Cogswell Interchange

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I have to say that it’s refreshing to read the positivity about how nice of a place that this is to live. Sometimes I think we get caught up in the minutiae of what isn’t working and lose sight of the gem that Halifax really is.

We have to take many of the “backwater” comments with a grain of salt, as I think many of them come from some other disgruntlement from people who feel the need to put down our fair city to make themselves feel better about their own situations.

I just spent last week entertaining three Toronto Residents that direct parts of my Company . Two of them had visited Nova Scotia many times and the third had never been here. Near the end of the Week I casually warned the newbie that Halifax would in time become a top three in Canada place to visit for He and his Wife. Both the veterans agreed including my National Marketing Manager that Immigrated from Sao Paulo Brazil. In Fact My Boss was one of the veterans and changed a schedule when he found out the other two were coming East. Much Lobster, Beer and touring,and a few Customer visits.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

I just spent last week entertaining three Toronto Residents that direct parts of my Company . Two of them had visited Nova Scotia many times and the third had never been here. Near the end of the Week I casually warned the newbie that Halifax would in time become a top three in Canada place to visit for He and his Wife. Both the veterans agreed including my National Marketing Manager that Immigrated from Sao Paulo Brazil. In Fact My Boss was one of the veterans and changed a schedule when he found out the other two were coming East. Much Lobster, Beer and touring,and a few Customer visits.

That’s long been my experience as well, when entertaining international work associates, including top levels of upper management. The lobster and touring seemed to be tops on their lists, and oh yeah, let’s have that meeting…

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

We have to take many of the “backwater” comments with a grain of salt, as I think many of them come from some other disgruntlement from people who feel the need to put down our fair city to make themselves feel better about their own situations.

Sometimes I wonder how much of it is people trying to make themselves sound more sophisticated by implying they know how things are in the wider world, or that only the most cosmopolitan places are good enough for them. Fair enough, except they often don't come off as well informed about other places.

I think the standard notion of a "backwater", likely set many decades ago in pop culture, has become anachronistic given modern connectivity and technology. Information and access to aspects of culture like visual and audio media are far more ubiquitous today than in the 80s or earlier.

It does seem like things are improving a bit in NS but I still see such a strong element of naysaying and zero sum thinking. I dunno, I just don't agree that until hospital wait times are fixed cultural spending should be halted. I think a lot of those problems are institutional and organizational and are not fixable by diverting comparatively paltry funding from other areas. Recent health care plans have a budget in the $5-10B range. The water feature HRM got cold feet over ballooned from $0.002B to $0.0035B.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

It does seem like things are improving a bit in NS but I still see such a strong element of naysaying and zero sum thinking. I dunno, I just don't agree that until hospital wait times are fixed cultural spending should be halted. I think a lot of those problems are institutional and organizational and are not fixable by diverting comparatively paltry funding from other areas. Recent health care plans have a budget in the $5-10B range. The water feature HRM got cold feet over ballooned from $0.002B to $0.0035B.

The argument that a govt spending item that is wasteful spending is virtuous in spite of that because it is less wasteful than another wasteful spend by govt because that one costs more remains a very weak argument.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The argument that a govt spending item that is wasteful spending is virtuous in spite of that because it is less wasteful than another wasteful spend by govt because that one costs more remains a very weak argument.

Maybe so, but that is not my argument. I'm saying there's already a lot of spending on healthcare and various smaller cultural projects won't move the fiscal needle either way, though they may move the needle in terms of quality of life and attractiveness. The waterfront is a tourism gem and adding to the draw could produce a big payout.

More broadly I don't think NS is unique in being in some kind of crisis that mandates only bare-bones infrastructure funding. And anyway that standard is only applied selectively: https://www.taxpayer.com/newsroom/report...ighest-paid-politicians-in-north-america

[OldDartmouthMark]

I would like to offer the idea that spending on things that help to make the city a nice place to live do much to improve the feeling of wellbeing, which has positive effects on peoples’ health. There may even be a payback with a small reduction in healthcare costs, not that it could be quantified easily, but one could argue that there is a cost involved with not spending on items that improve the enjoyment of the city for the public.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I would like to offer the idea that spending on things that help to make the city a nice place to live do much to improve the feeling of wellbeing, which has positive effects on peoples’ health. There may even be a payback with a small reduction in healthcare costs, not that it could be quantified easily, but one could argue that there is a cost involved with not spending on items that improve the enjoyment of the city for the public.

