Third Harbour Crossing

[beyeas]

And... now that I am done getting my frustration out... LOL

Part of my worry is that this will turn into the typical Halifax situation that NOTHING gets done. The city etc will be paralyzed by hard opinions on a new bridge versus public transit, southern versus northern routes into the city etc, and instead of leadership on the issues we get paralyzation and absolutely nothing will get done. If I had to bet, that is will be what happens. There won't be a bridge by 2016 or even 2020, nor will there be a major investment in public transit. Instead the vacuum of leadership in this city/province will result in a whole lot of nothing.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by beyeas

Wow.

Setting aside the fact that some who shall go unnamed (although mostly someone who's name starts with Keith and ends with P) that seem to want to resurrect the McCarthy hearings for anyone who dares suggest that trying to discourage the use of single-traveller cars is an evil horrible thing (aka a Communist apparently)...

The fact is there is no one @#$%ing answer, no matter what 'some' may think. To simply say that it is clear that a billion dollars to build a Gold Plated Memorial Bridge to KeithP's Legacy is a perfect idea is single-minded, in a way that is equally true for if I were to argue that taking all that money and putting it into public transit was going to result in Utopia.

I have said it before on here, a fundamental problem is the piecemeal approach to transport planning in this city. The bridge commission's job is to maximize bridge use, while Metro Transit's job is to maximize transit use. The province is responsible for 100 series highways, and the city is responsible for city streets. There is no one body that is trying to think holisticly and look at what is best taken overall. In some cases new roads will be needed to improve car flow, in some cases more public transit infrastructure will be needed. Instead all we get at the political level is the same as what some on here seem to have, a single-minded approach with no flexibility to be open to other things.

And as far as the constant digs at people who live in the 'retirement village' of the South End... last I checked we didn't have exclusivity on NIMBYs. I defy you to show me evidence that my neighbours are any more anti-development than any other area. It has been acceptable to bash people from the South End and apply certain labels, and that is complete 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. It is ok to call people who want to get out of their cars communists, but I am quite sure it would not be ok to call people who want to drive Hitler?! Glass houses and all that right?

I have railed on people in the South End also, although in this case I am in favour of rapid transportation versus the South End bridge. However, there is a good argument for having a Northwest arm bridge and rail cut roadway and it cannot even be discussed because it would pass through the South End.

I can understand why people would like to see a South End Bridge though, it would like having the Golden Gate Bridge in Halifax.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I have railed on people in the South End also, although in this case I am in favour of rapid transportation versus the South End bridge. However, there is a good argument for having a Northwest arm bridge and rail cut roadway and it cannot even be discussed because it would pass through the South End.

I can understand why people would like to see a South End Bridge though, it would like having the Golden Gate Bridge in Halifax.

Personally I think an ideal situation would be to use the railcut for LRT, and move the container terminal to the Dartmouth side where it has easy access to both the rail-lines over there and immediate access to the 100 series highways heading out. However, like I said above, more than anything it is that I wish there was one board responsible for thinking about this as a whole and making integrated rather than piecemeal decisions about all these issues. Clearly city council is not the place for productive discussion on this!

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by beyeas

Personally I think an ideal situation would be to use the railcut for LRT, and move the container terminal to the Dartmouth side where it has easy access to both the rail-lines over there and immediate access to the 100 series highways heading out. However, like I said above, more than anything it is that I wish there was one board responsible for thinking about this as a whole and making integrated rather than piecemeal decisions about all these issues. Clearly city council is not the place for productive discussion on this!

The Mayor suggested this also - you should sent an email to the Mayor and Premier (or person in charge of transportation). This is critically required in the HRM. Calgary and Copenhagen can be used as examples.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

The Mayor suggested this also - you should sent an email to the Mayor and Premier (or person in charge of transportation). This is critically required in the HRM. Calgary and Copenhagen can be used as examples.

Yeah I was surprised. One of the few things I have actually agreed with him on.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by beyeas

I wish there was one board responsible for thinking about this as a whole and making integrated rather than piecemeal decisions about all these issues. Clearly city council is not the place for productive discussion on this!

