Third Harbour Crossing

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't know what the plans are for the Macdonald but I would hope that it will be treated like a heritage element in the city. It would be a shame to see it replaced with a boring modern bridge, and I'm not sure either side would handle the increased traffic well.

I'd expect that either side of the MacKay could be adjusted to handle 6 lanes worth of traffic.

Valid point. It is to Halifax what the Lion’s Gate is to Vancouver or the Golden Gate to San Francisco. I figured the age would have made it the more likely candidate, but highway-level traffic volumes wouldn’t be suitable for Gottingen.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Why not leave both bridges alone and build a 6 lane twin tunnel for?

Too expensive for what we would gain in my opinion, assuming bridge replacements make use of some existing infrastructure.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

Too expensive for what we would gain in my opinion, assuming bridge replacements make use of some existing infrastructure.

I don't understand why a 3rd crossing would not be a good thing to gain. It would ease traffic on the other bridges more than adding 2 more lanes to the MacKay bridge.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I don't understand why a 3rd crossing would not be a good thing to gain. It would ease traffic on the other bridges more than adding 2 more lanes to the MacKay bridge.

There would have to be a bigger goal than just relieving traffic. Such a project would support growth, but the congestion relief would only last a handful of years before that growth fills out. Halifax’s integrated mobility plan speaks to this as well. If the city were planning another Burnside-sized industrial park somewhere in Dartmouth for example (theoretically speaking), the additional crossing could be justified as supporting that economic activity.

Even for the growth we have, the benefit is not worth the burden.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Summerville

Allns is reporting that a replacement of the MacKay bridge will be in the area of $1billion, have 6 vehicle lanes, and lanes for pedestrians and cyclists. For the span, it would be quite the trip on foot

I guess sidewalks and bike lanes on the Circ and the 102 are up next!

Such a ridiculous thing. There is zero pedestrian connectivity to anything at either end of such a structure and only the most zealous cycling zealot would attempt such a crossing.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

Too expensive for what we would gain in my opinion, assuming bridge replacements make use of some existing infrastructure.

Except taxpayers aren't footing the bill. Such is the genius of road tolls. Now if we can only figure out a way to collect them from those pesky cyclists.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't know what the plans are for the Macdonald but I would hope that it will be treated like a heritage element in the city. It would be a shame to see it replaced with a boring modern bridge, and I'm not sure either side would handle the increased traffic well.

I'd expect that either side of the MacKay could be adjusted to handle 6 lanes worth of traffic.

The Macdonald is mostly new now after the big lift project.

My understanding is that time and increased/heavier vehicle traffic volumes have shown the MacKay to be underbuilt and it is kinda sorta falling apart. The steel deck has some distortions in it that one can detect when driving over parts having older pavement. Not saying it is going to fall into the harbour because I don't know but apparently HDBC is concerned enough that they want to replace it.

The Windsor St Exchange redevelopment will hopefully address the bottlenecks at that end but the Circ needs additional lane capacity at the Dartmouth end at least as far as the 118.

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The Macdonald is mostly new now after the big lift project.

My understanding is that time and increased/heavier vehicle traffic volumes have shown the MacKay to be underbuilt and it is kinda sorta falling apart. The steel deck has some distortions in it that one can detect when driving over parts having older pavement. Not saying it is going to fall into the harbour because I don't know but apparently HDBC is concerned enough that they want to replace it.

The Windsor St Exchange redevelopment will hopefully address the bottlenecks at that end but the Circ needs additional lane capacity at the Dartmouth end at least as far as the 118.

That’s exactly what I heard. The MacKay was designed differently from the MacDonald. It is “lighter” but it can’t be upgraded with a big lift project in the same way as the MacDonald.

The cost of fixing the bridge makes total replacement a better solution.

This is also why a third bridge or tunnel is not an option. You would still have to figure out a way to upgrade the MacKay.

Plus you can’t add a lane for cyclists on the existing bridge efficiently

[Antigonish]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

Very True. Chretien and company tried and nearly succeeded in shutting it all down back in the nineties until the Yanks had an Adult chat about how important the entire Eastern Passage industrial region is for NATO. We take it for granted because we live here but bigger heads look at the whole package.

The most Easterly terminus of the North American intercontinental Rail network ends at Auto port. CN can store and move over 10,000 vehicle's to a deep water load facility that can be turn over to military purposes in the snap of the finger. The Imperial Oil Tank Farm is also the closest collection of POL before to open Atlantic to get to Europe.

