[Halifax] QE II Health Sciences Centre | ? | ? | U/C

[Jonovision]

I think he has valid points when it comes to the urban design of the complex. Sure we cannot expect everyone to ride the bus or the bike to get to the hospital. But this project is so large and on such a prominent site, it has the ability to create a more excited and animated connection between the Spring Garden Road area and Quinnpool and provide a nicer edge to the Commons. I think it would be a shame to waste that opportunity.

They could easily locate the parking more to the interior of the site and create active frontages along both Bell Road and Robie Street.

My biggest problem is that the city has spent so much time and effort to create the centre plan and with it a set of urban design guidelines and this will fly in the face of all of that because the Province will do whatever it wants and ignore what the city is trying to create.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

My biggest problem is that the city has spent so much time and effort to create the centre plan and with it a set of urban design guidelines and this will fly in the face of all of that because the Province will do whatever it wants and ignore what the city is trying to create.

It is probably the biggest development in the city in years, so it makes sense to put a lot of effort into not just the functional parts but the urban planning aspect as well. It could be a big asset to the city from an urban development perspective if implemented well.

Unfortunately I think the federal government (including DND) and province are the worst "developers" that operate in the city.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

The mindset seems to be to take away parking spaces to make it less convenient for people who need them, to force them to do something else. As you mention, it's better to make peoples' lives better by providing better options for them (i.e. better, more convenient transit, etc.) rather than forcing them into bad transit (or laughably in this case, bicycles) because they don't want people using their cars (the cars that people have spent their hard earned money on, to use in circumstances like these).

Anyhow, tactics of people with more extreme views like this can tend to turn off the average person, and make them see cycling advocacy, or the anti-car crowd in general, in a bad light. So be it - I'll be on site in the morning with my sign that says "More parking needed"...

This is the same philosophy being exercised by planners within the HRM bureaucracy and likely part of the current planning dogma being taught in planning schools. I have discussed HRM's war on motorists here before and been mocked for it, but this is exactly that all over again, in spades. This is the result of the inane "Vision Zero" movement rearing its ugly head yet again. The idea that there is a one-size-fits-all approach that can make people move to cycling and walking en masse is absurd on its face, but when applied to a hospital project like this one, goes way beyond even that.

[Colin May]

The opinion piece reflects the views of too many young people who have little or no life experience beyond school and university. Cleveland also opposed the location of the day surgery at Bayers Lake. I doubt he knows much about Nova Scotia other than peninsula Halifax and people under the age of 35. The peninsula has less than 20% of the HRM population; Tristan and his ilk think peninsula Halifax is the centre of the Maritimes universe. Sad.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Anyhow, tactics of people with more extreme views like this can tend to turn off the average person, and make them see cycling advocacy, or the anti-car crowd in general, in a bad light.

Great post, it's nice to read your perspective. I would have to add onto my previous post that unlike your average public parking, hospital parking is more of a necessity in the sense that your average shopper or worker won't use it - therefore it can't be attacked as promoting car use in quite the same way.

Our political science Ph.D. candidate seems to have missed diplomacy 101 (sorry Tristan)

[atbw]

While I would ~like~ to imagine a world where everyone visiting the hospital can do so via. alternative means, I think this one is more about minimizing the impact of parking vs. minimizing parking itself as Jono said.

Staff work long hours that aren't always well-suited to transit, and it makes sense for on-call staff to use the fastest possible way of getting there. And of course, a lot of folks who end up in hospital aren't necessarily in shape to get there by bike or bus.

Sure, if I need bloodwork as a 26-year old, I'll probably walk or bike, but that's not an option for everyone.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by atbw

While I would ~like~ to imagine a world where everyone visiting the hospital can do so via. alternative means, I think this one is more about minimizing the impact of parking vs. minimizing parking itself as Jono said.

Staff work long hours that aren't always well-suited to transit, and it makes sense for on-call staff to use the fastest possible way of getting there. And of course, a lot of folks who end up in hospital aren't necessarily in shape to get there by bike or bus.

Sure, if I need bloodwork as a 26-year old, I'll probably walk or bike, but that's not an option for everyone.

Plus this will be Nova Scotia's main hospital and will have a lot people from other parts of the province as well as from PEI and NB visiting, who will need a place to park.

[alps]

Threads like these are why I seldom visit this forum now. The piece makes two proposals:

1. Inclusion of some ground-level retail to soften all the blank walls
2. Less parking than is currently proposed. The piece is not arguing for no parking, as one might assume after seeing the reaction here.

If these suggestions are "radical" and "extreme" enough to prompt a chorus of rambling, ageist personal attacks then I have no hope for Nova Scotia.

