HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2015, 4:02 PM
q12's Avatar
q12 q12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 2,730
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2015, 6:15 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by q12 View Post
The latest:
Interesting! Thanks for posting!

I'm hoping that money from the feds will a reality rather than a hope. Wondering if the government changes this fall, if there will still be a chance of getting federal funding for this project.

The fact that they are starting another study on it makes me wonder when construction will ever start. Shouldn't these studies have already been done?

Also, the major change in routing will make it a longer trip. I assume it has something to put it below the elevation of the lake to eliminate any environmental issues? Or maybe a land cost issue?

I assume the active transit lane will still be included?

Too bad they are looking at another toll road but I guess it's better than it not happening at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2015, 11:46 PM
Jstaleness's Avatar
Jstaleness Jstaleness is online now
Jelly Bean Sandwich
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dartmouth
Posts: 1,532
I don't understand this. Why is the roundabout so far away from the actual starting point of the connector? Secondly I have no idea why you would make a connector go around the lake. The google map route is so much more efficient.
C'mon Nova Scotia Government. Let's get it together.
__________________
I can't hear you with my eyes closed
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 1:31 AM
kph06's Avatar
kph06 kph06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,670
The expropriation cost to buy the land from Municipal Enterprises (Dexter Construcion) was a big factor. Due to limits the road would put on quarry expansion fair market value was very high. I think the roundabout works into the final phases to direct people from the 118. Total KM's wise, this isn't much of an advantage over Magazine Hill, but it should ease the congestion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 4:27 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,931
^ Probably due to the topography for the lake jog. If the environmental assessment predicted more damage to the wetlands surrounding the lake by putting it to the north then it would be re-routed. Or maybe it was just logistical in the sense of there being hills or something that would require blasting.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 1:44 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,188
Routing it to the west side of the lake puts Magazine Hill back in play, so it certainly isn't a topographical advantage. The routing seems dumb. Might be better off with widening the existing road and doing some minor rerouting of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 5:03 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
The new proposed route looks to be about 40% longer than the original proposal. While I think it is less desirable than the original route, I still think it's better than not being built at all. Even if the capacity of the Magazine Hill was increased sufficiently, it will still be clogged up in the event of an accident, which is a regular happening. A bypass to bypass the Bypass would help alleviate that situation.

Regarding the topography, if you select "terrain" on google maps, it appears that this new route will have more severe grade changes than the original route, as Keith alludes to.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 5:06 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,931
I can't imagine they would choose that route without some rationale at all though. They'd have to be crazy.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 9:06 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I can't imagine they would choose that route without some rationale at all though. They'd have to be crazy.
I agree, there must be some rationale it's just not alluded to in the article and there doesn't seem to be any more info posted online.

I'm sure we eventually will find out - I'm just glad it's still on the list despite my impatience for wanting it sooner rather than later.

It is still included on the 5-year plan, though it has been for a number of years, each one proclaiming that construction will start "this" year.

http://novascotia.ca/tran/highways/5...an_2015_16.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2015, 11:10 PM
curnhalio's Avatar
curnhalio curnhalio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 314
The new route goes close enough to the existing highway that it almost makes sense to start this road as a spur off the existing interchange, with ramps to/from Dartmouth Rd and the bypass. A 500m stretch of the bypass leading into the interchange could be widened to allow for the lanes leading to the new road. Even that would take significant strain off of the Windmill/Akerley intersection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
A bypass to bypass the Bypass would help alleviate that situation.
Sorry, I couldn't help but think of The Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy here. "What do you mean 'why has it got to be built'? It's a bypass! You've got to build bypasses!"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2015, 2:01 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by curnhalio View Post
The new route goes close enough to the existing highway that it almost makes sense to start this road as a spur off the existing interchange, with ramps to/from Dartmouth Rd and the bypass. A 500m stretch of the bypass leading into the interchange could be widened to allow for the lanes leading to the new road. Even that would take significant strain off of the Windmill/Akerley intersection.
I think that's a good idea, actually. It could introduce a lot of new route possibilities that would be more useful to the motorist and would balance out the traffic flow at the same time.

Quote:
Sorry, I couldn't help but think of The Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy here. "What do you mean 'why has it got to be built'? It's a bypass! You've got to build bypasses!"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2016, 1:11 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
In the news again...