Shearwaters old main runway has not been used in years but at 8500 feet and reinforced it used to land the largest aircraft in the world including B-52's and fully loaded C-5 Galaxy Transports. Refurbishment if needed would probably take the U.S. military no time at all if they set their mind to it.


The deep water jetty in the Shearwater lower base is one of only 4 outside of the Continental U.S. that is safety certified to dock any U.S. or NATO Nuclear powered or armed Submarines.


Shearwater is not going anywhere.

Man I learned a lot from this.

I guess the only possible replacement solution you think could be a whole new airstrip, base, and deep water naval port that could be in the Canso Straight along Point Tupper (East of Port Hawkesbury). By sea the Chedabucto Bay is 6-8hrs faster to Europe by sea than the Port of Halifax and the area is serviced by rail, oil refineries (similar to Woodside), and the straight is extremely deep and sheltered similar to Halifax.

The area north of Hwy 104 at St. Peter's Junction is flat, uninhabited, and is connected by highway & rail service, and large enough to build an entire base and airfield with direct connectivity to the port.

I'm also extremely biased as I'd love to see a ton of development and major growth for the area to take some strain off HRM

[Citizen_Bane]

Difficult to believe that a six lane (plus walk and cycle lanes) bridge could be built within the existing bridge property while the current McKay continues to operate. Surely we wouldn't have to go without a second crossing for any significant amount of time?

[Citizen_Bane]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Except taxpayers aren't footing the bill. Such is the genius of road tolls. Now if we can only figure out a way to collect them from those pesky cyclists.

Given that Halifax Harbour Bridges is a self funded commission not supported by HRM maybe we will see tolls for cyclists. It would seem to be a poor business model to provide service for free. Time to start collecting tolls on the Macdonald.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

Very True. Chretien and company tried and nearly succeeded in shutting it all down back in the nineties until the Yanks had an Adult chat about how important the entire Eastern Passage industrial region is for NATO. We take it for granted because we live here but bigger heads look at the whole package.

The most Easterly terminus of the North American intercontinental Rail network ends at Auto port. CN can store and move over 10,000 vehicle's to a deep water load facility that can be turn over to military purposes in the snap of the finger. The Imperial Oil Tank Farm is also the closest collection of POL before to open Atlantic to get to Europe.

Shearwaters old main runway has not been used in years but at 8500 feet and reinforced it used to land the largest aircraft in the world including B-52's and fully loaded C-5 Galaxy Transports. Refurbishment if needed would probably take the U.S. military no time at all if they set their mind to it.


The deep water jetty in the Shearwater lower base is one of only 4 outside of the Continental U.S. that is safety certified to dock any U.S. or NATO Nuclear powered or armed Submarines.


Shearwater is not going anywhere.

Very interesting stuff!!

Maybe the federal government should seriously consider increasing Shearwater's role in our national defence strategy (although how to do this without impacting on CFB Greenwood would be problematic). Maybe the submarine fleet should be based on that jetty at Shearwater too. A move like this would improve operational readiness.........

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Antigonish

Man I learned a lot from this.

I guess the only possible replacement solution you think could be a whole new airstrip, base, and deep water naval port that could be in the Canso Straight along Point Tupper (East of Port Hawkesbury). By sea the Chedabucto Bay is 6-8hrs faster to Europe by sea than the Port of Halifax and the area is serviced by rail, oil refineries (similar to Woodside), and the straight is extremely deep and sheltered similar to Halifax.

The area north of Hwy 104 at St. Peter's Junction is flat, uninhabited, and is connected by highway & rail service, and large enough to build an entire base and airfield with direct connectivity to the port.

I'm also extremely biased as I'd love to see a ton of development and major growth for the area to take some strain off HRM

Interesting Idea and I believe there were initial plans to base Canadian Nuke Submarines in the Straight should the country have chosen to go that route with Mulroney's former Defense white paper. St Margaret's Bay however has a bigger part to play in any European emergency.

NATO would assemble the large convoys to replenish Europe in St Margaret's Bay as that body of water is close to the trained antisubmarine aviators at Shearwater ( about ten minutes flying time) and the Patrol capabilities of the 6 Kingston class Minesweepers.

It is a relatively sheltered large body of water that would replicate the Bedford Basin experience of WWII. Ships nowadays however are far larger than WWII so the only ships we would see in Halifax Harbor would be the ships picking up diverted Canadian goods that would not risk the journey down the St Lawrence. Canada lost the battle of the Gulf of St Lawrence in WWII.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Very interesting stuff!!

Maybe the federal government should seriously consider increasing Shearwater's role in our national defence strategy (although how to do this without impacting on CFB Greenwood would be problematic). Maybe the submarine fleet should be based on that jetty at Shearwater too. A move like this would improve operational readiness.........

