Dartmouth residents like the design for a new, expanded Bridge Terminal, but dislike its location on Dartmouth Common land.
Architectural drawings for the new transit terminal were revealed at a public meeting at Dartmouth High School Monday night. The proposal stretches the terminal between Nantucket Avenue and Thistle Street, through what is now the wooded “urban wilderness” park behind the Sportsplex parking lot.
The existing Bridge Terminal is already the busiest transit terminal east of Montreal, and the proposed expanded terminal is very large indeed—stretching over 700 metres feet long, it will serve 17,000 commuters daily. There will be 16 bus bays, and a bus parking lane along the length of the back, eastern, wall. The terminal building itself will be three times as large as the Portland Hills terminal building, and will include seating, washrooms and a concession stand.
Early proposals for the terminal oriented it east-west, parallel and adjoining Nantucket Avenue, but in response to complaints that such an orientation would bring it too close to Dartmouth High, the plan was re-worked into its present north-south orientation. That brought its own set of design challenges, however, as people walking to the terminal from adjoining neighbourhoods would have to cross the buses’ paths.
To resolve that problem and to provide a buffer between the noise of the terminal and the nearby Dartmouth High, architect Troy Scott has the terminal 18 feet beneath the existing grade leading up to the school, and provides a block-wide, curved pedestrian bridge leading to the top of the terminal building. There, three “lantern”-like entry points, two for stairways and one for an elevator, provide access to the building.
The pedestrian bridge and substantial excavation have increased costs considerably—Halifax council last month upped potential project costs from $4.5 to $9.5 million.
Residents at Monday’s meeting (full disclosure: I live nearby as well) mostly felt that, so far as is possible on the site, Scott had listened to their earlier concerns and has produced what several called a “beautiful” building. Scott, who also lives in the neighbourhood, was clearly proud of the design.
But residents also felt the expanded terminal is inappropriately placed on Common land, and that the decision to place it there was made with no community consultation. “This is a fait accompli,” said Dartmouth High teacher Mike Cosgrove. “We were never asked what we thought of this location, or if we had any better ideas.”
The terminal proposal will go before the Harbour East Community Council in April, and the full HRM council soon thereafter. If it is approved, construction will start this summer, and likely take a year or more to complete. The public can still comment on the proposal; see tinyurl.com/bridgeterminal for architectural drawings, contacts and other details.
This article appears in Mar 11-17, 2010.
Right building, right place.
I fully agree Matthew, right building, right place. The green space that is lost will serve more people better than the scrub land that is there.
How do passengers safely cross Nantucket to the strip mall ?
This should be at the ferry terminal at the derelict city owned parking lot next to Alderney Gate not in the wasteland that is the bridge terminal area.
Having seen this, I’m impressed with the planned architecture. That said, I have concerns over the cost. The extra money will have to come from somewhere, and I fear we will see fewer new buses in 2011/12 than planned. The terminal does protect the common land as best as possible, and the crosswalk by McDonald’s will see a lot more use, plus there are pathways from the parking lot up to the terminal. The upper area does make me wonder how much object throwing is going to occur at buses and passengers below. Also, Mumford terminal had a concessions area and a bathroom. Ten years later, neither one is open to the public. I hope the same doesn’t happen here.
Having the layover area means we’ll stop getting in the way of the auto shop on Lyle St (which has been steadily growing its business these past couple of years) or Dartmouth High. I don’t care what they build, just build the accesible community a terminal they can actually use.
This is LONG overdue, the current current bridge terminal is terrible, especially when the weather is bad. They can’t get this finished fast enough in my opinion.
Great looking building and the proper location. The so called “urban wilderness park” is a joke. It is just a place for Dartmouth High students to smoke.
Why can there not be some sort of overhang over the driveway(s)? All I want is to be able to get on or off of a bus in the rain or snow and not get soaked. This seems like a long term money saver as they wouldn’t have to plow the driveway in the winter because they’d be covered with a roof.
I didn’t know they closed the facilities at Mumford, Plastic Diver Guy – what happened?
