business, but noooo put them on around the ferry in conjuncted areas in close proximity... The board-walk along the waterfront works good as a attraction as itself. That event has been on the decline partly due to the conjunction of it not being spread out into other areas, its gone from a 10 day even to 6 days with fewer attractions to see. its always a nightmare to walk past the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic spot

[scooby074]

Gahan House is moving into the old Hart and Thistle space.

Great news. Love Gahan House beers and their pub in Charlottetown is real nice. Great food and atmos. The H&T space lacks the atmosphere compared to the old house they use in Charlottetown, but I have high hopes that Gahan will have decent food, at least it will be better than it was just prior to H&T closing.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/1227940-gahan-house-to-bring-pub-stylings-to-halifax

[Keith P.]

TPTB need to blow up the Law Courts building and open up Historic Properties to the rest of the touristy waterfront. A rethink of the ferry terminal area would be useful too.

Not sure how you can deem a potential Harbour Drive a failure since it was never attempted. And of course the absence of such a route also did away with the likely Northwest Arm Bridge that would have been constructed too. Just imagine the different/better development patterns that would have happened with that.

[OldDartmouthMark]

TPTB need to blow up the Law Courts building and open up Historic Properties to the rest of the touristy waterfront. A rethink of the ferry terminal area would be useful too.


I agree with this.

[OldDartmouthMark]

But this is more typical of today's Nova Scotia roads and traffic. I hear a roundabout is going in soon at the intersections shown to back things up even more.

YSD-jsYfN2c

Awesome video, Keith! Love the expressions of the people dealing with the old iron in the hot summer with no A/C, inadequate cooling systems meaning your car will probably overheat if you're stuck in traffic for too long, tubed tires that puncture if you look at them the wrong way, BIG families all stuffed into one car, etc. etc.

Classic! :cheers:

[Drybrain]

I agree with this.

Keith is indeed dead-on on that. There's no reason for Historic Properties to be separated from the rest of the boardwalk stroll. It's a confluence of historical accidents that led to it, but it's just bad planning not to have fixed it yet.

[Ziobrop]

I'm not sure where it's going but I heard that they will painting it yellow to match the rest of their new cranes before putting it up. Apparently it was shipped in from Portugal.

There are still parts or a red one and a yellow on at the port. That certainly gives credence to the Portugal story..

[curnhalio]

TPTB need to blow up the Law Courts building and open up Historic Properties to the rest of the touristy waterfront. A rethink of the ferry terminal area would be useful too.

The city plans to rehab the ferry terminal within the next 3-4 years. My personal hope of having the terminal moved a few hundred feet north closer to the Purdy's Wharf area to create better transit connections works beautifully with your suggestion.

[counterfactual]

Keith is indeed dead-on on that. There's no reason for Historic Properties to be separated from the rest of the boardwalk stroll. It's a confluence of historical accidents that led to it, but it's just bad planning not to have fixed it yet.

I also agree with Keith on this too.

Keith: please get on this, make it happen. :D

[counterfactual]

The city plans to rehab the ferry terminal within the next 3-4 years. My personal hope of having the terminal moved a few hundred feet north closer to the Purdy's Wharf area to create better transit connections works beautifully with your suggestion.

Yes, moving it further up the harbour makes a lot of sense, especially if they decide to make some use of the railroad track area that runs around the harbour, either for commuter rail or for a dedicated bus lane.

[ILoveHalifax]

I pulled out of Rona's parking lot today going east on Almon.
Suddenly there were 3 cranes right in front of me, very striking, 1365 Robie, Almon and Isleville and one in CFB Halifax.
Some crane enthusiast might like to get a pic. I did not have a camera.

[Hali87]

No more apples to oranges than comparing Halifax to, say, Winnipeg or London, neither of which have a compact land form like we do on the peninsula, which may lead to more walking over cars, as Dry points out.

I'm not sure what you mean. Winnipeg and London both have areas of their inner cities with population and building densities similar to what you'd see on the peninsula. They just also have wider and straighter roads that don't all dead-end arbitrarily. This might make driving less unattractive but it also cuts down on walking distances for pedestrians. They are both also extremely flat which theoretically would make cycling a more attractive option, though in practice I don't know if it's any more popular in those cities (Winnipeg, particularly, I wouldn't want to bike in during the winter).

I don't think the geographic constraints of the Peninsula inherently encourage walking; I'd say the opposite is more likely. For example if I could walk "directly" from my house in Armdale to my school/workplace downtown (ie. if the Northwest Arm wasn't there), it would be about a 25 minute walk. But because I have to go around the Arm, it actually takes over an hour (so I usually take the bus, or catch a ride with someone else). If what you mean is that people are more likely to walk within the Peninsula because everything is relatively close together, then I agree, and in practice this definitely seems to be true.


Also, I think the absence of subways or commuter rails doesn't obviate comparisons; I think this is also suggestive of a stronger car culture.

It is, sort of, but it's not really that simple. Halifax doesn't have a subway, but it also doesn't have the 401 (or the other mega-highways of the GTA). Also, a LOT of people drive to GO stations in the GTA. So saying that Halifax has "a stronger car culture" than Toronto because Toronto has a subway and GO trains is only looking at half the picture. I'm less familiar with Montreal.


We've talked for years about commuter rail in Halifax, usually hand wringing about the costs, and it never happens. Meanwhile, we earmark about many times more the estimated cost of an LRT for massive road projects like Bayers Road widening.

You may not find that noteworthy, but I think you're wrong.

