Halifax Transit

[q12]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

You would not be able to sell the concept of reversing lanes on either bridge for HOV use. The car traffic is so bad at peak hours that drivers would revolt and use them as ordinary lanes. Ticket them as much as you want, but all it takes is a few to do it and everyone would. Plus the public outcry would be enormous.

The reality is that we need a third bridge. The house of cards that is Halifax traffic means that it only takes one fairly minor incident like yesterday's to throw the entire city into gridlock at rush hour.

Yeah messing with the Mackay Bridge lanes would be a HUGE mistake. Friday morning a stalled car on the Mackay Bridge Halifax bound had the Circ backed up past main street in Dartmouth about 7 km. And in the evening an accident had the Mackay Bridge down to one lane in both directions. It took me over an hour to get across around 4:30pm.



Source:http://www.novascotiawebcams.com/halifax/mackay-bridge.html





Photo sources:https://twitter.com/hfxtraffic

[ILoveHalifax]

Most places where I've been where they had HOV it was usually on a 4 to 5 or 6 lane freeway, all in one direction, not a 4 lane street.
It make no sense to close off one lane in each direction to accommodate 2 or 3 buses every 15 minutes and the few who are able to car pool.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

Most places where I've been where they had HOV it was usually on a 4 to 5 or 6 lane freeway, all in one direction, not a 4 lane street.
It make no sense to close off one lane in each direction to accommodate 2 or 3 buses every 15 minutes and the few who are able to car pool.

A lot of people are "able" to carpool. It's just not particularly convenient on an individual level (if you have to drive around an extra 5-10 minutes picking people up, for example) and there is no real incentive to do so, other than the price of gas and in some cases maybe "trying to do the right thing" environmentally. If carpooling actually got you to your destination faster, more people would do it, and in doing so more vehicles would be taken off the roads.

[rkannegi]

Originally Posted by Hali87

A lot of people are "able" to carpool. It's just not particularly convenient on an individual level (if you have to drive around an extra 5-10 minutes picking people up, for example) and there is no real incentive to do so, other than the price of gas and in some cases maybe "trying to do the right thing" environmentally. If carpooling actually got you to your destination faster, more people would do it, and in doing so more vehicles would be taken off the roads.

Some of the major bridges and tunnels in Ontario and Quebec have reversing lane lights overhead even though they rarely ever reverse lanes (Thorold Tunnel in Thorold, ON and Hippolite Tunnel in Montreal, QC). I would only apply reversing lanes on the Mackay during massive events like the Parade of Lights, not for normal peak hours, since normal peak hours are now very bi-directional on the Mackay (both directions are equally busy). Yes, while we ultimately need a third bridge, but we also need to get the Mackay Bridge twinned so that the opposing directions of traffic are divided. I guess Friday's accident must of been a head-on collision for it to cause a loss of a lane in each direction. On the twinned Mackay bridge, I would have one HOV lane per direction initially, although, I would aim for 2 HOV lanes in each direction on the twinned Mackay and southern Harbour crossing once they are both in place in order to cause the full Highway 111 ring road to form the backbone of an extended bus/HOV lane network (including an extended NW Arm Drive, a realigned Mackay Bridge Connector in the North End and a viaduct over Joseph Howe Drive).

The "house of cards" remark coincides with a rant that I said a while back about the lack of adequate redundancy in the road network that enters and exits the Peninsula, compared to Toronto, which has much more redundancy. While Toronto traffic volumes are quite ferocious, when an incident happens, it only imposes additional delay on the immediate area or the affected corridor, while, in Halifax, take out a single lane coming on or off the Peninsula, and you jam almost all of Halifax Metro. Twinning the Mackay and extending Highway 111 to Highway 102 would be a good start, followed by building the southern Harbour crossing (may mitigate the need for twinning the MacDonald). Right now, the Mackay is stuck dead in its tracks as it is.


Cheers,

Richard Kannegiesser

[q12]

Originally Posted by rkannegi

The "house of cards" remark coincides with a rant that I said a while back about the lack of adequate redundancy in the road network that enters and exits the Peninsula, compared to Toronto, which has much more redundancy. While Toronto traffic volumes are quite ferocious, when an incident happens, it only imposes additional delay on the immediate area or the affected corridor, while, in Halifax, take out a single lane coming on or off the Peninsula, and you jam almost all of Halifax Metro.r

Yeah, I have driven in traffic in much larger cities; however Halifax is somewhat unique with the "House of cards" scenario playing out every other day.

Twinning the Mackay and extending Highway 111 to Highway 102 would be a good start, followed by building the southern Harbour crossing (may mitigate the need for twinning the MacDonald). Right now, the Mackay is stuck dead in its tracks as it is.

Expanding the Mackay Bridge and extending Highway 111 to Highway 102 would help a lot. Many people including myself were trying to cross the Harbour from Dartmouth to Mainland Halifax/Bedford South/Highway 103 etc., not the Peninsula (or vice versa).


https://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=44.682569,-63.60775&spn=0.101915,0.222988&t=m&z=13

[Hali87]

There are plans to twin the MacKay AND build a southern harbour crossing? And here I was thinking "adding the lights for a reversing lane might be kind of expensive".