Anyway, I quite like this building and the cost and design is perfectly appropriate for a facility that serves 17,000 daily. The current bridge terminal has always been one of the sketchiest places around the whole time I’ve grown up here and it really needs a replacement. I hope the new one has adequate lighting, because the current one sure doesn’t.
Kind of a joke that that guy from Dartmouth High is complaining there was no community consultation =S
Wrong Building, Wrong place.
The Scotiabank could be bought to expand the existing terminal and the park could be used for: 1) A regulation sports field and track for local athletics and for the adjacent high school and junior high sports teams and Phys. Ed programs, as well as Sportsplex members. (Remember, this giant bus terminal is set to go between a high school and a sports facility). 2) A grassland park with picnic tables and benches for the schools and local families 3) A skate park for local skaters and BMXers 4) Some basket ball hoops 5) A community garden for locals and science classes 6) An outdoor classroom for the schools
There are endless uses for this park space. It is huge! The Urban Wilderness park was not valued enough, but you should see what some cities are doing with urban parks these days.
The main thing is, that they are places to PLAY and MEET in. Once they are lost, they are lost forever. We have to be more imaginative and stop thinking about the space in its current condition.
There wasn’t any public consultation. Metro Transit announced the plan to the public after BILL 179 redefined the Dartmouth Common to allow for the terminal on 6 acres of it. It is 170 pages long. No one noticed. By definition the Common is a publicly shared piece of land. In this case, it had been so since the 1700’s. Be specific. When you say joke, what exactly do you mean? Did you know about the redefined Dartmouth Common in Bill 179 before it was passed? There wasn’t any discussion in the legislature. In fact a lot of time was spent talking about possible expansion to the QE II on the Halifax Common during that Bill’s readings.
Do you think Haligonians would be pleased if Metro Transit announced the construction of a bus terminal on their Common without their consultation. Would this also be a joke?
It would make far more sense for the Dartmouth terminal to be at Alderney so there is a direct connection to the ferries. And $10 mil for something like this is obscene. It will be a shithole in 6 months given the location and clientele in that area. It looks like th emost important thing required there — a 24/7 police office — has not been included either. Start over again please.
Will 16 bus bays behind a high school be an issue when it comes to air quality, noise and security? Are they planning on closing Dartmouth High? I noticed that some cities have by-laws against bus terminals being situated so close to high schools.
These drawings are very puzzling. The bottom drawing shows the walkway from Dartmouth High’s direction onto the terminal ramp. The top drawing shows the view from the Sportsplex parking lot. What happened to their parking lot? Is it being converted to a field. If not, the drawing is misleading, or miscoloured. If so, someone should tell the Sportsplex, which is also planning on expanding. Strange.
Manny, the new, reoriented terminal is not very close to the high school – at least 80 metres away.
play, it just struck me as odd that he would state that there was no community consultation when I distinctly remember them complaining about the previous proposed siting parallel to Nantucket
One of the enduring legacies of our species is that there will always be people who whine and moan about progress. Same type of people who screeched like banshee babies with a bad case of colic when Sunday Shopping came in.
I agree with dar, all the urban wilderness is right now is a place for Dartmouth High students to smoke. Am I distressed that green land will be disappearing? Sure. Do I realize that the improvement to the environment for the city that will be allowed by the expansion of our transit system that will result from it will MORE than make up for the small amount of space that’s being taken? Absolutely! To make an Omelette you have to break some eggs.
Yes dartmouthy, putting a massive bus terminal next to and in a space with massive stage that’s used multiple times of years for festivals and events and generates a shitwad of money would be perfect. And totes wouldn’t be a traffic nightmare on the road up the hill to the massive intersection that can handle the influx. It’ll be no problem to have all the inbound buses backtracking up to the bridge either.
There doesn’t need to be a direct connection to the ferries in Dartmouth. There isn’t a direct connection to the ferries in Halifax either, and since there’s always about oh, at least 5 routes always going past Alderney it’s not exactly difficult to connect from either direction.
If the “wilderness park” is so important, then why have the locals in the area let it become such a total shithole? I hate losing city green space, but I’ll take something that increases people using public transit and making it more efficient to a swath of trash choked scrub that people won’t even walk on the same side of at night.
