Bayers Road Widening

[Keith P.]

I see that the usual suspects (Watts, Sloane and Blumenthal) had a public meeting the other night where the people who live on Bayers Road and will be affected by the proposed widening project came out to bray at them and play the victim card. Naturally these 3 are now working to block the widening project, even to the point of promoting an EAC petition against the widening project.

Well, what works for those who oppose change can also work in favor of it, so I created my first online petition in favor of the project. I urge any of you who want this to go forward to visit and sign here:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bayersroadwidening/

Please pass this along by any means you can: Facebook, Twitter, etc.

[haligonia]

I'm sorry, but I just can't support this project. Widening the road doesn't solve the problem, it only adds to it. Sure, traffic will be better for the next few years. But by widening the road and decreasing traffic, we are only making it easier people to use their cars. We need real, long term solutions. Solutions that encourage people to walk, bike or take transit instead of using their cars. If not, car usage will only grow and we will be faced with the same situation ten years down the road.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by haligonia

I'm sorry, but I just can't support this project. Widening the road doesn't solve the problem, it only adds to it. Sure, traffic will be better for the next few years. But by widening the road and decreasing traffic, we are only making it easier people to use their cars. We need real, long term solutions. Solutions that encourage people to walk, bike or take transit instead of using their cars. If not, car usage will only grow and we will be faced with the same situation ten years down the road.

Not widening the road precludes any possibility of adding services like transitways, etc and merely perpetuates the existing problem while these same councillors blithely vote in favor of more sprawl in Bedford and the like. You cannot have it both ways. The last serious reconfiguration of this area was when Bicentennial Drive was built in 1949. The Halifax of today is far from that sleepy little burg. It needs to be upgraded, and you can use all the trendy phrases you want but you cannot deny that this is a joke of an entryway to our fair city. Suggesting people walk in from places like Kingswood or Glen Arbour is simply absurd.

[hoser111]

I support this...done

[haligonia]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Not widening the road precludes any possibility of adding services like transitways, etc

If the road widening was to be used as a step towards adding transitways and the like, why aren't they included in the proposal? If the road is widened, and a transitway is proposed a few years later, people will scream about how it will reduce the width of the road. Either that or the road will have to be widened again, which proves my point that any extra convenience you give to cars will be eaten up before you know it.

[haligonia]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The last serious reconfiguration of this area was when Bicentennial Drive was built in 1949. The Halifax of today is far from that sleepy little burg. It needs to be upgraded, and you can use all the trendy phrases you want but you cannot deny that this is a joke of an entryway to our fair city. Suggesting people walk in from places like Kingswood or Glen Arbour is simply absurd.

I do agree that Bayers Road does need to be upgraded/dealt with, however there has to be a better way than widening it.

[q12]

I support this as well, and I also think the province needs to widen Highway 102 from Bayers Road out to Bedford.

[alps]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Not widening the road precludes any possibility of adding services like transitways, etc and merely perpetuates the existing problem while these same councillors blithely vote in favor of more sprawl in Bedford and the like. You cannot have it both ways. The last serious reconfiguration of this area was when Bicentennial Drive was built in 1949. The Halifax of today is far from that sleepy little burg. It needs to be upgraded, and you can use all the trendy phrases you want but you cannot deny that this is a joke of an entryway to our fair city. Suggesting people walk in from places like Kingswood or Glen Arbour is simply absurd.

If a transitway is in the works they can propose a transitway. No, people aren't going to walk from Kingswood, but Kingwood shouldn't have been given permission in the first place if the infrastructure was inadequate and everyone would be driving in. The people that moved there knew what the commute would be like before they did. Why should people on Bayers have their apartments destroyed or their land expropriated, and where does it end?

It's another horrible project straight out of the 60s that doesn't actually solve any problems and is ultimately driven by traditional road fetishism and a lack of imagination. It perpetuates traffic problems by making it easier for people to live in far-flung places where 95% of people drive to work. Given the inaction of this city on actual plans to restrict sprawl, bad traffic is the only hope I have that things will actually begin to turn around naturally -- that people will seek to live closer to work so that they aren't stuck in gridlock every day.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by alps

If a transitway is in the works they can propose a transitway. No, people aren't going to walk from Kingswood, but Kingwood shouldn't have been given permission in the first place if the infrastructure was inadequate and everyone would be driving in. The people that moved there knew what the commute would be like before they did. Why should people on Bayers have their apartments destroyed or their land expropriated, and where does it end?

It's another horrible project straight out of the 60s that doesn't actually solve any problems and is ultimately driven by traditional road fetishism and a lack of imagination. It perpetuates traffic problems by making it easier for people to live in far-flung places where 95% of people drive to work. Given the inaction of this city on actual plans to restrict sprawl, bad traffic is the only hope I have that things will actually begin to turn around naturally -- that people will seek to live closer to work so that they aren't stuck in gridlock every day.

