Halifax Transit

[Querce]

Halifax Regional Municipality is developing a strategy to establish a Rapid Transit Network. Rapid Transit means public transit that is more reliable and attractive. The aim is to get you where you want to go, when you want to go, faster and more frequently – seven days a week.

Rapid Transit can be a key part of the municipality's shift to a more sustainable transportation system. Investing in Rapid Transit can help households reduce their transportation costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which helps to preserve our environment and meet the municipality’s ambitious goals for climate change mitigation.



The strategy includes two types of transit:

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a system that provides riders with fast, frequent, comfortable and high capacity bus service. The proposed network consists of four routes and aims to provide all-day frequent bus service along key corridors and have faster travel times.
New Ferry service which could offer a fast, direct connection to downtown Halifax using vessels capable of higher speeds than the current ferries. The Rapid Transit Strategy is considering potential routes and terminal locations.
The strategy will also look at connections between transit and land use, encouraging development near stations so that new growth is transit-oriented and sustainable.

go give your input about the rapid transit strategy

[Reesor]

I would never take a ferry to work myself. For me, the main priorities should be ensuring all main arteries in the city have dedicated bus lanes with queue jumps at traffic lights. I think that would be the lowest cost for the biggest reward... reward being reduced time to get to work. The Barrington St Corridor was a great add for those of us that travel from Sackville. If the 107 extension reduces traffic on Magazine Hill / Bedford Bypass, that'll be even better.

The dream would be once the 107 is complete, to make one dedicated bus lane in each direction on the Magazine / Bedford bypass, only at peak hours. But I have no way of knowing how much the 107 will reduce traffic enough to know if that will grind traffic to a halt. You'd essentially have to halve the traffic on the Magazine at peak hours in order for a bus lane to work, and that would result in the same congestion as we see now.

[swimmer_spe]

So I guess the Commuter Rail with Via is dead?

[Querce]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So I guess the Commuter Rail with Via is dead?

From the FAQ:

Is rail part of the Rapid Transit Strategy?

No. While larger cities often use rail as part of their rapid transit networks, the municipality has carefully considered the costs and benefits of rail and decided that it should not form part of the municipality’s transportation strategy at this time. Other cities’ experiences show that many of the benefits of rail service can be achieved with well-designed BRT.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Querce

From the FAQ:

But these other cities may not already have an underused grade-separated rail cut that will not decrease traffic capacity of the roads at their disposal.

They really should look into that further, I can't help think that something was left on the table that could have made this happen.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

But these other cities may not already have an underused grade-separated rail cut that will not decrease traffic capacity of the roads at their disposal.

They really should look into that further, I can't help think that something was left on the table that could have made this happen.

The one thing I have learned from living there is the people, and the politicians forget that Halifax is a large city. It is the largest one east of QC. It is time they started acting like it.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The one thing I have learned from living there is the people, and the politicians forget that Halifax is a large city. It is the largest one east of QC. It is time they started acting like it.

It's true. I think someone123's post in the Halifax Population & Growth thread sums it up pretty well:

Originally Posted by someone123

One of the implications of this is that there's a big disconnect between how ambitious the transportation infrastructure projects are in the city and how fast it's growing.

The current answer seems to be that it's enough to tweak the bus network and build new roads in greenfield suburban areas. That's about it. There's the Windsor Street Exchange project which is badly needed but the city will add 50,000 people before that's built.

The municipality and province should be planning now for a transportation network to serve 600,000 people, and then actually implementing those plans over a 5-15 year timeframe.

[ScovaNotian]

Other than the ferry, it all looks rather piecemeal. Does anyone here know of cities of a size similar to Halifax that are happy with their BRT networks rather than seeking to establish rail? Are there examples where above-ground BRT has resulted in significant densification near transit nodes?

[q12]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/hrm-survey-ferry-faster-bus-1.5474222

This city is growing faster than this plan...

I agree that this city needs to start acting like a large Canadian city.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by q12

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/hrm-survey-ferry-faster-bus-1.5474222

This city is growing faster than this plan...

I agree that this city needs to start acting like a large Canadian city.

What are they going to call it? They already have a MetroLink and a MetroX Maybe MetroZ.

I still feel they are missing the chance to have real transit for the city that could grow and be in high demand.

