HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth


    Sutton Place Nova Centre in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Halifax Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3701  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 1:18 PM
ns_kid's Avatar
ns_kid ns_kid is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by counterfactual View Post
Why are streetcars never debated or pitched at Council?
There is one significant reason why alternative public transportation options are rarely seriously considered in this region: there is virtually no expertise or understanding in the provincial department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, or in HRM's bureaucracy, that doesn't involve asphalt.

There are almost sixty cities in the US and Canada with light rail, heavy rail, streetcar and/or subway systems in operation or in various stages of planning. Yet on the rare occasions the subject has been raised in this city the response from top bureaucrats and politicians has generally been swift: we're too small; we can't afford it.

Of course, we measure our "investment" in roads and highways by an entirely different yardstick. That's because pols have known for decades that laying down pavement is a sure vote-getter. In Nova Scotia last year we spent roughly half a billion dollars (capital and operating) to build and maintain roads. Users paid for only about half of that; the rest came from the taxpayers' pockets.

(The ratio is even more startling when it comes to truck transport. Studies have shown that the road wear caused by heavy trucks far exceeds what their operators pay in taxes and fees, except in a few progressive jurisdictions that have introduced weight-distance taxes. So the next time you curse some slow-moving rig on the highway, find comfort in knowing that you're paying heavily to subsidize that trucker.)

Forgive the digression, but the fundamental point remains: if we judged roads by the same standard we apply to public transport, we'd return a lot of suburban streets and lightly used highways to pasture.

Now that the courts have apparently settled the city's fight with CN on the responsibility to fix crumbling overpasses, its been reported we might be ready to re-engage with the railway on the possibility of introducing some form of rail transit to the city. Don't hold your breath. Overcoming the naysayers will require some strong champions and a lot of public support.

(Another aside: I have been curious about the redevelopment of the Halifax Shipyards lands. The original rail corridor, which extended through Africville and Richmond to the foot of Cornwallis Street, has been paved over but remained essentially intact. Bringing rail transit to the downtown core will require that this corridor remain open through the shipyard.)

Anyway, to get back to the original and more modest suggestion about streetcars, in fact several American cities have returned streetcars to downtown streets in recent years, including New Orleans, Tampa, Philadelphia and Little Rock. They serve as reliable urban transporation and as tourist draws. It is a model Halifax would do well to study. Just don't expect the leadership to come from city staff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3702  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 2:42 PM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,103
Looks like a new crane is being undloaded down there. It is showing up in blue shipping containers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3703  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 3:09 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,555
I wouldn't actually be thrilled about running streetcars in mixed traffic--they're basically buses with higher maintenance costs. (When I moved to Toronto, I though the streetcars were cool. Now I loathe them because they're overcrowded, lumbering, traffic-obstructing beasts that take can 40 minutes to go ten blocks during rush hour.)

But a true on-street LRT, with a dedicated ROW, would be a different story. Indeed, people say there's "nowhere" to run a rail system--well, has anyone suggested simply closing a street or two, partly or entirely, to auto traffic and converting it to an ROW corridor? If it's designed properly and attracts sufficient ridership, it'll take enough cars off the road to more than make up the added congestion on other streets.

Robie could probably accomodate north/south LRT with only partial lane closures (see Toronto's St. Clair ROW) and University could probably do so without any lane closures going east/west. Shut down Morris to traffic and keep heading east. Maybe I'm totally out to lunch and that's crazy from a traffic-engineering perspective, but if so, I'd like someone to explain why.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3704  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2013, 11:32 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
I wouldn't actually be thrilled about running streetcars in mixed traffic--they're basically buses with higher maintenance costs. (When I moved to Toronto, I though the streetcars were cool. Now I loathe them because they're overcrowded, lumbering, traffic-obstructing beasts that take can 40 minutes to go ten blocks during rush hour.)

But a true on-street LRT, with a dedicated ROW, would be a different story. Indeed, people say there's "nowhere" to run a rail system--well, has anyone suggested simply closing a street or two, partly or entirely, to auto traffic and converting it to an ROW corridor? If it's designed properly and attracts sufficient ridership, it'll take enough cars off the road to more than make up the added congestion on other streets.

