Halifax Active Transportation

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The numbers I saw were conventional diesel bus, $600K, shiny new electric bus, $1.5 million. That $900K delta is a pretty big nut.

Is this the capital cost? You need to know about the lifespan of the vehicles and operating costs to say if they are cheaper or not. The electrics can have higher upfront costs with longer lifespans and lower maintenance and fuel/power costs. EVs are supposed to be easier to service than ICE vehicles.

If a bus costs 2.5x as much but has 3x the lifespan it is cheaper per unit of operating time as an example.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The numbers I saw were conventional diesel bus, $600K, shiny new electric bus, $1.5 million. That $900K delta is a pretty big nut.

If the flyover goes ahead and ends up costing the $15 million I expect it will, there will be only one big benefit to it. It will signal that the chances of re-election for the council members who favored it and pushed it though will be nil, once voters who see it for the waste that it is are reminded of it every time they cross the Macdonald and see it unused.

I have been biking across the bridge once a week to work lately, and I see quite a few people biking. With the flyover there will be a lot more. I know I would bike more. Currently its a nightmare to get onto the bridge on the Halifax side.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

I have been biking across the bridge once a week to work lately, and I see quite a few people biking. With the flyover there will be a lot more. I know I would bike more. Currently its a nightmare to get onto the bridge on the Halifax side.

What does "quite a few" mean ? At best I can see maybe , perhaps on a warmer day, almost the grand total of 1 % of the Greater Halifax population choosing to take a bike anywhere in this City. The TRUE 1%. Other than utopian European dreams is the expense worth it for the 1%? NO, never, Not. The true 1%.

[Nouvellecosse]

In the 2016 census 1% of commuters already report traveling to work by bike in the HRM, a figure that doesn't include trips to other places such as school. But again, the HRM's stated purpose in improving active transportation isn't primarily to improve the experience for existing users but to attract new users in order to shift the mode share. This was reiterated in the 2017 IMP (Integrated Mobility Program) where they make it clear that it's too expensive for the city to build and maintain the necessary road capacity that would allow traffic to expand at the same rate as population growth. In other words, cost (net savings) is a reason to do it rather than to oppose it.

The IMP also outlines how surveys show 50% of people would like to cycle more than they currently do, but often don't feel that it's safe. I've certainly encountered many people like this myself. That's why the all ages and abilities cycle network is a major priority, since even modest shifts from cars to active transportation make a major difference in reducing traffic congestion and emissions. The IMP's target is to double the number of commute cycle trips by 2026.

While everyone is entitled to an opinion on the direction of the city, it's important for opinions to consider the relevant facts rather than just assumptions or knee-jerk reactions.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by spaustin

Yes my pet project that comes off the spine of the most important piece of cycling infrastructure in the whole city (the Bridge) and that was identified in the Integrated Mobility Plan and then approved by Council unanimously. But sure, call it a pet project. HRM has a plan for a connected network. We're building that and I support it. Was very clear in the election that I would.

Incidentally, the crosswalk at Wyse and Elmwood is being upgraded this year. Set of new rapid flashing beacons being installed there. It's a spot that I have heard about from residents in the area and I'm glad that it made the list thanks to the additional funds I pushed into the crosswalk upgrade program to accelerate the rollout of upgrades.

It's nice to see you on the forum!

I for one fully support the Wyse Road upgrades. I currently drive the street daily but have biked it in the past and with the upgrades I've been considering buying a front wheel for my bicycle (was stolen in the fall) and saving some gas.

My only question for Wyse Road is why was a bicycle traffic light not installed at Albro Lake Road? The lane is painted through the intersection to encourage cyclists onto the Farrell Street Path but the high amount of right-turning vehicles is going to be an ongoing safety issue. I personally go up Albro Lake to Leaman to get to Burnside but I understand the municipality is not considering AT improvements even though it is the most direct route.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

In the 2016 census 1% of commuters already report traveling to work by bike in the HRM, a figure that doesn't include trips to other places such as school.

I wonder if the cycling infrastructure investments even do amount to 1% of the total of transport infrastructure in the municipality. People act like a $15M project is huge but it's a rounding error in the long-term capital expenditures. HRM transport infrastructure is worth many billions in total.

