Halifax Active Transportation

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Bike lanes in HRM have proven to be a massive failure. Cycling is actually down since the program began. Anecdotally I was running around town today and saw a grand total of 2 cyclists on the megabucks MacD bridge bike track and one riding on the sidewalk adjacent to the Bedford highway. We are not getting any kind of return on that investment.

I prefer to be a little more pragmatic about it, actually. The weather is turning to the point where I would expect less cyclists to be out, so that will be a factor.

Perhaps a more reasonable tack would be to continue developing at a moderate pace (as we have been), and monitor usage over the next year. Make the data available to the public and hold a referendum to the citizenship of Halifax with a few choices on where to spend budget money.

Imagine being able to vote on where your tax dollars were spent. Something to the effect of...
1) Bicycle lane infrastructure
2) Road infrastructure
3) Stadium
4) Rail transit/fast ferry
5) Etc.

Of course it wouldn't necessarily have to be one or the other... you could design the referendum to pick 5 of your favourite 10, or combinations thereof. Whatever the public votes for will have been determined by a democratic process, and therefore there could be no complaining - majority rules. Of course this would only apply to optional projects... 'expendable budget', and would not apply to necessities like snow clearing, policing, etc etc...

Just thinking outside of the box.

...but I really think there should be a proper study available on how much cycle lanes are used, and which types of lanes are used more than others. I suspect you would find they are used more than you think (especially in the summer months), but maybe it would reveal that they are not... or that some types are not used at all while others are used massively - which would also be useful in determining where our limited tax funds are spent.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Here you go, Keith. Your opportunity to make your opinions known to the city:

https://haligonia.ca/residents-invited-t...r-thoughts-on-short-term-rentals-271087/

I have already added my input.

[IanWatson]

So obviously this is super anecdotal, but: I'm currently in the process of moving. I live now on Hollis Street, and I almost never bike because everything is within walking distance. However, I'm not going to be able to afford a large enough place (need a bedroom for the kiddo) within easy walking distance of downtown, so I'm starting to look at neighbourhoods a little farther out (but still within the Peninsula). Now that we actually have bike infrastructure in a lot of places, I find it's heavily entering my decision-making process about neighbourhoods I would consider for a new home.

For example, the far north end (e.g. up by The Pit) always seemed really isolated to me. But with the Devonshire bike lane and the Barrington Greenway, it's actually super reasonable as a launching-off point for anywhere on the eastern side of the Peninsula. The Windsor Street bike lane is pretty lacking, but as that gets upgraded, it--along with the Vernon local street route--make it pretty easy to access anywhere on the central Peninsula. Finally, from there biking is actually the fastest way to get to my work in downtown Dartmouth if the bridge is backed up with traffic (plus no need to pay for parking). The only barrier is that crappy hill up to the bridge; it's a bummer to show up to work sweaty.

I think what I'll probably do is drop some money on one of those electric-assist bikes, which should make the bridge hill a breeze. Not one of the ones where it's a moped designed as a "bike" to skirt rules, but one that has the small electric motor that kicks in to give you a boost during strenuous areas of your ride.

It's easy to say no one uses this infrastructure, but I'd say part of that is because we never had the infrastructure to use. It's only in the last couple of years that there's actually been anything meaningful around which to organize your living and transportation decisions.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

So obviously this is super anecdotal, but: I'm currently in the process of moving. I live now on Hollis Street, and I almost never bike because everything is within walking distance. However, I'm not going to be able to afford a large enough place (need a bedroom for the kiddo) within easy walking distance of downtown, so I'm starting to look at neighbourhoods a little farther out (but still within the Peninsula). Now that we actually have bike infrastructure in a lot of places, I find it's heavily entering my decision-making process about neighbourhoods I would consider for a new home.