There has never, to my knowledge, been an "estimated cost of an LRT" for Halifax because there has never been a study on actual LRT for the region. It's not the same thing as commuter rail.

I agree that there is a disproportionate amount of money (and particularly focus/attention) spent on road projects, but Bayers Road for example is a major route not just for commuters but for anyone using the 102, which includes transport trucks and a very large share of people driving into the city from elsewhere. Widening Bayers Road isn't something I'm necessarily against, especially if it includes upgrades for transit.


And just to pre-empt the expected reply that Halifax is too "small" to support commuter rail

I literally wrote a thesis arguing that a hybrid commuter rail/LRT system could work in Halifax if planners and engineers were willing to think outside the box (or at least outside of the North American box). The problem is that historically they haven't. Basically every proposal for commuter rail in Halifax since at least the 1970s has only looked at using the CN ROW (which is only available "in theory" and is only a semi-convenient routing), and obsolete vehicles that require very long distances to accelerate/decelerate. I'm not convinced that the vehicles in the proposed Halifax system would ever reach their optimal operating speed.

It's really no surprise when such proposals are considered to be a poor investment, because the end goal is always a system with obvious flaws - it wouldn't be particularly convenient for many residents, it would be slow, it would not be usable for people going against the flow of traffic or traveling outside of peak hours, and its endpoint on the peninsula wouldn't be particularly convenient for downtown workers. Despite all of these problems, it could still cost as much, or more, than an equally-or-more effective system. Honestly, if Bayers Road is going to be widened anyway, using the 102 for BRT would probably be much more effective than anything proposed for the CN ROW. And that's not to say that I don't think Halifax could or should have an urban rail network of some sort, just that the proposals so far have tended to set themselves up for failure by only considering what is basically the least useful option.


there are a number of much smaller urban centres in North America with commuter rails, or have systems being built:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commuter_rail_in_North_America

I looked at the list and I don't see any "much smaller" urban centres in North America with commuter rail systems currently operating. Ann Arbor is slightly smaller than Halifax. All of the other systems seem to be within metro areas that have well over a million people. I'm not saying that a million is "the magic number", just that I fail to see what your point was here.


Taking subways/sky trains out of the equation is not a valid way to crunch the numbers. As I said above, lack of investment in mass transit is arguably an indication of car culture. If you don't build it, you don't get the windfall it offers in terms of reducing car culture and commute times. Spend the money and you do. Removing significant non-automobile based transit from an equation meant to measure car culture turns this exercise on its head.

All that I meant was that there's more than one way to look at the data. To you, that graph means that Halifax loves cars. To me, it means that we are very good at using what is currently available to us. In reality, both are true only to some extent.


Not really. It can explain some of the cities, but not all that beat Halifax on commute times. Moreover, all of these explanations equally apply to cities who we *best* on commute times, which are far bigger than us. So, perhaps, when we take those considerations into account, we may not fair better than even bigger cities.

Commute times are affected by a large number of factors, "how much we love our cars" is only one of them, and arguably not the biggest. The fact that so much employment is concentrated downtown and in adjacent parts of the Peninsula is part of it - the choke points, the narrow, one-way streets, the short blocks which necessitate more frequent stops, the fact that you often can't reach, let alone exceed 50km/h on much of the Peninsula (compare that to cities where 10+ over the speed limit on arterials is the norm)... Then there is the non-peninsular road network, which lacks anything resembling a coherent grid (the exceptions being Fairview/Fairmount and central Dartmouth), the fact that most off-peninsula arterials are very meandering (which adds time/distance) and many are one lane in each direction.

Then you also have to factor in the number of people who use transit or active transport/walking. It's no secret that the bus is rarely the fastest way to get somewhere in Halifax, and just because someone walks to work doesn't mean that they do it in 20 minutes or less. All of these people are generally counted as commuters, not just drivers.


Quebec City is a nice comparator to Halifax, in that it has a very compact and historic downtown ("Old Quebec") with very tight road grids but then, a large mass of sprawl building out from that. Downtown is also on a peninsula, with the Riviere Saint-Charles and the Saint Lawrence, bordering it on two sides. Quebec also doesn't have city transit.

So with comparable land forms and 530,000 in the city of Quebec, and 700,000+ metro, we should be easily beat them on commute times, based on sheer smaller population numbers alone.

This isn't really how this works though. It's like saying that downtown Quebec City should have twice as many office towers as downtown Halifax because numbers! Of course, if Quebec City had significantly more office towers downtown, maybe the average commute would be longer.

There's a certain irony to the fact that if more office development was concentrated in places like Bayers Lake and Lower Sackville, average commute times could drop significantly because employment would suddenly be a lot closer for some people and the traffic would not all be going in the same direction or using the same roads. Of course, that's theoretical. If people are living in Cole Harbour but working in Bayer's Lake, that's gonna be a long commute no longer what. But if people living in Clayton Park West or Timberlea are working in Bayer's Lake, that's a significantly shorter commute than downtown and takes commuters off peninsular streets, lowering commute times for people who do work downtown.


Edit: What do you mean Quebec doesn't have city transit?


We don't. Why? Because we looooooove our cars, Hali. :D (See Figure 1).

FIGURE 1: MORE EVIDENCE - TYPICAL HRM DRIVER BEFORE HEADING INTO MORNING COMMUTE

http://www.kiplinger.com/quiz/cars/T063-S001-10-ways-to-save-on-car-maintenance-quiz/images/can-you-tell-sound-advice-from-shibboleth-even-as1.jpg

Whatever. At least she's got a nice smile.

