Development Rumours

[JET]

Originally Posted by Agricola

Any clues on this renovation on the corner of Agricola and Ontario Streets?

those are some crazy windows. Be interesting to see what else is planned.

[Dmajackson]

^It's a commercial addition to an existing residential building. They've added in a second door since that photo was taken. I walk by this daily on my way to the nearby contruction sites and Hydrostone so I'll keep an eye on it.

[TheLittleGuy]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

You seem to be overstating the history of that building. It isn't like the Constitution was drafted there. The exterior is, IMO, nothing particularly attractive, especially with the added levels added to the original structure. And you have obviously never worked in that building. It is absolutely horrendous, full of asbestos and mold. The interior needs to be totally gutted and restructured internally, right down to the elevator shafts and floor decks. Its only noteworthy asset is that it is old. I've said here in the past that it should be demolished, but if it makes you happy to keep the facades, go ahead. But don't think it'll be a restored building in the end. It'll be a new building with an old facade on it, like Founders Square.

I agree with Keith P on this one

[TheLittleGuy]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

I completely agree-- i think George's Island being closed to the public is travesty. It would be a bigger tourist attract, I think, than Citadel Hill. Easy.

But, as usual, here is an announcement of a plan, and it never happens. I mean, whose job is it to follow up on this? I'm going to email Parks Canada about it. I mean, come on. They are pretty useless these days.

What is the point of having Georges Island if we can't go to it. It's a stupid idea, and shows the city/province/feds just don't get it. It really doesn't mean anything so use the damn thing as a footing for the 3rd crossing if no one is going to be allowed use the island.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by TheLittleGuy

I agree with Keith P on this one

The debate over the Dennis Building has been going on for a while. The other day I happened to wander past some old industrial buildings in Vancouver (Yaletown). A bunch of them are more or less like this:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2770248,-...3m4!1e1!3m2!1sHzM9p81oIpYGeOR82FLlPw!2e0

I doubt the ceiling heights in this building are much better than the Dennis Building, and I'd say its overall appearance is more modest. It has 3 retail chains in it and upstairs space is leasing for $35 per square foot. Many, many other cities in North America have buildings like this put to all sorts of good uses. In this Vancouver case, the character of the buildings is exactly the reason why this neighbourhood is as desirable as it is. People prefer these buildings over many newer buildings even for offices and the ground floors are full of bars, restaurants, and retail.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by TheLittleGuy

What is the point of having Georges Island if we can't go to it. It's a stupid idea, and shows the city/province/feds just don't get it. It really doesn't mean anything so use the damn thing as a footing for the 3rd crossing if no one is going to be allowed use the island.

A third crossing is a bad idea. It's just too much focus on car-centered planning and not enough on other things. A third crossing will lead to more sprawl (developers will buy up cheap land around the crossing, and sell it off for massive profit) and in a decade, it will just be another bottle neck full of congestion.

Take the billions that would be spent on a third crossing and spend it on a world class mass transit system. It's simple.

As for George's Island, it's actually pretty awesome if you've ever seen the place, and right now, a total waste, growing up weeds. There are plenty of ways to promote a national park on the island; a dedicated/small ferry service in summer would work.

I bet you a summer ferry service to Georges Island would cost less than the $26m that was pumped into the Yarmouth ferry!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

A third crossing is a bad idea. It's just too much focus on car-centered planning and not enough on other things. A third crossing will lead to more sprawl (developers will buy up cheap land around the crossing, and sell it off for massive profit) and in a decade, it will just be another bottle neck full of congestion.

Take the billions that would be spent on a third crossing and spend it on a world class mass transit system. It's simple.

Disagree. Like it or not, cars are here to stay, at least for the next 50 years or so. It would be silly to stick our heads in the sand and ignore the needs of the public just because some of us don't like people using cars to get around. Besides, as mentioned in previous posts, a third crossing would benefit mass transit. It's not an either/or situation.

