General Updates and News

[Northend Guy]

Great Summary! It'll be hard to recognize this part of town in a couple of years! Nice to see that most of it *appears* to be of pretty decent quality too.

[someone123]

The Design Review Committee looked at at least 4 proposals tonight: Gerrard Lodge, NFB, Bank of Canada, and Cunard.

According to ANS, the reaction to BoC was favourable but there were some negative comments about Cunard ("looks like a cruise ship on its side!" is an old trope now). These weren't formally reviewed, but the developer said he is planning to get started on BoC in the fall and then do the Cunard block in the fall of 2014. These two buildings, if and when they are built, will be pretty huge for the downtown area since they have so many units.

Gerrard Lodge and NFB were both approved. The Gerrard Lodge proposal involves restoring the northern side of the duplex (the south was done a few years ago) and adding some attached townhouses. Not sure when that will be started, but it seems like NFB could begin shortly after approval.

[teddifax]

Originally Posted by someone123

Here's a map of some of the North End proposals:



These renderings are from http://www.halifax.ca/planning/

Is there a feed for the Gottingen and Prince William site?

[Duff]

This was the "upgrade" for The Plaza @ 1881 Brunswick. I wish they would re-do the entire building.

[HalifaxRetales]

This looks like it's happening

[Keith P.]

That's the park where Gloria bought a bunch of "outdoor fitness equipment" from the local outfit that I believe went bankrupt. From what I understand the stuff has rapidly deteriorated after being out in the elements and will need to be junked. Last year she spent $25K of our money on a useless outdoor beehive over in a park down the street that had damage over the winter, but which only a group of ex-hippies uses anyway. I suspect the skatepark may actually get some use if they don't screw it up.

[Nifta]

Originally Posted by Duff

This was the "upgrade" for The Plaza @ 1881 Brunswick. I wish they would re-do the entire building.

Agreed! Just paint those tan-coloured metal sidings beneath the windows to a black colour and it would look so much more modern!

A shame that the 'upgrade' also removed the first floor garden and trees. Makes the street look far less 'liveable'.

[Jstaleness]

I wanted to share a CBC Mainstreet Segment that talks about what type of City Halifax is. Are we a centre core Downtown or are we a Beltway city?

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/NS/Audio/ID/2401287980/

From cbc.ca/ns

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Jstaleness

I wanted to share a CBC Mainstreet Segment that talks about what type of City Halifax is. Are we a centre core Downtown or are we a Beltway city?

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/NS/Audio/ID/2401287980/

From cbc.ca/ns

Interesting, although there are a lot of obvious points people failed to bring up, like the fact that a huge percentage of the region's employment is concentrated on the peninsula. It's not dispersed throughout the metro area.

It is fine to talk about Hubbards, but it is also important to realize that these places are small towns with a tiny percentage of the population of the municipality. They do not need 50% of the attention.

It is also important to note that, while the city missed its urban infill targets, there is still a ton of urban infill happening. It is a little weird that so many people are complaining about the state of the urban core when we're in the middle of the biggest spike in urban construction in about 30 years. I tend to agree with Sue Uteck that the city now has to play catch-up after some bad decisions in the past. It is still behind because of 1989-2005 but the trend in recent years is much more positive. I think part of the reason why people don't see things this way is that they remember how shabby the city was in, say, 2001.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Jstaleness

I wanted to share a CBC Mainstreet Segment that talks about what type of City Halifax is. Are we a centre core Downtown or are we a Beltway city?

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/NS/Audio/ID/2401287980/

From cbc.ca/ns

Oh, God. I can't believe that people are taking Poulton's dumb idea seriously.

This guy gets too much credit simply because he happened to be in the Dal planning department years ago. He's not a planner, but basically a public-choice / economic theorist. He's very market-centric in his planning thinking.

His whole argument is based on a entirely false premise-- that Halifax's geography is not conducive to a revitalized downtown as a hub city, and that instead we should be some shitty Beltway city like Pheonix, Arizona.

Some of the greatest cities in the world are located on peninsulas-- NYC, San Francisco, Istanbul, Cape Town, Athens, etc.

As for Halifax, the reason why all of the growth has happened outside the core, is based on neglect of proper planning in this city; Poulton's ideas is to double down on this shitty result, resulting in unhealthy lifestyles, increased costs, taxes, infrastructure extension, etc, etc, etc.

Please, Professor, stay in retirement. Or drive to Phoenix, I'm sure you'll find a Beltway Parking Lot of your Dreams.

[counterfactual]

Pardon me for changing the discussion, but whatever happened to the Spring Garden Rd Makeover, planned and discussed a few years back?

http://www.halifax.ca/RealPropertyPlanni...ocuments/SpringGardenRoadFinalReport.pdf

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=154781

Was this ever passed? Or was it, as usual, passed "in principle" with no concrete action ever taken by Council?

Or was it, also as usual, as typical of HRM planning: HRM fails to properly consult. HRM fails to properly communicate intentions. HRM staff tables plan. Spring Garden merchants and residents pan it. HRM staff punt redevelopment plan.