[Keith P.]

Interesting, Hali87. On the LRT idea, did you propose a routing of 102/Bayers/Connaught/Quinpool/Cogswell to downtown? It seems to me something like that could be done with reasonable little disruption given the width of those streets. How you get a "loop" out of the downtown might be a challenge, or perhaps not, I don't know. I could get behind this concept far more than obvious wastes of money like bike lanes.

[Hali87]

My thesis is available online but I can't find it at the moment. I posted it a couple of times on this forum, probably in the Rail-Based Transit Discussion thread a year or 2 ago. I don't really have time to look for it now but I'll post the link here when I get a chance.

About half of the thesis was looking at previous proposals for rail transit in Halifax since the 1970s and how rail transit has evolved elsewhere over the same time period (spoiler alert: Halifax's proposals have basically ignored all of the technological improvements and approaches to public transit used elsewhere).

The other half was basically a proposed system that involved three lines - one using the CN rail cut and ending at Bedford Commons, one traveling N/S along Hollis and Barrington Streets, and one traveling N/S along Robie and Agricola Streets, with the lines converging at a transfer station at the southern end of Robie. The three lines avoided basically any major hills and managed to hit most major trip generators on the Peninsula - Every university campus (including MSVU), both QEII campuses, the NSIT, downtown, the Seawall area, the Commons, the Dockyard, the Shipyard, Halifax Shopping Centre, and quite a few dense residential areas, off the top of my head.

It's by no means a complete proposal, but was meant to illustrate the kinds of things we haven't even been discussing as a city. I'm sure the technology has improved since I wrote it and in many ways it's probably more feasible than it was a couple of years ago. One assumption I had to make is that trains could travel both ways on a single set of in-street tracks (which would be basically a street parking lane converted to a streetcar-only lane) as long as they were given space along the route to pass each other (likely at stations). There isn't really a precedent for this in Canada, although Ottawa's O-Train works like this, but entirely off-street. I'm not sure if this would fly with Transport Canada or whoever gets to decide how these things work, but in theory it would work. It would affect some on-street parking, and actually the bike lane going in on Hollis would likely mean changing part of the route. I haven't actually looked at the thesis in quite a while, so I'm not sure what other developments that have happened since then might affect it.

I'll reiterate that it's not a perfect or complete proposal, and if I were tasked with designing a new system today I'm not sure it would follow the same route or use the same technology. But I think a lot of the advantages still stand in terms of having a reliable system that doesn't cost too much or take too long to build, and is easy for both residents and tourists to use. I invite any critique (and some forumers have already offered some valid critiques).

Something I didn't really look at at the time, but would now, is how much it would cost to build a km or two of tunnel to get through a few chokepoints. An all-out subway might not be feasible here (although no study has ever been done) but something like what Edmonton has, with short underground segments and the majority at surface level, could work well. Especially if the excavated rock could be sold as a building material (which is another thing that I don't think is ever considered).

[fenwick16]

My thesis is available online but I can't find it at the moment. I posted it a couple of times on this forum, probably in the Rail-Based Transit Discussion thread a year or 2 ago. I don't really have time to look for it now but I'll post the link here when I get a chance.

About half of the thesis was looking at previous proposals for rail transit in Halifax since the 1970s and how rail transit has evolved elsewhere over the same time period (spoiler alert: Halifax's proposals have basically ignored all of the technological improvements and approaches to public transit used elsewhere).

The other half was basically a proposed system that involved three lines - one using the CN rail cut and ending at Bedford Commons, one traveling N/S along Hollis and Barrington Streets, and one traveling N/S along Robie and Agricola Streets, with the lines converging at a transfer station at the southern end of Robie. The three lines avoided basically any major hills and managed to hit most major trip generators on the Peninsula - Every university campus (including MSVU), both QEII campuses, the NSIT, downtown, the Seawall area, the Commons, the Dockyard, the Shipyard, Halifax Shopping Centre, and quite a few dense residential areas, off the top of my head.

It's by no means a complete proposal, but was meant to illustrate the kinds of things we haven't even been discussing as a city. I'm sure the technology has improved since I wrote it and in many ways it's probably more feasible than it was a couple of years ago. One assumption I had to make is that trains could travel both ways on a single set of in-street tracks (which would be basically a street parking lane converted to a streetcar-only lane) as long as they were given space along the route to pass each other (likely at stations). There isn't really a precedent for this in Canada, although Ottawa's O-Train works like this, but entirely off-street. I'm not sure if this would fly with Transport Canada or whoever gets to decide how these things work, but in theory it would work. It would affect some on-street parking, and actually the bike lane going in on Hollis would likely mean changing part of the route. I haven't actually looked at the thesis in quite a while, so I'm not sure what other developments that have happened since then might affect it.

I'll reiterate that it's not a perfect or complete proposal, and if I were tasked with designing a new system today I'm not sure it would follow the same route or use the same technology. But I think a lot of the advantages still stand in terms of having a reliable system that doesn't cost too much or take too long to build, and is easy for both residents and tourists to use. I invite any critique (and some forumers have already offered some valid critiques).

Something I didn't really look at at the time, but would now, is how much it would cost to build a km or two of tunnel to get through a few chokepoints. An all-out subway might not be feasible here (although no study has ever been done) but something like what Edmonton has, with short underground segments and the majority at surface level, could work well. Especially if the excavated rock could be sold as a building material (which is another thing that I don't think is ever considered).

