HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 3:51 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
But that's what govts do. This is nothing new.

The tax system has been used as a social policy tool for generations. It subsidizes people who use public transit via a tax credit. It subsidizes families with kids over single folks. Etc etc. This is no different.
You are correct, but there has to be limits, checks and balances.

The idea of herding people into highrises by penalizing them through taxation is not a healthy one, IMHO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 3:57 PM
19200 19200 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 34
Move bottleneck from A to B...... Spend $$, Move bottleneck from B to C..... Spend $$ Move bottleneck from C to D....

Imagine traffic flow on and off the MacDonald with no traffic lights or restrictions for 1500m on either side?

The big picture needs to be looked at.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 4:00 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19200 View Post
The big picture needs to be looked at.
Agreed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 10:19 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I don't think people are moving anywhere to "evade" taxes. I think they are choosing where to live based on the lifestyle that they want.

Not everybody looks at highrise living as the absolute pinnacle of existence. To some, being confined to a small apartment with uninvited audible and olfactory glimpses into their neighbors' lives is not how they wish to live. Land on the peninsula is limited and thus expensive. For a household with average income the idea of owning a house on the peninsula with a backyard for their kids to play in or their dog to runabout is not a possibility. So, they choose to live a little further out of the core so they can do just that.

For those choosing to do so, car expenses are a necessity, since for the most part transit is pathetic around here, a thought which has been reinforced with our recent weather - buses on "snow plan", uncleared sidewalks, huge snowbanks to climb over in order to cross the street, etc. (conditions which also made living carless downtown quite miserable as well, I imagine). Not to mention, as has been brought up here numerous times, nobody wants to subsidize transit to the suburbs. In reality cars aren't as expensive as somebody with no experience might think, if the purchase is done sensibly and the buyer takes time to educate themselves on the subject of car ownership, maintenance and repair.

So, what would your solution be? Raise taxes in the suburbs so that the average person can't live in a house with a back yard? Should that only be something that the privileged rich can afford? Do you think that this will make people live in highrises? It would more likely cause people to want to live somewhere else, in another city...

Another aspect that I think you're not taking into account with your assessment, are the difficulties placed on commuting by our geography. Most large cities are not bound like Halifax is, on a peninsula with no real way to get off it, unless you travel back up the peninsula until you can get on a bridge or a highway outbound. Therefore the perils of traffic are magnified somewhat because of geography-imposed bottlenecks. Contrary to popular opinion, if we were to remove those bottlenecks, in building crossings near the downtown (both harbour and arm), this would relieve a lot of the perceived traffic issues. Combine this with a good transit system (by "good" I mean one that is efficient and convenient, to create an attractive alternative to taking their cars) and Bob's your uncle. Then, as if by magic, what is considered "downtown" has just expanded itself beyond the confines of the peninsula, allowing growth in those areas and attracting people away from the suburbs, 'cause who really wants to live there anyways?

Don't hold your breath thinking that rising oil prices will have any effect on car usage, by the way...
1) I don't think living in hi-rises is the pinnacle. There are houses on the peninsula. The north end is as a affordable as most mcmansions. To play this off as rich vs poor is more so a choice issue. Living in a huge house should cost money, duh. Note: I don't consider Fairview even suburban yet.

2) I'm talking about balancing the taxes a bit more to make it more affordable to live on the peninsula... not to make it unafforable to live off.

3) There should be more options for affordable downtown living. If you work downtown, you can likely afford to pay a bit more if you live off peninsula. The amount of people, not just geography, play a role in the congestion around bottlenecks.