Calvin. You are missing the point. Consultation should have taken place before the Common was taken. The reorientation is not the issue. So no, it’s not odd. You are not understanding the point at all. When were the people of Dartmouth asked if they wanted a bus terminal on their Common? Secondly, answer this: Would the people of Halifax be satisfied with the same process.
Hishighness. Firstly, I am glad you brought up the Sunday shopping. Great example. We solved this debate with a public referendum. The comment about banshee babies with colic seems designed to undermine people who differ with your view. However, we voted. Should we do the same with the terminal sight?
Secondly, could we have discussion about progress? What exactly is progress? Is it just the passage of time? Does it represent an aquisition of knowledge? Are nuclear weapons progress? Is globalization progress? Are fast foods progress? Wasn’t slavery once seen as progress by many people?
Perhaps, the freedom to discuss what progess is, is itself progress. What do you think?
Thirldy, the size of the space is defined by what it can be used for. I agree that a Wilderness park is not ideal. What about a field, a track, a skatepark, a grassland, a playground, a picnic area, a community garden. All that, and more could fit on the 6 acres they are taking behind the high school. Have you considered other sights for the terminal? Let’s continue this discussion.
Public space should serve the public. The current urban wilderness park does not do that. Having attended Dartmouth High, I can attest that it is only used as a trash can and a place to do drugs. That doesn’t mean that the space couldn’t be better used as recreational space, but even if it was I don’t think it would serve the public as much as a new bus terminal would. The main portion of the common has ample open space and benches. Basketball courts exist across the street from the Sportsplex. Skate parks serve a select few.
In regards to impacts on the school, do not fear. Once again, I can attest that Dartmouth High is built in solid mid-century fashion – thick brick walls and windows that no one cares to open. If anything the terminal would enhance Dartmouth High by allowing students a better transit experience.
Put the terminal somewhere else? That doesn’t make sense. The terminal is where it is because that location is the convergence of many different bus routes. There are three or four distinct “lines” that meet at this point. An Alderny terminal would serve one of those “lines”. Where would buses going from the Shannon Park area to the bridge stop? Alderny is out of the way for many, many routes.
The current terminal is woefully inadequate. It is unpleasant and dangerous. I have seen buses avoid hitting people by a mere four or five inches because people step in front of them to get to other buses.
Bus congestion at the current terminal prevents Metro Transit from increasing service frequency or offering any more routes that go through this area. Building this new terminal will not only serve its direct users, but will also serve the greater public by allowing an expansion of transit service.
This is a beautiful design it the only place that makes sense. 9.5 million dollars spent here will do more for the public than any highway interchange (approximately the same cost). This project has my full support.
Hipp5. It isn’t simply a case of the more people a space serves the better. If that was the case we should put a Walmart or some high rises on the Halifax Common. It isn’t always just about numbers. How do you think New Yorkers saved Central Park if that was the philosophy. Central Park is that one area of town where citizens can go to get away from crowds. In a sense, our parks are trying to preserve low density, not proove their value through popularity. They are the one area of the city unique in that respect. They offer something completely different than the status quo. All around the world cities are trying to reclaim green space. There are many options for the terminal. At the very least, don’t you think the city should have asked the Dartmouthians, the people who the land was given to? When the QE II expanded on the Halifax Common, the community, the city, and the province had to sign off on it. Why should Dartmouthians be treated differently?
As far as saying just a few people will use the park, I disagree. How about 1500 students just in the adjacent schools alone. Do you live in this area? It is teaming with new young families.
The abandoned parking lot next to Alderney Gate is great for a bus terminal because it is one full level, perhaps more, under the grade of Alderney Drive. This means you could have an inbound level and also an outbound level.
The current route configuration is not written in stone… Many routes do go through the bridge terminal but I’d hardly call a minute or two drive down the hill backtracking… this is well within the tolerance level of most routes, as evidenced by the 5-10 minute variance in any bus arriving at the terminal currently.
Perhaps this is a good time to look at route configuration too whether the terminal is moved or not. Either way routes can be reconfigured, bus stock can be reconfigured to modify routes and times.
