Halifax Active Transportation

[atbw]

Classic "one person's opinion should define a neighbourhood's" piece from Pam Berman. I don't think either read the proposal, as the loss of parking is actually due to the addition of a sidewalk on Dahlia and on Oak, as well as 1-2 spots at Victoria to make the crossing safer. One tree, not "some" is being cut to accommodate the sidewalk. Aside from allowing cross-rides at the crossing, very little cycle-specific infrastructure is going in here. The third proposed plan involving bi-directional bikeways seems overcomplicated to me and unnecessary.

https://www.shapeyourcityhalifax.ca/dahlia-oak-crichton

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scot...ansportation-hrm-dahlia-street-1.5777454

[alps]

Terrible article. One-sided and very misleading.

Edit: Should be noted they updated/expanded the article since it was first published the day before. Probably in response to complaints.

[atbw]

Originally Posted by alps

Terrible article. One-sided and very misleading.

Edit: Should be noted they updated/expanded the article since it was first published the day before. Probably in response to complaints.

I saw that. Good to see, though still lets Nixon off with some unsubstantiated claims about consultation. If you sign up for the ‘Shape Your City’ emails, you get at least monthly emails, and almost always an option to complete the survey as a resident.

Of course, we know residents are always going to complain about parking.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Having lived in that area 25+ years ago, my opinions are as follows with the caveat that some of these things may have changed since then:

1) The parking on Dahlia shouldn't be a loss, as nobody parks at that end of the street anyhow - that section of street faces the blank wall of 1 Oak Street's parking garage.

2) The Dahlia/Maple intersection has always been a problem, as Maple is used as a main commuter route to the Macdonald Bridge. I recall many vehicle accidents, some fairly bad, at that intersection. A childhood friend was actually killed crossing Maple Street further down the hill, many years ago. Maple/Pine/Victoria are all fairly steep hills, and with people rushing downhill on a commuter route, I would have concerns whether the proposed signals would be effective enough.

3) Pine is steeper than Maple, so I would not suggest putting stop signs on Pine in the middle of the slope - I recall driving down that hill (and Victoria) in slippery conditions in the winter and not being able to slow down enough to make the turn onto Dahlia, even when approaching it fairly slowly. After awhile, I decided to just not attack those hills in slippery conditions.

4) I don't agree with the person in the article who says the crossing at Victoria is at the crest of a hill. It is fairly steep there, though.

5) Leighton Dillman Park has always been a nice place to stroll. Some of the paths are a little on the steep side, and they never used to keep it ice-free in the winter. I think it would be kind of a shame to mix foot traffic with bikes, if the bike traffic became heavy enough, so I don't think using the park as a cycling route is a good idea, actually. Park Avenue is basically traffic-free, so I think that would be a better route.

[atbw]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

5) Leighton Dillman Park has always been a nice place to stroll. Some of the paths are a little on the steep side, and they never used to keep it ice-free in the winter. I think it would be kind of a shame to mix foot traffic with bikes, if the bike traffic became heavy enough, so I don't think using the park as a cycling route is a good idea, actually. Park Avenue is basically traffic-free, so I think that would be a better route.

As a cyclist, an AT mixed use path is always a compromise. Ultimately, it’s going to be one route of a few AAA bike facilities in Dartmouth; the waterfront trail/Alderney/Portland being the other one.

My 2 cents is that the cyclists who really want to rip around and go fast tend to stick on the roads, and are there already. Paths like this are moreso for families, kids, and new cyclists who are certainly slower.

If traffic does become heavy enough, I would hope an additional street based solution is offered as its never pleasant splitting a narrow path for cyclists or pedestrians.

[Good Baklava]

With the higher land values an AT network brings, any opposing homeowners are really shooting themselves in the foot.

[atbw]

Lower Water Street is finally getting some lane protection! Looks like the concrete barrier + green bollards we've seen before. This one is also getting some year-round planters.

The concrete + bollards is a temporary solution, which will inform a more permanent street configuration down the road.