.
.
.
I agree completely. I hate the TTC streetcars with a passion and have since I moved to the GTA 33 years ago. Navigating the embedded rails, avoiding offloaded passengers, avoiding collision with on-street locomotives (i.e. streetcars), riding on heavy, slow clunkers are all reasons why I wonder why anyone would want such a thing in Halifax (I am sure that Halifax got rid of them for a reason). On the other hand ROW corridors make a lot of sense whether it be light rail or a BRT (Bus Rapid Transit).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3705  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 1:53 AM
counterfactual counterfactual is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 1,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
I wouldn't actually be thrilled about running streetcars in mixed traffic--they're basically buses with higher maintenance costs. (When I moved to Toronto, I though the streetcars were cool. Now I loathe them because they're overcrowded, lumbering, traffic-obstructing beasts that take can 40 minutes to go ten blocks during rush hour.)

But a true on-street LRT, with a dedicated ROW, would be a different story. Indeed, people say there's "nowhere" to run a rail system--well, has anyone suggested simply closing a street or two, partly or entirely, to auto traffic and converting it to an ROW corridor? If it's designed properly and attracts sufficient ridership, it'll take enough cars off the road to more than make up the added congestion on other streets.

Robie could probably accomodate north/south LRT with only partial lane closures (see Toronto's St. Clair ROW) and University could probably do so without any lane closures going east/west. Shut down Morris to traffic and keep heading east. Maybe I'm totally out to lunch and that's crazy from a traffic-engineering perspective, but if so, I'd like someone to explain why.
Why must we do on-street LRT? Why not go off street? As on the corridor ns_kid mentioned above?

And if we can't get CN rail to share the railroad tracks, fuck them, and lets pave a dedicated high speed bus route right beside the tracks all along the harbour. I remember this was an idea that people had raised at the last Cogswell "Re-Imagining" gathering a few months back.

This way, we don't takeover any existing streets (this will never happen with current HRM staff, which I think are the biggest barrier to any kind of real, forward looking change).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3706  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 1:57 AM
hoser111's Avatar
hoser111 hoser111 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 353
Why must we highjack this thread? I'm pretty sure there's one on transportation?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3707  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 2:04 AM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by counterfactual View Post
Why must we do on-street LRT? Why not go off street? As on the corridor ns_kid mentioned above?

And if we can't get CN rail to share the railroad tracks, fuck them, and lets pave a dedicated high speed bus route right beside the tracks all along the harbour. I remember this was an idea that people had raised at the last Cogswell "Re-Imagining" gathering a few months back.

This way, we don't takeover any existing streets (this will never happen with current HRM staff, which I think are the biggest barrier to any kind of real, forward looking change).
I don't know enough about rail gauges, rail-sharing, etc., to know if that's feasible. Certainly something to look into if it is, but two potential problems I can think of:

1. Running along the rail cut would circumvent the peninsula, running around the Arm and the deep south end, so it wouldn't be nearly as useful as means of getting around the city. Running an LRT up and down Robie (or Cogswell/Bell Road/South Park?) and then east to downtown would bring people right into the heart of the city.

2. I'd like to think there's a chance that inter-city rail transport might again pick up in Canada, and the city would get more frequent rail service.

I don't think it HAS to run on street, but if we want it to run through the heart of the city without bulldozing a huge swath of said city, it'd kind've have to.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3708  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 3:08 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoser111 View Post
Why must we highjack this thread? I'm pretty sure there's one on transportation?
Good point. This is the Nova Centre thread.

It is good to see the steady progress taking place. Ziobrop has a picture of the third crane going up. Thanks again to Ziobrop for all the pictures.

(source: http://fillingtheholehfx.tumblr.com/ )
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3709  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 3:50 AM
counterfactual counterfactual is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 1,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by ns_kid View Post
There is one significant reason why alternative public transportation options are rarely seriously considered in this region: there is virtually no expertise or understanding in the provincial department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, or in HRM's bureaucracy, that doesn't involve asphalt.

There are almost sixty cities in the US and Canada with light rail, heavy rail, streetcar and/or subway systems in operation or in various stages of planning. Yet on the rare occasions the subject has been raised in this city the response from top bureaucrats and politicians has generally been swift: we're too small; we can't afford it.

