[Halifax] The Marlstone (1871 Albemarle) | 19 FL | U/C

[Drybrain]

Toronto's Eaton Centre went through a rough patch in the 90s, but it always kept its head above water. (If anything, the Eaton Centre's success contributed to the decline of Yonge Street, just outside its doors). Part of the Eaton Centre facade was rebuilt some years ago to have storefronts facing the street, which helped some.

Toronto has failed downtown malls too though, like Hazelton Lanes in Yorkville, or the Atrium on Bay.

Isn't a new transit hub downtown in the cards when Cogswell comes down? The current situation is truly terrible.

[teddifax]

I always wondered if Scotia Square could be re-engineered/designed. I believe a lot of the equipment for the centre is behind that wall on Barrington St. This complex, as everyone has said, has been so poorly designed with street front access in mind. I don't know if it is possible, but it would be wonderful to open up the whole corner entrance and Barrington St. as well maybe lowering the lower mall level to be level with Barrington St. This probably a dream, but usually, if you can think of something, it can be done. Maybe all the equipment can be relocated within the complex or build underneath street level.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Well, Scotia Square is the downtown transit hub for Metro Transit. It is usually overrun with buses. The problem is that Metro Transit is not very good, is seen as a system of last resort by many, and does not serve nearly the same percentage of daily travelers as the TTC.

As Someone123 said, Eaton Centre in Toronto is a much more welcoming space from street level than SS. Plus it is built on level ground, unlike SS which is poorly designed for any sort of pedestrian access - essentially inaccessible from Barrington, the main mall entrance a small almost invisible area on the side of a steep hill, the backside entrance on Abermarle buried deep into a spooky plaza, and no north side entrance whatsoever. It would be hard to design worse access in reality.

Originally Posted by someone123

The Scotia Square terminal is truly awful. It has no amenities, it is not intermodal, it's unpleasant and ugly, and there is nothing convenient near where the buses stop. It is crazy that Halifax has a giant concrete bunker that covers many blocks but the buses are outside along Barrington and rail doesn't even come downtown. Of course many of the transit routes themselves don't meaningfully relate to each other either.

A real version of Scotia Square would be a sheltered or indoor (i.e. comfortable year-round) bus loop surrounded by shop fronts plus ferry terminal and ideally rail (could be VIA and commuter rail with underground connections to both north and south rail lines).

In the Vancouver area developers and the transit authority are just starting to get this right. This article is from 2005; the transit hub and mall are all up and running now and have turned out to be very successful: http://www.6717000.com/blog/2005/10/...w-westminster/

Hard to disagree with a lot here -- mainly that Scotia Square is truly awful in its design; the Barrington side, with the long blank wall, is the absolute worse.

All that space, and concrete, and brick, and they still managed to find a way to ensure every single bus passenger had to stand freezing in the cold for buses heading in both directions on the street.

I also still think the major new Dartmouth bus terminal should have been moved from that dumb parking lot at Sportsplex to Alderney Gates, which would have been perfect to expand into a better terminal, which would have also encouraged more ferry use because the ferries would be right there at the terminal.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Hard to disagree with a lot here -- mainly that Scotia Square is truly awful in its design; the Barrington side, with the long blank wall, is the absolute worse.

All that space, and concrete, and brick, and they still managed to find a way to ensure every single bus passenger had to stand freezing in the cold for buses heading in both directions on the street.

I also still think the major new Dartmouth bus terminal should have been moved from that dumb parking lot at Sportsplex to Alderney Gates, which would have been perfect to expand into a better terminal, which would have also encouraged more ferry use because the ferries would be right there at the terminal.

I have to agree with all of the above-mentioned points. Humourously, I can remember in times past when I inadvertently walked into the upper Duke Tower entrance on my way to go into the mall. It's the more-welcoming entrance, and it's right off the crosswalk. Had my mind on other things and felt a little dumb, but really what a lousy design - definitely does not welcome the shopper. I seem to recall that I read here somewhere that initially the main entrance was designed to be on Market/Abermarle St, but was changed somewhere along the line.