[FuzzyWuz]

Barcelona launches 10 year plan to reclaim city streets from cars: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/n...r-plan-to-reclaim-city-streets-from-cars

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by FuzzyWuz

Barcelona launches 10 year plan to reclaim city streets from cars: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/n...r-plan-to-reclaim-city-streets-from-cars

Since we aren't Barcelona, and since we're not in Spain, I'm unsure of the relevance of their brand of lunacy. HRM Council is doing quite well with their own war on people who drive cars.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Since we aren't Barcelona, and since we're not in Spain, I'm unsure of the relevance of their brand of lunacy. HRM Council is doing quite well with their own war on people who drive cars.

Yes Keith, you are protecting us from the Dutch spies, who have already infiltrated the Barcelona & Halifax planning departments to impose their cycling ways. They have already carried out ruthless acts of sabotage such as covertly painting bike lanes when cars aren’t using the street, cutting supply routes by expanding sidewalks and tactically placing strange obstacles called bike racks. Beware!

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to ostracize the Dutch diaspora.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

Yes Keith, you are protecting us from the Dutch spies, who have already infiltrated the Barcelona & Halifax planning departments to impose their cycling ways. They have already carried out ruthless acts of sabotage such as covertly painting bike lanes when cars aren’t using the street, cutting supply routes by expanding sidewalks and tactically placing strange obstacles called bike racks. Beware!

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to ostracize the Dutch diaspora.

I am not sure of the national origins of these saboteurs and have made no such allegations. But your description of the outcomes seems essentially correct.

[Good Baklava]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I am not sure of the national origins of these saboteurs and have made no such allegations. But your description of the outcomes seems essentially correct.

I mentioned the Dutch since they are considered world leaders in AT, while they are also among the friendlier nations of the world making the idea of Dutch spies seem absurd. Somehow satirical rhetoric against minute AT changes is defended as if it were the truth.

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I am not sure of the national origins of these saboteurs and have made no such allegations. But your description of the outcomes seems essentially correct.

You're so far gone down the delusion of urban planners trying to punish drivers that you can't spot sarcasm that was intended to mock you. Nice.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Franco401

You're so far gone down the delusion of urban planners trying to punish drivers that you can't spot sarcasm that was intended to mock you. Nice.

And your continuing desire to attack me means that you take my satirical reply as reality. Nice job.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

I mentioned the Dutch since they are considered world leaders in AT, while they are also among the friendlier nations of the world making the idea of Dutch spies seem absurd.

I guess that must be planner humor? Probably a real knee-slapper at meetings of the HCC.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Good Baklava

I mentioned the Dutch since they are considered world leaders in AT, while they are also among the friendlier nations of the world making the idea of Dutch spies seem absurd.

The Dutch may be fine, upstanding and very friendly people, but a Dutch person on a bicycle is an entirely different person. I know - I've been to Amsterdam. Dutch cyclists are vicious!!

Dutch cyclists take all road rules as mere suggestions, and assume they have the right of way 100% of the time. They have absolutely no consideration for pedestrians (at least motorists will give pedestrians the right of way most of the time). In Amsterdam however, the rule is for pedestrians to clear way for the cyclists, or else spend the afternoon in the infirmary waiting for their broken wrist to be set...……...

[Citizen_Bane]

There can be little to no doubt that HRM council is purposely discouraging automobiles from coming onto the peninsula/downtown through their design choices. Hopefully council knows what they're doing. Hopefully our city planners know what they're doing. I can't help but think that big city solutions are being implemented on small city Halifax. Halifax is not Barcelona...as has been previously stated. We don't have big density downtown. We actively plan against density through allowing only squat buildings to be built downtown. We don't have Barcelona's pollution issue to resolve. Their additional bicycle lanes are a byproduct of a pollution resolution plan not transportation problem. The UK has announced that they will ban the sale of petrol autos in 2030 which is coincidently the point in time at which Barcelona has planned to have spent 37 billion dollars to achieve a same or similar goal. Wouldn't the 37 billion be better spent to create emissions free electricity to power electric autos in Barcelona? Barcelona has an extensive public transportation system. Halifax doesn't. The BRT plan is a bargain basement plan that I've personally witnessed fail several times in the past couple of weeks or so. I've walked and bussed to work and other locations on this peninsula for about 20 years. I totally support active transportation. I would like to see a periodic daily usage count of the newly completed Hollis St. bicycle lane starting asap and over the nest two years so that I as a taxpayer can decide whether I'm getting my $$$ worth.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Dutch cyclists take all road rules as mere suggestions, and assume they have the right of way 100% of the time. They have absolutely no consideration for pedestrians (at least motorists will give pedestrians the right of way most of the time). In Amsterdam however, the rule is for pedestrians to clear way for the cyclists, or else spend the afternoon in the infirmary waiting for their broken wrist to be set...……...

