HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 8:55 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,289
I feel like Cornwallis Park is a totally overlooked and potentially quite grand civic space. As the impressive buildings that used to surround it have been torn down, it's become more and more of an afterthought, and that parking lot is the final insult.

There should be some sort of revitalization plan to address this. It's a great neighbourhood asset that isn't even close to fulfilling its potential.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 8:59 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Anytime I've went there I've always been coming down Barrington, so i'd either have to take the long way to avoid the parking lot and gas station, or take the most direct route by going through it. which is what I do. And that's what i was getting at. Inconveniencing pedestrians for the sake of catering to automobiles. It isn't a matter of whether one has to walk thru the parking lot or be forced to walk an extended walk way, but rather having people diverted and forced to walk extra distance to get to an entrance that should have been built at the street, like on Quinpool.



Just because there's a need (or perhaps desire is a better term than need) to provide parking, it doesn't mean the parking has to be front and centre and be the focus of the development. And some would also argue that the concept of demand inducement applies here. If you invite people to do things a certain way, make it the most visible/obvious way and make it easy for them to do it, then chances are many will do it. From what i can tell, Pete's Frootique doesn't have any parking at all, but I'm 100% certain that if it did, the lot wouldn't sit empty either. So, that would be proof that it was needed?

Besides, things that are built in an auto centric manner are often to some degree functional; my criticism is of how they function. If it didn't function at all then the store would go out of business and we'd have no need for discussion.
So the bulk of your argument is based on the idea of for whom the store layout should be more convenient, pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists. Fair enough.

I suggest the best design would be to put pedestrians first by having the store frontage right up to the sidewalk, as suggested. Then have parking to the rear or underground, as suggested, to accommodate motorists, motorcyclists/scooters, and bicyclists. The reason I would put bicycle racks at the rear entrance is to avoid conflict with pedestrians. I have had a few close calls with bicyclists who ride their bikes on pedestrian access areas for their own convenience with little regard for pedestrians - I see it happening regularly. A bonus for pedestrians is that the cash registers will likely be less busy at the front entrance so they will get out of the store more quickly than their petrol-consuming and pedal-pushing counterparts.

FWIW, both Pete's locations have ample parking. The Bedford location is in Sunnyside Mall, which has parking on upper, lower and underground levels. The Halifax location has parking in the parkade which is located within the building. IIRC, Pete's gives a discount coupon for parking with purchase.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 9:01 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
I feel like Cornwallis Park is a totally overlooked and potentially quite grand civic space. As the impressive buildings that used to surround it have been torn down, it's become more and more of an afterthought, and that parking lot is the final insult.

There should be some sort of revitalization plan to address this. It's a great neighbourhood asset that isn't even close to fulfilling its potential.
That's a good point. Perhaps the increased level of residential about to almost surround the park will bring more focus/users to it. I would like to see some of my tax money spent there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 9:10 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
FWIW, both Pete's locations have ample parking. The Bedford location is in Sunnyside Mall, which has parking on upper, lower and underground levels. The Halifax location has parking in the parkade which is located within the building. IIRC, Pete's gives a discount coupon for parking with purchase.
You mean, people have to pay for access to an independent parking facility like everyone else who wishes to park on SGR and just gets a discount from Pete's? Or the parking facility is actually part of and owned by the store development?
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 9:13 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I suggest the best design would be to put pedestrians first by having the store frontage right up to the sidewalk, as suggested. Then have parking to the rear or underground, as suggested, to accommodate motorists, motorcyclists/scooters, and bicyclists. The reason I would put bicycle racks at the rear entrance is to avoid conflict with pedestrians. I have had a few close calls with bicyclists who ride their bikes on pedestrian access areas for their own convenience with little regard for pedestrians - I see it happening regularly.
Or perhaps just have the bike rack a few meters away from the entrance with ample space? A cyclist is far more in the realm of a pedestrian than a motorist, and putting bikes in the area with cars would only increase conflict between cars and bikes which is far more dangerous.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 9:57 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,255
Judging from how busy the parking lot always seems, the vast majority of Superstore customers arrive by car, so it makes no sense to reconfigure it for a sidewalk entry. Also, retailers want only one entry/exit for security reasons so that suggestion makes zero sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 10:00 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
You mean, people have to pay for access to an independent parking facility like everyone else who wishes to park on SGR and just gets a discount from Pete's? Or the parking facility is actually part of and owned by the store development?
I mean, the complex who's name escapes me, that contains Petes and other business has a public parking facility contained within. IIRC, if you spent, like 20 bucks at Pete's, they would give you a pass for parking. Don't know if that is still the case, though.