Of course, we measure our "investment" in roads and highways by an entirely different yardstick. That's because pols have known for decades that laying down pavement is a sure vote-getter. In Nova Scotia last year we spent roughly half a billion dollars (capital and operating) to build and maintain roads. Users paid for only about half of that; the rest came from the taxpayers' pockets.

(The ratio is even more startling when it comes to truck transport. Studies have shown that the road wear caused by heavy trucks far exceeds what their operators pay in taxes and fees, except in a few progressive jurisdictions that have introduced weight-distance taxes. So the next time you curse some slow-moving rig on the highway, find comfort in knowing that you're paying heavily to subsidize that trucker.)

Forgive the digression, but the fundamental point remains: if we judged roads by the same standard we apply to public transport, we'd return a lot of suburban streets and lightly used highways to pasture.

Now that the courts have apparently settled the city's fight with CN on the responsibility to fix crumbling overpasses, its been reported we might be ready to re-engage with the railway on the possibility of introducing some form of rail transit to the city. Don't hold your breath. Overcoming the naysayers will require some strong champions and a lot of public support.

(Another aside: I have been curious about the redevelopment of the Halifax Shipyards lands. The original rail corridor, which extended through Africville and Richmond to the foot of Cornwallis Street, has been paved over but remained essentially intact. Bringing rail transit to the downtown core will require that this corridor remain open through the shipyard.)

Anyway, to get back to the original and more modest suggestion about streetcars, in fact several American cities have returned streetcars to downtown streets in recent years, including New Orleans, Tampa, Philadelphia and Little Rock. They serve as reliable urban transporation and as tourist draws. It is a model Halifax would do well to study. Just don't expect the leadership to come from city staff.
Great post!

Completely agree about HRM bureaucracy.

IMHO, for example, the only reason why we got HRMxD, is because Andy Filmore went in there, busted heads, and basically dragged the bureaucracy kicking and screaming for several years, and got HRMxD (at least the first central phase) done.

Then they basically forced him out. Too much of a change agent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3710  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 4:02 AM
teddifax's Avatar
teddifax teddifax is offline
Halifax Promoter!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax
Posts: 1,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Good point. This is the Nova Centre thread.

It is good to see the steady progress taking place. Ziobrop has a picture of the third crane going up. Thanks again to Ziobrop for all the pictures.

(source: http://fillingtheholehfx.tumblr.com/ )
Again, please don't hijack this thread and keep it for the Nova Centre.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3711  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 11:08 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by teddifax View Post
Again, please don't hijack this thread and keep it for the Nova Centre.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3712  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 11:51 AM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,103
Based on the photos it looks to be a flat topped crane as shown below:

Source
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3713  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 2:51 PM
ns_kid's Avatar
ns_kid ns_kid is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoser111 View Post
Why must we highjack this thread? I'm pretty sure there's one on transportation?
Yes there is. I don't think anyone intended to hijack the thread. The conversation began with discussions round the latest cause celebre of Nova Centre naysayers, the closure of one block of Grafton Street (and possibly, periodically, Argyle) to vehicular traffic. That morphed into a discussion about downtown traffic in general. To return to the original point, some of us find it a little bizarre that the STV coalition, Heritage Trust and their acolytes are now standing up to keep Grafton Street safe for the automobile. I hope even they appreciate the irony.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3714  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 8:41 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by ns_kid View Post
Users paid for only about half of that; the rest came from the taxpayers' pockets.

(The ratio is even more startling when it comes to truck transport. Studies have shown that the road wear caused by heavy trucks far exceeds what their operators pay in taxes and fees, except in a few progressive jurisdictions that have introduced weight-distance taxes. So the next time you curse some slow-moving rig on the highway, find comfort in knowing that you're paying heavily to subsidize that trucker.)
One more slight hijack (sorry), but to bring this a little closer to reality, remember that we are all "users" in one way or another. Whether it be through taking the bus, riding on your bicycle, receiving quick assistance from emergency providers, or consuming goods that are being shipped to you through the trucking industry (, etc.). We all benefit from roads in many ways, so I don't think it's a black and white issue that some "users" should pay everything and others should pay nothing.