I think this might be it - http://dalspace.library.dal.ca/bitstream/handle/10222/14898/alex-kawchuk-thesis-revised.pdf?sequence=1
(I found it on skyscraperpage by Googling Hali87 thesis)

I read it previously and thought it was well written and based on rational, unbiased thinking (just my opinion, FWIW)

[Keith P.]

One of the things that strikes me when I look at all the material kicking around regarding the Cogswell interchange, possible LRT routings, etc is the problem that one large but unremarkable building creates: the Trade Mart. It occupies a very strategic spot, and makes dealing with grade changes and other traffic issues difficult. Yet it is a nothing building, really just a big freight shed, which happens to be used mostly for provincial govt offices for the Dept of Education (who have stayed there only because, I am told, its large footprint allows them to maintain everything on one level).

Many things would be possible if it were to go away, among them a much more direct routing to/from Barrington to/from Brunswick and SGR. You could use that for existing traffic. Allan Duffus proposed a diagonal street like that in his alternate proposal for the Cogswell site in the early 1960s. You could also, with a little creativity and investment, use it for transit and maybe even trucks, to get the latter off the downtown streets. I really think Halifax needs to put a stake in the ground to say, OK, by year 20xx, we need to have a solution to get these container pier trucks off Hollis and Water Streets, full stop. This may not be it but maybe its part of a bigger solution.

One of the things I always dreamed about is doing what other large cities have done: have their subway lines or whatever go INTO major buildings. With no Trade Mart, you could potentially connect Barrington to an extended Market St and have a transitway go INTO Scotia Square or the lower levels of the existing WTCC/Metro Center. Or, I suppose, if the Heritage Trust falls in love with the Trade Mart, you could tunnel beneath it to do something similar. From there, go downhill or...

I wonder what it would cost to bore a tunnel under Citadel Hill? I hear it is largely glacial till, not bedrock, so it shouldn't be ridiculously hard from an engineering standpoint. Punch a tunnel under it from the Metro Center area to Bell Road or upper parts of Cogswell or wherever.

Being BOLD here!

[counterfactual]

I'm not sure what you mean. Winnipeg and London both have areas of their inner cities with population and building densities similar to what you'd see on the peninsula. They just also have wider and straighter roads that don't all dead-end arbitrarily. This might make driving less unattractive but it also cuts down on walking distances for pedestrians. They are both also extremely flat which theoretically would make cycling a more attractive option, though in practice I don't know if it's any more popular in those cities (Winnipeg, particularly, I wouldn't want to bike in during the winter).

I don't think the geographic constraints of the Peninsula inherently encourage walking; I'd say the opposite is more likely. For example if I could walk "directly" from my house in Armdale to my school/workplace downtown (ie. if the Northwest Arm wasn't there), it would be about a 25 minute walk. But because I have to go around the Arm, it actually takes over an hour (so I usually take the bus, or catch a ride with someone else). If what you mean is that people are more likely to walk within the Peninsula because everything is relatively close together, then I agree, and in practice this definitely seems to be true.


It is, sort of, but it's not really that simple. Halifax doesn't have a subway, but it also doesn't have the 401 (or the other mega-highways of the GTA). Also, a LOT of people drive to GO stations in the GTA. So saying that Halifax has "a stronger car culture" than Toronto because Toronto has a subway and GO trains is only looking at half the picture. I'm less familiar with Montreal.


There has never, to my knowledge, been an "estimated cost of an LRT" for Halifax because there has never been a study on actual LRT for the region. It's not the same thing as commuter rail.

I agree that there is a disproportionate amount of money (and particularly focus/attention) spent on road projects, but Bayers Road for example is a major route not just for commuters but for anyone using the 102, which includes transport trucks and a very large share of people driving into the city from elsewhere. Widening Bayers Road isn't something I'm necessarily against, especially if it includes upgrades for transit.


I literally wrote a thesis arguing that a hybrid commuter rail/LRT system could work in Halifax if planners and engineers were willing to think outside the box (or at least outside of the North American box). The problem is that historically they haven't. Basically every proposal for commuter rail in Halifax since at least the 1970s has only looked at using the CN ROW (which is only available "in theory" and is only a semi-convenient routing), and obsolete vehicles that require very long distances to accelerate/decelerate. I'm not convinced that the vehicles in the proposed Halifax system would ever reach their optimal operating speed.

It's really no surprise when such proposals are considered to be a poor investment, because the end goal is always a system with obvious flaws - it wouldn't be particularly convenient for many residents, it would be slow, it would not be usable for people going against the flow of traffic or traveling outside of peak hours, and its endpoint on the peninsula wouldn't be particularly convenient for downtown workers. Despite all of these problems, it could still cost as much, or more, than an equally-or-more effective system. Honestly, if Bayers Road is going to be widened anyway, using the 102 for BRT would probably be much more effective than anything proposed for the CN ROW. And that's not to say that I don't think Halifax could or should have an urban rail network of some sort, just that the proposals so far have tended to set themselves up for failure by only considering what is basically the least useful option.


I looked at the list and I don't see any "much smaller" urban centres in North America with commuter rail systems currently operating. Ann Arbor is slightly smaller than Halifax. All of the other systems seem to be within metro areas that have well over a million people. I'm not saying that a million is "the magic number", just that I fail to see what your point was here.




All that I meant was that there's more than one way to look at the data. To you, that graph means that Halifax loves cars. To me, it means that we are very good at using what is currently available to us. In reality, both are true only to some extent.