For example, the far north end (e.g. up by The Pit) always seemed really isolated to me. But with the Devonshire bike lane and the Barrington Greenway, it's actually super reasonable as a launching-off point for anywhere on the eastern side of the Peninsula. The Windsor Street bike lane is pretty lacking, but as that gets upgraded, it--along with the Vernon local street route--make it pretty easy to access anywhere on the central Peninsula. Finally, from there biking is actually the fastest way to get to my work in downtown Dartmouth if the bridge is backed up with traffic (plus no need to pay for parking). The only barrier is that crappy hill up to the bridge; it's a bummer to show up to work sweaty.

I think what I'll probably do is drop some money on one of those electric-assist bikes, which should make the bridge hill a breeze. Not one of the ones where it's a moped designed as a "bike" to skirt rules, but one that has the small electric motor that kicks in to give you a boost during strenuous areas of your ride.

It's easy to say no one uses this infrastructure, but I'd say part of that is because we never had the infrastructure to use. It's only in the last couple of years that there's actually been anything meaningful around which to organize your living and transportation decisions.

First thought: Have you considered using the ferry to get to downtown Dartmouth - might avoid some of the hills and you get a nice boat ride twice a day. I used to use it to bike from downtown Dartmouth to Dalhousie, and really looked forward the harbour crossing as a chance to collect my thoughts while enjoying the scenery.

Second thought: Your picking your next location to be near bike lanes reminds me of someone123's posts in the past about neighborhoods growing around rail transit lines. I hadn't really thought of that angle before, relating to bike lanes. Thanks for mentioning it and providing food for thought...

[OldDartmouthMark]

https://haligonia.ca/open-house-bayers-r...nsportation-improvements-project-273857/

Open House: Bayers Road Transit & Active Transportation Improvements project

The Halifax Regional Municipality is inviting residents to an upcoming open house to review and discuss the design of the Bayers Road Transit and Active Transportation Improvements project.

Municipal staff are currently planning for the construction of dedicated bus lanes on Bayers Road between Romans Avenue and Windsor Street. The addition of a multi-use path on the south side of Bayers Road between Romans Avenue and George Dauphinee Avenue will also provide a significantly improved pedestrian and cycling experience in the area.

Construction is targeted to start in 2020 and will be completed in phases.

The open house will be an opportunity to review details of the project, as well as the expected implementation approach and time frame. ​

​

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

6 p.m. – 8 p.m.

Halifax Forum | Maritime Hall

This project is a key component of Halifax Transit’s Moving Forward Together Plan and Integrated Mobility Plan, which recommend investment in transit lanes for the Bayers Road corridor in order to give priority to buses over general traffic, improve transit reliability, and ultimately encourage more people to use transit.

All are welcome to attend the open house, and municipal staff will be present to answer questions. A snow date has been scheduled for Thursday, January 30 from 6 p.m.- 8 p.m. at the same location, if needed.

For more information please visit halifax.ca/bayersroad.

[IanWatson]

In December I moved houses to a location where cycling distances make a lot of sense (previously I'd been downtown, where there was no point cycling because you could just walk to everything).

This past weekend was the first time since moving that I was able to get the bike out. Gotta say, I was super impressed with how Halifax's AT network has evolved. I was able to get from the deep North End to Point Pleasant Park and back almost entirely on dedicated AT infrastructure. I'm a young-ish male and usually feel confident enough to bike on the road, but I had my pre-schooler on the back of the bike this weekend so truly appreciated the additional safety dedicated infrastructure provides. There were also many other cyclists of all ages using the infrastructure, which was great to see.

The new South Park lanes are particularly great, as is the Barrington Greenway. The worst part was the Cogswell Interchange and transitioning from the Greenway to Hollis. Hollis was also a bit weird because they're in the process of putting in the new lanes, so half way down you have to switch from left to right, with no warning.

I know there's a lot of hang-wringing on these forums about what a waste cycling infrastructure is, but honestly it makes this city so much more livable.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I know there's a lot of hang-wringing on these forums about what a waste cycling infrastructure is, but honestly it makes this city so much more livable.

Sensible bike infrastructure is fine. The problem with Halifax is that so much of it has not been sensible (see the Hollis St example, where we are on what I believe is the 3rd interation of bike lanes), seemingly designed to inconvenience or punish motorists and businesses as much as possible. The basic idea of the greenway is what should have been pursued where possible far more than has been the case, with shared spaces for both pedestrians and cyclists to use.