The Barrington dead zone has always been horrible - the new addition currently being added will help it somewhat but will not correct the blank wall problem at the bus stop. As mentioned, I think it's time for a total rethink on that blank wall at Barrington. It's obvious by the new additions that Scotia Square is not going away, so why not try to bring it up to contemporary urban standards to make it more functional for the future? Who knows, with the changes happening in the neighborhood, including the reconfiguration of Cogswell (and possible relocation of the 'transit hub', SS could have a whole new lease on life for the next half-century.

The Dartmouth Sportsplex terminal has always been a bad idea IMHO, and seems to be a bit of a crime area to boot. The Ferry Terminal site would seem to be a much better location to me.

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by teddifax

I always wondered if Scotia Square could be re-engineered/designed. I believe a lot of the equipment for the centre is behind that wall on Barrington St. This complex, as everyone has said, has been so poorly designed with street front access in mind. I don't know if it is possible, but it would be wonderful to open up the whole corner entrance and Barrington St. as well maybe lowering the lower mall level to be level with Barrington St. This probably a dream, but usually, if you can think of something, it can be done. Maybe all the equipment can be relocated within the complex or build underneath street level.

Barrington street is the back of the building. The corner entrance on Duke was an afterthought when the city refused to move the transit terminal to market street where it was intended to be.

[Ziobrop]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

I also still think the major new Dartmouth bus terminal should have been moved from that dumb parking lot at Sportsplex to Alderney Gates, which would have been perfect to expand into a better terminal, which would have also encouraged more ferry use because the ferries would be right there at the terminal.

this. the terminal needs to be a multi-modal transfer point. its stupid that i get off the ferry and have to take a bus to the bus terminal to switch to the bus i want to take. In one case i walked it faster.

[teddifax]

I really don't understand what kind of plan exists for Halifax Transit..... why things are built where they are, nothing makes much sense. Bus Terminals built away from Ferry Terminals, in both the Dartmouth and Halifax sides of the harbour. Is it possible (if we were to get our wishes in an ideal world), to re-develop the Halifax side and Bus terminal, along with a rebuilding of the Law Courts site to have a functional Transit terminal, at least in Downtown Halifax? The Dartmouth terminal has unfortunately already been built, so running shuttle buses from the ferry terminal to the transit terminal on a non-stop basis to connect up with buses there, would be a solution (if this isn't already done). The Halifax idea, I believe is doable. The Law Courts building is really not an attractive building and doesn't really fit the property on which it sits. I believe something to be done to make this a much better area. I know it has been mentioned about the Cogswell land redevelopment as an option for the transit terminal but that would perpetuate the problem that already exists. Maybe just rambling here, but I get so frustrated at the running of Halifax Transit. If you build it they will come idea, doesn't necessarily work with Transit. More thought and dollars must be used to make our transit system viable.

[IanWatson]

Well it's pretty easy to see why the bus hub was not built at the ferry terminal. The hub where it is is at the crossing points of a huge number of routes, many of which do not go south into Dartmouth. That extra distance can (each way) be 2 minutes, up to 7 or 8 minutes if traffic is bad. That means 4 to 16 unnecessary minutes added to most of the routes that use that hub.

I think the thing they could do is better coordinate the buses hitting Alderney with the arrival times of the ferries. Then it wouldn't be a big deal to get off the ferry and hop a bus up the hill to the hub.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I think the thing they could do is better coordinate the buses hitting Alderney with the arrival times of the ferries. Then it wouldn't be a big deal to get off the ferry and hop a bus up the hill to the hub.

That is almost impossible now. I have waited 30 minutes at Queen Square for a bus up to the terminal. It is absurd.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Well it's pretty easy to see why the bus hub was not built at the ferry terminal. The hub where it is is at the crossing points of a huge number of routes, many of which do not go south into Dartmouth. That extra distance can (each way) be 2 minutes, up to 7 or 8 minutes if traffic is bad. That means 4 to 16 unnecessary minutes added to most of the routes that use that hub.

I think the thing they could do is better coordinate the buses hitting Alderney with the arrival times of the ferries. Then it wouldn't be a big deal to get off the ferry and hop a bus up the hill to the hub.

Your argument cuts the other way as well. There are countless major routes coming from the other direction (Penhorn Mall, Portland Street, Cole Harbour, etc) that have to add extra minutes onto their drive, which could be shortened if they ended their stop at the Ferry Terminal.