Commute times are affected by a large number of factors, "how much we love our cars" is only one of them, and arguably not the biggest. The fact that so much employment is concentrated downtown and in adjacent parts of the Peninsula is part of it - the choke points, the narrow, one-way streets, the short blocks which necessitate more frequent stops, the fact that you often can't reach, let alone exceed 50km/h on much of the Peninsula (compare that to cities where 10+ over the speed limit on arterials is the norm)... Then there is the non-peninsular road network, which lacks anything resembling a coherent grid (the exceptions being Fairview/Fairmount and central Dartmouth), the fact that most off-peninsula arterials are very meandering (which adds time/distance) and many are one lane in each direction.

Then you also have to factor in the number of people who use transit or active transport/walking. It's no secret that the bus is rarely the fastest way to get somewhere in Halifax, and just because someone walks to work doesn't mean that they do it in 20 minutes or less. All of these people are generally counted as commuters, not just drivers.


This isn't really how this works though. It's like saying that downtown Quebec City should have twice as many office towers as downtown Halifax because numbers! Of course, if Quebec City had significantly more office towers downtown, maybe the average commute would be longer.

There's a certain irony to the fact that if more office development was concentrated in places like Bayers Lake and Lower Sackville, average commute times could drop significantly because employment would suddenly be a lot closer for some people and the traffic would not all be going in the same direction or using the same roads. Of course, that's theoretical. If people are living in Cole Harbour but working in Bayer's Lake, that's gonna be a long commute no longer what. But if people living in Clayton Park West or Timberlea are working in Bayer's Lake, that's a significantly shorter commute than downtown and takes commuters off peninsular streets, lowering commute times for people who do work downtown.

Edit: What do you mean Quebec doesn't have city transit?


Whatever. At least she's got a nice smile.

Thanks for the thorough response; a proper reply coming when I have more time, but wanted to chime in to say that your thesis-- and LRT proposal-- looks very interesting, and well thought out.

Have you ever forwarded it to HRM planners? Or better yet-- since I don't expect HRM planners to think beyond path-of-least-resistance planning without clear political direction-- have you provided a copy to a councillor like Waye Mason, whose is probably willing to kick up some dust and think outside the box on transit issues, and get this in front of the Mayor?

[counterfactual]

As much as I think a stadium would be nice, I really would prefer the Mayor throw his time, effort, and political capital behind putting together a bold and world class mass transit system, that could benefit the city-- downtown and suburbs-- for a generation or more to come.

[Ziobrop]

I suspect glacial till while easy to dig is not easy to tunnel in. Ottawas let tunnel is going through granite. Halifax is mostly piyritic shale which breaks easily and is probably easier to tunnel

[Ziobrop]

Back to the Khyber,
The HTNS released a Press release (http://www.htns.ca/press-in_the_news.html) (and posted it to their website for the second time since 2010) stating their mandate.

Item 3 reads:
Acquire, preserve and protect buildings and sites which are recognized as historical sites by the Department of Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada or an appropriate provincial or municipal authority;

SO it would be part of their mandate to Buy the khyber and restore it.
I might even chip in a few bucks if they did.

[Drybrain]

Back to the Khyber,
The HTNS released a Press release (http://www.htns.ca/press-in_the_news.html) (and posted it to their website for the second time since 2010) stating their mandate.

Item 3 reads:


SO it would be part of their mandate to Buy the khyber and restore it.
I might even chip in a few bucks if they did.

Hell, so might I.

I also wonder where the city's arts patrons are on this, actually—if the Fountain family can donate $3 million to NSCAD, I'm wondering if there are any other prominent/wealthy arts supporters who might chip in a few hundred thousand here and there for the Khyber.

Not that we should rely on charity to provide arts funding, or save our great buildings. But given the situation, if I had the resources, I'd certainly be thinking about it.

[Keith P.]

Hell, so might I.

I also wonder where the city's arts patrons are on this, actually—if the Fountain family can donate $3 million to NSCAD, I'm wondering if there are any other prominent/wealthy arts supporters who might chip in a few hundred thousand here and there for the Khyber.

Not that we should rely on charity to provide arts funding, or save our great buildings. But given the situation, if I had the resources, I'd certainly be thinking about it.

I believe that the silence of the literati on this reflects the vastly overstated importance of the Khyber and the KAS to the artsy types in the city. As I mentioned in an earlier post, they are perceived as a closed club, not doing much for anyone but themselves, that somehow managed to finagle the city into giving them a free clubhouse. They are not a cornerstone of the arts community in Halifax as some would have you believe.

[ILoveHalifax]

Just bring in the bulldozers.
23 years with NFB looking like a bomb hit it and we get an apartment behind a façade.

[Keith P.]

Just bring in the bulldozers.
23 years with NFB looking like a bomb hit it and we get an apartment behind a façade.

No question that the remains of the NFB should have been taken down immediately after the fire. To have it in the state it has been for a generation is unacceptable, and to now keep that ugly facade is adding insult to injury.

[coolmillion]

I don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere but I noticed a "commercial space for lease coming soon" sign at the corner of Hennessey and Isleville. The rendering shows a low-rise faux-tudoresque design, similar to the Mother's Pizza building. See here: http://cwatlantic.com/properties/3138-isleville-street/
The address is 3132 Isleville and the only current tenant I am aware of is Sweetleaf smoke shop and hydroponics.

