General Updates and News

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by portapetey
Anyone can go read the comments on the Herald's story about the Forum. All the failure buzzwords are flying.

Originally Posted by curnhalio

And on the Metro story as well. I've long since learned that they represent a minority opinion. They have no faith in the Forum association to bring their plan in on budget, but they have 100% faith that the city and CFB joint plan would not only come in under budget, but would be done early! Two guys were bowing down to Gloria for getting a four-pad for her "community". That one speaks for itself...

I've said it before, I don't even bother reading the comments below newspaper website articles anymore. They seem to bring out the lunatic fringe, and I feel they do not represent the views of the majority.

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I've said it before, I don't even bother reading the comments below newspaper website articles anymore. They seem to bring out the lunatic fringe, and I feel they do not represent the views of the majority.

Yeah, sometimes it gets so ugly in there I just have to close the window lest I let a stupid newspaper article make me angry!

Wow, any article about fracking, development on the peninsula, or gay or trans people....yikes!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by curnhalio

They have no faith in the Forum association to bring their plan in on budget, but they have 100% faith that the city and CFB joint plan would not only come in under budget, but would be done early! Two guys were bowing down to Gloria for getting a four-pad for her "community". That one speaks for itself...

I would not congratulate Gloria for the Dartmouth 4-pad as I suspect she had little to do with it, nor would I expect HRM and CFB to bring their project in so efficiently, but I too have little faith that the Forum Commission has the stuff to manage this large project capably. They just do not impress.

[mcmcclassic]

Originally Posted by Empire

Here is and example of a tiny city with 40+ storey buildings in your own backyard.

Niagara Falls
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Niagara+F...-gugy3114tqFb87XkVw&cbp=12,275.58,,0,-45

I think the tourist trap that is Niagara Falls is why those hotel & casino towers are there. The same thing can be found in Atlantic City, NJ. AC is only like 40,000 in the actual city (~225k in the CMA) but they have 50+ storey towers.

This google street view sums up AC nicely - nice casinos, but most of the city looks like downtown Dartmouth. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=atlantic+...4YGeXfhYO3PXzPHUw&cbp=13,111.82,,0,-9.77

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I think the tourist trap that is Niagara Falls is why those hotel & casino towers are there. The same thing can be found in Atlantic City, NJ. AC is only like 40,000 in the actual city (~225k in the CMA) but they have 50+ storey towers.

This google street view sums up AC nicely - nice casinos, but most of the city looks like downtown Dartmouth. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=atlantic+...4YGeXfhYO3PXzPHUw&cbp=13,111.82,,0,-9.77

Yup, and there's actually a much larger city right next door to Niagara Falls, so it really doesn't count as a standalone metro area of 390K.

And, yikes, I didn't realize AC was such an awful looking place!

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

This google street view sums up AC nicely - nice casinos, but most of the city looks like downtown Dartmouth.

Oy. That's a hell of a lot worse than Dartmouth.

[Ziobrop]

on the tall VS Wide debate, i am aware of a case in Ottawa where a developer proposed 2 shorter towers, and the community preferred a taller one. this had to do with the shadow cast - the taller tower would cast a slimmer shadow, so they preferred it, and that's what got built.

The building is the Minto Metropole.

[JET]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I think the tourist trap that is Niagara Falls is why those hotel & casino towers are there. The same thing can be found in Atlantic City, NJ. AC is only like 40,000 in the actual city (~225k in the CMA) but they have 50+ storey towers.

This google street view sums up AC nicely - nice casinos, but most of the city looks like downtown Dartmouth. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=atlantic+...4YGeXfhYO3PXzPHUw&cbp=13,111.82,,0,-9.77

It looks a bit like parts of Wyse Rd in Dartmouth, but I would not say it looks like Dartmouth Downtown; most of DDT is quite nice.

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

on the tall VS Wide debate, i am aware of a case in Ottawa where a developer proposed 2 shorter towers, and the community preferred a taller one. this had to do with the shadow cast - the taller tower would cast a slimmer shadow, so they preferred it, and that's what got built.

The building is the Minto Metropole.

Interesting case.

Also interesting in that even Ottawa at four times our size hasn't really pushed past the 30-story boundary much more than we have. But they do have significantly more buildings in the 24-to-29 story range, which would be perfect infill for Halifax's empty spots.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

on the tall VS Wide debate, i am aware of a case in Ottawa where a developer proposed 2 shorter towers, and the community preferred a taller one. this had to do with the shadow cast - the taller tower would cast a slimmer shadow, so they preferred it, and that's what got built.

The building is the Minto Metropole.

Ha! Interesting that in this case they built tall to help preserve a viewplane.

Could be an alternate tack for Halifax developers to take: "Hey, we'll build it taller and narrower to block less of the harbour view". I remember hearing when Maritime Centre was built that it was angled as it is to help preserve the viewplane from Citadel Hill, such that its narrowest cross section faced the hill. It is a good-sized building and yes, it does not take up much of that view...

