I have severe misgivings about this deal with the devil approach that the NS government is taking. IBM is well documented to having dubious dealing with the American gov (re. the Patriot act) as well as atrocious treatment of older employees.
While we do need to build a strong IT sector in this province, there is simply no good that comes of signing over our soul in order to achieve it. The corruption that this kind of thinking spawns is going to be a disaster for our future.
I work in the IT sector in this city, and the overall attitude towards workers here is a disgrace. The large companies (most in the industry know who I mean) are allowed to operate with a ennobled sense of righteousness now. They abuse labor laws and pretend they are something other then what they are in order to get listed as "Canada's top 50 employers".
These companies need to be called on their lies and abuse of employees and immigrants, just as the government is being accused of making bad deals. We should be asking who broached this deal? Did IBM approach NSgov or did the gov actually think IBM was worth coveting. Those are the answers I want from the government documents. Most of what I read there is typical corporate BS lines.
I also think roller skates are much cooler. If the city gets some of these, I will be there.
This issue is a perfect example of how our so-called democratic system works. There were public hearings which made it clear that the public preferred Agricola. Then the real people in power basically ignored what the public said and ensured that a few business owners, concerned about a couple of parking spots, got their way. Private profit concerns always trump the public interest in this country. What galls me most is that the city feels obligated to make a show of engaging the public, but participatory democracy this certainly ins not!
So happy I won't be the only one. The oval I a great place for fitness
I wish they would by the old style skates!! I loved rollerskating but can't balance on in -lines
Start with Windsor, add a bike lane on Agricola when the political will is there in a few years. Both are good routes. Agricola is already a busy bike route. Windsor is more central and will appeal to university students and West Enders. Also, parking on Windsor is already a safety issue. Look at how wide the street is in front of Phat's Barber. Let's eliminate these few spaces and park on Duncan and Lawrence instead.
halifax resident - If Halifax stevedores/tugs/pilots go on strike the ships drop the cargo in the US. If US East coast stevedores/tugs/pilots strike the ships drop cargo in Canada.
Draw a great circle route from the western approaches to the English channel to Long Island
and see how close it passes Halifax. Containers from Halifax to Toronto take over 24 hours and a ship opting for NY rather than Halifax adds less than 30 hours. The ship is going to the US as part of its regular route. It will be very difficult for Halifax to be a much larger port, the savings are not obvious but having the port as a competitor to US east coast ports is an advantage to the shipping companies.
We are not Rotterdam and we are not Singapore.
We are backup.
Just what I want when I go to a park. Somebody trying to sell me something topped off with a way to cancel out any health benefits I might have gained by park visiting. Wait! Isn't that a mall?
They probably didn't want you seeing their doodles, is all. I've heard of briefings from industry officials where Preya spent all or most of his attention on his blackberry. Heck, come to think of it, maybe there weren't even any notes. They're just trying to prevent you from finding out that they didn't actually write anything relevant down.
I think that HRM needs to deal with two things at the same time. Urban sprawl and wasted space. As for the former I am not against Halifax growing but I am against the way it is growing and what it is growing into. The planning for "suburban" development is lacking, to say the least. It's almost like the designers, contractors and owners just don't care. They just puke out a building and move on, cause it's all just money to them. The way this city is "sprawling" is discouraging. Parts of HRM are going to have transportation and water service problems at the rate it's going. There seems to be very little to no thought of professional design and the required infrastructure needed before the building of apartments and condos. I think that HRM has created and continues to create a situation where transportation to and from the "core" peninsula is falling by the wayside. HRM is sacrificing development contracts to the cheapest most uninspired bidders for the almighty dollar. This city disparately needs to focus on transportation and green spaces! The building of a Convention Centre was a poor choice... period! It was forced onto the people by an ignorant, nepotistic, elitist, bureaucracy that ignores their constituents and lines their own pockets. I don't have much hope that things will change for the better, however, that cynicism aside, I would suggest that people start participating and communicating in how this city develops just the same because the consequences in a few decades from now will not be good if we don't.
Just another Dexter fuck up everything and anything that this government touches is a disaster in the making. Poor old Stephen MacNeil will have his hands full when he takes over, he will have to wear rubber gloves for the first six months until all of the dipper shit is cleaned away.