[Dmajackson]

^This was initially brought up a few months ago in this thread. The plan is to start construction this year. The demolition permit has been issued for the existing building.

Personally I would rather see retail expand its footprint along Young/Kaye and south on Gottingen before taking over the side streets, however, other than the imperfect location this looks a great infill project. Visually I cannot see this being worse than the yellow, blank fall the smokeshop has along Hennessey.

[coolmillion]

Thanks Dma! Yeah, it looks like a decent project and I imagine that it won't be too challenging to find tenants with all the interest and new and upcoming residential developments in this area.

[Dmajackson]

Might as well add 3138 Isleville to the Halifax Developments Blog. Any photos I take will be available via the link below;

Halifax Developments Blog - 3138 Isleville (http://urbanhalifax.tumblr.com/tagged/3138Isleville)

[curnhalio]

Hah, some old friends of mine used to live in the upstairs apartment years ago. I was unaware this was up for development, but awesome none the less.

Think of it as an extension of existing retail on Isleville. In addition to the new building for Willmans, it also gives the other business sites on the street incentive to come up with their own new designs.

[Keith P.]

Ugly building IMO though I see what they are trying to do with it as a homage to the Hydrostones. Of course anything will be better than the existing supplier to the drug trade.

[Drybrain]

Ugly building IMO though I see what they are trying to do with it as a homage to the Hydrostones. Of course anything will be better than the existing supplier to the drug trade.

If they keep this up it won't take long before there are more faux Hydrostone commercial buildings than real ones. I hope this is the last of the faux variety, and the rest of the neighbourhood fills out with some contemporary buildings. This and the Mothers building are okay, but I don't really understand why they've taken this approach.

[counterfactual]

If they keep this up it won't take long before there are more faux Hydrostone commercial buildings than real ones. I hope this is the last of the faux variety, and the rest of the neighbourhood fills out with some contemporary buildings. This and the Mothers building are okay, but I don't really understand why they've taken this approach.

Hey Dry, The Coast is looking awfully thin these days.

I'm not sure I like the new format; missing a lot of the stuff I found it helpful-- local entertainment/culture/events listings, quick reference movie reviews for locally playing shows.

Is everything OK over there, financially? Worried when newspapers get cut down so thin; not a great sign. Would suck for the city if The Coast went under...

[Drybrain]

Hey Dry, The Coast is looking awfully thin these days.

I'm not sure I like the new format; missing a lot of the stuff I found it helpful-- local entertainment/culture/events listings, quick reference movie reviews for locally playing shows.

Is everything OK over there, financially? Worried when newspapers get cut down so thin; not a great sign. Would suck for the city if The Coast went under...

Oh, I dunno—I've just done a few freelance pieces, so I'm not on staff or anything. Not sure what the finances are like.

Your concern is well-founded, though. The similar magazine I worked fo (http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/07/02/the_grid_weekly_magazine_is_closing.html)r in Toronto went out of business a few months ago, taking out or at least slowing down some really great careers. Times are desperately hard in the magazine business.

Could also just be a lack of ad content in late summer though. Weeklies tend to get thinner in late summer and January/February, 'cause that's when ad dollars are at their least. They get fatter in fall and spring (approaching Christmas and summer).

[pblaauw]

On the other hand, Tim Bousquet left.... Was that the beginning of the slow demise?

[Colin May]

On the other hand, Tim Bousquet left.... Was that the beginning of the slow demise?

It has been a wet noodle since he left.
It was a must read when he was editor, didn't matter if you didn't like some of the leftie nonsense but it broke stories no other outlet would touch.
The CBC is just a bunch of ambulance chasers.

[Jonovision]

Dal has started work on their new Wallace McCain Learning Commons. No renderings or elevations. Just this floor plan.

http://www.dal.ca/content/dalhousie/en/home/dept/facilities/campus-development/projects/life-sciences-centre-learning-commons/jcr:content/contentPar/featureslider/featureSlider/featureslide_0/image.adaptive.579.high.jpg

Construction as of today.

https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/t1.0-9/10620790_10100440587706449_948366939061535556_n.jpg

[Keith P.]

On the other hand, Tim Bousquet left.... Was that the beginning of the slow demise?

Addition by subtraction.

[counterfactual]

Oh, I dunno—I've just done a few freelance pieces, so I'm not on staff or anything. Not sure what the finances are like.

Your concern is well-founded, though. The similar magazine I worked fo (http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/07/02/the_grid_weekly_magazine_is_closing.html)r in Toronto went out of business a few months ago, taking out or at least slowing down some really great careers. Times are desperately hard in the magazine business.

Could also just be a lack of ad content in late summer though. Weeklies tend to get thinner in late summer and January/February, 'cause that's when ad dollars are at their least. They get fatter in fall and spring (approaching Christmas and summer).

Yeah, you should compare The Coast to The Now. The used to be very similar in style and content (and both were poor Canadian man's Village Voice, of course), but The Coast is seeming a lot thinner to me these days.

Worried, because it's a true staple out here.

I kinda wish Metronews went away. A useless free daily, that has a lot of celebrity garbage in it and usually front page is sensational crime stories. Blah.

[Hali87]

I remember there was an explanation for the new format in the Coast a couple weeks ago. Most of the entertainment listings are online and the print edition's focus is to be on articles. It seems like they are trying to gradually shift content onto their website and they mentioned some issue with their newsprint supplier. The articles I've read lately are actually a lot less slanted and remind me of the pre-Bousquet Coast.

