HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 11:05 PM
gm_scott's Avatar
gm_scott gm_scott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 181
^ haha, thats what I thought too.
I just thought they were getting rid of "parking" to add more room for pedestrians. Which would be great because its sort of tight.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Feb 24, 2009, 11:12 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,310
Did anybody else just watch McClusky and Uteck fight it out in council?

I got confused with the multiple corrections but as I understand it now the plan is for the Quinpool project to go ahead if the money is available.

The also corrected the Chronicle Herald article I posted earlier today about the street closing to private vehicles. They have no plans to ban privately owned vehicles.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2009, 12:33 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Sounds like the ball is being dropped yet again. Why would there be a council meeting about budgeting for this project immediately after consulting the business owners' association, as appears to be the case? Why are people so poorly informed?

The fact that the city spends years and millions on studies and consultations but still ends up with people complaining essentially that they have not been adequately consulted implies that there are some severe problems. One of the first things to do when overhauling a street would be to start by asking property owners/tenants with frontage what their needs and desires are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2009, 9:33 PM
Halifax Hillbilly Halifax Hillbilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 708
What a useless story from the Herald. A consultant's report suggests the idea of a car-free Spring Garden so the Herald goes out and solicites Chicken Little 'the sky is falling' reports from merchants. It was a suggestion and appears to have been a total non-starter and no longer on the agenda. END OF STORY.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Feb 26, 2009, 2:23 AM
Barrington south's Avatar
Barrington south Barrington south is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 580
well I hope Bernie is happy...guess Quinpool has got there act together more than SGR......ohhh, yeah I forgot.....Dawn Sloane should shut the F*** up!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 10:45 PM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,310
From the HRM Media Room:

Spring Garden Road Streetscaping Project

At the February 24, 2009, Regional Council meeting, a decision was made to postpone the Spring Garden Road Streetscaping project.The following is a communique to provide clarification as to what was recommended for Spring Garden Road, the public consultation that has taken place and the decision of Council.

Spring Garden Road, between Queen Street and South Park Street, is a prime commercial street in HRM. It is a narrow but heavily-used pedestrian route (30,000 persons per day in 2004), transit route (30,000 riders per day) and vehicular route (14,500 vehicles per day). As there are only three metered parking spots on the street, most parking occurs on neighbouring streets, on surface lots or in parkades. Whereas, pedestrian and transit usage is on the rise, vehicular use has declined by 1500 vehicles per day over the past eight years.

The existing 18m (60') cross-section of the street is comprised of a 3m (10') wide sidewalk flanked by a 2m (7') wide loading lane and a 4m (13') wide through traffic lane, which then repeats this pattern across the opposite side of the street. Based on 2004 pedestrian counts, it has been calculated that the existing sidewalks are over 2m (7') too narrow to handle the volume of people walking along Spring Garden Road.

As party of the study, Preferred Design Option #2, which was recommended by HRM staff, proposed the following adjustments to the current cross-section of the street:
• sidewalks are widened / bulbed by 2m at intersections - in areas where parking and loading are currently prohibited - to reduce the pedestrian crossing distance and make crossing safer;
• crosswalks are made flush with the sidewalks and defined by bollards rather than curbs to overcome the steep cross-slopes currently encountered when traversing the street in a north - south direction;
• sidewalks are widened by 2m along store frontages where loading for those business establishments is provided from the rear of the building;
• on-street loading zones are defined in bays edged by granite curbs and inset between sidewalk bulbs, creating a safer pedestrian environment;
• amenities such as benches, trees, bike racks, transit shelters, and public art are provided in the widened sidewalk areas to increase interest and comfort; and
• the two existing 4m wide lanes of through traffic are maintained and, to ensure smooth traffic flow, left turns will be prohibited at Dresden Row.

The preferred design option is the result of the analysis of considerable public and stakeholder consultation, including one-on-one interviews with business and property owners fronting on the street and four public open houses held from September to December, 2008. By the end of December, five design options had been evaluated. None of the options involved closing the street to through traffic and all options place overhead wiring underground and incorporate decorative LED street lighting.

The Spring Garden Area Business Association proposal to widen the sidewalks on both sides of the street by only 18" to 24" (1.0-1.2m in total) was evaluated early on in the process and HRM determined that it could not be pursued for the following reasons:
• it requires the removal of parking and loading along one entire side of the street, whereas, the majority of businesses along both sides of the street require front loading;
• the sidewalk widening proposed is 1.5m (5') deficient in width to accommodate 2004 pedestrian volumes; and
• the cost is about the same as HRM's recommended Option #2.