Quote:
Business group calls on province to ‘take whatever actions necessary’ to complete Burnside Connector
http://www.metronews.ca/news/halifax...completed.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 1:50 AM
TheNovaScotian's Avatar
TheNovaScotian TheNovaScotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
So this boondoggle is going to cost around the same as a commuter rail system?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 4:45 AM
Colin May Colin May is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian View Post
So this boondoggle is going to cost around the same as a commuter rail system?
A massive waste of money.
The province wants federal money for a new and smaller replacement of the VG but there are no designs and thus the money will be spent on roads across the province.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 1:13 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian View Post
So this boondoggle is going to cost around the same as a commuter rail system?
This has been going on for 30-ish years now, so I can't imagine them actually building it. Especially with the proposed route change I don't think it will be as useful as originally thought, not to mention the effect on the bike path part of the project.

Perhaps the province should get off their duffs and consider how much commuter rail might take off the Sackville/Bedford Bypass/Mackay Bridge route and figure out if we really need it.

Commuter rail should really be a priority now, IMHO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 1:13 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
A massive waste of money.
The province wants federal money for a new and smaller replacement of the VG but there are no designs and thus the money will be spent on roads across the province.
Haven't been following the hospital issue. Are you saying they aren't going to replace the VG?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 2:20 PM
curnhalio's Avatar
curnhalio curnhalio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Haven't been following the hospital issue. Are you saying they aren't going to replace the VG?
I think he's referring to the fact that in order to get federal money for a project, there already have to be plans drawn up for it, cost estimates, etc. Saying "we need a hospital" and having no conceptual plans for location, size, or cost isn't good enough. The feds may chip in for this road just because there are plans in existence for it (that are older than me at 31, btw)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 2:53 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by curnhalio View Post
I think he's referring to the fact that in order to get federal money for a project, there already have to be plans drawn up for it, cost estimates, etc. Saying "we need a hospital" and having no conceptual plans for location, size, or cost isn't good enough. The feds may chip in for this road just because there are plans in existence for it (that are older than me at 31, btw)
Thanks! I've been so busy lately that I haven't really kept up with the news on everything that's going on.

Sounds to me to be typical government dysfunctionality on both sides. It's not like the hospital suddenly started to fall apart this year. This has been known for a long time and it appears that there have been no plans put in place. On the feds side, there should be some way to compensate for this in cases where the need is somewhat dire (which this case appears to be).

Instead, it appears like they will continue to spend money on bandaid fixes for the current VG, meanwhile plans will get caught up in the usual bureaucratic nonsense that will take many years and many dollars to study, then by the time we reach the point to do something about it, the federal dollars will have dried up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 3:08 PM
Phalanx Phalanx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Halifax
Posts: 524
Off topic for the thread (maybe there should be a VG replacement thread?) but in a recent radio interview the provincial minister responsible said that they were looking at a smaller, less capable (paraphrasing there, but he specifically said that we don't need a premiere, first rate hospital here) hospital to replace the VG, and offloading some of the services provided there to other hospitals in the city.

Basically they don't want to spend the money to do it right, so they'll build what's adequate for right now (if anything, and I'll believe that when I see plans). Typical shortsightedness in the name of being 'fiscally responsible' (or incredibly irresponsible if you look at the long term costs).

No government wants to deal with the multi-billion dollar football that a proper VG replacement would be, so it keeps getting kicked down the field.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2016, 5:24 PM
Colin May Colin May is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx View Post
Off topic for the thread (maybe there should be a VG replacement thread?) but in a recent radio interview the provincial minister responsible said that they were looking at a smaller, less capable (paraphrasing there, but he specifically said that we don't need a premiere, first rate hospital here) hospital to replace the VG, and offloading some of the services provided there to other hospitals in the city.

Basically they don't want to spend the money to do it right, so they'll build what's adequate for right now (if anything, and I'll believe that when I see plans). Typical shortsightedness in the name of being 'fiscally responsible' (or incredibly irresponsible if you look at the long term costs).

No government wants to deal with the multi-billion dollar football that a proper VG replacement would be, so it keeps getting kicked down the field.
A good summary of what Glavine said.
The feds want to push some money out the door ASAP and then they want to push out more money for projects that will be prepared over the next 12 months or so. They want to see people put to work ASAP and I expect transit and basic infrastructure such as sewers, water, to be top off the list as all municipalities have such projects in their annual capital budgets.
I notice Ontario is spending $100,000,000 to replace home furnaces. Ours is from 1978 and due for replacement, after a new roof.
The feds may put incentives in place for such work if they decide cutting CO2 emissions should be part of infrastructure spending.
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 2:34 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.