HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2010, 11:44 AM
something_witty's Avatar
something_witty something_witty is offline
Watching & Waiting
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 25
A lot of the issue with capacity on the McDonald is when heading to Halifax from Dartmouth. 5 toll gates are supposed to merge into 1, or 2 lanes depending on the day. Another thing is you have to pick your lane to plan your exit, because if you chose the left lane, and you decide you want to take the Barrington exit, good luck. No one will let you in.
I'm looking out my office window now and both lanes are backed all the way up to the toll gates. Nothing moving, probably another accident.

A reason that I would use the McKay coming from Cole Harbour is that it's very straightforward. You get on the highway, pass through the toll, cross the bridge and pick your exit. If I was to take the Circ and take the McDonald, you have to exit at Woodland, turn left on Victoria, turn right down Nantucket, and it feels like it takes so much longer than if you were to just keep on the highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2010, 1:00 PM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
A North West Arm tunnel would certainly have less visual impact than a bridge. Calling it the Mini-Dig might be preferable. "Big Dig" conjures up ideas of the massive multibillion dollar project in Boston to bury some of its highways - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig .
Yup the Boston Big Dig is exactly what I was drawing the comparison to. Not saying that it is to be the same scale etc, but simply that that "sort" of project was what I was meaning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2010, 1:02 PM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by something_witty View Post
A lot of the issue with capacity on the McDonald is when heading to Halifax from Dartmouth. 5 toll gates are supposed to merge into 1, or 2 lanes depending on the day. Another thing is you have to pick your lane to plan your exit, because if you chose the left lane, and you decide you want to take the Barrington exit, good luck. No one will let you in.
I'm looking out my office window now and both lanes are backed all the way up to the toll gates. Nothing moving, probably another accident.

A reason that I would use the McKay coming from Cole Harbour is that it's very straightforward. You get on the highway, pass through the toll, cross the bridge and pick your exit. If I was to take the Circ and take the McDonald, you have to exit at Woodland, turn left on Victoria, turn right down Nantucket, and it feels like it takes so much longer than if you were to just keep on the highway.
Yeah when I lived in CH I tried either taking the Circ followed by the Mackay and then on to Robie, or taking Portland to Alderney to the Macdonald... and it was always faster (when there was heavy traffic) to take the longer route across the Mackay.

I totally agree with the other comment made in the post above that what should have been told is controlled access exits off of each end.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2010, 2:05 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyeas View Post
Yeah when I lived in CH I tried either taking the Circ followed by the Mackay and then on to Robie, or taking Portland to Alderney to the Macdonald... and it was always faster (when there was heavy traffic) to take the longer route across the Mackay.

I totally agree with the other comment made in the post above that what should have been told is controlled access exits off of each end.
So if another harbour crossing is required sometime in the future do you think that a twin MacKay would be acceptable (maybe more direct connections to the Halifax mainland could be part of such a bridge)?

Here is an idea - have all vehicular traffic on the MacKay Bridge and twin it when necessary (with another MacKay Bridge) and convert the MacDonald to bus lanes only and even LRT without vehicular traffic. Possibly the center lane could be LRT and the two outer lanes could be just for buses. Possibly the MacDonald Bridge could just be open to vehicular traffic during none rush hour periods (week nights and weekends).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2010, 7:17 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,006
I have been railing on for years about the brain-dead traffic designs at either end of either bridge (Dartmouth approaches to the MacKay excepted, aside from the speed trap that they set up approaching the tolls -- an excellent revenue generator but precisely the wrong thing to do for traffic flow). Where do we start? At the Halifax end of the MacKay we have the abomination known as the Windsor St exchange, which was obsolete the day it was opened and is a total failure in design. You know its bad when the most efficient way to get on the bridge is to take the Lady Hammond lane and make a U-turn partway up the hill to double back onto the bridge. That entire thing needs to be abandoned and a proper grade-separated interchange constructed.

