Cogswell Interchange - Page 27

Keith P. · #**521** Posted **Mar 9, 2019, 11:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franco401

Once again,

Such great constructive criticism.

Franco, those are not "personal attacks". You should look up the definition of the word. With every post you make, you confirm my original statements about the profession.

pblaauw · #**522** Posted **Mar 10, 2019, 5:13 AM**

someone123 · #**523** Posted **Mar 10, 2019, 8:55 PM**

Here is an illustration of what I'm talking about. It's not really about pedways or no pedways or having more or fewer pedways, it's about having infrastructure that enables everybody to get around this newly redeveloped area efficiently while maximizing the value of the new development parcels and public spaces.

(Edit: to clarify, I made this. It's not part of the HRM Cogswell planning documents or the 90% plan.)

Keith P. · #**524** Posted **Mar 10, 2019, 9:31 PM**

The argument in that document is spurious. It starts from the premise that being outside to experience what they propose to build is superior to using the pedway. While this may be true for an able-bodied person on a fine weather day, the pedway would be superior if either or both of those factors were not true. The impact of the pedway on what is being built is minimal at best.

Hali87 · #**525** Posted **Mar 11, 2019, 6:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The argument in that document is spurious. It starts from the premise that being outside to experience what they propose to build is superior to using the pedway.

That's not really true though. It starts with the premise that the existing above-ground tunnel would not the best potential indoor route from point A (Scotia Square/Granville Mall area) to point B (Purdy's Wharf/Casino area) once the interchange no longer exists. This isn't really the same thing and I would agree to this. One of the ideas being suggested here seems to be to keeping the existing pedway's alignment but moving it underground; I don't see how this is worse than what exists currently for someone who wants to get from one area to the other without going outside.

Keith P. · #**526** Posted **Mar 11, 2019, 12:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hali87

That's not really true though. It starts with the premise that the existing above-ground tunnel would not the best potential indoor route from point A (Scotia Square/Granville Mall area) to point B (Purdy's Wharf/Casino area) once the interchange no longer exists. This isn't really the same thing and I would agree to this. One of the ideas being suggested here seems to be to keeping the existing pedway's alignment but moving it underground; I don't see how this is worse than what exists currently for someone who wants to get from one area to the other without going outside.

Aside from the cost, I think moving it underground would be problematic because of the large grade change that exists there. Already there are escalators required to get to Scotia Square from the Granville Mall, and from Scotia Square to the WTCC. Putting it underground would require even more.

The grade on the site is significant and it will be interesting to see how this proposal deals with it overall, not just for pedways. The reports tend to gloss over that.

OldDartmouthMark · #**527** Posted **Mar 11, 2019, 12:53 PM**

I don't think that the idea of a tunnel is a bad one, but it would be more expensive, and other than here I haven't seen it offered as a valid option.

The main argument I have is against removing the pedway and not replacing it over a questionable aesthetic issue, as it is a key part of the Downtown Halifax Link, and should remain as such in some form.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Halifax_Link

someone123 · #**528** Posted **Oct 20, 2019, 9:08 PM**

Not sure how long it's been up but Develop NS has a small project page for "Boardwalk North": https://developns.ca/projects/boardwalk-north/

Looks like there is some work planned to tie the waterfront in with the Cogswell redevelopment. If and when Cogswell happens there is a lot of potential to change the nature of the boardwalk between Historic Properties and the casino.

I wonder when construction is expected to start now? Earlier in 2019 the estimate given was late 2019.

atbw · #**529** Posted **Oct 22, 2019, 12:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

Not sure how long it's been up but Develop NS has a small project page for "Boardwalk North": https://developns.ca/projects/boardwalk-north/

I wonder when construction is expected to start now? Earlier in 2019 the estimate given was late 2019.

I thought so too, but I guess it was only that the tender was to be awarded in the fall of 2019.

someone123 · #**530** Posted **Oct 22, 2019, 4:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atbw

I thought so too, but I guess it was only that the tender was to be awarded in the fall of 2019.

There have been many announcements of when demolition will start that have been missed.

For example:

After decades of planning, the municipality says Cogswell demolition planned set to begin in October 2017.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3027918/p...cades-of-talk/

It always seems to be the current year + 1.

OldDartmouthMark · #**531** Posted **Oct 22, 2019, 5:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

There have been many announcements of when demolition will start that have been missed.

For example:

After decades of planning, the municipality says Cogswell demolition planned set to begin in October 2017.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3027918/p...cades-of-talk/

It always seems to be the current year + 1.

Sounds like the Burnside expressway to Sackville. Their announcements of impending construction date back to the 1990s. Looks like it will finally start this year... or will it?

"At this time we would like to announce that we are planning to consider thinking about devising a concrete plan to discuss announcing a plan to have a meeting about upcoming construction, which will happen next year."

Keith P. · #**532** Posted **Oct 22, 2019, 7:56 PM**

Well, you need to cut our esteemed Council some slack. It is not easy to get things accomplished when vitally important issues like banning bull riding events at the Metro Centre naturally take precedence on the Council agenda.

Jstaleness · #**533** Posted **Oct 23, 2019, 6:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Well, you need to cut our esteemed Council some slack. It is not easy to get things accomplished when vitally important issues like banning bull riding events at the Metro Centre naturally take precedence on the Council agenda.

Thought I was reading The Manatee last evening when I saw those updates on Twitter.

someone123 · #**534** Posted **Nov 5, 2019, 11:05 PM**

An update on the Cogswell website:

Quote:

The tender for construction was originally expected to be issued in April 2019. Why the delay?

Given the scope of this unprecedented multi-year project, significant due diligence must be completed prior to issuing a tender for construction. An extensive review process by multiple municipal departments is required, as well as engagement with external partners and agencies such as water, power and telecommunications utilities.

This significant effort, up front, will help ensure the project proceeds as smoothly as possible once underway. The tender is expected to be released the end of this fiscal year, March 31, 2020. Further details regarding timing and specifics of the construction efforts can only be determined after the tender is awarded, following discussions with the selected contractor.

OldDartmouthMark · #**535** Posted **Nov 6, 2019, 2:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

An update on the Cogswell website:

...due to the scale of this project, a tender will be released (enter current year) +1. Construction will start (enter current year) +2.

Keith P. · #**536** Posted **Nov 6, 2019, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

...due to the scale of this project, a tender will be released (enter current year) +1. Construction will start (enter current year) +2.

Unless there are more unforeseen delays.

RoshanMcG · #**537** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 9:13 PM**

I think (?) this is new...

Mr. Hunt · #**538** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 9:22 PM**

It is.

mleblanc · #**539** Posted **Jan 2, 2020, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoshanMcG

I think (?) this is new...

Looks rather silly now but it's nice to see them getting ready to make Purdy's more pedestrian friendly for the upcoming changes to the area. According to the current plan, this will connect right up to the Bells Lane/Granville Square park and should have a development right across the street at some point.

Dmajackson · #**540** Posted **Jan 3, 2020, 12:01 AM**

I get the idea behind this project. It connects Purdy's Wharf to the future Granville Park and development lands. It looks nice but I am a little saddened. I loved biking through the area in the evening and stopping to watch and listen to the hoardes of small black birds that called those trees home. Hopefully they stay nearby it is quite enjoyable watching a concentration of wildlife making an urban area their home.