Halifax Stadium Discussion

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

How long since our last civic election? Didn't our mayor indicate a desire to get a stadium built and a CFL team in Halifax?
Still nothing but a lot of BS?

One only has to look further back in this very thread.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=174940&page=259

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

How long since our last civic election? Didn't our mayor indicate a desire to get a stadium built and a CFL team in Halifax?
Still nothing but a lot of BS?

I think it would be nice, but I think we have more important priorities.

I'd rather all that money be spent on building a great mass transit system.

Something so obviously "world class" that even Tim Bousquet declares himself a fan...

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

I think it would be nice, but I think we have more important priorities.

I'd rather all that money be spent on building a great mass transit system.

Something so obviously "world class" that even Tim Bousquet declares himself a fan...

But then the evil transit corporations would get our public money

[ILoveHalifax]

If we, Halifax, were to build a stadium and get a CFL team, we would add a basic piece of infrastructure and receive additional national exposure, as well as have fun, and experience a lot of civic pride. The occasional Grey Cup would also add millions to our economy.
If we put all our money into transit we have a few more buses clogging our roads along with the many cars. We are not large enough for a subway or skytrain and all we have is a few extra people getting to work a couple of minutes faster, and more people in the out regions screaming for expansion of the system to their front doors.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

If we, Halifax, were to build a stadium and get a CFL team, we would add a basic piece of infrastructure and receive additional national exposure, as well as have fun, and experience a lot of civic pride. The occasional Grey Cup would also add millions to our economy.
If we put all our money into transit we have a few more buses clogging our roads along with the many cars. We are not large enough for a subway or skytrain and all we have is a few extra people getting to work a couple of minutes faster, and more people in the out regions screaming for expansion of the system to their front doors.

With all due respect, that's pretty ridiculous.

A: Buses (hypothetically) get people OUT of cars, so we'd ultimately have fewer vehicles on the road.

B: An aggressively expanded transit system—and I think there it should be considered realistic and reasonable to start planning an urban rail/LRT system—will be a much greater economic benefit than a stadium.

Stadiums are virtually always enormous money-suckers, of course, and while a transit system is too, it can be used as a tool not only to knit together the city into a more cohesive whole. It can help drive public and private investment in real estate to the areas we want, and create a city where it's easier for people to get around without cars, creating a more urban, 21st-century kind of environment. Good transit systems are one of the number-one generators of wealth and investment in urban communities. Stadiums are...not. I'm pro-stadium, but it's just not going to happen soon. A transit expansion is something that Halifax, as a city, can start planning and executing all by ourselves.

[Keith P.]

The point should be that adding more buses is not the solution to fixing transit. The roads are not designed to handle what we have now. If we are talking something rail-based or otherwise, then it is a different discussion, but that is considerably more expensive than a stadium.

[ILoveHalifax]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

With all due respect, that's pretty ridiculous.

A: Buses (hypothetically) get people OUT of cars, so we'd ultimately have fewer vehicles on the road.

B: An aggressively expanded transit system—and I think there it should be considered realistic and reasonable to start planning an urban rail/LRT system—will be a much greater economic benefit than a stadium.

Stadiums are virtually always enormous money-suckers, of course, and while a transit system is too, it can be used as a tool not only to knit together the city into a more cohesive whole. It can help drive public and private investment in real estate to the areas we want, and create a city where it's easier for people to get around without cars, creating a more urban, 21st-century kind of environment. Good transit systems are one of the number-one generators of wealth and investment in urban communities. Stadiums are...not. I'm pro-stadium, but it's just not going to happen soon. A transit expansion is something that Halifax, as a city, can start planning and executing all by ourselves.

With all due respect that pretty ridiculous on so many levels.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

With all due respect that pretty ridiculous on so many levels.

Could you elaborate? Maybe with some examples? Most of what DryBrain posted is pretty much on point. Look at the experiences of Portland (OR), Austin, Vancouver, Calgary, etc...

Investing in transit infrastructure, aside from making it easier for people to get around, also creates a greater sense of "certainty" for developers, leading to increased development pressure. HRMbD was another initiative to create certainty, and after its adoption, construction within the study area skyrocketed. Some kind of higher-quality transit with a dedicated ROW (LRT or something along those lines), combined with HRMbD-style regulation for the rest of the urban area, would be a very effective (and self-supporting) way of encouraging and directing development.

There's no real magic population number at which it's appropriate to start using rail for transit. More important are settlement patterns, street grid characteristics, local culture, and integration of transportation planning with land-use planning. Other than this last point, conditions in Halifax seem like they could definitely support a basic rail-transit system.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

With all due respect that pretty ridiculous on so many levels.

Reasons? I'm just saying, a stadium is a nice-to-have. To be a competitive, modern city, a good transit system is increasingly a must-have. It should be fairly obvious that providing an efficient way to move passengers—whether acting as workers, tourists, shoppers or whatever else—throughout a city is an economic boon. To say nothing of the potential for transit-oriented development. To reach that next level of potential, Halifax also needs more options for people who can't, or won't, drive everywhere.

