[Dartmouth] M District FGN (21 Mic Mac Blvd) | ? m | ^40 Floors | Approved

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

One of my pet peeves about Halifax (and I'm sure we're not unique in this respect), is the reactionary thinking that we have to create a problem before we solve it.

It seems to depend on who is doing the planning. The province does pretty well with highways. They acquire land decades before it's needed, plan alignments, and adjust the construction schedule to the amount of growth that happens. Halifax should have had a plan laying out the path to higher capacity and higher frequency transit years ago, and that could have guided investments and where to do this kind of zoning and development. The infrastructure itself does not have to be built speculatively. It's also great to have these plans in place for when the federal government or province go through periods of infrastructure investment.

This mall development superficially looks like a bunch of others happening around Canada but there is no transit and the mall itself isn't really changing much. So it's a plan for a high density quasi-car-oriented suburb with so-so amenities and bad traffic.

[Empire]

So far there are few repercussions for not having improved transit. Streets are narrowed with bump outs and bike lanes slowing traffic, developers keep building, people keep buying and renting and everyone complains. Until there is total gridlock there likely won’t be a serious traffic management plan. I think higher frequency smaller busses with constant dedicated loops would be a huge improvement.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Empire

So far there are few repercussions for not having improved transit. Streets are narrowed with bump outs and bike lanes slowing traffic, developers keep building, people keep buying and renting and everyone complains. Until there is total gridlock there likely won’t be a serious traffic management plan. I think higher frequency smaller busses with constant dedicated loops would be a huge improvement.

The challenge is to name one city in the world where road traffic has been significantly reduced by increased transit and/or cycling, or by imposing a cost on drivers entering a city.....and don't mention Amsterdam because it has the same problem as many other cities in the world.
The latest increase in gasoline gives Premier Houston the opportunity to continue to allow many provincial employees to work from home, and to seriously consider moving provincial office workers off the peninsula.
If the mid-east conflict continues for several months inflation will become a major problem and the Canadian economy will face serious problems. Provincial and municipal budgets will need considerable revision. HRM has never used hedging to mitigate cost pressures on fuel purchases and neither has the province.
Back in 1969 I flew from Kharg Island to Tehran and then on to London and in earlier years I was frequently in many parts of the Persian Gulf. Monsoon season is just 3 months away and clueless Trump now wants other countries to help his stupid foray, best we stay out of his mess.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The challenge is to name one city in the world where road traffic has been significantly reduced by increased transit and/or cycling, or by imposing a cost on drivers entering a city.....

I think you (and people in general) are looking at transit and active transportation backwards. And that goes for both proponents and opponents.

AT and transit investments don’t eliminate traffic. They prevent traffic from becoming untenable (I.e. completely and absolutely gridlocked). For better or worse, the car is the default mode of transportation in North America (and arguably the rest of the world - yes, even Europe). Given no constraints, most people will drive because there’s much less friction. However, there are very real physical constraints on how many cars a space can accommodate.

Once you run out of space you can:

1) Build more car space. Add lanes to highways, etc. The problem with this approach is that each lane has diminishing returns as the system gets more and more complex. Worse, there are many situations where adding more car space ruins the surrounding context. How many downtowns in North America have been absolutely destroyed by car infrastructure?

2) Build alternatives that move more people in less space. This is transit and active transportation.

3) Do nothing, and watch as the city comes to a grinding halt.

Halifax is hitting the point where option 1 is no longer the way we can move forward, at least not without destroying the fabric of the city. This isn’t a discussion of morality - it’s a cold hard reality of the limits of the space available in our communities.

New York doesn’t have transit because it’s dense; New York is dense because it has transit. Without the higher order transit systems there the city would have grinded to a halt decades ago.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The challenge is to name one city in the world where road traffic has been significantly reduced by increased transit and/or cycling, or by imposing a cost on drivers entering a city.....and don't mention Amsterdam because it has the same problem as many other cities in the world.

Where has traffic been reduced by imposing a cost to enter? Most recently, New York City, by a lot.

For transit, well, there are actually tons of examples in planning and academic literature where new rail or bus lines have resulted in reduced traffic. But there's a common-sense element here: what if Halifax Transit was eliminated, and the 10-15 percent of people in who use it to commute used cars instead. It's self-evident that traffic would increase.

