Halifax Active Transportation

[LikesBikes]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Is this adding capacity, though? It's connecting to the bridge, which has a fixed capacity, and unless there are backups of tens of cyclists waiting at the exit to the bridge due to the bottleneck created by... I'm not sure... car traffic I suppose, it is not adding capacity.

As the poster who likes bikes attests, this is about improving safety of cyclists (the most important thing), and also providing a break from the slope, apparently, for those going up to Gottingen (a nice thing, but doesn't improve capacity, unless it unlocks thousands of cyclists who decide to start commuting by bicycle because of this).

It depends on how you define capacity but regardless, building this piece of infrastructure will increase the number of people who bike here as it would make getting between Halifax and Dartmouth safer and easier to do. In its current state, it is not safe nor easy to do.

Further, while the bridge has a fixed capacity for cyclists, I don’t think it is anywhere near filling that capacity due to the lack of AT infrastructure on the peninsula making it difficult and unsafe to get to the bridge in the first place. As more infrastructure is built, more people will choose to bike and eventually capacity will be more of an issue.

Following the fly over, hopefully the next step would be to build a protected bike lane on Gottingen and/or North Street so that the bridge, and Dartmouth (via Wyse Street) would be fully connected to Halifax’s bike network, making it much easier to live without a car, lowering traffic levels, and decreasing noise and gas pollution.

[Keith P.]

Increasing the number of cyclists has been the argument for every single piece of bike infrastructure that taxpayers have built to date. And to date, it has spectacularly failed in doing that. There is always a "but, wait" reason why as so eloquently stated in the previous post. The reality is that in a city such as ours the only way to add this desired separate bike network is closing streets entirely to traffic other than vehicles. HRM is slowly inching towards this by making streets nearly unusable for vehicles. At some point - coming soon, I suspect - the voters will finally say "enough!" and throw the bums on Council out.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

That's not how it works. The feds raise money nationally and NS contributes a disproportionately small amount. They tend to announce programs in favoured areas, e.g. climate change and active transportation, that have a national budget. NS is a small province with almost no impact on the national agenda. Halifax/NS either take a piece of that pie or they don't and the money goes to other provinces that happily fund projects.

If Halifax fails to use its federal transit funding, Ottawa will not be returning money to NS taxpayers.

For many years Halifax was near the bottom for federal financing obtained through cost sharing while places like Calgary were near the top since they're always ready to match.

The municipality, province, and local economy recover a portion of federal spending so the spinoff effect can easily be positive even if there's no payoff whatsoever and the municipality has to chip in some $. The penny-pinching attitude can and does harm the local economy.

The "recovery" you refer to is like an internet con that promises something you do not need and will likely never get if only you give the initiator some money up front. The Feds take our money just as they take it from all other parts of Canada. Then they offer some of it back to us for something we neither need nor want. Chasing 20-cent federal dollars with our own money for unnecessary projects is a sure-fire way to go broke.

[MonctonRad]

The Halifax Cycling Coalition's wet dream:



Observe all these happy people, gayly peddling through the slush and snow on the way to work so they can meet their clients with sweat stains under their armpits and dirty slush covered clothes. All Haligonians should be doing this, no matter how windy, how wet, how much snow is on the streets or what the windchill is like.

This is their vision for your future.................

[LikesBikes]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The Halifax Cycling Coalition's wet dream:



Observe all these happy people, gayly peddling through the slush and snow on the way to work so they can meet their clients with sweat stains under their armpits and dirty slush covered clothes. All Haligonians should be doing this, no matter how windy, how wet, how much snow is on the streets or what the windchill is like.

This is their vision for your future.................

Moncton coming in hot with Qanon-level takes here.

[LikesBikes]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Increasing the number of cyclists has been the argument for every single piece of bike infrastructure that taxpayers have built to date. And to date, it has spectacularly failed in doing that. There is always a "but, wait" reason why as so eloquently stated in the previous post. The reality is that in a city such as ours the only way to add this desired separate bike network is closing streets entirely to traffic other than vehicles. HRM is slowly inching towards this by making streets nearly unusable for vehicles.