At the February 24th Regional Council meeting the following recommendation was approved (with one amendment):
• The Spring Garden streetscape design be revisited by all of the stakeholders over the spring and summer of 2009 and once a consensus has been reached, the design be brought back to Regional Council for approval.
• A streetscape and undergrounding design project for Ochterloney Street be accelerated to determine feasibility, design detail, costs and timelines.
• The preferred option to be identified through completion of the schematic design report for Quinpool Road, proceed into Phase II, Detailed Design and Construction Documents.
• Staff work to assemble other sources of funding for Council approval in support of the streetscape program
• As part of 09/10 budget deliberations staff make recommendations to Regional Council on the streetscape and undergrounding projects to advance in 09/10.

Recommendation was approved by Council, with the amendment that staff report back on whether Ochterloney Street or Quinpool Road would proceed this year.

As a result, the Spring Garden Road Streetscaping Project will not proceed this spring. Once community support exists for a specific project scope, the project may be funded, subject to Council approval.

Reports in the media that the consultant's report recommended closing Spring Garden Road to vehicles other than Metro Transit buses and taxis are inaccurate. As evidenced by the content of the recommended Option #2 above, there is no mention of closing the street to cars.

Also, reference has been made to HRMbyDesign supporting the closure of streets to cars. HRMbyDesign does not promote a vehicle free downtown. Rather it promotes a beautiful and walkable downtown in which people will have the choice to not own a car and to use transit or active transportation instead.

For more information on the Spring Garden Road Streetscaping Project, visit: www.halifax.ca/IAM
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 11:53 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ View Post
From the HRM Media Room:

Reports in the media that the consultant's report recommended closing Spring Garden Road to vehicles other than Metro Transit buses and taxis are inaccurate. As evidenced by the content of the recommended Option #2 above, there is no mention of closing the street to cars.

Also, reference has been made to HRMbyDesign supporting the closure of streets to cars. HRMbyDesign does not promote a vehicle free downtown.
This is blatantly false. From the staff report referenced earlier:

Quote:
"Spring Garden Road is the most vibrant and important commercial streetscape in HRM. With Option 1 (no bollards), future requirements to convert the street into a Transit and Pedestrian-Oriented Street (as suggested by HRMbyDesign) will amount to simply adding signage to limit access to buses, loading vehicles, and bicycles...

Recommendation:
Depending upon funding availability, Options 1 and 2 are preferred."
I think HRM and/or their planning group are backtracking at top speed. Clearly the pedestrian mall/vehicle ban concept didn't get made up by the Herald; it was presented and in fact RECOMMENDED in the staff report as a future requirement that was advocated by HRM by Design. HRM is speaking out of both sides of its mouth in an attempt to deflect blame for their bungling by trying to force a concept upon the street that the property owners did not want.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 3:56 AM
Dmajackson's Avatar
Dmajackson Dmajackson is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B3K Halifax, NS
Posts: 9,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
This is blatantly false. From the staff report referenced earlier:



I think HRM and/or their planning group are backtracking at top speed. Clearly the pedestrian mall/vehicle ban concept didn't get made up by the Herald; it was presented and in fact RECOMMENDED in the staff report as a future requirement that was advocated by HRM by Design. HRM is speaking out of both sides of its mouth in an attempt to deflect blame for their bungling by trying to force a concept upon the street that the property owners did not want.
Ummm....I was watching the council meeting on Tuesday when they adressed this and according to HRM the idea was brought up in a public meeting but was never added the the wish list for the make-over.

By Pedestrian and Transit oriented they simply mean wider sidewalks and narrower roads. There are a couple streets labelled as this in HRM by Design but it is never mentioned that they plan to close the street to private vehicles.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 1:58 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bedford_DJ View Post
Ummm....I was watching the council meeting on Tuesday when they adressed this and according to HRM the idea was brought up in a public meeting but was never added the the wish list for the make-over.
That is more of the blatant falsehood I mentioned.

Quote:
By Pedestrian and Transit oriented they simply mean wider sidewalks and narrower roads. There are a couple streets labelled as this in HRM by Design but it is never mentioned that they plan to close the street to private vehicles.
Perhaps you overlooked this in the report:

"...limit access to buses, loading vehicles, and bicycles..."

