Halifax Traffic

[Corker]

Get ready folks, PNS and HRM are teaming up to... hire a consultant to study traffic on the peninsula.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot...-traffic-congestion-in-halifax-9.7012234

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Corker

Get ready folks, PNS and HRM are teaming up to... hire a consultant to study traffic on the peninsula.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot...-traffic-congestion-in-halifax-9.7012234

I wonder how the findings and recommendations will compare to those of the dozens of other similar studies already performed? Could one not simply plug in updated numbers? Not that any meaningful action will be taken anyway.

I am guessing this will cost 6 digits, to produce something of questionable value and actionability.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by kzt79

I wonder how the findings and recommendations will compare to those of the dozens of other similar studies already performed? Could one not simply plug in updated numbers? Not that any meaningful action will be taken anyway.

I am guessing this will cost 6 digits, to produce something of questionable value and actionability.

It's pathetic, really. It's going to take one year to complete the study, with the option to extend to two. So we may not get results until 2028. That means the government may not even be looking at doing anything for another two and a bit years. And then the scope of the study seems painfully modest: basically fiddling with traffic throughput to try and squeeze a handful more cars through here and there. It's just beyond visionless.

The only really interesting thing here, I think, is the idea of another entry point to the peninsula from the west. Northwest Arm bridge?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by kzt79

I wonder how the findings and recommendations will compare to those of the dozens of other similar studies already performed? Could one not simply plug in updated numbers? Not that any meaningful action will be taken anyway.

I am guessing this will cost 6 digits, to produce something of questionable value and actionability.

I foresee recommendations for more bike lanes, road diets, traffic calming and HOV only lanes.

[kzt79]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

It's pathetic, really. It's going to take one year to complete the study, with the option to extend to two. So we may not get results until 2028. That means the government may not even be looking at doing anything for another two and a bit years. And then the scope of the study seems painfully modest: basically fiddling with traffic throughput to try and squeeze a handful more cars through here and there. It's just beyond visionless.

The only really interesting thing here, I think, is the idea of another entry point to the peninsula from the west. Northwest Arm bridge?

From a purely logical and engineering standpoint, that seems to make some sense (NW arm crossing). It will never happen bc those who would be affected have ++money.

Agree the study will consume resources and delay action, until another study is requested to see if an updated study is needed. I suppose the true function of these studies is probably twofold:

- transferring taxpayer funds to some of the chosen "friends" of gov't (consultants etc.)
- delaying as long as possible (ideally permanently) any actual concrete action on the issue being studied

From this perspective, HRM excels. Love that for us!

[Keith P.]

High speed electric rail from Enfield to the city. Stops at the airport, Fall River, Lr. Sackville/Bedford, Hammonds Plains, Kearney Lake, BLIP, and somewhere on the peninsula. Seems simple.

[someone123]

One of the ironies is that while there has been years of studies probably costing millions of dollars, nothing has crystallized around specific corridors or solutions, nor is there any actual resulting interim plan that commits to anything and can guide development. It's not clear where transportation resources will go and what capacities will be along different corridors. I'm not sure there has been even meaningful investigation into wider possible solutions (like new bridges, tunnels/overpasses at bottlenecks, LRT/streetcar, etc.). It is a sort of "groundhog day" dynamic where the same vague high-level analysis happens over and over; I assume you can just copy paste from the old studies to the new studies this point and update some statistics.

In Halifax at the end of the day it seems pretty clear there won't be any silver bullet, simply due to the nature of the constraints and geography. It'll have to be a mix of many relatively modest improvements for different areas (projects costing tens or hundreds of millions, not billion-plus). I think the ideal would probably look something like road fixes for certain corridors, plus a ferry or two, plus BRT, plus capacity improvements along some specific areas like streetcars, plus strategic tunnels/overpasses, maybe commuter rail, phased in over many years.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by someone123

One of the ironies is that while there has been years of studies probably costing millions of dollars, nothing has crystallized around specific corridors or solutions, nor is there any actual resulting interim plan that commits to anything and can guide development. It's not clear where transportation resources will go and what capacities will be along different corridors. I'm not sure there has been even meaningful investigation into wider possible solutions (like new bridges, tunnels/overpasses at bottlenecks, LRT/streetcar, etc.). It is a sort of "groundhog day" dynamic where the same vague high-level analysis happens over and over; I assume you can just copy paste from the old studies to the new studies this point and update some statistics.