Everybody pays for roads. The argument about subsidizing public transit is moot. We're all subsidizing your car driving. Look at all of the most successful cities: they all have good public transit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 11:41 PM
ILoveHalifax ILoveHalifax is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Palm Beach Gardens FL
Posts: 1,059
Obviously some people have never operated a car. I have not received a subsidy yet in 50 some odd years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2015, 12:58 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
The biggest per-capita subsidy of all based on the number of users must be bike lanes. Little to no use much of the year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2015, 4:43 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian View Post
1) I don't think living in hi-rises is the pinnacle. There are houses on the peninsula. The north end is as a affordable as most mcmansions. To play this off as rich vs poor is more so a choice issue. Living in a huge house should cost money, duh. Note: I don't consider Fairview even suburban yet.
Your post is implying that all houses in the "suburbs" are "mcmansions". That is not the case. There are areas where large houses are prevalent (just like on the peninsula) but they definitely do not constitute the average dwelling in these areas.

By the way, what is "suburban" in Halifax? "Halifax" is now made up of what used to be independent cities, towns, and the county. Bedford and Sackville were once towns unto themselves, with history going back almost as far as Halifax itself. Dartmouth was a city basically founded the same time as Halifax, give or take a year or so (growing up in Dartmouth, we were quite aware of our distinct identity and were somewhat proud of it - we even had a separate "Natal Day" than Halifax). People inhabited these areas for various reasons and typically lived their lives somewhat central to where their house/work was located. That said, Dartmouth was linked to Halifax from way back via the ferry, and thus people living in Dartmouth could work in Halifax as my Grandfather did, commuting to the Moirs chocolate factory each day from downtown Dartmouth. For most living outside the core of the city, getting around was cumbersome due to poor roads and horse and buggy conveyances, so each centre of population tended to be somewhat autonomous.

With the advent of the automobile came a level of mobility never before experienced by humans. As better roads were being built we became aware of the possibility to live in one town while working in another. Planners/engineers were fascinated by these new amazing horizons and tailored infrastructure to facilitate such things, perhaps innocently not seeing the potential downside of this (i.e. traffic congestion, infrastructure costs). They bought into the concept just like everybody else.

Expansion had occurred in the West End and Dutch Village/Fairview, and new places to build in traditional Halifax were running out. At this point the population of traditional Halifax was basically "maxed out" for standard housing whereas the other areas had room for development. The only way to increase population on the peninsula was to build "up", which did start to happen in the fifties/sixties, but at that point apartment living was more a way to live cheaply rather than a lifestyle choice (the concept of condominiums hadn't been realized yet).

So Bedford and Sackville grow, Dartmouth expands to fill the demand for housing. People can get around easier now, so they are less bound by their work location and have newfound freedom to live where they want to in the situation that they want to. Also keep in mind that the downtown area of Halifax during that time was becoming somewhat "gritty" as much of the housing was becoming rundown and there was always that element of unruliness related to bars/taverns, incoming sailors wanting to have a good time, etc. etc. In other words, the downtown had become an area that many people would not choose as a place that they wanted to raise their kids, and they wouldn't if they could afford to live somewhere else.

Meanwhile, some areas of the city such as the south end, didn't experience that decline and continued to remain more upscale and expensive.

So we have some areas of the downtown becoming "undesirable" and some remaining expensive, while areas like the North End being more stable. At this point, with populations increasing, the concept of supply and demand kicks in and the price goes up. That opens up the opportunity for profit in a free market situation, where developers can now make money building on previously "worthless" land in those other towns/cities. Expansion (or "sprawl" depending on how you want to label it) continues.

The purpose of this rough "history lesson", is really to question the concept of "the suburbs" as being some modern phenomenon that just appeared out of nowhere and has no link to the past. Like some evil, selfish people suddenly decided to create the suburbs as a cheap place to live at the expense of the good, all-knowing urban dwellers.

In reality, it has been a long, complex process, and one that has been more market-driven than planned.

The attitudes expressed here sometimes confound me somewhat, as it's almost as if the writers don't understand how it all happened.

Obviously, now that we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, we should try to plan differently for the future, but rest assured that every decision today's planners use will not necessarily be viewed in a positive light in the future.

I guess all I'm hoping for here is a greater level of understanding and acceptance for all areas of "Halifax", that's all.