The same can be said for cycling, though not at this point in Halifax. But developing active-transit infrastrucure is not just about congestion, it's also about providing a safer and easier way for cyclists to travel. That's a worthy enough goal on its own. Generally they take little to no space away for auto infrastructure, and it really shouldn't be super-controversial.

I also find all this "move workers off the peninsula" stuff baffling. Move them to where? Moving them off the peninsula won't necessarily make it easier or faster for them all to get to work. Indeed, you'll surely be moving the office farther for some, and if the idea is to move it into suburban office parks, they have their own traffic issues. You'll also make transit much less practical for workers.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

This mall development superficially looks like a bunch of others happening around Canada but there is no transit and the mall itself isn't really changing much. So it's a plan for a high density quasi-car-oriented suburb with so-so amenities and bad traffic.

I find myself wondering if this entire scheme for MMM hasn't already missed the boat. The mall itself is not doing well, and doesn't really have a whole lot of stores and services that support the immediate neighborhood. Grocery, hardware, home improvement, cleaners, etc are not to be found there. I guess they are trying to transition into a higher-end fashion mall like HSC but I'm not sure of the size of the market for that.

With all of the towers already well underway in Dartmouth close to the Macdonald bridge, they will be in-market long before the first shovels go into the ground here. I can see the planning theory behind the concept of this, but without considerable support infrastructure from HRM this fairly bucolic suburban neighborhood by the lakes will be absolutely destroyed by a flood of car and diesel bus traffic. Will unchecked immigration and population growth continue until these units are ready? It could be a hard sell, especially if the feel of the area gets wrecked and the construction drives away both existing residents and the shops.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I used to walk from downtown Dartmouth to Mic Mac Mall, it's about 40 minutes.

Seriously? Mark, I can't believe I'm reading this. Even at my age, I could do a downtown-MMM-downtown round trip in 40 minutes.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

For transit, well, there are actually tons of examples in planning and academic literature where new rail or bus lines have resulted in reduced traffic. But there's a common-sense element here: what if Halifax Transit was eliminated, and the 10-15 percent of people in who use it to commute used cars instead. It's self-evident that traffic would increase.

It can happen but it's a secondary effect, while the primary benefit of transit investment is to improve transit. The ultimate goal is to provide efficient transportation options to people, for example, by giving them a train that takes 30 minutes for a trip that takes 1 hour by car. It's the same for active transportation. It's mostly for the person walking or biking, not for the person who is not using that infrastructure.

Some governments do reduce congestion through measures that increase the cost of driving, like congestion pricing or licensing fees. You see this in some places in Asia. I like these systems but I think they are politically difficult to implement in Halifax because people feel they are entitled to drive and get offended by driving-related fees (yet tolerate one of the least competitive tax environments overall in Canada). I don't agree that Halifax is an exclusively car-focused city or hates transit, but I think there is a kind of car-based chauvinism among some drivers, who think of driving as the only "serious" way to get around, and don't have a lot of sympathy for those who don't or can't drive. Many people rely on transit, walking, or biking, especially younger people and seniors.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I find myself wondering if this entire scheme for MMM hasn't already missed the boat. The mall itself is not doing well, and doesn't really have a whole lot of stores and services that support the immediate neighborhood. Grocery, hardware, home improvement, cleaners, etc are not to be found there. I guess they are trying to transition into a higher-end fashion mall like HSC but I'm not sure of the size of the market for that.

The high-end fashion mall concept may or may not work out but it might be good for the mall to become a full-service stop with a grocery store and so on, and adding towers around it would help with that. A lot of the secondary malls around here have shops that cover basic local errands. They tend to have a full sized grocery store, some smaller shops like a bakery or produce store, bank branches, pharmacy, and liquor store.