But that is minor compared to the MacDonald. Everything about the approaches at either end is all wrong. A grade-separated interchange needs to be built at Wyse Rd and the crosswalk partway up the hill at Nantucket needs to be abandoned in favor of an overhead or tunnel design for pedestrians. The same thing needs to be done for the crosswalk on the Halifax side and a better solution to accessing Gottingen St needs to be found. Heading to Dartmouth the bridge deck needs to be widened prior to the toll plaza to eliminate the backup of traffic in the left turning lane and if nothing else, some lines need to be painted on the roadway in both directions to try and impose some lane discipline on drivers who currently dart willy-nilly from tollgate to tollgate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2010, 10:15 AM
beyeas beyeas is offline
Fizzix geek
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South End, Hali
Posts: 1,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
I have been railing on for years about the brain-dead traffic designs at either end of either bridge (Dartmouth approaches to the MacKay excepted, aside from the speed trap that they set up approaching the tolls -- an excellent revenue generator but precisely the wrong thing to do for traffic flow). Where do we start? At the Halifax end of the MacKay we have the abomination known as the Windsor St exchange, which was obsolete the day it was opened and is a total failure in design. You know its bad when the most efficient way to get on the bridge is to take the Lady Hammond lane and make a U-turn partway up the hill to double back onto the bridge. That entire thing needs to be abandoned and a proper grade-separated interchange constructed.

But that is minor compared to the MacDonald. Everything about the approaches at either end is all wrong. A grade-separated interchange needs to be built at Wyse Rd and the crosswalk partway up the hill at Nantucket needs to be abandoned in favor of an overhead or tunnel design for pedestrians. The same thing needs to be done for the crosswalk on the Halifax side and a better solution to accessing Gottingen St needs to be found. Heading to Dartmouth the bridge deck needs to be widened prior to the toll plaza to eliminate the backup of traffic in the left turning lane and if nothing else, some lines need to be painted on the roadway in both directions to try and impose some lane discipline on drivers who currently dart willy-nilly from tollgate to tollgate.
Hey, something we agree on! Cool! LOL
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2010, 10:58 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Here is a (fantasy) North West Arm Tunnel sketch with connectors to Robie and Barrington (it wouldn't all have to be completed at one time). If the grain elevators are ever torn down then it could follow that route (although it could be done without tearing the grain elevators down).

Part of this route is actually industrial land (grain elevators and rail yards).


Last edited by fenwick16; Jun 19, 2010 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2010, 5:14 PM
Canadian_Bacon's Avatar
Canadian_Bacon Canadian_Bacon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 239
^ That would be amazing if that could be done. Imagine the growth boom that area would experience. (Especially around Williams Lake etc.)

Plus with that plan, Point Pleasant Park is untouched.
__________________
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
- Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 2:56 AM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
A lot of expropriation involved in this idea Fenwick - but I think the principle is sound. One thing I'd say might work slightly better is to actually have another crossing at South Street. With two principle crossings (the rotary at or exceeding capacity now) and then this tunnel - it won't take long to reach capacity with a tunnel and if it's one designed to deal with 4 or 6 lanes - where else would the traffic go?

Although it would cost more; I'd support another tunnel at south street across and popping up by the dingle park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 3:45 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by halifaxboyns View Post
A lot of expropriation involved in this idea Fenwick - but I think the principle is sound. One thing I'd say might work slightly better is to actually have another crossing at South Street. With two principle crossings (the rotary at or exceeding capacity now) and then this tunnel - it won't take long to reach capacity with a tunnel and if it's one designed to deal with 4 or 6 lanes - where else would the traffic go?

Although it would cost more; I'd support another tunnel at south street across and popping up by the dingle park.
I think a South Street or Coburg crossing would be good also.

For the passage shown above, there would be some expropriation, but mostly it would involve widening Pine Hill Drive and Harbourview Drive to the edge of the rail-cut since there are no homes on the northern side of Pine Hill Drive and Harbourview Drive (next to the rail-cut). Here is the Google map - http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&rlz...ed=0CBYQ8gEwAA

I think the real estate on the southern Halifax Mainland (near Williams Lake) would increase dramatically with such a crossing. For the passageway shown above, I think about 10 to 15 homes would be required; maybe these home owners could be offered new homes on the South Halifax Mainland (just about a 10 minute walk from their previous neighbourhood with a tunnel or bridge).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 4:07 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Here is a (fantasy) North West Arm Tunnel sketch with connectors to Robie and Barrington (it wouldn't all have to be completed at one time). If the grain elevators are ever torn down then it could follow that route (although it could be done without tearing the grain elevators down).

Part of this route is actually industrial land (grain elevators and rail yards).

Good idea though it would never see the light of day since the blue line lies right on Sue Uteck's property.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 4:50 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmajackson View Post
Good idea though it would never see the light of day since the blue line lies right on Sue Uteck's property.
Unfortunately, I think you are probably right. However, I think that it is dumbfounding that a North West Arm bridge was never built. Such a bridge makes more sense than another bridge across the harbour.

Last edited by fenwick16; Jun 21, 2010 at 5:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 12:14 PM
Wishblade's Avatar
Wishblade Wishblade is offline
You talkin' to me?
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 1,322
I think this sketchup for the northwest arm would work quite well. It has all the major street connections that would be able to handle the traffic flow.