Very well said!

[someone123]

Originally Posted by alps

No, people aren't going to walk from Kingswood, but Kingwood shouldn't have been given permission in the first place if the infrastructure was inadequate and everyone would be driving in. The people that moved there knew what the commute would be like before they did. Why should people on Bayers have their apartments destroyed or their land expropriated, and where does it end?

Devil's advocate:

1) It's built now. The city is responsible for people who live there.
2) People knew they'd live farther out but didn't necessarily sign up for antagonistic policies towards off-peninsula residents and commuters!
3) Expropriating a few houses (most of the land is empty and the widening was planned for -- we are not talking about destroying a neighbourhood) is not a big deal if people are properly compensated. I bet people would be in favour of it if they each got a cheque for $30k on top of their house value. The project would still be worth it with that added cost.

Given the inaction of this city on actual plans to restrict sprawl, bad traffic is the only hope I have that things will actually begin to turn around naturally -- that people will seek to live closer to work so that they aren't stuck in gridlock every day.

Unfortunately at this point most people live in the suburbs. The failure to provide good transportation around the core has simply encouraged more jobs to move out to the suburbs for the past 20 years.

I am all for investing in transit but there also needs to be an emphasis on cutting commuting times and on weighing costs and benefits. In the case of Bayers Road we're talking about carrying out a planned widening of what's already an artery in order to handle way more traffic.

People also need to accept that the city is growing. Since not all new traffic can be accommodated with transit, and since most HRM transit also needs roads, more roads must be built in order to maintain service levels.

The best thing to lobby for would be dedicated bus lanes. Torpedoing the widening is not necessarily going to help the peninsula.

[alps]

Originally Posted by someone123

Devil's advocate:

1) It's built now. The city is responsible for people who live there.
2) People knew they'd live farther out but didn't necessarily sign up for antagonistic policies towards off-peninsula residents and commuters!
3) Expropriating a few houses (most of the land is empty and the widening was planned for -- we are not talking about destroying a neighbourhood) is not a big deal if people are properly compensated. I bet people would be in favour of it if they each got a cheque for $30k on top of their house value. The project would still be worth it with that added cost.

1/2) I'm not antagonistic towards off-peninsula residents -- I'm all for new commuter projects backed by a shred of sense: transportation options that take cars off the road rather than simply widening the roads, encouraging sprawl, and pushing the congestion issue ten more years into the future in the most inefficient way imaginable (and destroying neighbourhoods on top of that.) Of course, new suburban development should also be tightly managed to ensure we get the most out of whatever alternative would be built. I'd love to see proper BRT, with dedicated busways, serving suburban areas.

3) 90 properties will be affected, 3 large apartment buildings and many homes fully demolished, with the entire 102 corridor project costing in the realm of $300 million, (diagrams from corridor study)

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I see that the usual suspects (Watts, Sloane and Blumenthal) had a public meeting the other night where the people who live on Bayers Road and will be affected by the proposed widening project came out to bray at them and play the victim card. Naturally these 3 are now working to block the widening project, even to the point of promoting an EAC petition against the widening project.

Well, what works for those who oppose change can also work in favor of it, so I created my first online petition in favor of the project. I urge any of you who want this to go forward to visit and sign here:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bayersroadwidening/

Please pass this along by any means you can: Facebook, Twitter, etc.

What troubles me is the frequency of Councilors going against staff recommendations. I can see why there appears to be so much friction between the HRM Councillors and the HRM staff.

There appears to be too much resistance to change in the HRM - especially peninsular Halifax. I thought that the HRM long-term plan was to densify the urban core. However, many decisions seem to be contrary to that plan.

[alps]

If I didn't have class I'd be at the meeting tonight to voice my opposition. The 102, 107, and 113 "improvements" will certainly hit a billion by the end of it all and for what? More bland business parks, cookie cutter homes with two SUVs in the driveway, and cries for more parking downtown (if anyone's even able to get their car down there). It barely takes any imagination to come up with a load of completely viable alternatives. Shouldn't we be putting money into a proper BRT system first? There's no excuse to how long it takes to get into the city from Clayton Park and Bedford.

[halifaxboyns]

I'm probably off in my own world on this project. While I don't like the widening idea for just cars. If the widening would take the lane added in both directions (or at least one lane) for buses and for car pooling, then I'd be a little more comfortable with this project.

Centre Street in Calgary is much like Chebucto, certain lanes change direction with the time of day but in each rush hour there is one lane dedicated completely to buses and car pooling and I know police are out monitoring randomly - a friend got hit with a ticket in the car pool lane, when he was by himself. I had no pity on him and it cost him a lot of $, but still...my point is that could help.