Sure, it's definitely that and not that there's like 3 protected bike lanes in the city that don't connect to each other and every other road is a safety hazard to cyclists.

Originally Posted by Keith P.

At some point - coming soon, I suspect - the voters will finally say "enough!" and throw the bums on Council out.

Keep dreaming. Surveys on this show the majority of Halifax residents want increased bike infrastructure. Further, more and more people keep moving into parts of the city where biking makes sense. Do you really think everybody moving into places like Richmond Yards, downtown or the North End want to have to own a car or rely on the city's (not so great) transit service?

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by someone123

Isn't the flyover an example of cycling infrastructure that adds capacity

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Is this adding capacity, though?

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

It depends on how you define capacity

This is what irritates the hell out of me in these discussions.

- A statement is made that appears illogical (or untrue), but the statement seems aimed at 'selling' the idea of how great it is.

- Somebody reads this statement, realizes that it doesn't seem right, and questions the point.

- A reply follows up, that doesn't really answer the question, but leads to more reasons why this is a great thing.

- Then, typically, the person who questioned the statement becomes accused of being "anti-bike" or against bike infrastructure, or part of some imagined fictional car coalition, when really they just wanted a factual answer to their question.

Oxford defines capacity as:

the number of things or people that a container or space can hold

The Macdonald Bridge flyover ramp connects the bikeway on the bridge to North Street.

Source

Assuming that capacity of the flyover ramp is equal or greater than the bridge bikeway, then it will do nothing more than maintain capacity.

So the answer is no. It will not increase capacity.

And that's fine. Just tell it like it is, and stop using 'used car salesman' tactics to try to sell us on the idea.

So tired of wading through the bullcrap and then being made to feel like I'm some kind of bicyclist-hating ogre just because I would like to have some straight answers to my questions (as so many more would like as well).

FWIW, when most of us feel like we are being lied to, or at least told half-truths, then we become suspicious that somebody is trying to pull something on us. I fully support bicycle infrastructure, and don't know any way to state this more clearly, but I will never understand why the bicycle activist community thinks they need to fool people in order to achieve their goals.

That's it.

Just a heads-up: I'm no longer going to get dragged into another useless back-and-forth like I allowed myself to do on the previous pages. I already know how it plays out, and am tired of rude and sarcastic responses. On my part I will try to not allow myself to sink to the level of also communicating in such a manner.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

Moncton coming in hot with Qanon-level takes here.

Please note that there is also a [Moncton] Active Transportation thread to which I am an active contributor. You will find that I am not an anti-bike zealot on that thread, and that the majority of my posts over there are in fact supportive. Mind you, Moncton is blessed with greenways along which most of our bicycle infrastructure is constructed, thus there is little to no conflict with automobile traffic. Some of our streets have undergone "road diets", where the number of lanes have been reduced to three lanes from four. Again, given traffic volumes, this has usually made sense and I am supportive. Occasionally bad decisions have been made however, and I'm willing to call a spade a spade.

It is important to maintain a critical eye. Cycling zealots in Halifax are zealots and tend to view automobiles as a public menace, or, at best a necessary evil that must be suppressed at all costs. Traffic in Halifax is bad enough as it is. You want to make it worse.

[LikesBikes]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

It is important to maintain a critical eye. Cycling zealots in Halifax are zealots and tend to view automobiles as a public menace, or, at best a necessary evil that must be suppressed at all costs. Traffic in Halifax is bad enough as it is. You want to make it worse.

You were spreading misinformation and I called you out on it. If you have an issue with bike lanes, fine, but saying that people who want to make it safer to bike actually want to remove all cars and make everyone bike is utter bs.

[someone123]

I mean that the flyover probably replaces some at-grade bike infrastructure which would otherwise use up space. It relates to the idea that cycling infrastructure comes at the expense of infrastructure for other modes (e.g. switch car lanes to bike lanes). In this case I'm not sure it does, either in terms of physical space or funding. There will be some space used up by cyclists regardless, so we should compare this to the existing infrastructure and usage, not a theoretical scenario where there are no cyclists.