The way I look at it is that the cap will probably be something like 3-5% cycling but that's still worth a lot of investment dollars.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

In the 2016 census 1% of commuters already report traveling to work by bike in the HRM, a figure that doesn't include trips to other places such as school. But again, the HRM's stated purpose in improving active transportation isn't primarily to improve the experience for existing users but to attract new users in order to shift the mode share. This was reiterated in the 2017 IMP (Integrated Mobility Program) where they make it clear that it's too expensive for the city to build and maintain the necessary road capacity that would allow traffic to expand at the same rate as population growth. In other words, cost (net savings) is a reason to do it rather than to oppose it.

The IMP also outlines how surveys show 50% of people would like to cycle more than they currently do, but often don't feel that it's safe. I've certainly encountered many people like this myself. That's why the all ages and abilities cycle network is a major priority, since even modest shifts from cars to active transportation make a major difference in reducing traffic congestion and emissions. The IMP's target is to double the number of commute cycle trips by 2026.

While everyone is entitled to an opinion on the direction of the city, it's important for opinions to consider the relevant facts rather than just assumptions or knee-jerk reactions.

Those are not "facts". Those survey results are pure spin by the HCC and the HRM cycling planning dept to justify diverting taxpayer dollars to this boondoggle.

Doubling a number approaching zero still gives you a number approaching zero.

Nobody has still been able to provide a credible answer as to why the usual protocols for installation of traffic signalization like this just happened without the usual studies, risk assessments, and prioritization of requests. I think we know why that is though.

Now that the province has taken over the housing project approvals process from HRM Planning, one hopes they will do the same for traffic measures and take back the traffic authority role from HRM. Just imagine the reaction to a visitor from out of town encountering this dog's breakfast of an intersection for the first time.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

The numbers I saw were conventional diesel bus, $600K, shiny new electric bus, $1.5 million. That $900K delta is a pretty big nut.

Definitely a big gap, but maintenance and fuel are a major component of a bus’ lifetime cost, so the gap closes pretty quickly. The bigger issue as I understand it is that the bus garages are not currently set up to “fuel”, maintain, and store electric buses (they do better when stored inside). Once the garage upgrades have been made the math on each individual bus will favour the electric.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Definitely a big gap, but maintenance and fuel are a major component of a bus’ lifetime cost, so the gap closes pretty quickly. The bigger issue as I understand it is that the bus garages are not currently set up to “fuel”, maintain, and store electric buses (they do better when stored inside). Once the garage upgrades have been made the math on each individual bus will favour the electric.

Great points.

Not to mention that purchase price will come down as they become more mainstream, through amortization of technology and economics of scale (and competition).

Every city everywhere is in the process of making the switch to electric buses, and some already have. Why would Halifax want to lag behind and stick with diesel as the technology is being phased out everywhere else? And then have to play catch-up and make rushed decisions (that are not good economic decisions) to quickly switch over once manufacturers stop supporting their old diesel units...

As far as economics go, the feds are helping municipalities make the switch by offering financial assistance (This will help with the up-front infrastructure costs as well as purchasing new units.). Halifax has to take advantage of this now, while funds are available, or it will miss out.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Nobody has still been able to provide a credible answer as to why the usual protocols for installation of traffic signalization like this just happened without the usual studies, risk assessments, and prioritization of requests. I think we know why that is though.

Keith, you speak of this as if it's fact, but it sounds like an assumption. AFAIK, the city doesn't release every traffic study it does to the public, especially when it's just a minor change to a few intersections. I've seen changes to traffic lights (through additions of new lights, changes in sequencing, lanes added or removed, etc.), with no major public announcement being put out there. Why should this be any different?

As a driver, I can't see any huge problem caused by this. There are intersections all over the place where you have to wait a little longer than you like, or roundabouts that improve things at some times and make them more difficult at others. You just deal with it. Nobody expects to be able to drive freely at all times without some traffic tie-ups or whatever. Heck, that's one of the advantages of biking is that you get to avoid some of this (while risking your safety due to inattentive/bad/aggressive drivers, unfortunately).

Not to mention that Halifax doesn't really have a traffic problem, relative to other cities. Any time I've returned to Halifax after driving in a large city, I want to kiss the ground... driving is so easy here!

[someone123]

Originally Posted by IanWatson

Definitely a big gap, but maintenance and fuel are a major component of a bus’ lifetime cost, so the gap closes pretty quickly. The bigger issue as I understand it is that the bus garages are not currently set up to “fuel”, maintain, and store electric buses (they do better when stored inside). Once the garage upgrades have been made the math on each individual bus will favour the electric.

For the buses here TransLink said they save around $40,000 in fuel costs per year per bus. For commercial and transit vehicles the fuel costs are larger relative to capital depreciation than with a personal vehicle that sits idle 90%+ of the time.