Nothing gets done.

[Keith P.]

Well, it got derailed because of an apparent hidden agenda by HRM to turn it into a pedestrian only street at some point and the merchants quite rightly went ballistic. While there was some argument whether that was actually the intent it was contained in the consultant's report as a "future requirement as per HRM by Design" and nobody within HRM could explain it away. The problem was that the options went well beyond undergrounding and the businesses there did not like much of what was proposed.

[someone123]

Some of this is happening now as part of the Queen Street renewal project that will tie in with the landscaping happening for the library.

I agree that it was a big mistake not to do the whole street though, particularly given that part of it is already being torn up. Dresden Row and South Park could use some streetscape improvements too.

I also agree that pedestrian-only for Spring Garden would be a big mistake. Part of what makes a busy commercial area work in the first place is the traffic, and even transit-only wouldn't help much because the diesel buses are some of the worst vehicles on that street.

Granville Street in Vancouver has worked out nicely but it is a mix of transit-only and mixed traffic at different times and it has electric buses and rapid transit service, not just diesel buses. The improved transit makes a huge difference in terms of accessibility and overall pleasantness.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Oh, God. I can't believe that people are taking Poulton's dumb idea seriously.

This guy gets too much credit simply because he happened to be in the Dal planning department years ago. He's not a planner, but basically a public-choice / economic theorist. He's very market-centric in his planning thinking.

His whole argument is based on a entirely false premise-- that Halifax's geography is not conducive to a revitalized downtown as a hub city, and that instead we should be some shitty Beltway city like Pheonix, Arizona.

Some of the greatest cities in the world are located on peninsulas-- NYC, San Francisco, Istanbul, Cape Town, Athens, etc.

As for Halifax, the reason why all of the growth has happened outside the core, is based on neglect of proper planning in this city; Poulton's ideas is to double down on this shitty result, resulting in unhealthy lifestyles, increased costs, taxes, infrastructure extension, etc, etc, etc.

Please, Professor, stay in retirement. Or drive to Phoenix, I'm sure you'll find a Beltway Parking Lot of your Dreams.

I don't entirely agree with Poulton but I don't entirely disagree either. There would certainly be a benefit to concentrating more employment/other activity in existing suburban areas, like Clayton Park, Bedford, Spryfield, etc. and developing higher density around the interchanges of the 111 could actually result in some interesting TOD, if the circ were used as the basis for a proper BRT system. Allowing those living in the suburbs to work/play close to home rather than having to commute downtown all the time is just much a part of the equation as increasing residential density downtown, in my opinion. I think the city/region needs a balance of both, and from what I understand this is the plan anyway. There's a big difference between, say, expanding Bayer's Lake or Burnside, and adding more population/commercial activity within Clayton Park and other established neighbourhoods.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Hali87

There would certainly be a benefit to concentrating more employment/other activity in existing suburban areas, like Clayton Park, Bedford, Spryfield, etc. and developing higher density around the interchanges of the 111 could actually result in some interesting TOD, if the circ were used as the basis for a proper BRT system.

What are the chances that HRM would implement this correctly though, particularly given the predilictions of regional council, Metro Transit, and the province's tendency to direct disporportionate amounts of funds into highway construction? The city has largely failed to build a good transit system since amalgamation. In the absence of transit, larger suburban employment nodes would just result in a new ring of auto-oriented sprawl and more environmental and budgetary problems. And of course the city has tons of old planning rules in the suburbs that are basically designed to stop anything but low-density, auto-oriented sprawl. Those would all have to be fixed through a process like HbD covering a much larger area.

I like the focus on investment in the urban core because it's the simplest solution. If more residential and more offices are built on the peninsula, a large percentage of those people will walk to work or take transit and the increased business will have a positive impact on pre-existing neighbourhoods.

The model of people working and playing closer to home in the suburbs seems a bit off to me too. There are a lot of people who move out as far as they can while still having a reasonable commute. They do this to get more space, and they are effectively subsidized so that they can commute a lot more than would otherwise be economically feasible. If you put jobs for these people in Clayton Park instead of downtown it just means that they'll move out to Hubbards instead of Tantallon. They're not going to switch to BRT. Fixing this is again a huge political problem because it involves reforming the city's outdated tax system.

[Keith P.]

You can't have a beltway without roads, and we won't or can't build roads here. The concept might make sense with a third harbour bridge, an Arm bridge, and suitable connections to the MacKay at the other end to complete the beltway. But none of those are possible with the current HRM mindset and in fact our mayor has stated his opposition to the concept of new bridges, keeping us locked into our 1950s road network with container trucks running through the heart of downtown for another generation. Even something as simple as getting from the Halifax end of the MacKay bridge to Bayers Lake requires several 90 degree and 180 degree turns, numerous sets of traffic lights, and travel on several residential streets. Utterly ridiculous.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by someone123

If you put jobs for these people in Clayton Park instead of downtown it just means that they'll move out to Hubbards instead of Tantallon.