I could point to a bunch of academic work on the subject, but this is more readable.

This is part of the reason why Toronto's current transit-expansion crisis and deteriorating gridlock is considered such a big deal—it could choke off employers' access to employees, limit the movement of people (i.e, money) across the city, and generally just slow everything down.

[ILoveHalifax]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Reasons? I'm just saying, a stadium is a nice-to-have. To be a competitive, modern city, a good transit system is increasingly a must-have. It should be fairly obvious that providing an efficient way to move passengers—whether acting as workers, tourists, shoppers or whatever else—throughout a city is an economic boon. To say nothing of the potential for transit-oriented development. To reach that next level of potential, Halifax also needs more options for people who can't, or won't, drive everywhere.

I could point to a bunch of academic work on the subject, but this is more readable.

This is part of the reason why Toronto's current transit-expansion crisis and deteriorating gridlock is considered such a big deal—it could choke off employers' access to employees, limit the movement of people (i.e, money) across the city, and generally just slow everything down.

Funny, I looked up both of your references and see nothing to justify your point of view, just another person's point of view and he's just hoping that what he says might be true.
Time will tell and I expect you will have a very different point of view as you gain experience.

[Hali87]

Really? The co-author of the second article admitted to being "skeptical" of rail-based transit, and they conducted a HUGE, model-based study of hundreds of American cities - this is just "one person's point of view" where he is "hoping that what he says might be true?" Edit: what would qualify as "evidence" or even "a compelling argument", if not this?

I'm still curious as to why you think Drybrain's suggestions are "pretty ridiculous on so many levels".

[Hali87]

For the record, I'd love to see a new stadium/CFL franchise in Halifax, but in terms of what would affect me more on a day-to-day basis, and what would have a bigger impact on the city's profile, economy, and overall quality of life... definitely better transit (ie. not just more standard bus routes).

[ILoveHalifax]

I have a problem trying to understand how a stadium equates to a transit system. They are so different from each other.
I understand discussing transit in the same discussion as roads, bicycles, bridges, freeways, the movement of goods, services and people.
One's life can be improved because they spend 5 minutes less time getting to where they are going. Not really life changing unless one lives a very simple life. One rides a street car rather than a bus? Not such a big deal.
On the other hand we also need to talk about libraries, museums, stadiums, aquariums, sports facilities, and other public spaces.
If we never build any of these facilities, why do we need transit if there is no place to go. These are the spaces that create a great city and people want to visit.
A century ago it was exciting to go to NYC and ride the subway but that is not much of an attraction today.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

I have a problem trying to understand how a stadium equates to a transit system. They are so different from each other.

I'm not sure why the zero-sum false dilemma type thinking comes around so frequently with the stadium issue in particular. The city can afford transit and a stadium, and some of the funding for those projects might come from different sources. Federal infrastructure funding isn't necessarily available for a stadium, for example, while private donors might be less interested in transit.

It's not necessarily true that a stadium would be more affordable than rail transit. Subways cost billions of dollars but commuter rail and streetcar systems have been created with budgets below $100 million. In the case of Halifax I think commuter rail linked up with streetcars on the peninsula and some express buses would work well. A plan like that is actually pretty modest. Kitchener-Waterloo is marginally larger than Halifax and they are in the middle of building a $790M LRT project (which will be 1/3 provincial and 1/3 federal funding). Meanwhile, in Halifax, a public project with 1/4 of this budget is considered beyond the pale for some reason. It was pretty common for people to talk as if the Nova Centre would bankrupt the province, for example. The entire budget for the convention centre amounts to 0.4% of the province's economic output during one year.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

With all due respect, that's pretty ridiculous.

A: Buses (hypothetically) get people OUT of cars, so we'd ultimately have fewer vehicles on the road.

B: An aggressively expanded transit system—and I think there it should be considered realistic and reasonable to start planning an urban rail/LRT system—will be a much greater economic benefit than a stadium.

Stadiums are virtually always enormous money-suckers, of course, and while a transit system is too, it can be used as a tool not only to knit together the city into a more cohesive whole. It can help drive public and private investment in real estate to the areas we want, and create a city where it's easier for people to get around without cars, creating a more urban, 21st-century kind of environment. Good transit systems are one of the number-one generators of wealth and investment in urban communities. Stadiums are...not. I'm pro-stadium, but it's just not going to happen soon. A transit expansion is something that Halifax, as a city, can start planning and executing all by ourselves.

Yes, exactly!

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Hali87

Could you elaborate? Maybe with some examples? Most of what DryBrain posted is pretty much on point. Look at the experiences of Portland (OR), Austin, Vancouver, Calgary, etc...