In Halifax at the end of the day it seems pretty clear there won't be any silver bullet, simply due to the nature of the constraints and geography. It'll have to be a mix of many relatively modest improvements for different areas (projects costing tens or hundreds of millions, not billion-plus). I think the ideal would probably look something like road fixes for certain corridors, plus a ferry or two, plus BRT, plus capacity improvements along some specific areas like streetcars, plus strategic tunnels/overpasses, maybe commuter rail, phased in over many years.

Its not about doing something , its about being SEEN to do anything.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

When I look at the footprint and destruction that would be required to land another bridge on the peninsula I balk at the idea. Instead of an additional bridge I think we should concentrate on up scaling existing infrastructure and expediting through traffic.

I'd like to see the 102 connected to the Mackay bridge. If you happen to live in Clayton Park and work in Burnside, for instance, this would be a godsend. Check out the screen shot of the viewpoint map below. Visually the route is obvious and obviously there will be resistance.

Connect 102 to Mckay by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


I'd also like to see Herring Cove Rd. connected to the 102 and having no access to the Armdale Rotary. Again, check out the screen capture below for the obvious routing...over the railcut. A Mumford transit terminal exit would be great and an exit to a much beefed-up Bayers Rd. would be required.


Herring Cove to 102 by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


Key to the much beefed-up Bayers Rd / Young St. corridor would be two uninterrupted traffic lanes in each direction with limited access to side streets. Turning where permitted would need a turning lane. Most side streets would be routed over or under the corridor.

Beefed-up BayersYoung by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


Also, I agree with Keith's post above regarding electric rail from Enfield in. And I think that if we're going to build the infrastructure to support electric ferries that we should build out the entire system rather than piecemeal the system.

In short, let's make the mingling of traffic types unnecessary.

[dreamcamera]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

When I look at the footprint and destruction that would be required to land another bridge on the peninsula I balk at the idea. Instead of an additional bridge I think we should concentrate on up scaling existing infrastructure and expediting through traffic.

I'd like to see the 102 connected to the Mackay bridge. If you happen to live in Clayton Park and work in Burnside, for instance, this would be a godsend. Check out the screen shot of the viewpoint map below. Visually the route is obvious and obviously there will be resistance.

Connect 102 to Mckay by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


I'd also like to see Herring Cove Rd. connected to the 102 and having no access to the Armdale Rotary. Again, check out the screen capture below for the obvious routing...over the railcut. A Mumford transit terminal exit would be great and an exit to a much beefed-up Bayers Rd. would be required.


Herring Cove to 102 by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


Key to the much beefed-up Bayers Rd / Young St. corridor would be two uninterrupted traffic lanes in each direction with limited access to side streets. Turning where permitted would need a turning lane. Most side streets would be routed over or under the corridor.

Beefed-up BayersYoung by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr


Also, I agree with Keith's post above regarding electric rail from Enfield in. And I think that if we're going to build the infrastructure to support electric ferries that we should build out the entire system rather than piecemeal the system.

In short, let's make the mingling of traffic types unnecessary.

What happens to the Mackay itself in this plan? If we are adding major connections to the bridge, it would need to be upgraded to accept them. Upgrading the capacity is estimated at $1B before you upgrade the 102.
The Mackay will need to be re-decked soon as its lifespan is up, I think this will happen at the end of the Windsor St Exchange project in 2029.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Originally Posted by dreamcamera

What happens to the Mackay itself in this plan? If we are adding major connections to the bridge, it would need to be upgraded to accept them. Upgrading the capacity is estimated at $1B before you upgrade the 102.
The Mackay will need to be re-decked soon as its lifespan is up, I think this will happen at the end of the Windsor St Exchange project in 2029.

We will have to replace the Mackay sooner than later. If I understand correctly the bridge would be difficult to bring up to necessary structural standards for its existing four lanes let alone be able to support the six lanes we likely need and pedestrian and cycle traffic too. In my ideal world, the entirety of from the end of the 102 to the Dartmouth side of the narrows, inclusive of the port lands traffic needs, should be a single project.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by dreamcamera

What happens to the Mackay itself in this plan? If we are adding major connections to the bridge, it would need to be upgraded to accept them. Upgrading the capacity is estimated at $1B before you upgrade the 102.
The Mackay will need to be re-decked soon as its lifespan is up, I think this will happen at the end of the Windsor St Exchange project in 2029.