[DigitalNinja]

Originally Posted by alps

Threads like these are why I seldom visit this forum now. The piece makes two proposals:

1. Inclusion of some ground-level retail to soften all the blank walls
2. Less parking than is currently proposed. The piece is not arguing for no parking, as one might assume after seeing the reaction here.

If these suggestions are "radical" and "extreme" enough to prompt a chorus of rambling, ageist personal attacks then I have no hope for Nova Scotia.

The main arguments without getting person are:

Inclusion of retail is silly as it is taking up valuable space for medical use, specially if it goes all along the blank wall - Which we don't even know it will be a blank wall. It could be open glass or something as we don't have detailed floor plans. Hospitals/government should not also be in the business of renting out retail spaces that are unrelated to hospitals and is a risky business specially with more people shopping online, especially this year.

In regards to parking - the hospital is getting expanded including a lot of additional services there ontop of what is already there. More parking will be needed. More parking then available beds will be required. You do not want a situation with someone arriving for a treatment needing to walk. I really think this is a no brainer. There are developments to argue these things about like retail and commercial buildings but this is a purpose use built by the government for what is required.

Tristian Cleveland is arguing the wrong side of this, and needs to pick better fights. If he really wanted to improve the city he would look at arguing for better material choice, speedier development process, more housing to fix our housing crisis. Not parking and retail at a hospital.

[alps]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

Inclusion of retail is silly as it is taking up valuable space for medical use, specially if it goes all along the blank wall - Which we don't even know it will be a blank wall. It could be open glass or something as we don't have detailed floor plans. Hospitals/government should not also be in the business of renting out retail spaces that are unrelated to hospitals and is a risky business specially with more people shopping online, especially this year.

Hospitals already include some provision of retail and F+B spaces which principally serve the needs of staff and visitors (e.g. drug stores, coffee shops, eateries, gift shops). I don't think anyone is suggesting that the hospital should compete with the Halifax Shopping Centre. But a marginal increase in retail and more thoughtfulness regarding the disposition of the various programmatic elements could make a huge difference.

This is a massive project on a prominent site which will greatly impact the feel of the area for decades to come. Bell Road is a primary route into downtown Halifax. Given the urban context, it is hardly "extreme" nor "radical" to ask for some consideration to be given to urban design. As someone123 pointed out, hospitals can be beautiful, well designed, and nicely integrated with the city. As they often are elsewhere. But I guess that argument doesn't mean anything as long as it comes from a "young person" with "little or no life experience beyond school and university".

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

In regards to parking - the hospital is getting expanded including a lot of additional services there ontop of what is already there. More parking will be needed. More parking then available beds will be required. You do not want a situation with someone arriving for a treatment needing to walk. I really think this is a no brainer. There are developments to argue these things about like retail and commercial buildings but this is a purpose use built by the government for what is required.

The piece merely argues for less parking than is currently proposed. Which would most likely still mean an increase from what is currently provided on the site. I am failing to see the "extreme" or "radical" side to this. Nobody is forcing anyone to cycle to the hospital. Visitors, who are prioritised under the QEII's parking policy, will still be able to park there.

[alps]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The opinion piece reflects the views of too many young people who have little or now life experience beyond school and university. Cleveland also opposed the location of the day surgery at Bayers Lake. I doubt he knows much about Nova Scotia other than peninsula Halifax and people under the age of 35. The peninsula has less than 20% of the HRM population; Tristan and his ilk think peninsula Halifax is the centre of the Maritimes universe. Sad.

I understand that the mods take a generally hands-off approach here. But these bizarre, ageist personal attacks contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by alps

Hospitals already include some provision of retail and F+B spaces which principally serve the needs of staff and visitors (e.g. drug stores, coffee shops, eateries, gift shops). I don't think anyone is suggesting that the hospital should compete with the Halifax Shopping Centre. But a marginal increase in retail and more thoughtfulness regarding the disposition of the various programmatic elements could make a huge difference.

This is a massive project on a prominent site which will greatly impact the feel of the area for decades to come. Bell Road is a primary route into downtown Halifax. Given the urban context, it is hardly "extreme" nor "radical" to ask for some consideration to be given to urban design. As someone123 pointed out, hospitals can be beautiful, well designed, and nicely integrated with the city. As they often are elsewhere. But I guess that argument doesn't mean anything as long as it comes from a "young person" with "little or no life experience beyond school and university".

The piece merely argues for less parking than is currently proposed. Which would most likely still mean an increase from what is currently provided on the site. I am failing to see the "extreme" or "radical" side to this. Nobody is forcing anyone to cycle to the hospital. Visitors, who are prioritised under the QEII's parking policy, will still be able to park there.