Sounds like Halifax cyclists. Or NYC cyclists. Or Montreal cyclists. Or Portland cyclists.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Citizen_Bane

There can be little to no doubt that HRM council is purposely discouraging automobiles from coming onto the peninsula/downtown through their design choices. Hopefully council knows what they're doing. Hopefully our city planners know what they're doing. I can't help but think that big city solutions are being implemented on small city Halifax. Halifax is not Barcelona...as has been previously stated. We don't have big density downtown. We actively plan against density through allowing only squat buildings to be built downtown. We don't have Barcelona's pollution issue to resolve. Their additional bicycle lanes are a byproduct of a pollution resolution plan not transportation problem. The UK has announced that they will ban the sale of petrol autos in 2030 which is coincidently the point in time at which Barcelona has planned to have spent 37 billion dollars to achieve a same or similar goal. Wouldn't the 37 billion be better spent to create emissions free electricity to power electric autos in Barcelona? Barcelona has an extensive public transportation system. Halifax doesn't. The BRT plan is a bargain basement plan that I've personally witnessed fail several times in the past couple of weeks or so. I've walked and bussed to work and other locations on this peninsula for about 20 years. I totally support active transportation. I would like to see a periodic daily usage count of the newly completed Hollis St. bicycle lane starting asap and over the nest two years so that I as a taxpayer can decide whether I'm getting my $$$ worth.

^^^ Some of the most sensible words to appear in this forum on the topic, thank you. Sadly, words such as these will never be dared to be spoken by members of HRM Council, who have chosen to act like lemmings in following one another down the rabbit hole of the foolhardy integrated transportation strategy, which is Barcelona on a smaller scale. But we had our opportunity to change that direction last month and failed to do so. Unless several newly elected Council members come to their senses and stop drinking the kool-aid, HRM is condemned to 4 more years of the nonsense discussed so eloquently by Citizen_Bane above.

[Summerville]

I too cycle, drive a car and use the bus. I probably drive most of all, for my kids’ activities. And I agree that buildings need to be taller to deal with future demand.

And I really hope that the planners are making the proper decisions. But I assume that they are better informed than some of the posters here. It would seem that a lot of the griping is about what is going on now. But in reality is the city spending more on new roads and rebuilding roads than bike lanes? Per capita? Most definitely. Think of the cost of the new burnside connector.

I know that Keith wants to uphold our federal fiscal budget, but most of the cost of the bike lanes and probably the bus lanes is coming from the feds.

The reality is that we have to go back to what the future need will be for the city. If we wait till the last minute when traffic is overwhelming,...what will be the cost then?

The AT plan is designed to get people out of their cars. The suburbs are growing and the arteries into the peninsula are already getting overwhelmed with cars. In theory,....and here is the low-hanging fruit for Keith’s griping,...if you widen streets for cars, they will fill the spaces quickly and you will be jammed up in a few years. Bus lanes can be filled with more buses. People on the peninsula or immediately off the peninsula can choose to bike in if they are able.

We can’t put our faith in car infrastructure. And actually we are catching up after bad planning decisions. The city is monitoring traffic flow where bike lanes have been built and nothing has changed for the worse. You can’t widen streets in the downtown core for more car lanes. Parking?....new buildings are being constructed with public parking because it makes money. And it deals with the need.

Unless you have a better plan than the current AT plan such as expropriation of private property, I don’t think that there is a viable alternative.

My only fear is whether we aren’t spending enough. Will the BRT system be a dog? Time will tell. If it fails, give the lanes back to the cars or spend a lot more to convert the lanes to LRT.