HRM is an ungainly beast and regional council is filled with powerful councillors with conflicting vested interests. Because of the size of the municipality, councillors tend to behave more like MLA's fighting for their individual constituencies rather than advocates for the municipality as a whole........

I agree, the best solution would be to develop a regional transit authority to look after these issues. This needs to be moved out of the political realm, especially in a municipality like Halifax with a weak mayor and powerful councillors. HRM is as dysfunctional as the U.S. Congress.......

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by beyeas

Personally I think an ideal situation would be to use the railcut for LRT, and move the container terminal to the Dartmouth side where it has easy access to both the rail-lines over there and immediate access to the 100 series highways heading out. However, like I said above, more than anything it is that I wish there was one board responsible for thinking about this as a whole and making integrated rather than piecemeal decisions about all these issues. Clearly city council is not the place for productive discussion on this!

Personally, I think that the rail cut could be used for heavy rail to places like Bedford and beyond (maybe two trains in in the morning and two out at night - it could be one train but only make stops in one direction - this is what is done on some routes with the GO system around Toronto). However, the LRT should focus on the heavily travelled routes such as a circular route up Spring Garden to West Mall, back down Spring Garden to downtown Halifax at Scotia Square. This could be subway where feasible and overhead track where subway is not feasible - but for it to be rapid transit it should be Right of Way for the whole route. Then at sometime, add one or two routes under the harbour.

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Personally, I think that the rail cut could be used for heavy rail to places like Bedford and beyond (maybe two trains in in the morning and two out at night - it could be one train but only make stops in one direction - this is what is done on some routes with the GO system around Toronto). However, the LRT should focus on the heavily travelled routes such as a circular route up Spring Garden to West Mall, back down Spring Garden to downtown Halifax at Scotia Square. This could be subway where feasible and overhead track where subway is not feasible - but for it to be rapid transit it should be Right of Way for the whole route. Then at sometime, add one or two routes under the harbour.

Ok let me correct my "ideal" statement... by ideal I mean "ideally realistic given the state of affairs in Halifax". I totally agree with you that the LRT/subway system that you describe would be awesome. But realistically I don't see us going from what we have to that anytime in the next 20 years. What I do think is maybe possible, just to get Halifax used to trains as daily transit, is using the rail cut etc with something like limited stops in Bedford, Rockingham, Mumford (I didn't do a good job describing that... others on here have done better). Something along those lines MIGHT be possible here in Halifax in the next while (maybe), but I don't see this city having the stones to go from what we have now to a full out service like you described (as much as I would love it to be otherwise).

[something_witty]

It seems like everyone is missing the point of a third bridge: to go to Dartmouth.

You all seem to be very excited for a billion dollar LRT system. An LRT system would be great, except, how do you plan on having this get to Dartmouth? There is no way they would spend another billion to have a LRT bridge/tunnel only going to Dartmouth.

If people have to take a bus, then take a ferry, then ride light rail to the rest of their destination, people will just take their cars.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by something_witty

It seems like everyone is missing the point of a third bridge: to go to Dartmouth.

You all seem to be very excited for a billion dollar LRT system. An LRT system would be great, except, how do you plan on having this get to Dartmouth? There is no way they would spend another billion to have a LRT bridge/tunnel only going to Dartmouth.

If people have to take a bus, then take a ferry, then ride light rail to the rest of their destination, people will just take their cars.

Absolutely correct - transportation only works when the mode is the simplest and least frustrating way to get somewhere. This is where heavy rail falls down with the rail cut and servicing Dartmouth - you can't get people to the Peninsula easily (if you went from the Train station; you still need a bus to go from there).

If a tunnel were built (or a bridge); it could potentially incorporate room for an LRT on the deck or in the tunnel - but there is always going to be an added cost.

An LRT system doesn't work unless it connects all the major employment centres together with residential areas and Burnside is one of those centres. In the transportation thread on rail; I posted a map of a potential rail based system (probably underground mostly) that served Dartmouth and Halifax. Here it is:


The idea was to hit many of the major employment centres on the peninsula (Hospitals/Universities/DND) and also major commercial centres (West End Mall/Halifax Shopping Centre/Downtown/Spring Garden Road) and then cross the harbour (in some fashion) and do the same there. I figured a common route (much like the Skytrain in Vancouver) through downtown would give more reason to put more high density residential there since the route would be well serviced. This doesn't solve the problem of how you get the train across the harbour though - could be it's bridge or part of a tunnel. I'm not sure.