That goes far beyond wider sidewalks and narrower roads. That means no private cars. HRM is now trying to run away from their mostly hidden agenda, but this time it needs to stick to them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 11:22 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
That goes far beyond wider sidewalks and narrower roads. That means no private cars. HRM is now trying to run away from their mostly hidden agenda, but this time it needs to stick to them.
Does the HRM really have an agenda, or is it just random people adding these things to reports?

Either way, it's a little disappointing because the whole idea of pedestrianization contributing the activity levels on a street has so obviously been discredited over a 30 year or so period. The only working pedestrian/transit mall type setups are those that REQUIRE private vehicles to be banned because there is no space for them. These are mostly (maybe exclusively?) in larger cities. Spring Garden Road does not have that much foot traffic, and it is busy precisely because it is a gateway into the downtown.

Unfortunately, it's pretty classic for planners (professional or armchair variety) to ignore the real economic places for streets, neighbourhoods, or whole cities, and to propose that anything they find unsightly be taken out. It is like deciding to tear the engine out of your car because you don't like the noise it makes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 11:33 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
Does the HRM really have an agenda, or is it just random people adding these things to reports?
I don't know the answer, but I find it hard to believe those lines were put in there by Terrain and just missed by everyone at HRM. I do not wish to impugn motives, but I have become more and more concerned about the people behind HRM by Design, Andy F. in particular. He seems to have assumed a role as a mini Robert Moses of sort, often being quoted in the paper regarding what he would and would not support. He may not mean to come across that way but often does. I don't think it's healthy for one person to have that much influence over planning and design.

Quote:
Unfortunately, it's pretty classic for planners (professional or armchair variety) to ignore the real economic places for streets, neighbourhoods, or whole cities, and to propose that anything they find unsightly be taken out. It is like deciding to tear the engine out of your car because you don't like the noise it makes.
You put it better than I could. Well said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2010, 8:45 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
I just don't see Spring Garden Road as the sort of street that could function without some car movement - mainly because I don't see where the traffic would go? It's too important to be closed off to streets and speaking as a planner, I don't get that move. There are wonderful examples of streets with cars and transit that are like Spring Garden Road - I think of 17th Avenue here in calgary and it's even wider and busier! Or the Kensington area; both are great examples of pedestrian oriented commercial corridors; but still have bus and car movements on them.

A thought that could be considered might be to remove the on street parking component if bigger sidewalks for things like cafes is what are wanted. But I'd say that delivery spaces and potentially taxi cab spots should be left alone.

Another thought would be to the restriction of private vehicles during high traffic hours (to give public transit some priority of movement) - but yet again I come back too the question I said earlier; where would the traffic go?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2010, 2:27 AM
Halifax Hillbilly Halifax Hillbilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by halifaxboyns View Post
I just don't see Spring Garden Road as the sort of street that could function without some car movement - mainly because I don't see where the traffic would go? It's too important to be closed off to streets and speaking as a planner, I don't get that move. There are wonderful examples of streets with cars and transit that are like Spring Garden Road - I think of 17th Avenue here in calgary and it's even wider and busier! Or the Kensington area; both are great examples of pedestrian oriented commercial corridors; but still have bus and car movements on them.

A thought that could be considered might be to remove the on street parking component if bigger sidewalks for things like cafes is what are wanted. But I'd say that delivery spaces and potentially taxi cab spots should be left alone.
I agree with you, Spring Garden is one of the few streets that connects Robie and South Park to Barrington, tough to shut it down to cars. I don't think you would gain much anyways, due to the number of pedestrians and cross streets cars move slowly and people can cross easily. It's already a very pleasant pedestrian street, removing cars isn't going to improve on that aspect too much. I think it's a better candidate for a naked street myself.

There are only a handful of parking spaces on the street right now but the merchant's assocation is dead set on having them removed for improvements.

My thought on the whole thing is you can talk about making Spring Garden car free all you want it's not happening any time soon. Council would never make that decision, they couldn't be convinced to add parking meters around the commons to bring in a lot of revenue and potentially improve the parking situation around the Infirmary. In Halifax, unless you're willing to slog it out in the political trenches for seven years, you go with the status quo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2010, 4:25 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halifax Hillbilly View Post
I agree with you, Spring Garden is one of the few streets that connects Robie and South Park to Barrington, tough to shut it down to cars. I don't think you would gain much anyways, due to the number of pedestrians and cross streets cars move slowly and people can cross easily. It's already a very pleasant pedestrian street, removing cars isn't going to improve on that aspect too much. I think it's a better candidate for a naked street myself.

There are only a handful of parking spaces on the street right now but the merchant's assocation is dead set on having them removed for improvements.