As for George's Island, it's actually pretty awesome if you've ever seen the place, and right now, a total waste, growing up weeds. There are plenty of ways to promote a national park on the island; a dedicated/small ferry service in summer would work.

I bet you a summer ferry service to Georges Island would cost less than the $26m that was pumped into the Yarmouth ferry!

I agree, although a comparison to the Yarmouth ferry doesn't really apply, as that ferry helps to bolster the economy of the western/south shore areas of the province.

IMHO, a ferry service to Georges Island would only need to have money invested in infrastructure (i.e. a docking area on both sides). The ferry service could be contracted out to a private vendor at zero cost to the taxpayer. Of course the feds would have to be convinced to invest a little in sprucing up the island to make it palatable and safe for the public, but this should be happening anyways as it is a National Historic Site.

http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/lhn-nhs/ns/georges/natcul.aspx

[beyeas]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Besides, as mentioned in previous posts, a third crossing would benefit mass transit. It's not an either/or situation.

I totally agree it is not an either or, and both transportation modes need to be looked at as a whole and funded as whole. We can't "choose", we have to figure out the right way to make the system work as a whole.

My issue is with the imbalance... $1B put into new roads etc is seen as necessary and many people don't blink because they view it as something that will reduce rush hour gridlock etc, but no has ever even remotely considered putting $1B into public transport because that is seen as a government handout to left wing loonies.

The real gridlock that needs to be broken is treating these as two separate and independent choices, and pretending that only one of them is a government subsidy. The sooner we figure out how to make smart investments that improve transit as a whole (mass or car) the better.

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

IMHO, a ferry service to Georges Island would only need to have money invested in infrastructure (i.e. a docking area on both sides). The ferry service could be contracted out to a private vendor at zero cost to the taxpayer. Of course the feds would have to be convinced to invest a little in sprucing up the island to make it palatable and safe for the public, but this should be happening anyways as it is a National Historic Site.

this past summer there were at least 2 individuals who consulted with me regarding starting up a Ferry service from Halifax to Mcnabs, stopping at Georges.

from my figuring, its doable, but you would need full boats almost every trip to make money. Labour and Fuel costs are just to high. a quick back and forth shuttle to georges might work - easier to control costs.

[FuzzyWuz]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

...
Take the billions that would be spent on a third crossing and spend it on a world class mass transit system....

The key word here is 'system'. effective movement from one side of the harbor to the other is part of that system and the existing bridges and ferrys can only handle so much.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by beyeas

I totally agree it is not an either or, and both transportation modes need to be looked at as a whole and funded as whole. We can't "choose", we have to figure out the right way to make the system work as a whole.

My issue is with the imbalance... $1B put into new roads etc is seen as necessary and many people don't blink because they view it as something that will reduce rush hour gridlock etc, but no has ever even remotely considered putting $1B into public transport because that is seen as a government handout to left wing loonies.

The real gridlock that needs to be broken is treating these as two separate and independent choices, and pretending that only one of them is a government subsidy. The sooner we figure out how to make smart investments that improve transit as a whole (mass or car) the better.

Couldn't agree more. I think on the whole, people are not thinking big-picture as everybody stands to benefit here. Increased commuting capacity for all methods of transport lightens the load of each one, i.e. for those who would still choose to use their cars as transportation, they would benefit from less cars on the road and thus lighter traffic due to increased transit usage. Then we would all benefit from less pollution and less wear and tear on the roads themselves, which will reduce maintenance costs.

As mentioned previously, it costs money to build a good city and thus investment needs to be made up front that will see benefits far into the future. Enveloping all forms of transport as a whole would be a good start towards achieving this goal.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

this past summer there were at least 2 individuals who consulted with me regarding starting up a Ferry service from Halifax to Mcnabs, stopping at Georges.

from my figuring, its doable, but you would need full boats almost every trip to make money. Labour and Fuel costs are just to high. a quick back and forth shuttle to georges might work - easier to control costs.