[q12]

Just wait till the Mackay needs to be replaced...

Halifax bridge commission says ‘closures will be the new normal’ as harbour spans age

By StaffStar Halifax
Wed., Nov. 6, 2019
HALIFAX—The bridge commission says that with the Macdonald and MacKay bridges getting long in the tooth, “closures will be the new normal.”

The Halifax Harbour Bridges Commission (HHB) released its fiscal 2018-2019 report this week, detailing the Crown corporation’s financial position and its plans for the years ahead.

In a message introducing the report, HHB general manager and CEO Steve Snider writes that the 64-year-old Macdonald Bridge and the 49-year-old MacKay will require somewhat regular closures to keep up on maintenance.

“With the exception of when the third lane was added to the Macdonald Bridge in 1999 and the Big Lift, it is extremely rare that bridge closures for maintenance projects were necessary,” Snider wrote.

“That is no longer the case.”

On the Macdonald, for example, Snider wrote that although the suspended spans were replaced during the Big Lift, the approaches will need work, meaning lane drops or full bridge closures “for the next several years.”

There were already lane closures happening on the MacKay this past summer as crews worked to repair the asphalt and waterproofing on two lanes, and the other two lanes will be done next year.

“Because the bridges are used significantly for people to commute to and from work, we plan projects to take place evenings and weekends, when there is less traffic and, historically less congestion,” Snider wrote.

But growing traffic on the bridge – up to 100,000 vehicles crossing daily on weekdays and 34 million crossings annually – “there is never a good time to close a bridge or a lane to traffic.”

In another introductory message, HHB board chairperson Vicki Harnish writes that the commission will decide next year whether to rehabilitate or replace the MacKay Bridge.

Harnish also writes that the commission is “evaluating whether we should rebuild the toll plazas or move to an all-electronic system.”

About three quarters of drivers already use the digital MacPass, not change, to cross the bridge.

The annual report itself gets into the commission’s finances, and projects lower net income in the coming year, but a strong future.

“Expenses are budgeted to increase with a significant focus on preventative maintenance programs for the MacKay Bridge as well as planning to replace the toll system for both bridges,” the report said.

“Longer term, HHB’s solid financial position will allow for increased capital work programs to further enhance and protect the bridge structures for the long term.”

https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/11/...the-new-normal-as-harbour-spans-age.html

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by q12

Just wait till the Mackay needs to be replaced...







https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/11/...the-new-normal-as-harbour-spans-age.html

If only there were some sort of transit that didn't have to sit in that traffic.....

[atbw]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

But these other cities may not already have an underused grade-separated rail cut that will not decrease traffic capacity of the roads at their disposal.

They really should look into that further, I can't help think that something was left on the table that could have made this happen.

The problem with the rail cut is it doesn't really serve the big residential nodes well, besides Bedford and the Peninsula. Much of the density in Clayton Park is up the hill, clustered near the bus terminal and along Dunbrack. Bedford West is along Larry Utek and Kearny Lake. Spryfield and Dartmouth aren't even possibilities for commuter rail.

The only thing rail really has is the true dedicated ROW and the 'permanence' factor. It would be nice to see some real investment in terminals and dedicated bus ROW to make BRT a popular option.

Given the absolute mess Ottawa has found itself in with its LRT line, I would much prefer a BRT system that could be quickly implemented and serve all corners of HRM.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by atbw

The problem with the rail cut is it doesn't really serve the big residential nodes well, besides Bedford and the Peninsula. Much of the density in Clayton Park is up the hill, clustered near the bus terminal and along Dunbrack. Bedford West is along Larry Utek and Kearny Lake. Spryfield and Dartmouth aren't even possibilities for commuter rail.

The only thing rail really has is the true dedicated ROW and the 'permanence' factor. It would be nice to see some real investment in terminals and dedicated bus ROW to make BRT a popular option.

Given the absolute mess Ottawa has found itself in with its LRT line, I would much prefer a BRT system that could be quickly implemented and serve all corners of HRM.

I'm not saying that we should only rely on the rail cut, but it would surely provide the same, but better, service than the proposed ferry. If you look back through the proposal that was abandoned, there were stops along the way that could be timed with BRT, or at least 'regular' bus routes to get people from the dense areas to the rail route. Plus, service could have been expanded out towards the Enfield/Lantz area, which is experiencing a mini building boom these days - all these people will be driving into the city within the next decade.

