General Updates and News

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Count me in the "slip lanes have no business in a pedestrian-heavy area" camp. They're designed to let vehicles slide through unimpeded without significantly slowing, and drivers often read them as little more than an extension of the straightaway. Intersections without them are intrinsically more dangerous than an intersection designed without them, as is demonstrated by actual research. There's nothing wrong with slowing down and taking a 90-degree turn.

Nantucket and Wyse isn’t a particularly pedestrian-heavy area. In any event he kept the one from Wyse northbound to Nantucket so apparently they can’t be that bad.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

Since our roads are already pretty clogged, we need to get people to use more efficient modes of transport, like transit and AT, as more cars on the road will just add to congestion, pollution and making the city less attractive a place to be. Even if we ignore these things, to actually build the road network able to accommodate everyone using a car to get around would require massive wave of demolishing homes, businesses, and existing transportation infrastructure - i.e., not politically or economically feasible.

This reminds me of the comment you sometimes see that there's "no space" for transit improvements as it is all used by congested mixed vehicles. This is backwards. Cities rarely have space set aside and as density increases space is at a higher premium and higher value, denser modes of transport become more desirable. You also hit economy of scale and traffic issues with buses (adding more buses to a congested road can slow trips down rather than speeding them up).

Hopefully the situation will be turned around but I think heavy congestion will be the norm in Halifax because nothing major can be completed in the next few years but there's likely to be a lot of population growth. To some extent people will adapt by traveling less and moving closer to where they need to be, but people with fewer resources will just see more of their time wasted in traffic. Eventually Halifax will need something like a light rail system for a medium-sized city similar to what Calgary or Vancouver initially built, as well as other complementary modes like ferries, and the cost isn't likely to go down as the city grows. The time to start that was probably something like 2016.

[Drybrain]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

Not everyone has that option. The stay at home work option I do think is very much responsible for hollowing out MT's ridership. It would be interesting to see how much work from home has reduced Car trips.

Halifax Transit is back to about 95 percent of pre-pandemic ridership, which is probably better than any transit in the country. Maybe there’s a perception that the system has been bleeding riders, but it’s actually recovered better than most public transit systems. No doubt it would be doing even better if the devices was better, of course.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

The City recently changed the Right turn off Joe Howe to the 102 as a signal only Right turn which is ridiculous and only serves the multiuse trail while creating an at least 4-5 Light wait for right turning vehicles.I was under the Impression that our new planners are younger enviro concerned professionals. I wonder how many litres are waisted at just that light.

I hadn't been aware of that change as I'm not in the area so often, but yesterday I did witness a truck pull out of the right lane, which was backed up with traffic, to go around the line of vehicles and make a right turn (with no arrow) while other vehicles waited.

I get the impression that people are getting frustrated by the changes, which may be of benefit to the few, and resorting to breaking the law to avoid waiting. FWIW, I noticed exactly zero cyclists using the lanes, while there were a lot of vehicles idling while waiting for those precious seconds of 'green arrow' time. I'm thinking that this situation is not of benefit to the climate change situation.

[Saul Goode]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

Intersections without them are intrinsically more dangerous than an intersection designed without them, as is demonstrated by actual research.

To which I say, fine, but there's no history of which I'm aware of pedestrian accidents at this particular one. That's just my anecdotal experience, I'll concede, but it's based on many decades of travel in the area. I've driven it all my life and, for almost a decade, worked at Metropolitan Place and dealt with that intersection as a pedestrian at least twice every working day. Anyway, I highly doubt that the slip lane was removed for the sake of pedestrians who had to cross it, but rather for the (ahem) multitudes of cyclists heading north on Wyse.

As for "actual research", no doubt it has been basis for many of our recent street "improvements" in HRM. The problem is that it seems now to be preferred over actual local lived experience, no matter what the latter may tell us, causing us to waste obscene amounts of tax money on fixing non-existent problems. There's no other way to explain the multitude of patently unneeded curb "bump-outs" and no fewer than five Samerrhoid™ speed bumps on Joffre street. It's manifestly crazy.

There's nothing wrong with slowing down and taking a 90-degree turn.

Of course not, but speed is not my beef with it. It's about being able to make a right onto Wyse at all without having to wait through an entire traffic light cycle (occasionally two) during heavier traffic times.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I hadn't been aware of that change as I'm not in the area so often, but yesterday I did witness a truck pull out of the right lane, which was backed up with traffic, to go around the line of vehicles and make a right turn (with no arrow) while other vehicles waited.

I get the impression that people are getting frustrated by the changes, which may be of benefit to the few, and resorting to breaking the law to avoid waiting. FWIW, I noticed exactly zero cyclists using the lanes, while there were a lot of vehicles idling while waiting for those precious seconds of 'green arrow' time. I'm thinking that this situation is not of benefit to the climate change situation.

I fail to see the justification for these changes other than some obscure design philosophy that is only delivering on driver frustration, cost and pissed away time.

[Dmajackson]

Mixed Use & Commercial Building Permit - New Building - Submitted - 28 VIRIDIAN DR, DARTMOUTH - $17'100'000 - Dwelling - Multiple Units - Residential Use - 95 Units - 6 Floors - New construction of a multi unit residential building (95 Units).