[Colin May]

During commute times subways in NY, London and Toronto are packed. The roads are packed with all manner of vehicles. Central HRM is all rock so forget a subway.
Name one city that has solved the commuting problem. People commute to London from Manchester on a Monday morning and rent a bedroom in London from Monday evening to Friday morning and then go home for the weekend... the trains are packed. I cannot comment on the thoughts of drivers because I have not spoken to many of them. The arguments for continuing the commute to the peninsula by anyone other than those who work in hospitals or university or DND or the shipyard is not sustainable.
How do you reduce the number of car commuters to the peninsula by 5,000 a day .... does HRM buy 100 buses and hire 100 drivers ?
And when will HRM obtain traffic date showing the number vehicles entering the peninsula..... data that I have had for more than 6 months, data that no councillor and no staff member has ever presented in any report to council.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

It can happen but it's a secondary effect, while the primary benefit of transit investment is to improve transit. The ultimate goal is to provide efficient transportation options to people, for example, by giving them a train that takes 30 minutes for a trip that takes 1 hour by car. It's the same for active transportation. It's mostly for the person walking or biking, not for the person who is not using that infrastructure.

Some governments do reduce congestion through measures that increase the cost of driving, like congestion pricing or licensing fees. You see this in some places in Asia. I like these systems but I think they are politically difficult to implement in Halifax because people feel they are entitled to drive and get offended by driving-related fees (yet tolerate one of the least competitive tax environments overall in Canada). I don't agree that Halifax is an exclusively car-focused city or hates transit, but I think there is a kind of car-based chauvinism among some drivers, who think of driving as the only "serious" way to get around, and don't have a lot of sympathy for those who don't or can't drive. Many people rely on transit, walking, or biking, especially younger people and seniors.

Younger/fitter people can bike if they're brave but as you say those people are mostly already biking. Those who do not cycle are highly unlikely to embrace it given that it is dangerous and really just a quicker way of walking to work out in the elements, making it unattractive on many days.

The problem here is that HRM thinks of "Transit" as buses, with a small percentage also including the ferries in that mix. Unfortunately the harbour ferries are poorly/not integrated with the buses, and the buses themselves get thrown into the stew of road congestion and are only slightly less unpleasant than any other option because they are overcrowded at rush hours, have some very dubious people on board, and are slow and uncomfortable. I used to rely on them, I know how bad they are. They are also a good place to contract colds, flu and the like. That latter point is true of any other mode of public transit but if you could get them off congested streets and into their own ROW at least they wouldn't be so slow. Sadly I do not see that happening here in my lifetime.

The old chestnut of Halifax being built on rock thus ruling out a subway option is just that, a myth. NYC is also built on rock. Just look for old pics of the subways being built there a century ago. Much of present-day Manhattan where it meets the ocean is built on that rock that was used as landfill a long time ago. The argument against a subway is much more of a financial one these days. That makes me wonder if there are any notional estimates of what either an elevated or at-grade light rail line might cost.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The old chestnut of Halifax being built on rock thus ruling out a subway option is just that, a myth. NYC is also built on rock.

I swear Halifax is the world capital of silly excuses for why things can't be done. As you say lots of subway in NYC was built through rock and it's true in many cities going back to the 1800s. Softer or water-logged material can present engineering challenges too. It also seems wrong to talk about all-or-nothing choices of underground or above-ground infrastructure. Many transit lines are a mix of above-ground, below ground, elevated, mixed traffic or dedicated. It's not outlandish to imagine some kind of tunneled portion for LRT one day.

But the city does get a decent transit route it likely won't help much with congestion in road network. It'll be a better alternative to taking congested streets.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Younger/fitter people can bike if they're brave but as you say those people are mostly already biking.

Improved batteries have really changed this, whether it's an electric bike or scooter. They are good for short to medium length trips (5 km) which are a bit long to walk. In Halifax this covers a lot of trips including commutes.

It's true they don't do as well in bad weather but I'm not sure Halifax is really that much of an outlier. Most places have some mix of heat, cold, rain, snow, etc. If you can only use the bike or scooter 30% of the time it's still probably worth it as they cost a tiny fraction of what a car costs.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Saul Goode

Seriously? Mark, I can't believe I'm reading this. Even at my age, I could do a downtown-MMM-downtown round trip in 40 minutes.

Well, TBH it's been many years since I lived in the area. I thought it was roughly 30 min, but I double checked walk times on Google maps and it indicated 45 min from ferry terminal to MMM. So I rounded it down to 40 thinking that my memory has failed me yet again (lol).