Thanks for the link and info. The wiki details are a little vague, but it sounds like the developer acted directly on public input rather than being forced into it through political pressure and the approval process. This could indicate that the differences in cost might balance themselves out, or at least that a timely approval process would offset the cost differences created through a long back-and-forth approval process. All speculation on my part, of course.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by portapetey

Interesting case.

Also interesting in that even Ottawa at four times our size hasn't really pushed past the 30-story boundary much more than we have. But they do have significantly more buildings in the 24-to-29 story range, which would be perfect infill for Halifax's empty spots.

Ottawa has a rule stipulating that nothing can be built downtown over 150 feet (about 12 storeys) so that the Peace Tower dominates the skyline. The rule has been relaxed for plenty of specific projects, but it still tends to keep the skyline pretty stubby.

[curnhalio]

Originally Posted by portapetey

Yup, and there's actually a much larger city right next door to Niagara Falls, so it really doesn't count as a standalone metro area of 390K.

And, yikes, I didn't realize AC was such an awful looking place!

AC actually is a lot more isolated than Niagara Falls. It fits what you were looking for with tall buildings in a small city with no other large centers immediately nearby. Philly is probably within 100 miles of it, but that's about it.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by mcmcclassic

I think the tourist trap that is Niagara Falls is why those hotel & casino towers are there. The same thing can be found in Atlantic City, NJ. AC is only like 40,000 in the actual city (~225k in the CMA) but they have 50+ storey towers.

This google street view sums up AC nicely - nice casinos, but most of the city looks like downtown Dartmouth. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=atlantic+...4YGeXfhYO3PXzPHUw&cbp=13,111.82,,0,-9.77

At least they have clearly painted crosswalks!

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by curnhalio

AC actually is a lot more isolated than Niagara Falls. It fits what you were looking for with tall buildings in a small city with no other large centers immediately nearby. Philly is probably within 100 miles of it, but that's about it.

Yes it does sort of fit the test I was looking for.

So we now have two examples - Benidorm, Spain, and Atlantic City, New Jersey - both of which are hotel / casino industry towns with atypically tall hotels.

I'm thinking they are the exceptions that prove the rule, no?

[q12]

Originally Posted by portapetey

Yes it does sort of fit the test I was looking for.

So we now have two examples - Benidorm, Spain, and Atlantic City, New Jersey - both of which are hotel / casino industry towns with atypically tall hotels.

I'm thinking they are the exceptions that prove the rule, no?

Give up, Halifax will likely see +40 story skyscrapers in the near future and there is not much you can do about it. This is a forum about skyscrapers, you are preaching to the wrong choir. Halifax is not small, it's at least a mid-size city about to become a large city.

Here is a report that lists Halifax as a large city with the highest quality of life in large (north) american cities.

http://investtoronto.ca/InvestToronto/me...rts/FDI_Cities-of-the-Future_2011_12.pdf


Source

CITY SIZE CLASSIFICATION

Major cities
Population more than 750,000

Large cities
Population more than 250,000 but less than 750,000

Small cities
Population more than 100,000 but less than 250,000

Micro cities
Population less than 100,000

You sound like you're afraid if Halifax builds these tall skyscrapers it will instantly become Toronto.

[curnhalio]

Originally Posted by q12

Here is a report that lists Halifax as a large city with the highest quality of life in large (north) american cities.

Halifax has a better quality of life than Seattle?? Could very well be. Suburban Seattle has similar problems to Halifax with having to traverse large bodies of water and a somewhat outdated highway network to access the central area. With a much larger population base, commutes from Bellevue and Kirkland across Lake Washington are notoriously horrendous.

We also placed #2 on the list of cities of the future, trailing only Pittsburgh, of all places. Well, all I know there is it's reputation is no longer solely based on the steel industry. There is a lot of growth occurring in the health-care sector in Pittsburgh IIRC.

We did not crack the top 10 on business friendliness, which I suppose isn't that surprising.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by q12

Give up, Halifax will likely see +40 story skyscrapers in the near future and there is not much you can do about it. This is a forum about skyscrapers, you are preaching to the wrong choir. Halifax is not small, it's at least a mid-size city about to become a large city.

Here is a report that lists Halifax as a large city with the highest quality of life in large (north) american cities.


You sound like you're afraid if Halifax builds these tall skyscrapers it will instantly become Toronto.

I didn't get that impression at all, and it seems like most of us generally agree with him

It's not that we shouldn't build 40-storey buildings in Halifax, it's just that there is no real reason to expect or demand that they be built, and for most of us it wouldn't be a huge disappointment if there are none on the horizon. That's all.