Tim Bousquet's story on the megaport presents a number of statements with no backup support whatsoever. It claims that land transportation is more expensive than having a container ship at sea an extra two or three days. Is land transportation by rail really more expensive than the costs of sailing the extra day or two? If so where is the evidence to back up the claim? Is it true that the top priority of shipping companies is to get as close as possible to their destination, as opposed to cutting down on sailing time? On what information does Bousquet rely for this claim? Bousquet casts aspersions on Professor Mary Brooks by suggesting that her articles on this subject lack "peer review". If Tim Bousquet studied under Professor Brooks he would know that there are several shipping cost models from which to choose from. In some cases the buyer assumes responsibility for overland transportation fees; in other cases it is the seller. Tim Bousquet should show evidence to support the statements that are made in this article; if he is not prepared to do so his article should appear as an opinion piece
@joeblow: of course the Stantec repot doesn't define "sprawl". I'm not sure it even uses the term. But the terms regional centre, suburban area and rural area are all clearly defined based on the regional plan. And the report makes it pretty clear that if we continue to focus most of our growth in the suburban and rural areas, it is going to cost us all billions. But you know that, cause you read the report, right?
And since you read the report, you also know it addresses policing costs. @hipp5 has done a good job of explaining why your simple HRP vs. RCMP analysis doesn't cut it. Since more people work and shop in areas covered by HRP than live there, you can't just compare costs on a per capita basis.
No one is saying that everyone has to live in urban areas, or apartment buildings (my family lives in a house, in the middle of the urban core). All the report says is that we can't have the majority of our growth continue to be in areas where we can't afford to support it.
Typical, Halifax wants to grow but doesn't want to grow. Really do you want to live in a place like New York City or Tokyo where there's no room to breathe?
The Herald quotes one man saying he wanted a 50 storey tower, delusionist.
I'll mail him some Lego.
Shipping companies like options in case of strikes and Halifax is a useful option, to be played against US east coast ports.
Halifax could look well ahead and seriously consider providing LNG fuel for ships
I understand that ham isn't kosher, but what is the connection between kosher and the container operation?
I find this paragraph confusing: "Shippers don't want to go to the closest port—they want to go to the port that's farthest away. More succinctly, shippers want to get to the port that's closest to their ultimate destination, in order to reduce the much more expensive land-shipping (i.e., trucking) costs. " Is this an editing blip? Actually, after a few re-reads I see understand what you are saying, in a somewhat cumbersome way.
Also, how does kosher factor into this? Why the reference to ham and hebrew laws? Just curious.
Wording it another way: evaluating policing costs on a population basis means you are looking at the costs of residential policing. This probably is a pretty fair evaluation in suburban areas because residential uses are by and large the majority. However, it's entirely unfair in urban areas because there is a HUGE range of uses that don't have a population figure attached to them (i.e. not residential) but do have policing costs associated with them (commercial offices, bars, Moosehead games, etc. etc.).
Evaluating costs based on assessed value seems a slightly more fair and accurate way of doing it, because assessed value roughly takes into account all those other things (areas with events, commercial business, etc., are more valuable) and because assessed value also gives a better idea of whether an area is "pulling its weight" in terms of paying for that police service. For example:
House A: Policing cost of $10, assessed value of $200k
House B: Policing cost of $10, assessed value of $400k
House B is the "better" development (from a municipal financial sustainability POV) because it's paying more taxes for similar policing costs. I don't have the data to tell you if house A and B are in the suburbs and urban area, or vice versa, but I think that's the more fair analysis that does need to be done (and to my understanding that's the gist of what the Stantec report does, though I haven't had the time to read through it yet).
Well of course police are less busy in low density areas because they have less to police. Read my comment again:
"Policing in urban areas isn't just about policing people's homes, but also about policing related to the higher concentration of commercial uses (which many of the people in the suburban areas work in), policing related to special cultural events, policing related to bars and other late night activities, and policing related to the concentration of traffic coming from those suburban areas for employment and to experience the cultural amenities of the urban areas."
You just don't have those things (to any large degree) in suburban areas, so the police don't need to police them. That doesn't make suburban areas better though. Yeah I guess we could imagine a hypothetical situation where we deleted all the bars, special events, and commercial businesses from the urban areas; police costs would plummet, but our city (the city that even the suburbanites use and benefit from!) would suck.
Halifax's sex secrets revealed
300+ Ways to Live Sustainably
Interior design and home accessories in Halifax.
Designers, stores and fashion, all locally-sourced.
The official handbook to student life in Halifax.
Halifax's best independent stores and boutiques
2013 Reader Survey results
All the beer, all over town
The Coast's Well Being Guide
The couple's guide to everything.
Search 100s of Halifax restaurants, bars and cafes
The best of everything Halifax has to offer.
Coast Publishing Ltd.