Joint Regional Transportation Agency

[Summerville]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

IMO it's worse than a nothing burger. There's some laughably bad ideas in here and relatively few that I think would actually make a dent in improving the city's transportation/livability. It's really a shame too since now is the time for a strong vision to aim for - but, this plan obviously does provide that. The Province's response is even worse with mostly short term road adjustments which will just increase driving and inevitably congestion. Also, no surprise but the kneecapping of the AT program is a laughable recommendation that totally goes against all the densification going on in the city and the very recommendations made in the plan.

If this actually results in a rail system or funding for a BRT I'll eat crow, but I have a feeling the only thing to come out of this is a few fights over bike lanes, some AI/musky "traffic solving technology" that does nothing but cost the taxpayer $, and the odd road between sprawling cul de sacs in the sticks. What a shame, this could have been something great.

One thing this report may do is convince more people on the peninsula...to rely on a bicycle to get around town faster

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Summerville

One thing this report may do is convince more people on the peninsula...to rely on a bicycle to get around town faster

Now, let’s not get carried away…

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Summerville

One thing this report may do is convince more people on the peninsula...to rely on a bicycle to get around town faster

Oh I highly doubt that. The recent ,Gorilla in the big City, threats by the Premier ,I would argue, should be a signal for our Bike advocates masquerading as City Councilors to get back to serving the majority of the City's travelers instead of the at max 2% Bike riding public. The Bike coalition has been noticed for the wrong reasons by the most powerful arm of Government in N.S..

Houston would receive an even larger Super majority if he went to the Polls tomorrow on the bike issue as the economic, congestion and public safety issues have illustrated how out of bloody touch Bike folks are. The City has added at least 60,000 more people since the Studies advocating for MORE bike lanes were commissioned back in 2018.One councilors rebuttal of the Ambulance service concerns was to actually suggest a BIKE ambulance for Morris Street .Smoke some more Sister, smoke some more.

[LikesBikes]

People will still bike, except they won't be on separated protected bike lanes but instead in the lane, occasionally getting hit by cars, and slowing down traffic. Those that don't will drive (contributing to more traffic congestion) or use the bus (taking up space from people who actually need to take the bus).

[gcaven]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

One councilors rebuttal of the Ambulance service concerns was to actually suggest a BIKE ambulance for Morris Street .Smoke some more Sister, smoke some more.

What was suggested by Councillor White is that ambulances would be able to drive on the bidirectional bike lane, which is done elsewhere in the world to bypass traffic.

[someone123]

One positive is that the province seems more or less on board with the municipal BRT plan. Maybe this will soon unlock provincial and federal funding to accelerate the work.

The BRT routes would have a spinoff effect for regional transportation since reliable high-frequency corridors make connections more viable. In the urban core, during regular hours, there should be comparatively easy to understand backbone routes where you only wait a few minutes at a stop and don't need to worry about schedules or missing connections.

There should be thought given to upgrading the BRT to streetcar or LRT in the next decade or two. I hope that they properly study this for the urban core. I think the best outcome is probably a new route in a built up corridor (Robie for example) rather than reusing old rail lines running through low population areas. A challenge there is that Halifax has so many destinations spread out around the downtown; there isn't really a "main street" to serve. So maybe having 3-4 streetcar routes is better than 1 LRT route with more expensive infrastructure.

Regional rail around NS would be nice but the demand is hugely lower than in the urban areas and it's not really related to solving capacity problems, nor is it a substitute for something like LRT.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by gcaven

What was suggested by Councillor White is that ambulances would be able to drive on the bidirectional bike lane, which is done elsewhere in the world to bypass traffic.

O how bloody F-ing generous of her to allow an ambulance on her bike lane.
OUT OF TOUCH!!

[DartmouthSteve]

Forbes article from 2020 on bike lanes and ambulances.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton...or-ambulances/

[LikesBikes]

If we really cared about emergency response times then we'd be removing what actually delays the vehicles - people driving in cars. Not to mention also that a lot of the time they're just responding to people who have hurt or killed themselves or others by doing something stupid while driving.

Example though of ambulance using a bike lane - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6BV9kWFUYU

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

O how bloody F-ing generous of her to allow an ambulance on her bike lane.
OUT OF TOUCH!!

Why is this a problem? If a bi-directional bike lane is wide enough to accommodate ambulances, isn't that better than forcing the ambulance down a street crowded with much larger vehicles that are more difficult to get out of the way? It would take a matter of seconds to move a bunch of bikes out of the way. On a narrow, crowded roadway, it could be harder to clear a sufficient path through cars and trucks.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

O how bloody F-ing generous of her to allow an ambulance on her bike lane.
OUT OF TOUCH!!

It's a common way to get ambulances out of traffic... the lanes just have to be designed right for the weight and size of the ambulances. It's not someone "allowing" an ambulance in "her" bike lane, it's really more like setting aside space where cars aren't normally allowed and through which ambulances can travel without being caught up in traffic.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

It's a common way to get ambulances out of traffic... the lanes just have to be designed right for the weight and size of the ambulances. It's not someone "allowing" an ambulance in "her" bike lane, it's really more like setting aside space where cars aren't normally allowed and through which ambulances can travel without being caught up in traffic.

But would the cyclists using the lane get out of the way?

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by someone123

A challenge there is that Halifax has so many destinations spread out around the downtown; there isn't really a "main street" to serve. So maybe having 3-4 streetcar routes is better than 1 LRT route with more expensive infrastructure.