Some will, but others won't. A lot of people do move to the suburbs because they like the suburban lifestyle, but others simply live there because their family/significant other wants to live there for financial reasons (either for lower rent or because they're living with family or roommates who choose to live there) or because their significant other wants to live there, etc. Whether rents would remain cheaper off-peninsula if there were better infrastructure/job options is something I'm not sure about. There are also significant differences between Clayton Park and Tantallon and Hubbards. I also wouldn't really envision BRT running to Tantallon or Hubbards; I was thinking more along actual built-up corridors like the 102 as far as Bedford/Sackville and the 111.

I agree though that tax reform should happen sooner rather than later.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Hali87

Some will, but others won't. A lot of people do move to the suburbs because they like the suburban lifestyle, but others simply live there because their family/significant other wants to live there for financial reasons (either for lower rent or because they're living with family or roommates who choose to live there) or because their significant other wants to live there, etc. Whether rents would remain cheaper off-peninsula if there were better infrastructure/job options is something I'm not sure about. There are also significant differences between Clayton Park and Tantallon and Hubbards. I also wouldn't really envision BRT running to Tantallon or Hubbards; I was thinking more along actual built-up corridors like the 102 as far as Bedford/Sackville and the 111.

I agree though that tax reform should happen sooner rather than later.

You're basically advocating a planning approach that would create a number of different downtown-like centers through out the suburbs. Why the hell would we spend the time (HRMxD's x 20 as someone1234 said) and huge amounts of money (infratructure / extensions / road construction) when we *already have a downtown now that is being neglected*.

And, anyways, this is basically a formalization (and formal funding of) the approach HRM has taken over the last 20+ years by default, that is, by virtue of shitty planning and neglect-- the donut effect of suburban growth, and all the associated costs-- both financial and human (ie health)-- that come with it.

We need precisely the opposite of what Poulton is advocating. We need HRM to double down on urban growth and downtown investment, something this city hasn't done since the 1940s and 1950s. Then, once downtown is back to 1950s levels of density, and comparable levels of investment to other major urban centers in this country, we can re-adjust for more "balance". Because the balance has, IMHO, entirely slanted the other way, towards endless sprawl.

In other words, Poulton needs to STFU.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by someone123

Some of this is happening now as part of the Queen Street renewal project that will tie in with the landscaping happening for the library.

I agree that it was a big mistake not to do the whole street though, particularly given that part of it is already being torn up. Dresden Row and South Park could use some streetscape improvements too.

I also agree that pedestrian-only for Spring Garden would be a big mistake. Part of what makes a busy commercial area work in the first place is the traffic, and even transit-only wouldn't help much because the diesel buses are some of the worst vehicles on that street.

Granville Street in Vancouver has worked out nicely but it is a mix of transit-only and mixed traffic at different times and it has electric buses and rapid transit service, not just diesel buses. The improved transit makes a huge difference in terms of accessibility and overall pleasantness.

Are there any plans to turf some of these ridiculous loud and dirty diesel buses for quieter electric buses anytime soon? And how about a few mixed rapid transit options in the city?

I've always liked the idea of a streetcar that begins at the ferry terminal (Lower Water Street & Duke) and runs up Duke Street to Argyle or Barrington.

This would a great connection between the waterfront and areas up the hill. Tourists would love it, bringing them from the waterfront to Argyle/Barrington, two historic streets, and of course closer to the Citadel.

Commuters would love it because people who take the Ferry wouldn't have to walk from the waterfront all the way up to Barrington or Duke Bus Terminal to catch connecting buses further uptown, or would bring them up the hill closer to their destination.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

You're basically advocating a planning approach that would create a number of different downtown-like centers through out the suburbs. Why the hell would we spend the time (HRMxD's x 20 as someone1234 said) and huge amounts of money (infratructure / extensions / road construction) when we *already have a downtown now that is being neglected*

I didn't mean that we should stop focusing efforts on downtown (which I suppose is largely what Poulton was saying), but rather that in addition to focusing efforts downtown, we should also focus at least some efforts into making Mainland Halifax/Dartmouth/Cole Harbour/Bedford/Sackville more than just bedroom communities. I guess the alternative is to just let them stay extremely auto-oriented and offering little in terms of employment forever but this really sucks for people who live there, particularly those who grow up there. It's easy to say "they should just move to the peninsula" but it's not always that simple. It would make more sense to put at least some effort into creating higher-density, mixed-use nodes off the peninsula; among many other things, this would help mitigate traffic issues on the peninsula.

I'm not saying "let's give up on downtown", I'm saying "we don't need to accept that off-peninsula neighbourhoods have to be dull, auto-dependent bedroom communities forever". Bear in mind that the regional plan assumes that 50% of the growth over the plan's lifespan will take place in suburban areas. Even if the numbers are retooled it seems unrealistic (and not really practical, and I know that some people will hate me for this, but not really desirable) to expect 100% of all growth to occur on the Peninsula and DT Dartmouth Should all of these new residents have to commute downtown?