If you ever watch the traffic patterns on Google maps during rush hours, the main bottlenecks are the 102 coming into town, the Bedford Highway, the Magazine Hill and the bridge approaches. A lot of that traffic originates from the 'suburbs' or just beyond the suburbs - rail could handle a lot of that if it were designed well.

I stick to my contention, that not utilizing an existing grade-separated rail cut is a mistake.

Otherwise, the ferry is the second-best option that gets people downtown without clogging up the roads, or restricting capacity due to closing down lanes for bus-only use.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I'm not saying that we should only rely on the rail cut, but it would surely provide the same, but better, service than the proposed ferry. If you look back through the proposal that was abandoned, there were stops along the way that could be timed with BRT, or at least 'regular' bus routes to get people from the dense areas to the rail route. Plus, service could have been expanded out towards the Enfield/Lantz area, which is experiencing a mini building boom these days - all these people will be driving into the city within the next decade.

If you ever watch the traffic patterns on Google maps during rush hours, the main bottlenecks are the 102 coming into town, the Bedford Highway, the Magazine Hill and the bridge approaches. A lot of that traffic originates from the 'suburbs' or just beyond the suburbs - rail could handle a lot of that if it were designed well.

I stick to my contention, that not utilizing an existing grade-separated rail cut is a mistake.

Otherwise, the ferry is the second-best option that gets people downtown without clogging up the roads, or restricting capacity due to closing down lanes for bus-only use.

The unique thing is, all of the area used to be rail accessible. Much of it still is. It would be short sighted not to use what is there already.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The unique thing is, all of the area used to be rail accessible. Much of it still is. It would be short sighted not to use what is there already.

It's interesting when you realize all of the rails that have been torn up over the last 40-50 years (or even the past 20). It's a shame when you consider that much of it could have been used for commuter rail with some maintenance and upgrades. Now, the cost of installing all new rails again, plus the struggles of trying to get the ROWs back (many are gone forever) have made it pretty much impossible to happen again. We are, if nothing else, short sighted around here.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It's interesting when you realize all of the rails that have been torn up over the last 40-50 years (or even the past 20). It's a shame when you consider that much of it could have been used for commuter rail with some maintenance and upgrades. Now, the cost of installing all new rails again, plus the struggles of trying to get the ROWs back (many are gone forever) have made it pretty much impossible to happen again. We are, if nothing else, short sighted around here.

Getting most of them back would be easy as the ROW is still mainly intact. The real issue would be all those that use the trails that they created whining about loosing them.

[Keith P.]

The biggest mistake is relying on Halifax Transit to operate all these proposed new modes of transit. Imagine if HRM had said "We want a BRT and ferry service along these routes at these capacities and frequencies - private sector operators, provide us with proposals that meet our parameters." You would likely get something in a more timely manner that operates better at lower cost.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Getting most of them back would be easy as the ROW is still mainly intact. The real issue would be all those that use the trails that they created whining about loosing them.

I wasn't sure how the ownership/land use was sorted out after the rails were converted to trails, but yes you have a good point there.

Just one example that would have checked a lot of boxes for commuter rail is the old rail ROW now known as the Chain of Lakes Trail (changing to Beechville Lakeside Timberlea, etc.), which hooked up to the main line near the old Fairview roundhouse, ran alongside Joseph Howe Drive, up around Fairmount, through Bayers Lake Park, out past Timberlea, St. Margaret's Bay, etc.

A transit line like that would have serviced a number of people, provided access to shopping at Bayer's Lake, and would likely have spurred development along the rail corridor. Just one example.

It would delight me if I thought that Halifax staff/council were considering the possibilities of using this in the future, but honestly I believe they are just stuck in the mode of thinking small. Maybe I'm wrong with my assertion, but there really doesn't seem to be much fresh thinking going on, just how can we add more buses...

[Keith P.]

I seem to recall posting here at the time that rail ROW was pitched as an "active transportation" trail saying exactly that, namely that it should be reserved for commuter transit of some higher order than bicycles. But of course the cycling lobby got its way as we have seen far too often, to the detriment of a far larger group of taxpayers.