I’m sure the shops that will already be part of the project could be re-oriented within the structure to face the street, providing dual inside/street access. I would like to see the parking take up less space, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say parking spots should be cut just because it’s aesthetically pleasing. I’m all for making use of derelict parking spaces and encouraging other modes of transportation, but I don’t think hospital parking should be treated as your average parkade because it doesn’t serve the same crowd. Space that’s potentially underused? Yup, but better safe than sorry. Encouraging car use? Not quite.

While the proposals in the opinion piece alone aren’t too radical, I think we should be realistic about where the recommendations are coming from. I actually think those at Happy City (speculation here) would champion themselves as advocates for radical change. I don’t think it’s one bit insulting to call them radical, and it would help differentiate special interest groups from administrators.

I’m somewhat paraphrasing Lefebvre’s “Production of Space”, where he claims a group of “reactionaries” will protest the loss of a certain privilege (Peggy Cameron), followed by “radicals” who join the movement because it aligns with their objectives (Tristan Cleveland). By characterizing someone or their movement as radical, I’m trying to accurately describe how this space is being shaped.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by alps

I understand that the mods take a generally hands-off approach here. But these bizarre, ageist personal attacks contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion.

I find it ironic how you characterize the comments. Mr. Cleveland has a long track record via his often-bizarre weekly columns for a now-defunct newspaper of doing the exact same thing, just at the opposite extreme, much like the piece in question here.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by alps

Threads like these are why I seldom visit this forum now. The piece makes two proposals:

1. Inclusion of some ground-level retail to soften all the blank walls
2. Less parking than is currently proposed. The piece is not arguing for no parking, as one might assume after seeing the reaction here.

If these suggestions are "radical" and "extreme" enough to prompt a chorus of rambling, ageist personal attacks then I have no hope for Nova Scotia.

I don't understand how any of the discussion here would be seen as a personal attack. Can you explain?

I suppose I can see how it could be perceived as ageism, albeit loosely at most. I can't speak for others, but whether younger people realize it or not, age and experience gives you a perspective that you just don't have when you are 25... I know, because I've been there. In my mind, when I was 25 I was indestructible and capable of anything... however, in retrospect I realize that my thoughts as a 25 year old were somewhat naive and idealistic... the reality of life that I experienced subsequent to that revealed experiences and nuances that I could not have imagined at that age.

So, to say that somebody suggesting that we should turn the screws on people going to the hospital by reducing parking, and thus forcing them to take a bus or ride a bicycle, seems naive to me... i.e. somebody who hasn't experienced the need, due to illness or transporting an ill loved one, to take a simple car ride to a parkade, and a dry, ice-free walk or wheelchair ride through a pedway etc. to hospital reception. Hence the comment. If that's ageism, then sorry, but it's a fact that a 60 year old knows what it's like to be a 20 year old, but a 20 year old does not know what it's like to be a 60 year old. By the time you hit 60, then you have probably experienced the situation described above - if you haven't, consider yourself lucky.

Y'know? It actually seems a little strange to read the charge of ageism in this regard, as more often than not (mostly in the "Canada" section), you don't have to read long to come across "boomer" this and "boomer" that, or covid is no problem because it only affects old people, etc... yet nobody complains of ageism in those circumstances...

Regarding making the hospital more attractive and welcoming to the street? Yeah, I agree, but I think that using the hospital building for hospital purposes should be the first priority. I think governments walk a fine line because if they make it too pretty then people will complain that they are wasting tax dollars... if too austere then people complain that it's ugly and not inviting at the street level... damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Saul Goode]

Thank you OldDartmouthMark. You saved me a lot of typing, and I'm a lousy typist.

The notion that the ideas expressed in this thread are "ageist personal attacks" is, to me, simply inane. Even worse is the notion that it's so awful that it would keep someone from reading or posting here or to "have no hope for Nova Scotia".

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by alps

I understand that the mods take a generally hands-off approach here. But these bizarre, ageist personal attacks contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Oh My, I will tell you a little story about my younger years as I turn sixty this coming October. When I graduated from Dalhousie back in 83 my father asked me to sum up my experience in a paragraph. I told him I could do it in less than a sentence. "I know nothing" I replied. "You have learned well my son" was Dad's reply .

Think about that .

The Old man BTW kept learning his entire life and earned the O"Brien medal in Irish studies at St Mary's . At 65. His fourth Degree.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I suppose I can see how it could be perceived as ageism, albeit loosely at most. I can't speak for others, but whether younger people realize it or not, age and experience gives you a perspective that you just don't have when you are 25... I know, because I've been there. In my mind, when I was 25 I was indestructible and capable of anything... however, in retrospect I realize that my thoughts as a 25 year old were somewhat naive and idealistic... the reality of life that I experienced subsequent to that revealed experiences and nuances that I could not have imagined at that age.