I agree that HOV lanes would be a good idea, I disagree that building two new bridges over the harbour should be any kind of priority.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Hali87

I disagree that building two new bridges over the harbour should be any kind of priority.

I concur. We only need one new bridge for the foreseeable future.

[alps]

I'm here for a visit and took the new airport bus into town.

The bus stop location at the airport isn't very good. I had expected it to be next to the terminal so you could wait indoors, but it's about 50 metres south of the centre parking lot "tunnel" entrance. The shelter is also standard size which was inadequate for everyone waiting that Sunday afternoon. It was fine given the sunny weather but it seems like it'd be a huge hindrance in rain, or winter. They should make space directly next to the terminal ideally, or even next to a "tunnel" entrance.

The trip itself was good, relatively quick and direct. The bus (normal 40 ft vehicle) was about 50% full. And you can't beat the $3.25 fare!



Different topic: why did they add more bus stops along Spring Garden!? For example, a new stop at Carlton Street has been added between the existing stops at Robie and Summer streets (Mumford direction). does having stops so close together really have any appreciable effect on ridership or quality of service? It just slows things down! I think there was also a new stop at Henry st.

[Jonovision]

Originally Posted by alps

Different topic: why did they add more bus stops along Spring Garden!? For example, a new stop at Carlton Street has been added between the existing stops at Robie and Summer streets (Mumford direction). does having stops so close together really have any appreciable effect on ridership or quality of service? It just slows things down! I think there was also a new stop at Henry st.

Both of those stops have always existed as long as I've been using the #1. The Carelton St one is rarely used and could definitely be eliminated. The Henry St stop though is used a lot by Dal students.

[Jonovision]

Just a reminder too that the dates for the MT survey have been pushed back to October 15 for submissions. Everyone should take a minute to fill it out and tell your friends. This is a great opportunity to really have a say on what we want our transit system to look like. We could even push for a total redesign. Everything is on the table at this point.

http://shapeyourcityhalifax.ca/transit-service-plan

[alps]

Originally Posted by Jonovision

Both of those stops have always existed as long as I've been using the #1. The Carelton St one is rarely used and could definitely be eliminated. The Henry St stop though is used a lot by Dal students.

Eh, really? I can recall eastbound stops at Henry and Carlton, but have ZERO memory of westbound stops at those streets. Odd..I guess it makes sense.

[W.Sobchak]

Alright I did the survey but quickly got frustrated. It felt like it was trying to decide on only one of two ideas. A) get rid of all the low ridership routes and be solely profit driven, or B) Same crappy service everywheres. Not much flexibility with interpretation of an end result, like what if we had a transit system that had streetcar on the peninsula, buses feeding the entrepots at Mumford, Lacewood, and Dartmouth bridge terminals, with select BRT routes going straight to ScoSqrTerm, with a commuter rail eventually that over say 20 years connects all the way to Yarmouth, and to Sydney.

I'm an ambitious dreamer, but this is not beyond our means. It takes political backbone, and dedicated follow through on funding of the planning. We will have the opportunity to redesign almost half of our Downtown. It makes only sense to me to make the most of the situation. Then again TIH. (ThisIsHalifax)

[ILoveHalifax]

I took a look at the survey as well but gave up. It seemed it was trying to get me to answer in a specific way to justify 1 or 2 options. Neither, as far as I am concerned, will solve our problems. I think changes need to be wide sweeping.

[Spire]

I don't work for HRM, but from my chats with Metro Transit staff, it seems as if a full system redesign is a definite possibility, and they're excited about the potential to make some big changes.

[Jonovision]

While I agree that the survey is not positioned in a way to allow for an open ended dialogue, I still think there is value in filling it out. Almost all of the questions had ample space for comment. If you didn't like the question, there was lots of opportunity to say so and tell them what you really wanted to see even if it didn't fit within the box that they created.

[curnhalio]

They're going to come back in the new year with public sessions asking about more specific changes to take place over 5 years. We'll find out once and for all their actual appetite to take on a rail project. I still say the focus should be shoring up terminal and HOV/priority signal infrastructure and laying the groundwork for any future rail/BRT initiatives. They don't want to build a streetcar network by 2019 but maybe they will by 2024?

[halifaxboyns]

I finally figured out why I couldn't complete the survey - but I wasn't impressed with it. There was no consideration for future planning to include streetcars, LRTs or fast ferries! So that was my biggest comment to them - it seemed too focus on now and 5 years out.