Given that one of the central "rapid" transit rides in the City (The Link) begins in Cole Harbour and terminates at Duke, it suggests ridership is actually heavier in that direction.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

Your argument cuts the other way as well. There are countless major routes coming from the other direction (Penhorn Mall, Portland Street, Cole Harbour, etc) that have to add extra minutes onto their drive, which could be shortened if they ended their stop at the Ferry Terminal.

Given that one of the central "rapid" transit rides in the City (The Link) begins in Cole Harbour and terminates at Duke, it suggests ridership is actually heavier in that direction.

But almost all of those routes continue past Alderney and go up the hill. All of the Portland routes go across the bridge. You're not saving any time by having them stop at Alderney instead of stopping at the bridge.

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

But almost all of those routes continue past Alderney and go up the hill. All of the Portland routes go across the bridge. You're not saving any time by having them stop at Alderney instead of stopping at the bridge.

Yes, those particular have to go up the hill, but my point, is that it's worth promoting ferry use (which will lessen the traffic/load going over the bridge) by having routes coming in the other direction go a little further down the hill at a more multi-nodal Alderney terminal. And while the Link and a few others routes coming from Portland go over the bridge, most terminate at the Dartmouth terminal.

[lawsond]

The major problem as Keith points out is elevation. They attempted to build a mal like the underground TD in Toronto ot PVM in Mtl. Even the storefronts had that look. And the original food court was fun but surrounded by darkness. It was the way downtown malls were built but they were not built for steep hills at all so an urban planning disaster ensued. Eaton Centre is a pretty good stab at getting it right. All that said, SS brought more people downtown to work and shop and was a catalyst for more towers and amenities. SS was a confidence builder for a downtown n steep decline. Without it, i doubt we'd have the vibrancy we now have. The problem is they did the right thing tragically wrong.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by lawsond

The major problem as Keith points out is elevation. They attempted to build a mal like the underground TD in Toronto ot PVM in Mtl. Even the storefronts had that look. And the original food court was fun but surrounded by darkness. It was the way downtown malls were built but they were not built for steep hills at all so an urban planning disaster ensued. Eaton Centre is a pretty good stab at getting it right. All that said, SS brought more people downtown to work and shop and was a catalyst for more towers and amenities. SS was a confidence builder for a downtown n steep decline. Without it, i doubt we'd have the vibrancy we now have. The problem is they did the right thing tragically wrong.

That's a very interesting take on it, and I would say bang-on.

[Keith P.]

HRM planners strike again! Another year's delay:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/busines...urther-delayed

[counterfactual]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

HRM planners strike again! Another year's delay:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/busines...urther-delayed

Why is it so damn difficult?

[gm_scott]

If they weren't asking for two variances, it would go much faster.

[IanWatson]

Seems reasonable. It'll take a couple of months for the variance process and a couple of more months for the developer to put together construction drawings.

I'm not holding my breath, but it'd be really great if the DRC denied the tower width variance request. Just because this proposed tower is clad in glass doesn't make it any better than other massive slabs that we complain about on Scotia Square.

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Seems reasonable. It'll take a couple of months for the variance process and a couple of more months for the developer to put together construction drawings.

I'm not holding my breath, but it'd be really great if the DRC denied the tower width variance request. Just because this proposed tower is clad in glass doesn't make it any better than other massive slabs that we complain about on Scotia Square.

I completely agree. This is now the 3rd or 4th building asking for a width variance which has basically rendered the width requirement in the downtown LUB null and void, since not one of the new towers has adhered to it.

To be perfectly frank I would much rather see the rampart bylaw relaxed or abolished. Give the developers the extra space they need on top, just keep the towers skinny. After all, what is more important. The view a few thousand tourists see a year, and yet no nothing about as it is not discussed outside of the planning realm; or the experience of thousands of pedestrians both local and tourists alike who walk through our downtown everyday.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

Give the developers the extra space they need on top, just keep the towers skinny.

Thing is, I'm not even sure they NEED the extra space. They had drawings done up and were ready to go with a building that was a fraction of the size. But now we have a situation where in six years of HRMxD, EVERY variance request has been granted. So it's no surprise they're asking for more, because why wouldn't they?