FWIW, I'm not sure what the argument is in this case, but if I'm driving I have no problem paying for indoor/underground parking. In fact I prefer it, because (1) there are usually plenty of parking spaces available in a pay lot, (2) if the weather is bad outside you don't get wet/frozen taking your groceries to your car, (3) it helps support the building owner's investment on providing parking for the public, thus lessening the desire for surface parking and encouraging more density building where its needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 10:09 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Or perhaps just have the bike rack a few meters away from the entrance with ample space? A cyclist is far more in the realm of a pedestrian than a motorist, and putting bikes in the area with cars would only increase conflict between cars and bikes which is far more dangerous.
Actually, a cyclist straddles both realms in that they are to be treated like a motor vehicle when on the road (granted, a "special" motor vehicle), and they can suddenly morph into a pedestrian when desired. Some are both a motor vehicle and pedestrian at the same time, for example when they ride on the sidewalk or through a crosswalk to take a shortcut or avoid a red light, or simply blow through the red light because nobody's coming. It's these cyclists that would lead me to believe that the bike racks should be with the cars, because if they are up front near the pedestrian entrance, they will ride along the walkway right up to the bike rack, which opens up the possibility of a cyclist/pedestrian collision.

Remember, it's the pedestrian who usually gets hurt the most in a collision, especially if it's an elderly person or small child, so there's a bit of a role-reversal that cyclists aren't accustomed to thinking about when they are around pedestrians. So, really, cyclists don't always deserve the 'best choice' in every situation, and this is one of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 10:33 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
A cyclist tends to be a lot more badly hurt in a collision with a motor vehicle than a pedestrian gets in a collision with a cyclist. In fact I would dispute the claim that a pedestrian is usually more seriously injured in a bike/pedestrian collision. The cyclist may be moving faster, but falling from the bike tends to be a greater risk than falling when standing so that element also affects things. Besides, in an entrance area, the bikes aren't going to be moving at street speed. And an elderly person or young child could be injured by a collision with a fast moving pedestrian too so that's not anything bike specific.

The fact is, in terms of momentum (which is simply mass times speed) a cyclist is much closer to pedestrianhood than to motoristhood. And it's the momentum that really creates the most danger. A cyclist's weight isn't much greater than that of the person without the bike (the weight of the bike is often no greater than the difference between the average man and the average woman.)

If you haven't already, I'd recommend reading the book Cycle Space by Steven Fleming. It discusses these issues (and many others) in great depths and really expands on why the "motorvehicleization" movement regarding bikes is not only wrong headed, but also extremely damaging to the efforts to increase public safety and encourage greater active transportation participation.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2015, 11:32 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
A cyclist tends to be a lot more badly hurt in a collision with a motor vehicle than a pedestrian gets in a collision with a cyclist. In fact I would dispute the claim that a pedestrian is usually more seriously injured in a bike/pedestrian collision. The cyclist may be moving faster, but falling from the bike tends to be a greater risk than falling when standing so that element also affects things. Besides, in an entrance area, the bikes aren't going to be moving at street speed. And an elderly person or young child could be injured by a collision with a fast moving pedestrian too so that's not anything bike specific.

The fact is, in terms of momentum (which is simply mass times speed) a cyclist is much closer to pedestrianhood than to motoristhood. And it's the momentum that really creates the most danger. A cyclist's weight isn't much greater than that of the person without the bike (the weight of the bike is often no greater than the difference between the average man and the average woman.)

If you haven't already, I'd recommend reading the book Cycle Space by Steven Fleming. It discusses these issues (and many others) in great depths and really expands on why the "motorvehicleization" movement regarding bikes is not only wrong headed, but also extremely damaging to the efforts to increase public safety and encourage greater active transportation participation.
You make some good points (especially if the cyclist is still strapped into their clips), but what I was thinking about is that a cyclist is usually wearing a helmet at least and usually is aware of the collision before the pedestrian and thus has a split second to try to protect themselves. The force of impact is the same for both (as indicated in your p=mv formula) but if that impact is made with a part of the bike, such as the front wheel, different things can happen, such as higher stress on the pedestrian, due to the force being delivered by an object with a smaller contact area, which will probably take them out by the legs as well. If a cyclist's head (with helmet) hits a pedestrian's head, we all know who will come out on the top of that one.

Regardless... collisions are bad, people get hurt. I'm just saying that, if cyclists dismount when coming to a pedestrian area and walk their bikes to the bike rack, it's all good. But we both know the temptation to ride all the way over there is just too great for some people. That would be my concern.

Thanks for the reading suggestion, I'll give it a look when I get a chance.