As to worldly's comment about Metro Transit - I think the current group within Metro Transit is really against rail. I don't understand it, I don't agree with it or like it. But most of the people involved are nearing the end of their careers, so these are people who likely won't change their minds unless directed to do so. This gives me hope that as this generation of staff retires, we could get people in who would be more willing to discuss or implement a rapid transit solution for HRM. I think the problem is that they keep thinking with the 'small city' hat on. It's time to grow up because Halifax is becoming a big boy.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

I think the current group within Metro Transit is really against rail. I don't understand it, I don't agree with it or like it. But most of the people involved are nearing the end of their careers, so these are people who likely won't change their minds unless directed to do so.

My suspicion is that Metro Transit has a bunch of old and unimaginative managers who have decision making power simply because they've been around for a long time. This is a horrible system that pretty much selects for people with bad, outdated judgement.

Is there even any mechanism for Metro Transit to be held accountable for their performance? Is there any real pressure for them to improve? My guess is that in terms of compensation and career progression it makes no difference to management whether you get from Bedford to downtown Halifax in 30 minutes or 90 minutes.

On top of this there's the transit union that periodically threatens to strike despite the fact that a bus operator gets paid $23/hr plus pension (so probably the equivalent of a $60,000/year private sector job) for a job that requires no post-secondary education and could be automated with present-day technology. Metro Transit is probably more of an income redistribution program than a transit system.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by someone123

Metro Transit is probably more of an income redistribution program than a transit system.

This is good writing!

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by alps

If I didn't have class I'd be at the meeting tonight to voice my opposition. The 102, 107, and 113 "improvements" will certainly hit a billion by the end of it all and for what? More bland business parks, cookie cutter homes with two SUVs in the driveway, and cries for more parking downtown (if anyone's even able to get their car down there). It barely takes any imagination to come up with a load of completely viable alternatives. Shouldn't we be putting money into a proper BRT system first? There's no excuse to how long it takes to get into the city from Clayton Park and Bedford.

The first half of your post sounds more like you are passing judgement on a lifestyle choice than anything else. Not everyone wants to raise their kids on the 16th floor of a commie block on the peninsula.

As for your comment on BRT, how would you propose getting those BRT units onto and through the peninsula? You need roads to do that. The current 1950s version cannot support that.

[alps]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The first half of your post sounds more like you are passing judgement on a lifestyle choice than anything else. Not everyone wants to raise their kids on the 16th floor of a commie block on the peninsula.

As for your comment on BRT, how would you propose getting those BRT units onto and through the peninsula? You need roads to do that. The current 1950s version cannot support that.

I like suburbs when they are properly designed -- when they are somewhat walkable (to some basic shops and services), attractive, and dense enough to be served by transit to a standard that would make it a realistic alternative to the car for the average person. Generally speaking, I really like British suburbs.

No new subdivisions in Halifax meet those basic criteria. It's not really a lifestyle choice if the same old Halifax suburb formula is the homebuyer's only choice. Even the sort of bland new-urbanist inspired developments that pop up outside Toronto are miles above what we get here.

If they want to widen the roads to implement a dedicated busway or something I'd be much more open to that, but only if it were proposed from the beginning because I don't think it'd happen otherwise.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by alps

It's not really a lifestyle choice if the same old Halifax suburb formula is the homebuyer's only choice.

Yeah, I think the most popular setup is a house in a small town sort of area with shops within walking distance. This simply isn't an option for most people because they cannot afford the limited Halifax equivalents (South End, West End, maybe parts of Dartmouth -- note that these are all much more expensive for a given size of house because people like them more!) and there are no similar suburban areas. I don't think many people actually prefer areas like Clayton Park. Some prefer Kingswood maybe, but not everybody would want to deal with the downsides of that type of development.

The dedicated bus ROW for Bayers Road makes a lot of sense and I think is being considered. It would be much better to promote its inclusion from the outset than to try to stop the whole process. The widening will happen eventually. The city is growing a lot and does need some improved traffic arteries. It's unrealistic to expect new growth to be handled 100% with increases in transit service.

[ILoveHalifax]

I was at the initial protest meeting last nite. It was organized by 2 councillors to hear all the protests by the local residents. Only one man had the guts to speak in favor in such an agitated crowd.
I was quite impressed by the proposed widening. I feel that if they can improve movement of traffic on Bayers Road, with so little impact the neighborhood would actually be much better.
I could not help but think, if this crowd had been around years ago we would still all be trying to get to work on St Margarets Bay Rd and the Bedford Highway, imagine no 103 or 102.