If it cannot be quantified, the argument remains very weak.

Then there's this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot...ls-told-to-take-action-at-park-9.7272780

HRM staff ignore concerns about inappropriate behavior in a park they were advised not to build because they know better than those working in the area daily. Then the park becomes a crime scene and they have to spend more unplanned money on fences and security staff. Even more oddly, the issues seem to be championed by a Dartmouth councillor despite being in the area for which a Halifax councillor is responsible because apparently she was sleeping on it.

You can't make this kind of stuff up. Sheer incompetence and arrogance on the part of the bureaucracy.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If it cannot be quantified, the argument remains very weak.

Then there's this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot...ls-told-to-take-action-at-park-9.7272780

HRM staff ignore concerns about inappropriate behavior in a park they were advised not to build because they know better than those working in the area daily. Then the park becomes a crime scene and they have to spend more unplanned money on fences and security staff. Even more oddly, the issues seem to be championed by a Dartmouth councillor despite being in the area for which a Halifax councillor is responsible because apparently she was sleeping on it.

You can't make this kind of stuff up. Sheer incompetence and arrogance on the part of the bureaucracy.

Not surprised - a park that is isolated from most residents/users, surrounded by roads, and adjacent to a shelter, is not designed to be functional as a place to be enjoyed by most - it's a space to get away from being observed and feels like a term I've recently learned: liminal.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

If it cannot be quantified, the argument remains very weak.

It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to understand that happier people = healthier people. Healthier people need less healthcare - prevention vs reaction, really not all that complicated if you actually care to think about it.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to understand that happier people = healthier people. Healthier people need less healthcare - prevention vs reaction, really not all that complicated if you actually care to think about it.

Just moments ago I saw a very young lady crossing the street. In one hand she had a combustion cigarette of some sort, while in the other she had a vape device. She was alternately inhaling on each virtually with every breath. She seemed very happy, almost euphoric. I would hesitate to suggest that she was healthy, however.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Just moments ago I saw a very young lady crossing the street. In one hand she had a combustion cigarette of some sort, while in the other she had a vape device. She was alternately inhaling on each virtually with every breath. She seemed very happy, almost euphoric. I would hesitate to suggest that she was healthy, however.

Is that happiness or an attempt to compensate for one’s lack of happiness with what amounts to substance abuse?

Anyhow, silly argument, and a humorous attempt to sidestep the simple fact that nice surroundings with interesting things to do will always give people an emotional boost and some pride in their city. My dad used to say “so much is conversation, and all the rest is BS”… so I’ll leave it at that.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to understand that happier people = healthier people. Healthier people need less healthcare - prevention vs reaction, really not all that complicated if you actually care to think about it.

A lot of what's most important in life is hard to quantify. Data and scientific or technical reasoning are important but so are judgement, preferences, and politics. The idea that you can make up a spreadsheet that proves what's best for a government to do is a large part of what's gone so badly over the past few decades. A city run by risk-averse accountants is not going to be a nice place to live for most people.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

A lot of what's most important in life is hard to quantify. Data and scientific or technical reasoning are important but so are judgement, preferences, and politics. The idea that you can make up a spreadsheet that proves what's best for a government to do is a large part of what's gone so badly over the past few decades. A city run by risk-averse accountants is not going to be a nice place to live for most people.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

I do think this is gradually changing. After all, the AGNS was planned approved, until the Houston government kiboshed it, and the city has become more willing to spend money on streetscaping and aesthetics, even little things like the parkette that replaced the slip lane at Brunswick and Sackville. But it's a slow change.

Maybe there will be some political shift and a project like that will again become possible.

The city's moving toward a scale now where doing more of the same doesn't necessarily work as well. This is most obvious in transportation where as a city grows it gets harder to build roads and parking and eventually it gets hard even to add buses and their economies of scale are worse.

I bet it's true even for visitors and people moving to a city. As the city grows it gets more expensive and annoying and people's expectations change. The stakes to compete against other comparable cities get larger too, and the scale of industry you need to grow changes.