When I used to ride a lot, as soon as I was on the street I considered myself a motor vehicle. I constantly looked around me and did lots of shoulder checks to see what was coming up to me. I stopped for pedestrians and red lights. I gave hand signals when I was going to make a turn, and I made a conscious effort to try to stay out of vehicles' blind spots as I knew blind spots are an accident waiting to happen. I wasn't overly concerned about my 'rights' when riding, I just did what I had to do to arrive at my destination in one piece. I guess also striving to be the best car driver I could be at the time helped me understand both perspectives. This is why I tend to be a little more pragmatic when it comes to cycling. Regardless of what the ideal world would be for cyclists if *this or that* were planned properly (or if cars weren't allowed on the same roads as cyclists or who or what has the right of way), you still have to cycle in the real world, and things really happen - quickly. Therefore, I consider it the responsibility of each and every car driver, cyclist, and pedestrian to look out for their own skin and everybody else's around them - assume the other guy is going to make a mistake and act accordingly. If you have to ride in a parking lot, then try to have ten sets of eyes to see what's going on around you at all times. If people can do that, then there will be few if any accidents and we're not having this conversation.

This is why when I see cases of stupid, lazy, selfish riding styles I become quite annoyed as I see it as people expecting everybody else to look out for their safety while they don't seem to want to bother.

Oops... off on another tangent... sorry folks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 12:31 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
Do you no longer ride?
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 6:32 AM
pblaauw pblaauw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
I feel like Cornwallis Park is a totally overlooked and potentially quite grand civic space. As the impressive buildings that used to surround it have been torn down, it's become more and more of an afterthought, and that parking lot is the final insult.

There should be some sort of revitalization plan to address this. It's a great neighbourhood asset that isn't even close to fulfilling its potential.
It's coming later this year, I think. Waye Mason would have all the details.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 1:20 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Do you no longer ride?
It's been a while. Would like to get back into it though, once I resolve an ankle/knee issue. It's a great way to get around and can just be a fun way of getting exercise and fresh air (unless you get stuck behind a diesel...).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 2:49 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
It's been a while. Would like to get back into it though, once I resolve an ankle/knee issue. It's a great way to get around and can just be a fun way of getting exercise and fresh air (unless you get stuck behind a diesel...).

Or get run over by one...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 3:00 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
It's been a while. Would like to get back into it though, once I resolve an ankle/knee issue. It's a great way to get around and can just be a fun way of getting exercise and fresh air (unless you get stuck behind a diesel...).
Well let me know if you ever do; we'll have to hit up the local trails or something!
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 3:08 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Or get run over by one...
That's a possibility whether in a car or on a bike. Especially the dump truck cowboys... a lot of those guys appear to be nuts.

Can remember a case a few years back where some poor soul waiting for a light in their Camry was crushed by one of these idiots taking a turn too quickly down on Joe Howe Dr.

Nobody is safe, really, so be careful out there, Keith!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 3:11 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
Well let me know if you ever do; we'll have to hit up the local trails or something!
Sounds good. I've heard that the abandoned rail trails are good for a run. No dump trucks there...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 3:12 PM
Ziobrop's Avatar
Ziobrop Ziobrop is offline
armchairitect
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Halifax
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Judging from how busy the parking lot always seems, the vast majority of Superstore customers arrive by car, so it makes no sense to reconfigure it for a sidewalk entry. Also, retailers want only one entry/exit for security reasons so that suggestion makes zero sense.
1. most superstores have 2 entrances - one at either end.
2. superstore has a sidewalk oriented store in Ottawa. Still has parking, but out back. it works well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 3:52 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Judging from how busy the parking lot always seems, the vast majority of Superstore customers arrive by car, so it makes no sense to reconfigure it for a sidewalk entry. Also, retailers want only one entry/exit for security reasons so that suggestion makes zero sense.
Just because things are done a certain way now doesn't mean that's how they should be done for ever and ever and ever - accepting status quo makes zero sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2015, 4:14 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,072
Parking lot activity and car traffic is very deceptive also, because cars take up so much more space that they can look like they're serving a lot more people than they actually are. You see the constant evidence of the motorists there the entire time they shop, while with pedestrians, you can only identify them by watching them during the few seconds they require to arrive or depart.

Any time I've gone there, I've seen lots of people arriving on foot. Usually there's a couple of people a few metres ahead of me and a few metres behind all cutting the same path across the parking lot. Certainly more than I see coming in or out of the parking lot by car.

But of course these types of observations are highly subject to perceptual biases, as well as variables such as time of day, days of week, time of year, type of weather, etc.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
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 > Halifax Peninsula & Downtown Dartmouth
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:05 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.