Canada does not have a National Defense strategy. We have a what can we get away with strategy. Most Canadians are under the distinct impression that Murica will defend us but think that through. If American forces are on Canadian soil directly "protecting" us then the castle walls have been breached and you should run for your lives.

That's why American defense strategy has been to keep the trouble way over there . Wherever that is. Part of that thinking makes the Halifax area and its assets one of the most important spokes in Western defense. Ottawa only see's about 14 Miles down the Ottawa river. We see the World when we look out Halifax harbor.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Except taxpayers aren't footing the bill. Such is the genius of road tolls. Now if we can only figure out a way to collect them from those pesky cyclists.

Yes, I think road tolls are great. Now we just need 407 styled tolling along all provincial highways in HRM, paired with a London styled congestion charge for the peninsula (Just kidding). Although that does point to the limit of how much drivers are willing to pay at the toll if a third crossing ever came to be.

I was not alive when this controversy was going down, but a quick search of some library archives shows the financing of the Mackay did not go so smoothly. I'm guessing this wouldn't be a problem for its replacement since it's a pretty unique situation, but it goes to show tolls don't eliminate the risk of bad decision making.


Source: MALCOLM GRAY Globe and Mail Reporter
The Globe and Mail (1936-2017); Jun 19, 1979; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Globe and Mail
pg. 42

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

There would have to be a bigger goal than just relieving traffic. Such a project would support growth, but the congestion relief would only last a handful of years before that growth fills out. Halifax’s integrated mobility plan speaks to this as well. If the city were planning another Burnside-sized industrial park somewhere in Dartmouth for example (theoretically speaking), the additional crossing could be justified as supporting that economic activity.

Even for the growth we have, the benefit is not worth the burden.

I am confused. with a bridge on the northern part of the Circ and a new tunnel added to the southern part of the Circ, what is there a need for an industrial park? If anything, more subdivisions in the southern Dartmouth/Cole Harbour/Eastern Passage area would most likely happen.

Originally Posted by Antigonish

Man I learned a lot from this.

I guess the only possible replacement solution you think could be a whole new airstrip, base, and deep water naval port that could be in the Canso Straight along Point Tupper (East of Port Hawkesbury). By sea the Chedabucto Bay is 6-8hrs faster to Europe by sea than the Port of Halifax and the area is serviced by rail, oil refineries (similar to Woodside), and the straight is extremely deep and sheltered similar to Halifax.

The area north of Hwy 104 at St. Peter's Junction is flat, uninhabited, and is connected by highway & rail service, and large enough to build an entire base and airfield with direct connectivity to the port.

I'm also extremely biased as I'd love to see a ton of development and major growth for the area to take some strain off HRM

Why would you move that which you need? The base likely will never move. It is in a strategically good location. There may be other locations that may serve your needs, but they wouldn't better serve the CAF or NATO needs.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Very interesting stuff!!

Maybe the federal government should seriously consider increasing Shearwater's role in our national defence strategy (although how to do this without impacting on CFB Greenwood would be problematic). Maybe the submarine fleet should be based on that jetty at Shearwater too. A move like this would improve operational readiness.........

One thing it could do is locate the SAR with the Coast Guard more here. Use Shearwater as the main airport/heliport in this area.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I am confused. with a bridge on the northern part of the Circ and a new tunnel added to the southern part of the Circ, what is there a need for an industrial park? If anything, more subdivisions in the southern Dartmouth/Cole Harbour/Eastern Passage area would most likely happen.

A hypothetical industrial park was just an example, could have been anything big like a large subdivision where a large portion of the commuters go downtown.

It was meant to help illustrate that a third crossing would be meant to support something new & massive, not necessarily to make life easier for those using existing crossings.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

A hypothetical industrial park was just an example, could have been anything big like a large subdivision where a large portion of the commuters go downtown.

It was meant to help illustrate that a third crossing would be meant to support something new & massive, not necessarily to make life easier for those using existing crossings.

They won't build anything big without it. Right now, it is too much of a commute for an even bigger subdivision to be built. There is still not enough travel lanes across the harbour to support much more growth.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

They won't build anything big without it. Right now, it is too much of a commute for an even bigger subdivision to be built. There is still not enough travel lanes across the harbour to support much more growth.

There are new highway connections being built towards burnside, so I wonder what effect those will have on the area's growth.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

There are new highway connections being built towards burnside, so I wonder what effect those will have on the area's growth.

To southern Dartmouth and further south? Not much.