Investing in transit infrastructure, aside from making it easier for people to get around, also creates a greater sense of "certainty" for developers, leading to increased development pressure. HRMbD was another initiative to create certainty, and after its adoption, construction within the study area skyrocketed. Some kind of higher-quality transit with a dedicated ROW (LRT or something along those lines), combined with HRMbD-style regulation for the rest of the urban area, would be a very effective (and self-supporting) way of encouraging and directing development.

There's no real magic population number at which it's appropriate to start using rail for transit. More important are settlement patterns, street grid characteristics, local culture, and integration of transportation planning with land-use planning. Other than this last point, conditions in Halifax seem like they could definitely support a basic rail-transit system.

Also very well put. 100%.

[counterfactual]

Also, for the record, I'm a fan of having a stadium. I think it would be great for the city.

My concern is not necessarily limited funds. It's just that in Halifax, we tend to take years and years and years to plan and implement even the most modest sorts of city or infrastructure changes. I mean, how long was HRMxD in the making? At least two decades, maybe more.

So. If we're going to prioritize *project planning and implementation* I think I'd prefer the Mayor spending his time and energy on a world class mass transit project, rather than chatting up CFL commissioners who seem to twist with the winds when it comes to Atlantic expansion.

There seems to be study, after study, after study, done on mass transit options, or LRT/light rail, but no one seems to ever get serious. It was like that for a new downtown planning document for decades too. Plenty of staff reports, very little staff action.

Staff reports are easy. Requesting staff reports is easy. Reading staff reports is also easy. Acting on staff reports, and taking action is hard. Planning, funding, building, and organizing a mass transit system is very hard. It takes a lot of vision and leadership. We really haven't had that sort of thing in HRM politics for decades. Maybe never.

Status quo is easy. In Halifax, we like easy. East Coast Lifestyle, and all that.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

One's life can be improved because they spend 5 minutes less time getting to where they are going. Not really life changing unless one lives a very simple life. One rides a street car rather than a bus? Not such a big deal.
...
A century ago it was exciting to go to NYC and ride the subway but that is not much of an attraction today.

As Someone123 says, it's not a zero-sum situation—we can have a stadium AND an improved transit system.

But as Counterfactual says, even within the large scope of a municipal budget, there are limitations and priorities have to be made. He was suggesting that IF it came down to it, he'd prefer a transit expansion. As would I.

But anyway, a transit system isn't about hopping on a subway for novelty value, or to have streetcars rather than buses (though the former's capacity is much higher). It's about enabling residents and visitors to move through the city with more flexibility, speed and freedom, without a private car. A better transit system will further urbanize the city.

A quick example of two similar Canadian cities, one with a good (well, relatively speaking transit system) and one with a terrible one: Calgary and Edmonton.

In built form, history, and civic culture, they differ very little. Calgary has a large LRT network throughout the urban core and suburbs, and has aggressively expanded it. As a result, ridership is 250,000 a DAY, in a city of only about 1.2 million. That's huge, and I think to a significant degree the way the network hits key attractions throughout town before converging on downtown has helped drive a lot of commercial development in the urban core than would otherwise be the case. And it's definitely kept a lot of cars off the road and helped lower traffic congestion in a city that is otherwise extremely car-centric. I'm not going to say that Calgary has a great downtown, because it really doesn't (I think Halifax's is better, and has LOADS more potential) but it does have a very high percentage of overall employment in the downtown core, which is something we struggle with. This has definitely been facilitated by the LRT system.

Edmonton, however, has a piddly little LRT network (ironically, theirs was first) and it doesn't serve much of the population at all. Correspondingly, its downtown is dramatically under-developed by comparison with Calgary, it has far less pedestrian traffic and retail, and surrounding neighbourhoods are less populated. Technically, it's probably no more low-density than Calgary, but it feels a lot more spread out and anonymously suburban. And if we want to talk about skyscraper development: not a single high-rise building went up in Edmonton (the capital of ALBERTA) between the late 80s and the mid 2000s.

I don't want to draw hasty conclusions, but I'm positive that Calgary's relatively much better transit system has had nothing but positive effects on the city's development, and I'm sure that Edmonton's development would have been more impressive if it had a better system.

[ILoveHalifax]

From what I understand, Edmonton never had much of a downtown. That is why West Edmonton Mall was able to be built, the largest shopping center in the world at the time, and it has be successful. This is a little more than a transit story.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

From what I understand, Edmonton never had much of a downtown. That is why West Edmonton Mall was able to be built, the largest shopping center in the world at the time, and it has be successful. This is a little more than a transit story.

Eh, I think the story of downtown Edmonton's decline has in part to do with the WEM drawing people away, and the fact that the city allowed developers to tear down most of the city's historic main street (Jasper Avenue) and build featureless office towers throughout the 60s-70s. It DID have a robust downtown, probably better than Calgary's at one point (as the capital and formerly larger city). But a series of bad decisions decimated it over the years, and it's only now crawling back.

One of the downtown plans there, incidentally, is a stadium, which there's plenty of room for due to all the surface parking. The city has sunk insane quantities of money into it, and there's a lot of controversy over whether it's a good use of downtown real estate.