I should add that this plan is meant to be viewed in a contextual way; incorporated with a variety of other transit methods (I've noted a ferry and I think a commuter rail from Bedford/Truro and even Tantallon is considered).

[planarchy]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

An LRT system doesn't work unless it connects all the major employment centres together with residential areas and Burnside is one of those centres. In the transportation thread on rail; I posted a map of a potential rail based system (probably underground mostly) that served Dartmouth and Halifax. Here it is:

Interesting map - as a first draft of regional transportation network. But some of these routes are bizaare. I understand your logic of trying to hit employment centres, but ignoring the potential of Agricola or Gottingen street - arguably some of the most important transit corridors and those with the most potential for redevelopment is a problem. A line through the Northend end, from at least the Hydrostone, seems like a much more critical line - with the potential to trigger further redevelopment and revitalization - than the Victoria road spur to SMU. I would also see a connection through fairview to Clayton park as more important than lines to Cole Harbour. At least Clayton Park has some density to work with.

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by planarchy

Interesting map - as a first draft of regional transportation network. But some of these routes are bizaare. I understand your logic of trying to hit employment centres, but ignoring the potential of Agricola or Gottingen street - arguably some of the most important transit corridors and those with the most potential for redevelopment is a problem. A line through the Northend end, from at least the Hydrostone, seems like a much more critical line - with the potential to trigger further redevelopment and revitalization - than the Victoria road spur to SMU. I would also see a connection through fairview to Clayton park as more important than lines to Cole Harbour. At least Clayton Park has some density to work with.

This was the first draft - I've updated the map but never got around to posting the second one. I had thought about Agicola and Gottingen streets (I think Agricola would probably be easier to redevelop comprehensively). Also, I agree about the hydrostone and I did factor that into my update.

I think mainly my view was hit the major residential areas while trying to get the major employment centres as well. Not easy!

[DigitalNinja]

I think we also need to look at places like sackville and areas further like fall river, bedford west which will be huge.
The problem is not getting around downtown, it's getting there. I think the highway from Sackville to burnside Dr. will take quite a bit of traffic out of burnside.
Bedford is another problem and will only compound when bedford west gets developed. The Bihi will be overflowing, and will need to be made into 6 lanes.
I don't really have a plan or anything like that, but Halifax seems like it is going to expand out into urban sprawl even more, and there doesn't seem like there is anything we can do about it.

[fenwick16]

Instead of building a southern bridge so that development is focused in southern Dartmouth (towards Shearwater) why not have a twin MacKay Bridge with LRT lanes and then have growth focused in Northern Halifax and Northern Dartmouth where the harbour crossing is the least expensive, and highways exist. Then have a rapid transit link to downtown Halifax, the two universities and the hospitals. The current downtown Halifax and Dartmouth will continue to be serviced directly by the ferries and buses. However, downtown Halifax and downtown Dartmouth will then tend to grow towards the North. Shannon Park could be tied by LRT to downtown Halifax and be the focal point of high density office and residential development in Dartmouth and have easy LRT access from the 100 series highways from Bedford, Sackville, Clayton Park , Fairview .... Although Shannon Park isn't currently a densely populated area, there is room to grow and land available for people to park in Dartmouth and take the LRT to downtown Halifax. One note; places like Burnside won't generate much LRT traffic during the evenings and weekends (for what that is worth). So the Burnside Park might be close to one end of a LRT route, but the LRT shouldn't necessarily pass through it. On the other hand, the universities, hospitals and downtown Halifax will generate LRT traffic 7 days a week.

I really think that encouraging growth in Southern Halifax is a mistake. There is simply a lack of real estate for future growth. I am thinking in terms of the HRM growing to 800,000 plus people.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

The problem is not getting around downtown, it's getting there.

Exactly!!