[IanWatson]

The Hollis Street lane was not sensible in its last iteration precisely because they attempted to not inconvenience motorists and businesses.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

I know there's a lot of hang-wringing on these forums about what a waste cycling infrastructure is, but honestly it makes this city so much more livable.

Transportation network effects can make it hard to judge the value of infrastructure investment. A single bike lane by itself is worth much less than the backbone of a functional system. I think there is a lot of potential in Halifax because the scale and density of the inner city are perfect for cycling, while the city is still a bit too small for rapid transit like subways.

Another problem I see is there isn't enough tolerance of risk taking and experimentation with municipal projects. Nobody really knows what an ideal cycling network looks like for Halifax. It's really unlikely the municipality could get there without some false starts like the initial iteration of the Hollis bike lane.

[Dmajackson]

Hollis Street is starting to look good (photo by me);

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by someone123

Transportation network effects can make it hard to judge the value of infrastructure investment. A single bike lane by itself is worth much less than the backbone of a functional system. I think there is a lot of potential in Halifax because the scale and density of the inner city are perfect for cycling, while the city is still a bit too small for rapid transit like subways.

Another problem I see is there isn't enough tolerance of risk taking and experimentation with municipal projects. Nobody really knows what an ideal cycling network looks like for Halifax. It's really unlikely the municipality could get there without some false starts like the initial iteration of the Hollis bike lane.

A big issue I've noticed is that people seem to want an all or nothing approach and don't want to see a mix of options. They'll say things like, "Not everyone can drive a bike, the weather/temperature isn't always suitable, and some trips are too far. Therefore bikes aren't practical and we should ignore them and focus 100% on motor vehicles." But of course, something doesn't have to meet the same standards of utility or practicality if it requires far less investment. If say, 1/4 of the street surface on 1/4 of thoroughfare streets were dedicated to bikes, that would mean only 1/16 of the street surface of our thoroughfares would be bike lanes so bikes would only need to provide 1/16 the benefit. In reality, far more than 1/16 of people are able to bike on more than 1/16 of days to more than 1/16 of their destinations. So this really isn't a difficult standard to meet. 1/16 of trips would be just over 6%.

Just imagine if we applied such strict standards to sidewalks. Not everyone is capable of using walking as transportation, not every day has suitable weather or temperature for it, and not every trip can be easily made with it. But it's there for the occasions when it's useful and the cost is not terribly controversial. The main difference is that it isn't seen as competition for automobiles, and some automobile users (lets call them the automobile lobby) are hostile to anything that appears to challenge their dominance and authority. Not because they're right or because of any sort of fairness, but because they've grown entitled to having their way.

[Keith P.]

The issue really is that all streets are already accessible to bicycles. But the cycling activists want their own dedicated network. It is a bit like little boys putting up a sign in their clubhouse saying "no girls allowed". In a logical world, such measures would only be necessary if the bikes (or little girls) started appearing in great numbers and causing problems. But they have not.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The issue really is that all streets are already accessible to bicycles. But the cycling activists want their own dedicated network. It is a bit like little boys putting up a sign in their clubhouse saying "no girls allowed". In a logical world, such measures would only be necessary if the bikes (or little girls) started appearing in great numbers and causing problems. But they have not.

However if you've ever cycled on city streets it can be quite hazardous to mix with cars. I used to cycle quite a bit around 30 years ago, when cycling lanes were not existent in Halifax (other cities had them and I was envious). Much of the time you were fine if you kept your speed up and did continual shoulder checks if you had to pass a parked vehicle or some other hazard, like a pothole etc., but there were always times when inevitably you had to put yourself out there and the risk was high. In some cases the road was only wide enough for a car or there was no shoulder to ride on, for example.

Today, there are more cars on the same roads, and I find anecdotally that drivers are less skilful and less attentive (and more aggressive) than they were then. Therefore, although I have not cycled for many years, I still think that cycling lanes, or specifically a good cycling network, is necessary. I won't say that I always agree with some of the more extreme advocates, but in general I believe the cycling community has valid concerns for their safety and it's reasonable to dedicate a certain amount of infrastructure for them to use.