Another thing I find interesting is if this were ever done, and a 3rd bridge built from the 111 to the rail cut connector road, we would have a true ring highway covering Halifax and Dartmouth

Also, I wonder if south end residents would be opposed to a tunnel. Their main concern seems to be their boats getting under it, and maintaining the natural look of the area.

Last edited by Wishblade; Jun 21, 2010 at 12:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 9:39 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,694
I think that eventually they should just do a traffic study and create some renderings of what an actual bridge would look like, asking people what alternative they'd prefer rather than asking them whether or not they'd like more traffic through their neighbourhood.

Nobody ever likes increased traffic but it has to go somewhere.

Another huge issue in Halifax is that people freak out before they have any idea what is actually being proposed. This isn't terribly surprising since rather than evaluating a proposal they imagine some dramatic worst-case hypothetical proposal. It's entirely possible to build something hideous over the Arm and destroy it but it's also very easy to build reasonable crossings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 11:20 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
When was this NW Arm Drive constructed? Based on the road name and the general route that it takes, it seems like the intention was to have it connect to a North West Arm crossing. But now homes are being built in its way.

Interesting note - The Halifax Harbour Bridges (Halifax Dartmouth Bridge Commission) has authority over the harbour bridges and any North West Arm bridge - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Harbour_Bridges


Last edited by fenwick16; Jun 21, 2010 at 11:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2010, 11:57 PM
hfx_chris hfx_chris is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 1,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
When was this NW Arm Drive constructed? Based on the road name and the general route that it takes, it seems like the intention was to have it connect to a North West Arm crossing.
Correct, it was originally supposed to cross the NW Arm and connect with the proposed Harbour Drive along the downtown waterfront and the Cogswell Interchange.
Not sure though exactly where it was supposed to cross.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2010, 12:03 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfx_chris View Post
Correct, it was originally supposed to cross the NW Arm and connect with the proposed Harbour Drive along the downtown waterfront and the Cogswell Interchange.
Not sure though exactly where it was supposed to cross.
Harbour Drive plan here; http://halifax.ca/archives/documents...rbourDrive.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2010, 1:20 AM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Thanks for the information. Interesting where they have the crossing drawn. It looks like they are following the rail cut tracks. Very similar to what I drew, except my drawing was shifted to the south above the rail cut instead of through it. (I should have done more research - it would have saved me a lot of time drawing my own sketches).

I don't think that this NW Arm crossing should be abandoned - just don't go through downtown Halifax. I agree with Keith P. - neither Sue Uteck or anyone else has the right to stop debate on the North West Arm crossing. This is a democracy and we all have the right to consider whether or not this is good for the Halifax Regional Municipality (at least residents should consider it).

Last edited by fenwick16; Jun 22, 2010 at 2:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2010, 4:23 AM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
Thanks for the information. Interesting where they have the crossing drawn. It looks like they are following the rail cut tracks. Very similar to what I drew, except my drawing was shifted to the south above the rail cut instead of through it. (I should have done more research - it would have saved me a lot of time drawing my own sketches).

I don't think that this NW Arm crossing should be abandoned - just don't go through downtown Halifax. I agree with Keith P. - neither Sue Uteck or anyone else has the right to stop debate on the North West Arm crossing. This is a democracy and we all have the right to consider whether or not this is good for the Halifax Regional Municipality (at least residents should consider it).
She may be able to stop the debate for now - but it's not going away. It will come up again and again and again. She won't be there forever - at some point people will either get tired of her and vote her out or she will retire - but the issue doesn't go away. That's what some of these politicians don't seem to understand - the issue doesn't just go away because you voted not to have it appear on an agenda. It still sits there; the report gets filed; but people (like us) remember.

So in five years time when no one can cross the bridges in less than an hour because of traffic - we can bring up the fact that someone proposed a crossing and we know who to point the finger at. My coworkers call me the elephant at work - I never forget this stuff. My office has piles of reports that have been filed because council has sent stuff back.

But it always comes back and I just find the report and go from there. That's from the City of calgary mind you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2010, 4:23 AM
alps's Avatar
alps alps is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian_Bacon View Post
^ That would be amazing if that could be done. Imagine the growth boom that area would experience. (Especially around Williams Lake etc.)

Plus with that plan, Point Pleasant Park is untouched.
Why would a boom in this area be desirable at this time? I find all this bridge talk strange for a forum normally into intensification of the city core.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:20 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.