[counterfactual]

I remember there was an explanation for the new format in the Coast a couple weeks ago. Most of the entertainment listings are online and the print edition's focus is to be on articles. It seems like they are trying to gradually shift content onto their website and they mentioned some issue with their newsprint supplier. The articles I've read lately are actually a lot less slanted and remind me of the pre-Bousquet Coast.

I do like the writing in the new format too, and yes, I've read their explanations, but I wouldn't take them (or at least all of them) at face value. Wondering if Drybrain had any further insights into the changes.

[Colin May]

I remember there was an explanation for the new format in the Coast a couple weeks ago. Most of the entertainment listings are online and the print edition's focus is to be on articles. It seems like they are trying to gradually shift content onto their website and they mentioned some issue with their newsprint supplier. The articles I've read lately are actually a lot less slanted and remind me of the pre-Bousquet Coast.

Were the articles about Kelly slanted ? He'd still be mayor but for Bousquet.
Were the articles about concerts slanted ?
Most journalists add slant to their reports, they toss in their opinion/prediction and the TV is the most egregious. Facts matter, but the press don't like to just lay out facts.

[Keith P.]

Were the articles about Kelly slanted ? He'd still be mayor but for Bousquet.
Were the articles about concerts slanted ?
Most journalists add slant to their reports, they toss in their opinion/prediction and the TV is the most egregious. Facts matter, but the press don't like to just lay out facts.

Everything Bousquet writes is slanted. It's not just the facts, it's how they are spun and presented.

[pblaauw]

First Nation band votes for development in Hammonds Plains (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/first-nation-band-votes-for-development-in-hammonds-plains-1.2744733) (Chronicle Herald)

[counterfactual]

Everything being said, we should be very thankful to Bousquet for his investigative journalism on Peter Kelly.

But for Bousquet, we'd still have the Mayor of Bedford pretending to be the Mayor for Halifax.

[Keith P.]

Everything being said, we should be very thankful to Bousquet for his investigative journalism on Peter Kelly.

But for Bousquet, we'd still have the Mayor of Bedford pretending to be the Mayor for Halifax.

Don't give Bousquet credit for Kelly not being mayor. IIRC Savage announced his candidacy before Kelly said he would not run. Do you think Kelly would have defeated Savage? We'll never know but I suspect not. Kelly never had to face a legitimate candidate in any of his prior re-election runs. I mean, Victor Syperek? Really?

No, I believe Savage would have destroyed Kelly at the polls and we would be in the same position as we are now. Bousquet had little to do with that. To claim otherwise is giving him far too much credit.

[counterfactual]

Don't give Bousquet credit for Kelly not being mayor. IIRC Savage announced his candidacy before Kelly said he would not run. Do you think Kelly would have defeated Savage? We'll never know but I suspect not. Kelly never had to face a legitimate candidate in any of his prior re-election runs. I mean, Victor Syperek? Really?

No, I believe Savage would have destroyed Kelly at the polls and we would be in the same position as we are now. Bousquet had little to do with that. To claim otherwise is giving him far too much credit.

Yeah, I think it's hard to argue-- wait for it-- counterfactuals. :)

I think you're probably right that Savage would have defeated Kelly, but we also have to look at his record-- he didn't lose a single election his entire political career. So it's not a slam dunk, but on balance probably maybe right. But then, wouldn't you say that Bousquet's work makes the possibility of Kelly *returning* to politics less likely? If Kelly had lost, but in a close race, he may be much more likely to re-run for Mayor in the next election. He may do that anyways, but he would then have to answer, publicly, some uncomfortable questions about Bousquet's reporting. I'm not sure he's prepared to do that.

[Keith P.]

I will not give Bousquet credit for anything positive during his time at the Coast. He is the most negative, biased, snide excuse for a journalist I have ever seen.

[Colin May]

Don't give Bousquet credit for Kelly not being mayor. IIRC Savage announced his candidacy before Kelly said he would not run. Do you think Kelly would have defeated Savage? We'll never know but I suspect not. Kelly never had to face a legitimate candidate in any of his prior re-election runs. I mean, Victor Syperek? Really?

No, I believe Savage would have destroyed Kelly at the polls and we would be in the same position as we are now. Bousquet had little to do with that. To claim otherwise is giving him far too much credit.

The public turned against Kelly long before Savage was mooted as a potential candidate for Mayor.
The downfall of Kelly started in March 24 2011 when Bousquet dealt the first of many serious blows to Kelly with his first article about the Mary Thibeault estate scandal. In what I would call the most detailed article of any journalist in Nova Scotia in the previous decade he laid out sufficient details to seriously question the judgement of the Halifax Mayor. see here

http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/archives/2011/03/23/peter-kellys-failure-of-will


and then in June 2011 the HRM Auditor General reported on the Kelly participation in hiding the transfer of money to a concert promoter, see this Globe article of June 11 2011 :
" Municipal rules were broken amid an "overwhelming desire" to hold concerts in Halifax, the city's Auditor-General said after probing a funding scandal.

In a report released Tuesday, Halifax Auditor Larry Munroe blamed "many people" for a mess that left the city on the hook for more than $350,000. He said Mayor Peter Kelly and a former senior bureaucrat should have been more diligent. " see here : http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/halifax-auditor-blames-many-people-for-concert-cash-scandal/article585030/#dashboard/follows/

Then there was the November 11 2011 Remembrance Day clear out of a protest mob at Victoria Park. and the role of Kelly in that action.