My thought on the whole thing is you can talk about making Spring Garden car free all you want it's not happening any time soon. Council would never make that decision, they couldn't be convinced to add parking meters around the commons to bring in a lot of revenue and potentially improve the parking situation around the Infirmary. In Halifax, unless you're willing to slog it out in the political trenches for seven years, you go with the status quo.
It may be a thought to shut it down during the rush hour perhaps so that buses would have some priority - but I don't see where the value in that would be since you'd end up with them just getting clogged on Barrington Street. But it's a thought...

It might also be an interesting street to close for pedestrians once in a while for say a walking festival or market? I visit Edmonton regularly and stay at the Coast Hotel on 105th Street and Jasper Avenue and during the summer they close the street to the east 104th for 3 blocks every saturday from 8am to 4pm for a flea market/farmers market. Something like that might be quite interesting - Metro Transit could setup temporary stops on Morris Street right to Barrington - it would be only a minor detour (at least in my mind) and just for a day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2010, 2:07 PM
eastcoastal eastcoastal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
I do not wish to impugn motives, but I have become more and more concerned about the people behind HRM by Design, Andy F. in particular. He seems to have assumed a role as a mini Robert Moses of sort, often being quoted in the paper regarding what he would and would not support. He may not mean to come across that way but often does. I don't think it's healthy for one person to have that much influence over planning and design.
Well, I don't know what the context is, but I would assume that as HRMs Urban Design Manager (a totally new position), that media will seek him out for his opinion on whether or not a particular project would fit the HRMbyDesign standards. I would say most of us aren't very conversant with the details, and media even less so, add to that, Andy F. would be regarded as someone intimately familiar with the nuances of HRMbyDesign.

Having seen him speak at HRMbyDesign public events, I would say that it's true that he holds a strong view of what is right and what is wrong when it comes to urban design. This is fine if we expect that his education and experience provides him with specialized knowledge. Not so fine if we feel that he's a Moses-style dictator. When it comes down to it, I don't think he has the power that Robert Moses did - which is not a comment on his motives. Motives that I think are not shadowy. They're pretty clear. If they're clear, it's easier to call bullsh*t if you see it. I happen to think that he's got the right ideals for the most part.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2010, 2:14 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastal View Post
Having seen him speak at HRMbyDesign public events, I would say that it's true that he holds a strong view of what is right and what is wrong when it comes to urban design. This is fine if we expect that his education and experience provides him with specialized knowledge. Not so fine if we feel that he's a Moses-style dictator. When it comes down to it, I don't think he has the power that Robert Moses did - which is not a comment on his motives. Motives that I think are not shadowy. They're pretty clear. If they're clear, it's easier to call bullsh*t if you see it. I happen to think that he's got the right ideals for the most part.
I just hope that he also has some background in economics. Practical building design that is based on both aesthetics and cost will be required if the Halifax downtown area is to grow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2010, 2:54 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by fenwick16 View Post
I just hope that he also has some background in economics. Practical building design that is based on both aesthetics and cost will be required if the Halifax downtown area is to grow.
Given the amount of time it has taken and will continue to take for HRM to call for proposals for the Clyde St parking lots, I would suggest not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2010, 8:47 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Is anything happening with this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2011, 12:07 AM
Wishblade's Avatar
Wishblade Wishblade is offline
You talkin' to me?
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 1,322
I know this doesnt particularly pertain to the redevelopment plan for Spring Garden rd, but it is about "improvements"....
Quote:
Spring Garden Road sidewalk fixes anger merchants
CBC News
Posted: Oct 26, 2011 4:51 PM AT

Some Spring Garden Road merchants aren't happy with how HRM plans to repair the sidewalk on their street.

They say the asphalt patching will look terrible and be an eyesore on Halifax's busiest street for pedestrian traffic.

Spring Garden Road is a popular shopping destination and is home to 420 businesses.

The city plans to follow its policy of using asphalt and not concrete for fixes. An official with the city said if the whole sidewalk were to be replaced, concrete would be used.
I completely agree with the merchants. This is the premier shopping district in Halifax and should look the part. Asphault patching on concrete looks bad in any neighbourhood and will only look even worse here.

more here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...sidewalks.html

Last edited by Wishblade; Oct 27, 2011 at 4:54 AM. Reason: adding link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2011, 1:33 AM
cormiermax's Avatar
cormiermax cormiermax is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Beijing
Posts: 884
Asphault patching? Seriously? On Spring Garden?
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 3:52 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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