So it appears you are covering 6 km in 40 minutes, which works out to 9 km/h. Wikipedia suggests that average walking speed ranges between 4.0 and 5.9 km/h, so you must really be cooking it when you walk. Impressive!

[JET]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Well, TBH it's been many years since I lived in the area. I thought it was roughly 30 min, but I double checked walk times on Google maps and it indicated 45 min from ferry terminal to MMM. So I rounded it down to 40 thinking that my memory has failed me yet again (lol).

So it appears you are covering 6 km in 40 minutes, which works out to 9 km/h. Wikipedia suggests that average walking speed ranges between 4.0 and 5.9 km/h, so you must really be cooking it when you walk. Impressive!

I used to live in North end Halifax, and a trip to HSC was a half day excursión on the bus.
On moving to Dartmouth it was a ten minute trip to MMM on the bus.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The old chestnut of Halifax being built on rock thus ruling out a subway option is just that, a myth. NYC is also built on rock. Just look for old pics of the subways being built there a century ago. Much of present-day Manhattan where it meets the ocean is built on that rock that was used as landfill a long time ago. The argument against a subway is much more of a financial one these days. That makes me wonder if there are any notional estimates of what either an elevated or at-grade light rail line might cost.

It is amusing to hear that a subway cannot be built in bedrock. Many subway lines are built as an open cut and then covered. We have our own open cut built in bedrock. Could have been a subway line. There is a 5ft diameter CSO tunnel that extends from Brunswick Street to the sewage treatment on Upper Water. This tunnel was bored through solid bedrock and as mentioned you have a ready made support structure. A subway line requires approx. 10ft diameter so we were half way there. I think a subway line could work with federal money. Robie & Spring garden.

[Empire]

Build a subway in bedrock:

https://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/civil/subway1.htm

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Well, TBH it's been many years since I lived in the area. I thought it was roughly 30 min, but I double checked walk times on Google maps and it indicated 45 min from ferry terminal to MMM. So I rounded it down to 40 thinking that my memory has failed me yet again (lol).

So it appears you are covering 6 km in 40 minutes, which works out to 9 km/h. Wikipedia suggests that average walking speed ranges between 4.0 and 5.9 km/h, so you must really be cooking it when you walk. Impressive!

No, I definitely don't and can't walk that fast. I'd suggest that Google Maps is giving you nonsense figures. Or maybe it depends on the route you choose.

I grew up close to the mall; in fact, as kids, we played in a large abandoned gravel pit known in the neighborhood as "Squirrel Canyon" which sat precisely where the mall is now. I can tell you without any exaggeration (having done it many hundreds of times) that the house I grew up in was a 12-15 minute walk to the ferry terminal and, in the other direction, no more than 6-7 min to Mic Mac Mall. I'd say if it took someone 40 minutes to walk from the ferry to the mall, they'd be moving at a very leisurely stroll.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Saul Goode

No, I definitely don't and can't walk that fast. I'd suggest that Google Maps is giving you nonsense figures. Or maybe it depends on the route you choose.

I grew up close to the mall; in fact, as kids, we played in a large abandoned gravel pit known in the neighborhood as "Squirrel Canyon" which sat precisely where the mall is now. I can tell you without any exaggeration (having done it many hundreds of times) that the house I grew up in was a 12-15 minute walk to the ferry terminal and, in the other direction, no more than 6-7 min to Mic Mac Mall. I'd say if it took someone 40 minutes to walk from the ferry to the mall, they'd be moving at a very leisurely stroll.

Maybe google figured in waiting for traffic signals?

The route it gave was Alderney Gate to Ochterloney, to Chrichton Ave, to the mall. I’m not a leisurely walker, but I found it took approx 10 minutes from the flower streets to the ferry terminal when I lived there. An extra 5 min to get almost to MMM seems a little scant, but no need to clog up the thread any further deliberating it.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Here's what google says:

GoogleWalkSpeed by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


I find google maps to be very conservative sometimes suggesting it would take as much as twice as long as it actually takes me. I don't think google takes into account pathways and trails etc, rather it sticks to public roads.