Have the bus terminal connect directly with the ferry terminal makes sense because it integrates the two transit options we currently have. Anywhere else, in any other city, they would want to make it easier to connect from one mode of transport to another. They would support making it easier to use transit so that it is more successful.
So what if there isn’t a bus terminal in Halifax that connects to the ferry? Is that a reason why Dartmouth shouldn’t?
The only impediment that I can see is that Alderney Drive where it meets Windmill and Wyse is a very awkward intersection, not to mention the fact that Alderney narrows to two lanes all of a sudden going up the hill.
If they could gently re-align Alderney Drive as a curve going up the hill to meet with Wyse, and keep it four lanes with a cross intersection with Windmill and Thistle, it would solve any traffic issue that is present there… that is something that should be addressed regardless of whether the terminal is placed in the logical space next to Alderney Gate.
The parking lot next to Alderney Gate is not the same location as the concert space… the concert space is across the railroad tracks. I am talking about the lot in front of Belmont House and across from Alderney Gate. And so what if there are concerts there in the summer – having the bus terminal across the tracks would make it even more convenient to visit that location and could perhaps increase the attendance of such events.
Also, with all of the people traffic in Downtown Dartmouth that could only help local merchants and businesses. How many people want to brave trying to cross Nantucket Avenue during traffic to go shopping at the Dartmouth Shopping Centre?
There could be a pedway from the Bus Terminal to Alderney Gate to the ferry… All Weather comfort for transit riders, and not in the barren windswept wasteland that is inherently unsafe, the bridge plaza area.
I agree Manny, it is under the stewardship (or lack thereof) that the Urban Wilderness park has met its current fate, not through the fault of Dartmouthians who instituted this use of space originally… The power to continue on where we left off seems to have dissovled along with our civic pride through amalgamation. If any of you are interested, check out Sperry McLellan’s Common Master plan that they did for the old city of Dartmouth around 1990… they had lots of great ideas that were lost in the shuffle along with amalgamation. It is available at the Library at Alderney Gate in the reference section, along with many other planning documents.
Lighting, upgraded paths, informational focal points, improved green space, viewpoints, benches, all things that could be added to the commons to make the space more engaging and popular with citizens.
It is ironic that it is again Sperry who were tasked with the Terminal expansion – too bad their hands were cut from the very beginning with the siting of this project in the first place. I would love to see what their vision could have been in Downtown Dartmouth, where the bus terminal should be in the first place.
There was a Commons Master Plan done in 1977, then again 1990, and then again in 2009. Nothing ever comes of it. They fool the gullible Dartmouthians into thinking something will become of their park dreams. It is a classic appeasement strategy. It should be called THE COMMONS MASTER SCAM.
Actually manny the public voted on Sunday Shopping and voted it down, then a short time later the government did the right thing and overrode them because it was the right thing to do. Sometimes a simple vote doesn’t get the correct answer. I imagine if you had a vote for or against desegregation in the American South in the 60s the path the voters choose wouldn’t have been the right one. Extreme example I know, but the point is the same here.
9/10 for effort tho.
I’m responding to “hishighness”. I completely disagree with what you seem to suggest. Taking a poll of the people’s opinion on an issue regarding the community in which they live should not be cast as inappropriate or ineffective in terms of getting a “correct answer”. You suggest that the people of the community are incapable of deciding what is right for themselves and their community. Rather than having the autonomy to collectively shape our shared environment, you suggest we should rather be submissive to “technical experts”, who would manage our community with minimal input from the people who live there. I’ll be totally frank and say I personally believe that no one is more capable of deciding what is “correct”, then those who make up the community. The more people who participate in the planning and shaping of our shared spaces, the more interests are represented. Popular input from a more than competent population is as close as we can come to a “correct answer”.
As far as your comparison to segregation in the American south, yeah it is kind of an extreme example and not a very accurate or relevant one. The US, as well as the Canadian constitution, protects minority rights. In the case of southern segregation, the government was justified in intervening to protect the rights of a minority group. They also enjoyed the support of a majority of Americans who themselves decided that it was an immoral and unjust social practice.