IMO the discussion would be much better if people just relaxed. I was not trying to pull the wool over anybody's eyes or lobby for anything, and it's fine if people disagree with me or I am wrong. We might need some rules on here to separate out the AT project discussion from general opinions on cyclists.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The Halifax Cycling Coalition's wet dream:



Observe all these happy people, gayly peddling through the slush and snow on the way to work so they can meet their clients with sweat stains under their armpits and dirty slush covered clothes. All Haligonians should be doing this, no matter how windy, how wet, how much snow is on the streets or what the windchill is like.

This is their vision for your future.................

Looks like a pic from the Soviet Union, circa mid-1970s. Oh joy.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Looks like a pic from the Soviet Union, circa mid-1970s. Oh joy.

Given how Mr Putin's War is going this might be Russian mass transit next Winter

[GTG_78]

Originally Posted by spaustin

Both are literally in the capital budget we just passed a month ago. Literally just a month ago. $2.3 million to start work on the Flyover (landing side work on Halifax side, actual Flyover to follow in 2023). $66 million in there this year too for electric bus procurement and work at Ragged Lake. HRM is getting good value on both too since the Province and Feds are contributing to each. It's the internet and people can make up whatever they want I guess, but the Council approved capital budget is right here https://cdn.halifax.ca/sites/default/fil...%20Capital%20Budget%20Book%202022~23.pdf

This - in relation to Keith's contention that the flyover would be put on the backburner - did not age well.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by GTG_78

This - in relation to Keith's contention that the flyover would be put on the backburner - did not age well.

It IS on the back burner, now scheduled for 2024. And we will see about that.

[GTG_78]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

It IS on the back burner, now scheduled for 2024. And we will see about that.

I would suggest that the councillor apologize, but I think you would be waiting until the end of time to get an admission that you were right and he was wrong.

[OldDartmouthMark]

CBC article on Halifax's "bike mayor":

Halifax's bike mayor reflects on end of 3-year term

I can't say that I was acutely aware that this was a thing, a bicycle mayor. At first I thought it odd that an organization from Amsterdam was advocating for things in Canada, but it sounds like they are trying to plant the seed worldwide. Good for them, I hope it brings some bicycle awareness to other countries.

The position is part of an initiative by a global organization based in Amsterdam that advocates for bicycle culture in cities around the world.

Can you talk about the organization that brings bicycle mayors to cities?

It's this cool social enterprise in Amsterdam and they're called BYCS. It doesn't stand for anything and they initiated this bicycle mayor network about five years ago.

Now I think there's maybe 120 or 140 bicycle mayors around the world —people like me working in their own cities to look at what are the important issues to try to talk about [and how] to get more people on bikes for transportation.

We just meet with the folks at BYCS whenever and they let us run and they just support us as much as we need.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

Accckkkk!! Foreign interference in our poliltics!

[Keith P.]

I wonder who will be receiving the bicycle chains of office from her.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

CBC article on Halifax's "bike mayor":

Halifax's bike mayor reflects on end of 3-year term

I can't say that I was acutely aware that this was a thing, a bicycle mayor. At first I thought it odd that an organization from Amsterdam was advocating for things in Canada, but it sounds like they are trying to plant the seed worldwide. Good for them, I hope it brings some bicycle awareness to other countries.

Bloody meddling Amsterdam flatlanders, spreading this vile creed to a city with notoriously unlevel terrain. There are so many heart-attack hills in Halifax that a move to ubiquitous bicycling culture would overwhelm our ERs with hundreds of out of shape people who shouldn't normally get within a metre of a velocipede.

Zealotry at it's finest..............

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Bloody meddling Amsterdam flatlanders, spreading this vile creed to a city with notoriously unlevel terrain. There are so many heart-attack hills in Halifax that a move to ubiquitous bicycling culture would overwhelm our ERs with hundreds of out of shape people who shouldn't normally get within a metre of a velocipede.

Zealotry at it's finest..............

Oh good grief