They're not really spread THAAAT far out. The Halifax Peninsula is only about 3km wide, which is the equivalent of Front Street to Bloor in Toronto. Robie is essentially the equivalent of Dundas Street.

LRT down Robie gets you within no more than 1.5km of any destination, and only a few hundred metres or less to some of the major destinations like the hospitals and universities. Very walkable for many people, or a quick zip on one of the rental e-scooters. If there was a bus that ran back-and-forth along Quinpool and Cogswell you'd pretty much have the major cross-town connections covered with 10-minute frequency for those who didn't want to walk or scoot (along with the 1 on SGR and 3 on North).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

They're not really spread THAAAT far out. The Halifax Peninsula is only about 3km wide, which is the equivalent of Front Street to Bloor in Toronto. Robie is essentially the equivalent of Dundas Street.

A walk up to Bloor from Dundas would be considered pretty far by most commuters though, and a transfer adds enough time to make transit less competitive with driving (adding "just" 10 mins can mean 15 min driving vs 20 transit goes to 30 mins of transit for example). That would be what service would be like for a Robie line if you are going to Barrington. If I remember correctly they're looking at something more like 500 m for coverage around core areas.

Just having an "X" shape with Robie and one "crosstown" route would be pretty good (the BRT plan calls for more than that), and would also serve a bunch of trips around the core. In the future, more and more trips will be from one part of the core to another. Streetcars could be a good fit for that, and maybe some small tunnels around downtown that allow for better alignments and stations right in the busier areas.

[terrynorthend]

A single 10 minute frequency route in a figure 8 loop of the Peninsula. Robie/Inglis/Barrington/Lwr Water/Cogswell/Quinpool/Joe Howe/WSE/Windsor/Young/Robie.

Originally Posted by someone123

A walk up to Bloor from Dundas would be considered pretty far by most commuters though, and a transfer adds enough time to make transit less competitive with driving (adding "just" 10 mins can mean 15 min driving vs 20 transit goes to 30 mins of transit for example). That would be what service would be like for a Robie line if you are going to Barrington. If I remember correctly they're looking at something more like 500 m for coverage around core areas.

Just having an "X" shape with Robie and one "crosstown" route would be pretty good (the BRT plan calls for more than that), and would also serve a bunch of trips around the core. In the future, more and more trips will be from one part of the core to another. Streetcars could be a good fit for that, and maybe some small tunnels around downtown that allow for better alignments and stations right in the busier areas.

[dtown]

An area MLA ''announced'' a Shearwater connector today on FB although there doesn't appear to be news or details aside from it being mentioned in the JRTA report.

The picture she uses is the same hypothetical road in a HRM master plan that's been around for 10+ years and my understanding is that DND isn't (wasn't) willing to give up the land. So why is she making this seem like its a sure thing now? The JRTA report was pretty light on any specifics IMO and there was no new details on this specific project. Also, its not like this JRTA report is binding or anything like that. Is this even the provinces roadway? would it not be HRM planning and construction?

I live in the area and its badly needed, I just can't get how a responsible sitting politician could take such old news and run with it to show off for praising while its lacking cost, timeline, and specific design details. Or am I missing something and there is news on this?

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by dtown

An area MLA ''announced'' a Shearwater connector today on FB although there doesn't appear to be news or details aside from it being mentioned in the JRTA report.

The picture she uses is the same hypothetical road in a HRM master plan that's been around for 10+ years and my understanding is that DND isn't (wasn't) willing to give up the land. So why is she making this seem like its a sure thing now? The JRTA report was pretty light on any specifics IMO and there was no new details on this specific project. Also, its not like this JRTA report is binding or anything like that. Is this even the provinces roadway? would it not be HRM planning and construction?

I live in the area and its badly needed, I just can't get how a responsible sitting politician could take such old news and run with it to show off for praising while its lacking cost, timeline, and specific design details. Or am I missing something and there is news on this?

I agree that that road is needed but a rebuild of the old Runway might be also needed now that Ottawa has to stop mooching Canada's Defence.
That Runway could and did land the largest aircraft in the World such as B-52's and C-5's. Autoport has also used the same runway for overflow parking so it seems there are all kinds of demands for the space.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by dtown

An area MLA ''announced'' a Shearwater connector today on FB although there doesn't appear to be news or details aside from it being mentioned in the JRTA report.

Where exactly would that road run - what would it connect to what?

[dtown]

Originally Posted by Saul Goode

Where exactly would that road run - what would it connect to what?

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Hali...6321160389169/

Heres the same picture, its the 'Mount Hope Connector' from Mount Hope Ave/Baker Dr to connect through the back of Shearwater to Caldwell Rd.

This new FB post from ReTales shows the same thing Barbara Adams "announced" yesterday, interestingly Andrew Younger commented on this post with the same skepticism I have as it doesn't actually appear to be any further ahead as it has been for the past 20 years.

[Saul Goode]

[QUOTE=dtown;10470790]https://www.facebook.com/groups/Hali...6321160389169/

Heres the same picture, its the 'Mount Hope Connector' from Mount Hope Ave/Baker Dr to connect through the back of Shearwater to Caldwell Rd./QUOTE]

Thanks - I don't have (or want, FWIW) Facebook access.

Further to Dartguard's comment, I've spent quite a bit of time in those woods and don't see the road necessarily having any implications for the Shearwater runway next to it. The route pretty much exactly follows existing woods trails and Mcdonalds Beach Road all the way to Caldwell Road.