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

I fail to see the justification for these changes other than some obscure design philosophy that is only delivering on driver frustration, cost and pissed away time.

I bike to work through there once a week and see quite few bikers through there in the morning and the way home.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

I bike to work through there once a week and see quite few bikers through there in the morning and the way home.

Quite few Huh? How many bikers exactly and more importantly how many vehicles are loitering and paying the price for the merry few? I don't think our City fathers and planners want to view or evaluate those numbers in an honest manner.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Mixed Use & Commercial Building Permit - New Building - Submitted - 28 VIRIDIAN DR, DARTMOUTH - $17'100'000 - Dwelling - Multiple Units - Residential Use - 95 Units - 6 Floors - New construction of a multi unit residential building (95 Units).

The existing neighbours will be quite annoyed - they were opposed to the apartment building next to the lot.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

Quite few Huh? How many bikers exactly and more importantly how many vehicles are loitering and paying the price for the merry few? I don't think our City fathers and planners want to view or evaluate those numbers in an honest manner.

Counted 20 going the opposite direction in the few minutes it took to cross. That's 2O less cars crossing the bridge in those few minutes, and it could be more with better bike infrastructure coming onto the bridge on the Halifax side. We wont have the critical mass of bikers until there is continuity of bike infrastructure in this city.

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

Counted 20 going the opposite direction in the few minutes it took to cross. That's 2O less cars crossing the bridge in those few minutes, and it could be more with better bike infrastructure coming onto the bridge on the Halifax side. We wont have the critical mass of bikers until there is continuity of bike infrastructure in this city.

Perhaps the 20 cyclists would use the ferry or a bus. I doubt they cycle in adverse weather. How does a healthcare worker get from peninsula Halifax to Cobequid hospital for a 7 a.m. shift - a decade ago the transit system was useless for many healthcare workers.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Colin May

Perhaps the 20 cyclists would use the ferry or a bus. I doubt they cycle in adverse weather. How does a healthcare worker get from peninsula Halifax to Cobequid hospital for a 7 a.m. shift - a decade ago the transit system was useless for many healthcare workers.

If I had to take a ferry or bus I would not bike to work, and I'm sure others wouldn't either. It would take too long and wouldn't bother if I couldn't bike across the bridge. As for your example of that health care worker they would obviously drive. I'm not sure what point your trying to make here?

[Colin May]

Originally Posted by Haliguy

If I had to take a ferry or bus I would not bike to work, and I'm sure others wouldn't either. It would take too long and wouldn't bother if I couldn't bike across the bridge. As for your example of that health care worker they would obviously drive. I'm not sure what point your trying to make here?

The point is very simple : shift workers employed in places where staff are required 24/365 and places where staff work 2 shifts per working day. I have met one nurse who bikes across The MacD and I am sure there are a few more.
The ferries have bike racks.
The point is : transit does not cater to shift workers outside the usual hours of many employers.

[Haliguy]

Originally Posted by Colin May

The point is very simple : shift workers employed in places where staff are required 24/365 and places where staff work 2 shifts per working day. I have met one nurse who bikes across The MacD and I am sure there are a few more.
The ferries have bike racks.
The point is : transit does not cater to shift workers outside the usual hours of many employers.

I agree, transit doesn't accommodate people working shift work, and it is something that should looked at. Not sure what that has to do with biking across the bridge though.

[terrynorthend]

Halifax Retales is reporting on his Twitter feed that United Gulf has submitted an application to redevelope the old Chebucto Ford site on Main Street in Dartmouth (recently hosted East Coast Amusements fair)

Proposal is substantial. 125k feet of retail/commercial and 1037 residential units.
No renderings available.

[Dmajackson]

Originally Posted by terrynorthend

Halifax Retales is reporting on his Twitter feed that United Gulf has submitted an application to redevelope the old Chebucto Ford site on Main Street in Dartmouth (recently hosted East Coast Amusements fair)

Proposal is substantial. 125k feet of retail/commercial and 1037 residential units.
No renderings available.

Me thinks he read my post from last night. If so hi Arthur!

What he is talking about is a site-specific request for the Regional Plan. This is a new one that I posted in the Suburban Thread last night.

[terrynorthend]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Me thinks he read my post from last night. If so hi Arthur!

What he is talking about is a site-specific request for the Regional Plan. This is a new one that I posted in the Suburban Thread last night.

Cool! I thought it may have come from the RP draft.
1037 units is a very large number. It's more than Opal, and about half of "M lands" on a much smaller lot than either (looks to be about 100m square on Google maps)

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Me thinks he read my post from last night.

I was going to say "stole it" but if you want to characterize it differently it's up to you for sure.

This one has been a long time coming. It is surely a huge proposal. That area is odd, with some rather pleasant areas cheek-by-jowl with others that are anything but that.

[Mapleton_Roadie]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

Me thinks he read my post from last night. If so hi Arthur!

What he is talking about is a site-specific request for the Regional Plan. This is a new one that I posted in the Suburban Thread last night.

Is this developer one who follows through on things? They are the ones who put the lofty development forward for the old Windsor Textiles site in Windsor. I can't see that project getting developed as proposed at this moment but do hope something does come out of it.