Interesting. Another possible consideration would be for the feds to manage it completely. Perhaps they could charge admission to the park which would include the cost of the ferry with the admission. This might require a certain amount of subsidization on their part, however, so I don't know if this would float (so to speak). I would hesitate to toss it to the federal government, though, as this would probably mean that we would be waiting another 20 years for something to be done with it.

I think an independent shuttle to Georges would be the best option as it would decrease transport time as well. Not everybody will want to visit both islands on the same day and the extra time taken to dock, unload/load might make it less attractive to some.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by beyeas

I totally agree it is not an either or, and both transportation modes need to be looked at as a whole and funded as whole. We can't "choose", we have to figure out the right way to make the system work as a whole.

My issue is with the imbalance... $1B put into new roads etc is seen as necessary and many people don't blink because they view it as something that will reduce rush hour gridlock etc, but no has ever even remotely considered putting $1B into public transport because that is seen as a government handout to left wing loonies.

The real gridlock that needs to be broken is treating these as two separate and independent choices, and pretending that only one of them is a government subsidy. The sooner we figure out how to make smart investments that improve transit as a whole (mass or car) the better.

I would think that as long as it isn't hijacked by crazy thinking to make it only for transit or bikelanes, that a third bridge would do wonders for the downtown and its commuters. Look at how many buses currently grind along Barrington, Gottingen, and the MacDonald Bridge carrying people to/from places like Westphal, MicMac Mall, Forest Hills, Eastern Passage, etc. All of those routes, every single one, would immediately transition to the new crossing, taking all that traffic off the peninsula far more efficiently, and very likely delivering people to their destinations a lot quicker. That alone is HUGE.

It really is an opportunity to rejuvenate a lot of streets on the peninsula that currently suffer because of heavy bus/rush hour traffic.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

this past summer there were at least 2 individuals who consulted with me regarding starting up a Ferry service from Halifax to Mcnabs, stopping at Georges.

from my figuring, its doable, but you would need full boats almost every trip to make money. Labour and Fuel costs are just to high. a quick back and forth shuttle to georges might work - easier to control costs.

Maybe the Haligonian III could work it into their schedule. Drop off at George's at 10:00am and pick up at 1:00pm to start?

[RoshanMcG]

Came across this picture of the Maritime Centre. Anyone have any information about this? Is this proposed?

[spaustin]

Originally Posted by Ziobrop

this past summer there were at least 2 individuals who consulted with me regarding starting up a Ferry service from Halifax to Mcnabs, stopping at Georges.

from my figuring, its doable, but you would need full boats almost every trip to make money. Labour and Fuel costs are just to high. a quick back and forth shuttle to georges might work - easier to control costs.

I actually wrote a little piece for Spacing on just this topic. Some back of the napkin calculations based on the hourly operating cost that Metro Transit intended on saving when they cut the evening ferry service back in 2012 says that we could run a ferry to McNab's every weekend and holiday from May through to September for about $500,000 http://spacing.ca/atlantic/2014/08/26/near-far-mcnabs-island/

[pblaauw]

Originally Posted by RoshanMcG

Came across this picture of the Maritime Centre. Anyone have any information about this? Is this proposed?

Source:

Maritime Centre Building Renovation, Halifax, NS, Canada


Looks like it's just a concept for now. That facade is going to be GREAT when the sun is setting on the horizon.

[teddifax]

I would love to see this done as it would cover up the mis-matched tones caused by the addition of the upper floors years after the first phase was built. You can plainly see it and the building does look worn.

[Waye Mason]

The biggest thing that needs to be fixed is the entrance off of Barrington. They can put a podium that is I think 14.5 or 18 metres on that site, which would help catch wind and keep the building from assaulting passersby. I'd love to see someone buy this, apparently Fortis has it for sale. I keep hearing rumors of it going condo, but it would be a really expensive conversion, so I am not sure if those are remotely real.

[ScovaNotian]

I like the current look much better.