Quote:
2) I'm talking about balancing the taxes a bit more to make it more affordable to live on the peninsula... not to make it unafforable to live off.
I don't think that in itself is a bad idea, but I would want to see some hard numbers to ensure fairness, as there are benefits that the peninsula sees that other areas pay for (i.e. Keith's favourite building). If the tax structure were to be changed, I think full transparency needs to be part of the process (not that I would ever expect to see it).

Quote:
3) There should be more options for affordable downtown living. If you work downtown, you can likely afford to pay a bit more if you live off peninsula.
Don't quite understand what idea you are trying to convey here.

Quote:
The amount of people, not just geography, play a role in the congestion around bottlenecks.
The point I was making was to compare Halifax to other medium/large cities. Our geography creates challenges that other cities don't have, or have dealt with in a better manner than Halifax has.

Quote:
Everybody pays for roads. The argument about subsidizing public transit is moot. We're all subsidizing your car driving. Look at all of the most successful cities: they all have good public transit.
Everybody uses roads, either directly or indirectly. As has been pointed out here before, how do you think the goods/groceries that you buy arrived at the store where you purchased them? What do buses drive on? Where are bike lanes located?

To say that you are subsidizing everybody's car driving is narrow-sighted. I agree that we should have better transit, and I am open to the idea of paying for it in my taxes even if I didn't use it because I know it will make Halifax a better city. I don't consider that I'm subsidizing everybody's bus trips because I know it is another necessary element to having a vibrant city that is functional and useful for most of its citizens.

So why don't we stop dumping on everybody who doesn't fit into our mold of what we view as the perfect inhabitant of the city? The sooner we do that, the sooner we develop a greater understanding on how to make it better for everybody.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2015, 9:05 AM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,799
I was moreso referring directly to the McMansion type suburbs... Some of which don't even have proper sidewalks!

3) There should be more options for affordable downtown living. If you work downtown, you can likely afford to pay a bit more if you live off peninsula.
Don't quite understand what idea you are trying to convey here.

- I meant that when you do the math, between parking, costs of vehicle ownership, fuel, etc... many people could afford to live closer to where they work. I've heard cases of people paying $300+ a month to park downtown... that's almost a good share of a mortgage or rent in parking cost alone.

I see your points and I also don't consider the majority of Dartmouth or Bedford to be "suburban". I would also venture to guess that alot of this SUV traffic is directly correlated with the McMansion owner types. I'm entitled to my opinion of distaste for this.

I'm not anti-car. To the contrary, I love the car and the freedom it gives. Yet, it really is the only option if you want to live outside of the city with the way the current setup. Reliance is not a good thing. Small European cities have it right.

Also, issues that have been discussed before (in part due to the geography) find that the neighbourhoods of the more urban areas are frequently overrun by those who have chosen to live in the outer areas. That's fine, but then they can't complain about "money going into downtown Halifax, Dartmouth, etc"... that's where the highest population densities are!

If there was an option for some sort of LRT system with hubs into the city, it would be much more viable than the current state of affairs. That being said, the road widenings are important for bus flow... which was my original point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2015, 9:07 AM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,799
Also, "inhabitant" of the city is a good way of putting it. Maybe the lines of HRM need to be redrawn in closer to the Old cities of Halifax, Dartmouth and Bedford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2015, 3:45 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian View Post
I was moreso referring directly to the McMansion type suburbs... Some of which don't even have proper sidewalks!

3) There should be more options for affordable downtown living. If you work downtown, you can likely afford to pay a bit more if you live off peninsula.
Don't quite understand what idea you are trying to convey here.

- I meant that when you do the math, between parking, costs of vehicle ownership, fuel, etc... many people could afford to live closer to where they work. I've heard cases of people paying $300+ a month to park downtown... that's almost a good share of a mortgage or rent in parking cost alone.