Are there any electric buses in service in Halifax? There was talk of a pilot years ago but the date seemed to get pushed back. It will take time to scale up the infrastructure and integrate them into the overall system.

[atbw]

A dispatch from Montreal (a city famous for having nice, mild winters, and no narrow historic streets to speak of): it really seems like if you build it, they come.

A colossal network of bike friendly side streets, bi-directional, protected bike lanes with signal priority on the main streets, and a Bixi station on every block. I will go as far as to say for some trips, a docked bike-share program is actually better than using your own bike.

Ignore the ignorant, build the bike lanes & build them now.

On driving in cities, we drove a couple places and it was fine, but most trips we did were on foot, by bus or metro that came so frequently we never once had to check a schedule or by bike.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by atbw

A dispatch from Montreal (a city famous for having nice, mild winters, and no narrow historic streets to speak of): it really seems like if you build it, they come.

Montreal's system is brilliant, and I think Montreal is really the only city in the country that took those pandemic active-transportation/active-streets pilot projects that were rolled out with varying success across the country and turned them into long-term changes. And it was already way out in front of the rest of everyone else.

Sometimes I'm cheered by how much progress Halifax has seen on active transport since I moved here (it's actually considerable if we just stand back and compare 2015 to today), but that's always tempered with "why not more, why not faster?" Because it's still not close to a complete network.

I think Toronto is instructive by comparison, because it's in many ways politically and temperamentally similar to Halifax, IMO. Despite its size and the huge lobby for active transport, it's probably got one of the worst bike networks of any major city on the continent.

The cycling map found here is kind of amazing; there are fewer than 20 actual, separated bike lanes (listed as "cycle tracks") and most are little stubs scattered here and there, miles distant from one another. There's not even north-south separated lane in the entire West End--you have to go all the way east to Sherbourne Street to go from Bloor to Queen in a separate lane. Even then it's pretty generous to call it separate, with no physical barriers and only a tiny little elevation change to mark the difference, plus some scattered flexi-bollards. Our Hollis or South Park lanes are world-class by comparison.

Anyway, this isn't to dump on Toronto, just to point out that I think I think both Toronto and Halifax are alike in many ways, including that both currently operate with civic governments that are painfully lacking in ambition--if not in their planning, then in the urgency with which they seek to execute those plans.

[ButterNutPecan]

Here's a current map of Halifax's bike network. The orange lines are only painted on bike lanes, so I don't even count those. Although there has been a lot of progress, there are still a lot of gaps. You can't really consider biking as a legit alternative until these gaps are closed.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by ButterNutPecan

Here's a current map of Halifax's bike network. The orange lines are only painted on bike lanes, so I don't even count those. Although there has been a lot of progress, there are still a lot of gaps. You can't really consider biking as a legit alternative until these gaps are closed.

This is why I am skeptical that cycling infrastructure has gotten investment proportional to the amount of use. A painted bike lane is extremely minor and there are only a few of those. There are maybe, what, 5 km of protected bike lanes in total? What's the cost of that equal to? 1 km of paved 2-lane road for cars?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Anyway, this isn't to dump on Toronto, just to point out that I think I think both Toronto and Halifax are alike in many ways, including that both currently operate with civic governments that are painfully lacking in ambition--if not in their planning, then in the urgency with which they seek to execute those plans.

They are similar although I think adjusted for size Halifax has had more public space improvements in recent years. There is also a "this is not a real city" vibe in Halifax that you don't really see so much in Toronto even though the municipal initiatives there are often unambitious (I think Haligonians might point out that they live in a small crappy town more than people in Fredericton or Moncton). And we can debate how Toronto's transit investment has fallen short but it is light years ahead of Halifax.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

There is also a "this is not a real city" vibe in Halifax that you don't really see so much in Toronto even though the municipal initiatives there are often unambitious (I think Haligonians might point out that they live in a small crappy town more than people in Fredericton or Moncton).

I think this is an accurate statement for 2002, but not 2022.

I will agree all day long with a general statement that the politicians who run the city are underwhelming in terms of moving infrastructure improvements forward, but for the rest I have to disagree.

[someone123]

I still see it online a lot and hear it from some people I know there (while others express frustration with it). Also in the local media. But I won't claim to have my finger on the pulse of the city today outside of those narrow areas.