[Nouvellecosse]

^ Exactly. Bike lanes are not for those who are already avid cyclists who are already comfortable in a variety of environments. They're for the many people who aren't currently comfortable cycling because they don't feel safe. I've spoken to countless people in that category. The idea that it's some conspiracy by cyclists to exclude others represents a fundamental lack of understanding.

And again, the same thing could be said about sidewalks. It's perfectly possible to walk along the side of a road that doesn't have any and have pedestrians share the space with cars. But on busier roads it doesn't feel (and isn't) as safe.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

A big issue I've noticed is that people seem to want an all or nothing approach and don't want to see a mix of options. They'll say things like, "Not everyone can drive a bike, the weather/temperature isn't always suitable, and some trips are too far. Therefore bikes aren't practical and we should ignore them and focus 100% on motor vehicles." But of course, something doesn't have to meet the same standards of utility or practicality if it requires far less investment. If say, 1/4 of the street surface on 1/4 of thoroughfare streets were dedicated to bikes, that would mean only 1/16 of the street surface of our thoroughfares would be bike lanes so bikes would only need to provide 1/16 the benefit. In reality, far more than 1/16 of people are able to bike on more than 1/16 of days to more than 1/16 of their destinations. So this really isn't a difficult standard to meet. 1/16 of trips would be just over 6%.

Yep. Even if it is seasonal for example there might be a big benefit. And there will always be demand for different modes of transportation.

Another misconception is the idea you need "room" to add new transportation infrastructure. I guess this means empty ROWs or empty streets. This comes up with people saying there is no room for transit or bike ROWs on the peninsula because all of the space is taken up by something already. But this kind of thinking is wrong for a bunch of reasons:

- Available space in cities gets used, particularly in valuable areas where infrastructure improvements are contemplated. It's unrealistic to expect to find an empty ROW ready for transit or bike lanes. If you want to make changes, you need to adapt what already exists. This has been happening for over 250 years in Halifax.
- In a land-constrained city, it's density (capacity per unit of land) that matters. Shifting use to a higher-density mode is a win. "Giving up" 2 lanes of mixed traffic for a transit corridor could make perfect sense.
- Often mixing traffic slows things down (e.g. buses weaving in and out of traffic) and there are diminishing returns to adding lanes, so it's not always even clear that something like a bike land or transit lane is a big net loss for other forms of traffic. It might be good to keep the bikes on a few corridors with good signalling and lanes instead of having them spread out on every street.

I wonder how much this is really reactionary thinking that is opposed to the 1960's-era urban renewal craze. There's a happy medium between 1960, when huge areas were torn down on a whim, and 2005, when almost nothing was built and people developed an expectation that the city would always remain more or less the same. Maybe there will be a "central library" type transportation infrastructure project in Halifax that will get people on board with somewhat more ambitious changes.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

- Available space in cities gets used, particularly in valuable areas where infrastructure improvements are contemplated.

Yet oddly, this does not seem to be the case for bike lanes.

[j.graham]

Originally Posted by someone123

Maybe there will be a "central library" type transportation infrastructure project in Halifax that will get people on board with somewhat more ambitious changes.

I like a lot of your points, and the one thing I can think about that might fit the "central library" category would be the MacDonald Bridge flyover. If that happens, I think it would really show a commitment to safe and accessible cycling infrastructure.

I'm not sure what the current status is on that project, though.

[j.graham]

Sorry for the double post.

Halifax widening 900 metres of sidewalk on Spring Garden, Quinpool roads

https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/city-hall...idewalk-on-spring-garden-quinpool-roads/

[IanWatson]

Had to drive downtown at lunch today. Saw that there's good progress on the Hollis Street bike lane. Looking forward to trying it as a cyclist. As a driver, I really like the change; realignment of the lanes means you no longer need to jog back and forth to be in the correct lane to go through intersections.

[someone123]

Pictures of the Hollis bike lane:







Source