Another point is that raising fees for the truckers would be reflected back into the prices for which you pay for your goods shipped from other locations (which is just about everything we buy these days). So in actuality, the solution has to be of a much higher level than simply charging more taxes/fees to truckers.

IMHO, there should be much greater support of rail transport, for example. It is so much more efficient a method for so many reasons than trucking could ever be, but is underutilized in Canada. Not only would the cost of maintaining our roads be lessened, but there would also be much less pollution of our atmosphere (think 1 or 2 locomotives pulling 100 cars on steel rails vs. 100-200 trucks [i.e. for stacked containers] moving the same load across the country - a no-brainer).

Again, sorry for the hijack, just wanted to bring to the surface that it's not really an "us and them" situation, we all have a part in it, and there are greater solutions just waiting for us to use them.

Locally, bring on the LRT, I would welcome a dedicated commuter rail service (including ferry service, if it were viable) with open arms. The more traffic it gets off the roads (including buses, for that matter), the better.

Sorry 'bout that, now back to the Nova Centre. Looking forward to that one being done so that it can be proven to the naysayers that it is a necessary addition. The Hal-Con situation is only a small symptom of a much greater issue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3715  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 9:26 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,024
Back to the Nova Centre, the current convention centre space is well below the capacity that events such as Halcon require. It might not even be a square footage issue, so much as the fact the building is all oddly assembled with the grand room not even being that big.

I don't think the new facility will have issues keeping up. City hall offices being in the old trade centre is also maybe a perfect fit if they are moving in there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3716  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2013, 9:50 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian View Post
Back to the Nova Centre, the current convention centre space is well below the capacity that events such as Halcon require. It might not even be a square footage issue, so much as the fact the building is all oddly assembled with the grand room not even being that big.

I don't think the new facility will have issues keeping up. City hall offices being in the old trade centre is also maybe a perfect fit if they are moving in there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3717  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2013, 6:22 PM
Jonovision's Avatar
Jonovision Jonovision is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,052
Took this on the way to work this morning.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3718  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2013, 12:00 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
The image below is from Ziobrop's tumblr page - http://fillingtheholehfx.tumblr.com/.

It is convenient to have the dirt ramp so that the concrete trucks can drive down into the work site but at some point it will have to be removed. I wonder how long they will keep the dirt ramp? Once it is gone the concrete trucks will have to off-load from the street.

My guess is that they will probably build two levels covering the work site (as they currently appear to be doing) so that the concrete trucks can off-load as close to the work area as possible. But after a couple of levels are complete then off-loading from the street will probably be more advantageous(?)

All the concrete being used in the Nova Centre must be a real boon for the concrete company supplying it.


Last edited by fenwick16; Nov 30, 2013 at 12:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3719  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2013, 3:20 AM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,851
An amazing amount of "stuff" on that deck already.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3720  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2013, 1:09 PM
Ziobrop's Avatar
Ziobrop Ziobrop is offline
armchairitect
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Halifax
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
The image below is from Ziobrop's tumblr page - http://fillingtheholehfx.tumblr.com/.

It is convenient to have the dirt ramp so that the concrete trucks can drive down into the work site but at some point it will have to be removed. I wonder how long they will keep the dirt ramp? Once it is gone the concrete trucks will have to off-load from the street.

My guess is that they will probably build two levels covering the work site (as they currently appear to be doing) so that the concrete trucks can off-load as close to the work area as possible. But after a couple of levels are complete then off-loading from the street will probably be more advantageous(?)

All the concrete being used in the Nova Centre must be a real boon for the concrete company supplying it.

I was told, by an architect friend working on the project, that with the exception of the Grafton street portion, the parking slabs were not being constructed to support the load of the concrete and pump trucks. This restricts their pours to a 50m distance from the ground, and adjacent slabs cant be poured concurrently due to shrinkage as the concrete cures.

The ramps days are numbered, as all the bellow grade drainage and waste-water will be connected directly to the citys main, 90m under Sackville st. (apparently installed in the 70's with a tbm). In that corner. the above ground portions will connect to argyle st.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:58 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.