I see your points and I also don't consider the majority of Dartmouth or Bedford to be "suburban". I would also venture to guess that alot of this SUV traffic is directly correlated with the McMansion owner types. I'm entitled to my opinion of distaste for this.

I'm not anti-car. To the contrary, I love the car and the freedom it gives. Yet, it really is the only option if you want to live outside of the city with the way the current setup. Reliance is not a good thing. Small European cities have it right.

Also, issues that have been discussed before (in part due to the geography) find that the neighbourhoods of the more urban areas are frequently overrun by those who have chosen to live in the outer areas. That's fine, but then they can't complain about "money going into downtown Halifax, Dartmouth, etc"... that's where the highest population densities are!

If there was an option for some sort of LRT system with hubs into the city, it would be much more viable than the current state of affairs. That being said, the road widenings are important for bus flow... which was my original point.
Thanks for your explanation. I feel you make good points.

Regarding affordability of living downtown, I think that the laws of supply and demand will dictate this for the most part. If there are many more options (i.e. more residential buildings) built downtown then the price will come down. However, with the caveat that it will only attract the type of buyer who wants to live in a highrise. It doesn't matter how cheap it is, if you do not desire appartment or condo living you will not live there, IMHO. I've lived in all of these, and have to say I like aspects of both styles of living but if I have a choice I prefer to live in a house, as I like the privacy, lack of noise, I enjoy gardening and working on projects in a workshop, etc. Apartment living doesn't typically allow you these things, though sound deadening in the newer buildings has improved vastly over recent years.

The 'mcmansion' deal isn't something I desire, but I can appreciate people who have worked hard to make a good living for themselves wanting to have a larger property for their families. Again, much like an expensive luxury condo, it's a choice that is made, but it's not for everybody.

I've always looked at the downtown area as one that should be available for all of the public. It should be the centre of public entertainment, i.e. good restaurants, interesting shops, performance arts, public spaces (i.e. the waterfront walk), etc. and therefore it should be accessible to everybody. I've never really agreed with the thought that it should be considered the "turf" of downtown dwellers, but that's just my opinion.

To bring it back to topic, until LRT is brought into play, everything possible should be done to make the bus service as efficient as possible, but this winter shows it will always be limited by the weather.

Good discussion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2015, 8:18 PM
worldlyhaligonian worldlyhaligonian is offline
we built this city
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Thanks for your explanation. I feel you make good points.

Regarding affordability of living downtown, I think that the laws of supply and demand will dictate this for the most part. If there are many more options (i.e. more residential buildings) built downtown then the price will come down. However, with the caveat that it will only attract the type of buyer who wants to live in a highrise. It doesn't matter how cheap it is, if you do not desire appartment or condo living you will not live there, IMHO. I've lived in all of these, and have to say I like aspects of both styles of living but if I have a choice I prefer to live in a house, as I like the privacy, lack of noise, I enjoy gardening and working on projects in a workshop, etc. Apartment living doesn't typically allow you these things, though sound deadening in the newer buildings has improved vastly over recent years.

The 'mcmansion' deal isn't something I desire, but I can appreciate people who have worked hard to make a good living for themselves wanting to have a larger property for their families. Again, much like an expensive luxury condo, it's a choice that is made, but it's not for everybody.

I've always looked at the downtown area as one that should be available for all of the public. It should be the centre of public entertainment, i.e. good restaurants, interesting shops, performance arts, public spaces (i.e. the waterfront walk), etc. and therefore it should be accessible to everybody. I've never really agreed with the thought that it should be considered the "turf" of downtown dwellers, but that's just my opinion.

To bring it back to topic, until LRT is brought into play, everything possible should be done to make the bus service as efficient as possible, but this winter shows it will always be limited by the weather.

Good discussion.
Yes, and it makes me wonder if rail could handle a winter like this? The widening of roads would help buses (assuming at least a lane has been cleared) because it gives more space if the outer lanes are clogged.

A bombardier tram such as the following... would it get stuck? What do you all think?

Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 5:34 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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