That's why you need to concentrate on commuter rail/LRT to get people from the commuter watershed onto the peninsula. If this burden is removed from the roadways then a lot of the problem will disappear.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I really think that encouraging growth in Southern Halifax is a mistake. There is simply a lack of real estate for future growth. I am thinking in terms of the HRM growing to 800,000 plus people.

It's not about encouraging growth in southern parts of the peninsula! It's about having something that will allow transport to/from areas of south Dartmouth to the mainland on the Halifax side. And most importantly, it is about planning for the inevitable growth that the city will experience in the next few decades, whether some like it or not.

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

It's not about encouraging growth in southern parts of the peninsula! It's about having something that will allow transport to/from areas of south Dartmouth to the mainland on the Halifax side. And most importantly, it is about planning for the inevitable growth that the city will experience in the next few decades, whether some like it or not.

Yes. There are some good illustrations of this in the Bridge Commission report linked to earlier. It shows traffic density with red lines (thicker and thinner) throughout the peninsula under the various scenarios. The current scenario is heavily weighted to traffic density in the north. The second northern bridge scenario cause unbelievable traffic density to the north of downtown, and exacerbates bottlenecks in Dartmouth, funneling drivers from all over southern Dartmouth, Woodside, Penhorn, Colby Village, Forrest Hills all the way north to cross the harbour, then back south to DT. The southern options create a much more balanced traffic pattern throughout the peninsula, allowing traffic to egress halifax in sixth directions, and balances commuter traffic on the Dartmouth side as well.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

It's not about encouraging growth in southern parts of the peninsula! It's about having something that will allow transport to/from areas of south Dartmouth to the mainland on the Halifax side. And most importantly, it is about planning for the inevitable growth that the city will experience in the next few decades, whether some like it or not.

I don't see why the growth must be in the southern part of Dartmouth when there is lots of land available in the northern part of Dartmouth, northern parts of Halifax, west of Halifax and east of Dartmouth. The Southern Bridge will be so costly and will require such high tolls that encouraging growth in southern Dartmouth seems like a bad idea. Regardless, even if growth occurs in southern Dartmouth then people can take the highway to another MacKay Bridge.

The plan could be - not to encourage growth in southern Dartmouth.

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

I don't see why the growth must be in the southern part of Dartmouth when there is lots of land available in the northern part of Dartmouth, northern parts of Halifax, west of Halifax and east of Dartmouth. The Southern Bridge will be so costly and will require such high tolls that encouraging growth in southern Dartmouth seems like a bad idea. Regardless, even if growth occurs in southern Dartmouth then people can take the highway to another MacKay Bridge.

The plan could be - not to encourage growth in southern Dartmouth.

Its an identified growth area in the regional plan. And its already grown quite a bit since 1990, so in many ways the demand is already there. Commuters are already making lengthy trips all the way north through Dartmouth, across the harbour then back south through Halifax. Its not sensible to force all traffic into the same horseshoe pattern through the city. All these commuters will be dumped onto the northern end of the peninsula, and then have to compete with the huge volumes of traffic that will be coming in from everywhere else in Dartmouth, Bedford, Hammonds Plains.

Traffic flow is like plumbing or electrics. We wouldn't wire our homes this way, tacking the dryer and stove onto the same circuit as the bathroom razor or porch light. Why do it with traffic? Its neither good for congestion nor the environment.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by terrynorthend

Its an identified growth area in the regional plan. And its already grown quite a bit since 1990, so in many ways the demand is already there. Commuters are already making lengthy trips all the way north through Dartmouth, across the harbour then back south through Halifax. Its not sensible to force all traffic into the same horseshoe pattern through the city. All these commuters will be dumped onto the northern end of the peninsula, and then have to compete with the huge volumes of traffic that will be coming in from everywhere else in Dartmouth, Bedford, Hammonds Plains.

Excellent point. I am on the fence about the third bridge but if south Dartmouth is expected to grow significantly then the need probably is there for this initiative. Traffic patterns would have to be carefully planned on the peninsula side but it may be feasible.

Regardless, Halterm still needs to be relocated and the railcut given over to commuter rail.......