Whether Halifax is "small" "mid-sized" or "large" or "major" is completely arbitrary and depends on your frame of reference. Sure it's important, but it's worth noting that Winnipeg and Hamilton each have close to double our population, and relatively obscure "smallish" American cities like Omaha, Hartford, Raleigh, Cincinatti, Louisville, Oklahoma City, Milwaukee, Indianapolis etc are all at least double if not 3-4x our population. So if we are a "large city", are these places megacities? Because it doesn't really work to say "they're basically in the same size category as us" because they're not. Conversely, when I think about "large cities in Texas", or even "cities in Texas"... Plano?

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by portapetey

Well, um, thanks for adding a few more of these mischievous "straw men" of lore to the discussion, like "Halifax is not a city." That's a pretty big one. Nobody said that. (But it's not large. Virtually nowhere on Earth would Halifax be considered a LARGE city. (Maybe we need to get out more and see the world? See how big it really, is, despite Disney's insistent little song?) But I guess I should give up talking sense on that point. Small is bad, mmmmmkay?)

And you're the one who showed us all your mathematical wizardry (I jest, I jest!) to demonstrate to us how inferior the Halifax skyline is to London's. That was your argument. No one made it up. No straw man there.

Haven't seen any self-congratulations either. Just people crunching numbers, comparing photos, and a bit of negotiating around reasonable, managed expectations. No agreement on what those are yet, though!

I think we can agree, though, that this is a ridiculous argument. Let's just agree to disagree on the rest. You keep on insisting that Halifax is a LARGE city that needs to PROVE itself, you know, PROVE that it's LARGE, like 40 STORIES LARGE! - Counterfactually, of course - and I'll keep on being very thankful that I live in this small but interesting city where lots of exciting things are starting to happen and I don't need to feel terribly inferior because I desperately want it to be something it isn't.

Hm. I see you're really reaching in this post, but not adding a whole lot. As the oldtimers say, lots of fizz, but no gin. I think you probably realize this too, so, my response will be my last foray into this, and we can all move on.

As for me adding a strawman-- what strawman? I quoted you directly.

My quote:

This negative Haligonian apparently believes that if since "we don't have 40 story towers, we must be small minded and backwards"!!

Your quote:

Originally Posted by portapetey

Yup, this is what I'm talking about. The constant expression that because we don't have 40 story towers, we must be small minded and backwards, and because we are so small minded and backwards, we're failing to build the 40 story towers that all those other cities our size surely must have.

You see, Porta, I don't need to create any new strawmen because you're such an efficient producer of them.

Yes, people disagree with definitions, terms, including what constitutes a big city, a small city. Fine. But there are also generally accepted metrics and definitions that we use to, you know, get things done.

Statistics Canada, since the 2011 census, provides the following definition:

Starting with the 2011 Census, the term 'population centre' replaces the term 'urban area.' Population centres are classified into one of three population size groups:

• small population centres, with a population of between 1,000 and 29,999
• medium population centres, with a population of between 30,000 and 99,999
• large urban population centres, consisting of a population of 100,000 and over.

Now, here's a tabulation of the roughly 1000 communities in Canada-- as per the 2011 Census-- that meet these definitions:

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recens...ANG=Eng&T=801&PR=0&RPP=9999&SR=1&S=3&O=D

You'll note a few things. Out of 942 communities, there are only 31 "large" population centres in Canada (small far outstrip large or medium-- there are 854).

And among the 31 large centres, you'll see... you guessed it... Halifax.

And not only is Halifax defined as a large population centre but it's actually in the top 50% of those large centres, at 14th.

Halifax. Large population centre. Ranked 14th out of 942 communities in the country by population. Not much left to say.

So yes, Porta, we can agree to disagree.

I'll agree to stick with my definition based on Statistics Canada, data, and math.

And you can stick with your definition.

(PS: with the name "port-a-petey" do you really want to start an SSP forum name pun war? )

[portapetey]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Ottawa has a rule stipulating that nothing can be built downtown over 150 feet (about 12 storeys) so that the Peace Tower dominates the skyline. The rule has been relaxed for plenty of specific projects, but it still tends to keep the skyline pretty stubby.

Yes, and for very similar reasons. And we know Vancouver has a similar (but higher) limit for similar reasons. I suspect most cities do here and there.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Halifax. Large population centre. Ranked 14th out of 942 communities in the country by population. Not much left to say.

The caveat is that it's "large" for the sake of Canadian statistical analysis, and that there are only 2 or 3 cities in Canada that are truly large (many people would not consider Vancouver to be a large city). Sure this is a category that is used for census purposes etc, but to extrapolate from that that Toronto and say, Kelowna or Moncton (both "large urban centres") are within the same basic size range is a huge stretch.

I guess my point is, why does it matter that Halifax is in a category of "Canadian cities over 100,000"? Of course it would be in that category. Why does it matter what it's called? It doesn't mean anything other than that more than 100,000 people live here.