It's also sad for NS and Atlantic Canada because Halifax is really the only game in town for potential larger scale urban attractions. Every other region of Canada has a range of attractions and amenities that Atlantic Canada doesn't, and in most cases Halifax is the only plausible place where that stuff might work. NS has spent decades trying to paddle upstream by building theme parks in rural areas, etc. and those investments produced very little payoff. NS probably spends about as much for the Yarmouth ferry as BRT would have cost.

[Antigonish]

Originally Posted by someone123

A lot of what's most important in life is hard to quantify. Data and scientific or technical reasoning are important but so are judgement, preferences, and politics. The idea that you can make up a spreadsheet that proves what's best for a government to do is a large part of what's gone so badly over the past few decades. A city run by risk-averse accountants is not going to be a nice place to live for most people.

It's a bit of both, tbh. Things like transit, traffic management, utilities, etc., really needs to be quantified before pursuing should/shouldn't. However, things like libraries, recreational facilities, landscaping, and so on are important but are more qualitative for bean counters.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I would like to offer the idea that spending on things that help to make the city a nice place to live do much to improve the feeling of wellbeing, which has positive effects on peoples’ health. There may even be a payback with a small reduction in healthcare costs, not that it could be quantified easily, but one could argue that there is a cost involved with not spending on items that improve the enjoyment of the city for the public.

This afternoon I used relatively new protected cycling infrastructure (a big money pit, some say, including on this forum) to bring my kids to the Commons Pool, a not cheap ($18 million cost) facility.

The safe, open-air bike ride--courtesy of HRM taxpayers--was infinitely more enjoyable than cramming into a car and wrangling parking. The pool is a fantastic newish facility, provided at no cost to users. While there we stumbled across friends we otherwise would not have, and ended up spending the afternoon together, and one of them remarked on the ideal size of Halifax for these happenstance encounters, and how this kind of recreational infrastructure enables it.

Indeed, these kinds of things are hard to quantify. They're also what make living in a community worthwhile, and encourage people to care about a place, and take joy in it. If we're not spending money on these things, what is even the point of living in a city?

If we have to an economic justification to it: I wouldn't live in a city without these things. Neither would many people. A city deprived of this kind of "frill" would be a worse place to live, and would suffer economically and demographically due to being simply undesirable, and it wouldn't matter how fast commutes or how low property taxes were.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

This afternoon I used relatively new protected cycling infrastructure (a big money pit, some say, including on this forum) to bring my kids to the Commons Pool, a not cheap ($18 million cost) facility.

The safe, open-air bike ride--courtesy of HRM taxpayers--was infinitely more enjoyable than cramming into a car and wrangling parking. The pool is a fantastic newish facility, provided at no cost to users. While there we stumbled across friends we otherwise would not have, and ended up spending the afternoon together, and one of them remarked on the ideal size of Halifax for these happenstance encounters, and how this kind of recreational infrastructure enables it.

Indeed, these kinds of things are hard to quantify. They're also what make living in a community worthwhile, and encourage people to care about a place, and take joy in it. If we're not spending money on these things, what is even the point of living in a city?

If we have to an economic justification to it: I wouldn't live in a city without these things. Neither would many people. A city deprived of this kind of "frill" would be a worse place to live, and would suffer economically and demographically due to being simply undesirable, and it wouldn't matter how fast commutes or how low property taxes were.

This is great to hear. I don't know why it seems so tribal in Halifax to build these essentials.

We should build everything and improve peninsular densification.

That includes LRT, stadiums, art galleries, museums, aquarium, etc.

All the greatest cities have all of these things. We should be looking at mid-sized European models in places on the water.

[Keith P.]

I thought the Commons pool was closed for repairs?

Depending on the ages of the children, I'm not sure of the wisdom of placing them in the midst of traffic.

[mleblanc]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Depending on the ages of the children, I'm not sure of the wisdom of placing them in the midst of traffic.

This is a fantastic, albeit unintentional I'm sure, argument for the continued developed of protected bike lanes

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by mleblanc

This is a fantastic, albeit unintentional I'm sure, argument for the continued developed of protected bike lanes

A family putting their children in the middle of city traffic raises its own questions rather than being a rationale for more unnecessary infrastructure spending.