In terms of our community, I take offence to the notion that we are incapable of shaping the community we all share and live in together. Personally, I refuse to be spoon-fed and told what is “correct”. Just like the planning that goes into them, our public areas are something to be shared, not micro-managed.
How the hell can the new terminal be 700 meters long, when the site itself is no more than 220 meters wide??
The public would be better served with a bus terminal at Alderney Landing. The environment would be better served by not destroying and reducing urban green spaces. This has proven to have a negative ecological effect. Sometimes progress means enhancing and improving the green areas we already have instead of bulldozing them in the name of moving forward which actually has the opposite longterm effect.
“Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone…they paved paradise and they put up a parking lot”
Progress isn’t always about destroying nature.
Keep going deeper. Deep enough and the ferry will finally be able to get close enough to the bus terminal for it to make sense where it is. If we are going to continue to rely on the bridge to get across the harbour, maybe the Bridge Commission should top up the funding? Tolls paying for better bus service makes a lot of sense.
This morning, while walking to the bridge terminal (which I use daily to get to and from work, and to get into Halifax when I have occasion to go over to the other side of the harbour), I had an epiphany- what about that big vacant lot on Wyse road between Dawson and Faulkner streets (the Tim Horton’s and the NSLC)? Who owns that? Why is it just my pedestrian shortcut? It’s so long and narrow, seems like a very sensible place to put a bus terminal. And, nobody has to lose their green space.
jgoreham – That land is owned by one of the entities formerly operated by the late-Charlie Keating. Not sure if all the legal stuff is finally over but for his businesses were taking a lot of legal work to hand over assets to his family, etc. The lot in question is prime property and the family isn’t going to part with it for what HRM would offer.
One other observation would be that buses coming from Halifax or from Downtown Dartmouth would get caught in the heavy oncoming traffic, meaning delays and longer route times. Especially buses coming over the bridge and sitting in traffic at that one left turn tollgate/traffic light. The new sportsplex location is just fine.
The land now belongs to a Mr Murphy from Charlottetown.
So you’re cool with majority rule then Andre? So if 50% +1 person were down with carpet bombing the land and putting in a brothel you’d be down with it?
I never said that all people everywhere should be ruled by imperial overseers, but nice attempt to put those words in my mouth. I said that sometimes a large group of people make the wrong decision. Take Gay Marriage for example. Obviously it’s the right thing to do, but there are thousands upon thousands of bigots all over the country to refuse to accept it. There are some communities that overwhelmingly didn’t want it, but the Liberal government at the time did the right thing and passed legislation making it the law of the land.
Anyway, this deal is going to get done despite the protests of a few waccos, so I’ll enjoy the new bus terminal and all the vast environmental benefits that will result because of it and other transit initiatives, and the whack jobs who oppose it can enjoy being dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century (and yes, I know it’s the 21st but I don’t think they’re ready for that big a jump yet)
After speaking to some people and taking time to think about the issue, I have revised my position. It hit me the other day that using the poor state of the nature forest as justification to tear it down is exactly the same thing we did with urban renewal, as well as the recent destruction of the veranda house at Hollis and Morris. So that leaves us in a conundrum. I think it’s pretty clear that a new, expanded transit terminal is desperately needed. However, the common land is a valuable asset that could be greatly improved with some tender loving care. I am also quite convinced that placing the terminal at Alderny would be foolhardy. It makes absolutely no sense to make buses detour through a narrow street and a difficult intersection. In the best case this will add five minutes to a bus’s route. With traffic I could see it being 10. This is a big deal for a system that lives and dies by the clock. Other general issues that must be dealt with are effective bus access, traffic flow, public safety, availability of land, and convenience. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to rectify all of these things. I’m not even sure its possible to do so. As with any land use issue, I suspect someone will have to make a sacrifice. Hopefully we can minimize that sacrifice. I know that I am certainly going to look more into this issue and follow it closely.
You are a great minimizer/exaggerator voice of reason… you should be in… politics… lol
Frickin retards. You deserve what you get.