[briancanada3]

I think when the new woodside ferry runs next year and the new express buses in Dartmouth/Coal Harbor there should be a few other changes to transit. I believe the 60 should only run to Bridge terminal from Eastern Passage when the ferry is not running. The route should run Woodside Terminal to Eastern Passage.
The 14 should terminate at the water street terminal and the 61 should only run as far as the Bridge. This way it gives a little less option to go across the bridge and that way the 1 and 10 could be more full going across. I also think that there should be 20 minute service on the 10. I also believe they need to make Portland street 15 minute service instead of 10, or even go 20 minute service AND improve service on the 159 to run every 10 or 15 minutes all day along Portland Street. Service on the 185 should run more often as well, both Link buses should be no more then 15 minutes apart all day. And they should run until 12:30 or later at night and 11pm on Sunday

Some other changes not necessarily related to the ferry but would be good for the city is to modify the route 6 and 22. Combine the service up and not run the 6 downtown. The 6 and 22 could do its run from Mumford out to Ragged Lake and even go to Bayers Lake. Extend the route 19 to run Herring Cove and then take a route to Dunbrack and head over to the Lacewood Terminal. Take the route 2 and 4 off of North Street and improve the 52 service. Make the 52 run 15 minute frequencies all day until 10 pm Monday to Saturday and 30 minutes all day Sunday. From Mumford there could be a modified 2/4 combo that basically services similar areas to what the 2 separate routes serve now. I also believe they need to run the 88/89 service hourly at the most not 2 hours and have better weekend service on both routes. I do believe the 89 only is Monday to Friday. From Lacewood to downtown there should be an express service. Maybe a Link bus that runs downtown to Lacewood Bayers Lake and Timberlea.

I also think modifying several runs will help improve the reliability. More service to Dartmouth Crossing from different areas including Bridge Terminal. Also better bus service to Mic Mac from Halifax. Maybe modifying the 16 to service Mic Mac. I also think in areas when there is major duplication, example, the 81 running right in front or behind an 80 going from Scotia Square to Larry Uteck, they need to space buses out or eliminate the duplicate route. Or in the case of the 80/81 run the 81 express from downtown to Larry Uteck then service a different area by going up to the retail area and to other areas up there. As it was discussed already in previous posts Larry Uteck is a growing area so if there is a chance even now it is a great idea to upgrade the transit in that area. Run the bus to spots that may not be as busy but will be. Even if the bus runs up Larry Uteck then goes past the retail onto a different road and then heads further into Bedford to connect Bedford place and Sunnyside mall. Right now anyone living on Larry Uteck should drive to Bedford Place because they would need to take a bus down to Bedford highway, get off, cross the street then wait for another bus to continue and in the few times I have done it I have had to wait 20 plus minutes for an 80.

I know my post is a lot of rambling but I do believe these simple things I have mentioned will help service some areas better or even new areas without the need for so many buses running the same corridor around the same time. I find it almost disturbing when I take a route like the 52 from Mumford running along North street and there is a 4 right in front of us and by the time we get to Gottingen the 2 has caught up to us, meaning that for almost 30 minutes there is no bus running until the next 3 roll along.

My ideas are meant to be a suggestion and I have emailed the company more then once but I have never seen a reply but if more people like them and email then maybe we will see stuff done. Also I am curious to know what people think of them and if anyone here has some better ideas or maybe someone sees something I have overlooked.

[Spire]

Thanks for posting! There's a lot to take in, but I definitely agree with you on the need for increased service on the 10 and 52, as well as better connections to Dartmouth Crossing. There are a couple of thoughts I have - for starters, if the 60 only goes as far as the ferry, what do the people who aren't taking the ferry do? You could transfer to the 63, but I would almost rather discontinue the 63 instead - I've always thought it seemed extraneous. One thing Metro Transit wants to do, as I understand it, is to separate out the Heritage Hills branch into its own "Route 60B", or something to that effect. They're currently not able to do letter branches of routes, due to the technical limitations of the current AVL/GoTime system, but the new system they're getting (whichever it is) will support that.

Also, I don't know if everyone wants to pay the premium fare for MetroLink, and not everyone wants to go to Portland Hills or Penhorn. I might instead suggest having just one regular 10-minute route for the Portland Corridor, rather than three - it will help people realize that there is an actual 10-minute frequency, and people can transfer at Portland Hills and the Bridge. Late night service on the MetroLink routes was discontinued a few years ago due to low ridership - but who knows, maybe things have changed since then?

Regarding route 19, it is designed to offer additional frequency between Mumford and Greystone, where there's more demand on route 20. Currently though, there's a perception problem, because many people don't realize that they could take it, and wait for a 20 to show up instead. I believe Metro Transit wants to change it to a letter branch of the 20, i.e. "Route 20B" once the new AVL system comes, so that people understand the connection better.

Also, if route 6 doesn't run downtown, there would still need to be a regular route to run down Quinpool. You are absolutely correct about the need for better connectivity between Larry Uteck and Bedford/Sackville.

You do raise some very good points, and more frequency is always a good thing! It's always great to see what other people envision for the system.

[Dmajackson]

The new Metro Express Route 380 Porter's Lake starts service at 5:38am on Monday.

Metro Transit - Metro Express