I don't doubt this but you are comparing yourself at a more advanced age to yourself at a younger age. It is different when considering two different people, including people who in many cases actually do have education as well as professional experience. Does every 60 year old know more about planning than every 30 year old, even the 30 year old who has a graduate degree in planning and 5 years of work experience?

I think for the most part, on the internet, it is best to stick to the facts and the subject matter rather than the personalities involved and whether their opinion should have more or less weight. The ages of commenters are largely neither here nor there when considering the pluses and minuses of building storefront retail into the hospital. Actually I'd put it more strongly and say that a lot of people try to invalidate the opinion of others as a shortcut to discounting things they don't like to hear when they don't have a compelling argument. That can take the form of "OK Boomer" or "those young whippersnappers just don't have any life experience...".

[mleblanc]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't doubt this but you are comparing yourself at a more advanced age to yourself at a younger age. It is different when considering two different people, including people who in many cases actually do have education as well as professional experience. Does every 60 year old know more about planning than every 30 year old, even the 30 year old who has a graduate degree in planning and 5 years of work experience?

I think for the most part, on the internet, it is best to stick to the facts and the subject matter rather than the personalities involved and whether their opinion should have more or less weight. The ages of commenters are largely neither here nor there when considering the pluses and minuses of building storefront retail into the hospital. Actually I'd put it more strongly and say that a lot of people try to invalidate the opinion of others as a shortcut to discounting things they don't like to hear when they don't have a compelling argument. That can take the form of "OK Boomer" or "those young whippersnappers just don't have any life experience...".

This was really well said, and I wished more people shared this point of view.

Personally, I think that strip along Bell Road would be really well suited for a few ground level retail spots that could integrate into the hospital. I think hospital patients would appreciate a sense of normality, and it would connect Quinpool more to the commons and South Park.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by mleblanc

Personally, I think that strip along Bell Road would be really well suited for a few ground level retail spots that could integrate into the hospital. I think hospital patients would appreciate a sense of normality, and it would connect Quinpool more to the commons and South Park.

I don't personally have anything against street front retail facing Bell Street as part of the hospital facade, but it should be noted that there really isn't that much of a nearby residential population base (not like SGR or Quinpool), and, most of the business would likely be driven by hospital employees. For this reason, interior entrances are imperative.

External entrances could also be done, but then hospital security becomes an issue with people potentially bypassing the main hospital entrance to gain access to the building. This could be an issue at times like the current pandemic, or if there is a security alert for whatever reason (absconding patient, armed suspect, drug theft etc).

Finally, I want to again strongly emphasize the importance of parking in any hospital facility. This is of immense concern to patients, visitors, staff and physicians. For the love of God, don't cut back on the planned parking in this building for any reason..........

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't doubt this but you are comparing yourself at a more advanced age to yourself at a younger age.

You are correct. i am.

Originally Posted by someone123

It is different when considering two different people, including people who in many cases actually do have education as well as professional experience. Does every 60 year old know more about planning than every 30 year old, even the 30 year old who has a graduate degree in planning and 5 years of work experience?

Yes, it is different, but it's not a competition to determine who knows more about planning. One shouldn't need a planning degree to understand the situation - just some empathy to realize that hospital parking isn't an area where an agenda needs to be pushed.

This empathy is often gained by going through these experiences during life events, which one tends to accumulate as they age - but you are correct in that one doesn't have to be 'old' to have experienced such events.

I spent 9 years of my twenties helping my mother deal with her fight against cancer until she passed away at age 60 - there were many hospital visits during that time for surgery, treatments, check-ups, etc. The parking situation at the VG wasn't great, but it was adequate... and necessary. Perhaps I shouldn't, but I take it very personally when somebody suggests that it's a good idea to squeeze people going through stressful, and sometimes devastating, life events such as this for the simple reason of advancing an anti-car agenda. Actually it infuriates me.

So I apologize if what I posted seems 'ageist'. I was really thinking that somebody who lacks empathy for patients, their families, and medical staff (who devote their lives to helping people when things are at their worst) surely must have never gone through anything like this.

Originally Posted by someone123

Actually I'd put it more strongly and say that a lot of people try to invalidate the opinion of others as a shortcut to discounting things they don't like to hear when they don't have a compelling argument. That can take the form of "OK Boomer" or "those young whippersnappers just don't have any life experience...".

I don't think this is the case here.