Then there was the February 6 2012 announcement by Savage that he would run for Mayor and 10 days later Bousquet delivered the coup de grace with another extensive and detailed article " A Trust betrayed " see here :
http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/archives/2011/03/23/peter-kellys-failure-of-will

Six days later Kelly announced he would not re-offer.
Savage had no competition in his run for office, the others were less qualified than Syperek.
To deny the role of Bousquet in the downfall of Kelly is childish, churlish and is to ignore facts.

[portapetey]

I'd have to agree that Bousquet probably did play a significant role in Kelly's downfall. He broke the stories. Of course, no one took them seriously until they were picked up by more respectable journalists at more respected newspapers, because people would likely assume that it just was more of Bousquet's usual anti-authority mewling.

So Bousquet had one, single, brag-worthy career success at the Coast due to to his single-minded, obsessive, and seemingly very personal vendetta against powerful men. And wasn't satisfied with that success but continued to try to pursue Kelly well past the victory line, seemingly not happy until he drives the man to his grave.

I loathe Kelly as much as anyone, but Bousquet at some point became less journalist and more stalker.

He couldn't get anywhere with Fred MacGillivray, Scott Ferguson, or now Joe Ramia - all perceived to be powerful men, which Bousquet hates with all the blinding rage of a second year philosophy major who deeply, deeply resents her wealthy, powerful daddy - and so he keeps on trying to find something else to say about Kelly, or to find some other powerful man to turn his crosshairs on.

But despite his one big victory, he's still a failed journalist with nowhere to go but to his own private blog which he keeps locked up away from people who aren't like-minded, lest they criticize his sophomoric drivel for the juvenile hate-rag that it is.

Speaking of childish and churlish.

"...exposed corruption..." indeed.

[Ziobrop]

I cant find the Post, but there was a proposal put forth for the St Mary's church parking lot at the corner of grafton and SPG. Apparently that land, as well as the front yard of the memorial library were the old pour house burial grounds. I knew about the library, but not that it extended right to the church.

See the Daily Plug on the Morning File (http://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/bring-out-your-dead-morning-file-friday-august-29-2014/)

Update:
This is the one i was referring to:
http://pdcentre.ca/construction-site/sites/default/files/styles/development_detail_large/public/1508%20Grafton.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/DevelopmentDuffettHFX/photos/a.497525526925090.119495.487040377973605/767755359902104/?type=1

[portapetey]

I cant find the Post, but there was a proposal put forth for the St Mary's church parking lot at the corner of grafton and SPG. Apparently that land, as well as the front yard of the memorial library were the old pour house burial grounds. I knew about the library, but not that it extended right to the church.

See the Daily Plug on the Morning File (http://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/bring-out-your-dead-morning-file-friday-august-29-2014/)

Update:
This is the one i was referring to:
http://pdcentre.ca/construction-site/sites/default/files/styles/development_detail_large/public/1508%20Grafton.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/DevelopmentDuffettHFX/photos/a.497525526925090.119495.487040377973605/767755359902104/?type=1





Soooooo, I think I'm going to have to contradict myself. I just posted in another comment that i like a blend of old and new...but not this time. I think this looks awful. The building itself is fine, nothing special but not terrible, but the contrast with the neighbouring buildings is terrible!

[hokus83]

I cant find the Post, but there was a proposal put forth for the St Mary's church parking lot at the corner of grafton and SPG. Apparently that land, as well as the front yard of the memorial library were the old pour house burial grounds. I knew about the library, but not that it extended right to the church.




I'm not sure I'm reading you right, are you saying there is a proposal for the front yard of the memorial library? Because I think that would be a great spot for some shops with the walk way staying in-between them and the old memorial library. Though I would really miss the trees in that section a lot

[Ziobrop]

I'm not sure I'm reading you right, are you saying there is a proposal for the front yard of the memorial library? Because I think that would be a great spot for some shops with the walk way staying in-between them and the old memorial library. Though I would really miss the trees in that section a lot

no. this is for the church parking lot across the street.
The Poor House Burying Ground is under that parking lot, Grafton Street, and the font lawn of the Memorial Library.

[OldDartmouthMark]

The Poor House Burying Ground is under that parking lot, Grafton Street, and the font lawn of the Memorial Library.

Never knew that, despite having walked those areas countless times. Thanks for the link, I now have a whole different view of that street corner.

[Keith P.]

Those graves are unmarked and the souls there unrecorded, so there should be little reason not to do a respectful relocation to another site.

[counterfactual]

I fully support Keith's proposal to re-locate, but I *don't* support stopping this or any other development. I think it would be ridiculous that we end up with another ugly and useless surface parking lot and decrepit old library forever, because there was, in a previous century, a burial ground that, also in an earlier century, was paved over for the parking lot and library foundations themselves!

This development proposal has been posted here before and discussed (it's made the rounds via the developer's website). The photo Zio has posted does not give a full perspective on what they're accomplishing here, which preserves heritage buildings along Sackville while bringing some density residential (and probably some more life) to Blowers, and really improves the corner of SGR/Sackville. Kill the parking lot. YES.

The only change, would be to move the entrance to the parking garage from Blowers to either Sackville or SGR.

[Ziobrop]

Blowers would be the perfect place for the enterance for parking. It's allready the service side for the hotel, and sgr and grafton fronts are too valuable.

[counterfactual]

Blowers would be the perfect place for the enterance for parking. It's allready the service side for the hotel, and sgr and grafton fronts are too valuable.

I could see that. I mainly just would love to see this proposal approved.