The Pierre Poilievre housing policy discussion on Reddit was sad. Of course, that Reddit is always like that. The worst was the guy arguing about how Red Deer feels like a much larger city than Halifax and people in NS do not know what a real city is. This is a parochial trait I associate with Canadians, and it doesn't surprise me that a federal leadership candidate would exhibit it. IMO it hits epic levels when Prairie folks lecture others about life in the big city. To me, even Vancouver is more like Halifax than it is like one of the world's great cities (such as New York, London, or Tokyo). It's neither here nor there as a topic; the infrastructure and planning in Halifax should depend on the costs and benefits there, not theories about what size of city it is and what such a city deserves.

I don't think Americans and Europeans have the same sense of "pecking order" as Canada although they have regions that get looked down on such as the Southern US or, err, Ukraine.

[Keith P.]

You can't compare Montreal to Halifax in any way. Montreal has always had a unique mindset and has always prided itself on being different from the rest of Canada. Aside from the language differences, the culture is totally unique. Montrealers fancy themselves as displaced Parisians, so having a bunch of them cycling around is part of their mindset. Then they get to their sidewalk cafe, have their espressos, have animated conversations with their mates about why they need to be different from us, and buy a baguette before heading home. In the old days you would add smoking cigarettes and reading newspapers to that list but that doesn't happen much now. Not something you find in the rest of Canada.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

I still see it online a lot and hear it from some people I know there (while others express frustration with it). Also in the local media. But I won't claim to have my finger on the pulse of the city today outside of those narrow areas.

The Pierre Poilievre housing policy discussion on Reddit was sad. Of course, that Reddit is always like that. The worst was the guy arguing about how Red Deer feels like a much larger city than Halifax and people in NS do not know what a real city is. This is a parochial trait I associate with Canadians, and it doesn't surprise me that a federal leadership candidate would exhibit it. IMO it hits epic levels when Prairie folks lecture others about life in the big city. To me, even Vancouver is more like Halifax than it is like one of the world's great cities (such as New York, London, or Tokyo). It's neither here nor there as a topic; the infrastructure and planning in Halifax should depend on the costs and benefits there, not theories about what size of city it is and what such a city deserves.

I don't think Americans and Europeans have the same sense of "pecking order" as Canada although they have regions that get looked down on such as the Southern US or, err, Ukraine.

Fair enough, and I can not judge what is posted on social media, as I spend little to no time on it. My impression is that it's not much better than the "comments" section at the end of news stories on many sites, and I typically judge that as bad information since only the most upset and vocal people seem to post there, along with 'agenda' people who just parrot the same tripe over and over again.

Simply stated, when I was growing up as a kid in the early to mid 1970s, Dartmouth seemed very much like a small town to me (or at least a kid's impression of what a small town would be like), as there were local established neighbourhoods where 'everybody knew everybody', and a downtown shopping district that was small, but had everything you needed there. Pace of life seemed slow and easy to me, and basically was a safe place to live as kids would freely go out to play with their friends all day without parental supervision. Halifax seemed like a big city to me, as crossing on the ferry yielded a stark contrast. In retrospect, Halifax was still very 'small' at the time, but just started entering 'city' territory with Cogswell, Scotia Square, etc. (again, a kid's impression of what it means to be a 'real city').

To make a long story short, I have been able to watch the city grow and subsequently travel to large cities in other parts of the world that helped to put Halifax in perspective in my mind.

With that in mind, I think I can say confidently that, 20 years ago, Halifax still felt like a small city, mostly defined by the suburbs vs what was going on downtown. People who lived here still tended to think of it as a rinky-dink place that wasn't anywhere near what they had experienced in large cities (and frankly I think most preferred it that way).

However, if you look at the development that has happened in the past 5-10 years, plus the number of people moving to Halifax from other places, I don't get that impression anymore. i read enough from other sources that view Halifax as the place to be (example: the Simons announcement), and IMHO peoples' attitudes are starting to reflect that. We are starting to have "big city" problems, like housing shortages and pricing, transit struggles, an apparent increase in violent crimes (anecdotally), homelessness issues, etc. that seem to be symptoms that Halifax has entered 'real city' territory. Others might argue that we don't have a major sports team/stadium, subway/LRT, etc. that might be considered harbingers of entering 'real city' territory.

That said, I don't pretend to have the pulse of the city at my fingertips, it's just my small piece of the world, and my perception (and perception is everything). Opinions are like bellybuttons, everybody has one and they're not all the same...

I can also say that I don't think about Halifax too much in terms of what it has or doesn't have compared to other cities, or the 'big city' status that seems to be important to some. I only care that it continues to be a great place to live...