Isn’t there already a tentative plan to replace the MacKay? Surely it will be built with planned overcapacity for future proofing.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

High speed electric rail from Enfield to the city. Stops at the airport, Fall River, Lr. Sackville/Bedford, Hammonds Plains, Kearney Lake, BLIP, and somewhere on the peninsula. Seems simple.

Seems logical, sensible and effective. It’ll never work!

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Isn’t there already a tentative plan to replace the MacKay? Surely it will be built with planned overcapacity for future proofing.

I believe I saw plans or verbally expressed wishes while the Macdonald under went its rebuild. The former head of the Bridge commission saw a 6 lane copy of the Joseph Zacom bridge in Boston, built beside the MacKay.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

When I'd like to see the 102 connected to the Mackay bridge. If you happen to live in Clayton Park and work in Burnside, for instance, this would be a godsend. Check out the screen shot of the viewpoint map below. Visually the route is obvious and obviously there will be resistance.

Connect 102 to Mckay by A.J. Forsythe, on Flickr

There is a more straightforward way to connect the 102 to the MacKay, one sketched out by former federal Cabinet Minister in his retirement here locally. He proposed a branch off the overhead structures at Bayers Rd, likely requiring expropriation of the PetroCan station nearby, then paralleling the rail cut up to the Windsor St Exchange and then linking to the MacKay. Makes too much sense.

Also, I agree with Keith's post above regarding electric rail from Enfield in.

Smart!

Electric ferries strike me as an expensive boondoggle. Lots of large ferries in Europe now use LNG as a clean fuel.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Electric ferries strike me as an expensive boondoggle. Lots of large ferries in Europe now use LNG as a clean fuel.

I can't help but think that the decision to electrify ferries was more about jumping onto an idea that's trendy rather than going wih something that's been fully developed and proven out. I still think we're a few technological breakthroughs away from electric vehicles being dead nuts reliable (and safe), and as cost efficient as they should be.

However, that's just my take. Maybe it'll be fine... either way we'll find out.

[eastcoastal]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

... I think we should concentrate on up scaling existing infrastructure and expediting through traffic...

As someone who lives on the peninsula, I don't feel like bringing MORE vehicles from off the peninsula onto the peninsula, just to go somewhere else off the peninsula is the answer. Through traffic is a highway-type solution, not a dense urban environment solution.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by eastcoastal

As someone who lives on the peninsula, I don't feel like bringing MORE vehicles from off the peninsula onto the peninsula, just to go somewhere else off the peninsula is the answer. Through traffic is a highway-type solution, not a dense urban environment solution.

Exactly. Treating urban streets where thousands of people live as essentially traffic sewers is archaic thinking (though certainly in line with the NS PC's take on these things).

And funnelling more cars onto already congested streets isn't going to fix congestion--we can move more cars over the bridges and through the rotary, and then what? This is basically how you end up with urban freeways and 1960s-style planning, treating neighbourhoods as thoroughfares.

Private vehicles, mostly with single occupants, are an extremely inefficient way to use precious road space. That's not an ideological or political statement, it's a fact of geometry. I'm not an anti-car zealot, but we have a finite amount of road space, and a growing number of road users. A major part of the solution here is to create viable alternatives in the form of active transportation and especially effective transit, so that those who wish to use those forms of transport can. That doesn't mean forcing anyone out of their cars. In fact, if we're able to entice more people towards other forms of transportation, it ought to make for easier driving as well.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Electric ferries strike me as an expensive boondoggle. Lots of large ferries in Europe now use LNG as a clean fuel.

Lots of electric ferries in Europe, Asia and beyond.

[someone123]

Fixing the 102 to Windsor St Exchange and MacKay is one of those select projects where investing in the road infrastructure can reduce how much some of those surface streets and neighbourhoods in that area are treated as (convoluted) traffic sewers. It would keep some of the through traffic on an elevated highway.

For the inner-city and inner suburban areas the solution is more transit investment, but new forms of solutions are needed, not just adding more buses to congested streets. Fundamentally the city needs to move away from a "milk run" bus system to one where there are some hubs and high frequency corridors with quick and reliable connections.