Halifax Transit

[Citizen_Bane]

Well, I guess the best any of us can offer is personal opinion and/or a bit of anecdotal evidence, unless of course we're knee deep in the actual research involved in problems and potential solutions. Strongly worded opinion can come across to some as an emotional tirade where others will nod approvingly as they read. But really, in the absence of facts isn't it all just supposition?

Anecdotally, I can offer that I've used either/or or both bus and rail transit in all of the Americas and a fair number of European countries too and I can't say that Halifax Transit bus service is any worse than others I've experienced. But I do hate bus transit in general. I find that buses stink and I also suffer motion sickness. Riders are often bad mannered. I will say that the riders I've encountered in Halifax smell better than those in some other places I've been.

I'm a fan of light rail. I believe cities should put transit where they want people to be. I've been suggesting for years that this city would benefit from light rail surrounding the basin and coming onto the peninsula. I had written off ferries as a possibility. In this regard I'd like to congratulate Transit management and council for putting forward a plan that utilizes a grand natural feature of our city and should encourage residential growth in a manner that can be dealt with, from a transit perspective, with incremental equipment and staff increases but reduced need of road infrastructure and the continual fix it costs. ie. the freeze thaw cycles ain't gonna hurt the basin.

Anyway, I'll finish by saying that during the 20 plus years I've walked/bused to work here in Halifax I've always made it there and back. I sympathize greatly with the drivers whom I have many times witnessed their abuse by horrible passengers. I personally just couldn't do it. They deserve respect.

[Nouvellecosse]

Personally I'm fairly satisfied with the plans. I mean, some of us wanted some type of rail transit but at least they've reversed their obstinate reversal to explore electrification. That was one of my main comments in the survey they circulated on the BRT proposal.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Personally I'm fairly satisfied with the plans. I mean, some of us wanted some type of rail transit but at least they've reversed their obstinate reversal to explore electrification. That was one of my main comments in the survey they circulated on the BRT proposal.

Battery-powered electric buses change the calculus with respect to rail, and the batteries will just get better in the coming years. Self-driving technology might change things too, eliminating part of the advantage of building a dedicated ROW.

I think getting more trucks out of downtown and switching from diesel to electric buses would have a big impact on quality of life, in a way that's not easily captured on a balance sheet.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Personally I'm fairly satisfied with the plans. I mean, some of us wanted some type of rail transit but at least they've reversed their obstinate reversal to explore electrification. That was one of my main comments in the survey they circulated on the BRT proposal.

I doubt Halifax will get rail transit before it hits 1 million people. It isn't that it isn't needed, but the people just don't want it yet.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I doubt Halifax will get rail transit before it hits 1 million people. It isn't that it isn't needed, but the people just don't want it yet.

I think the biggest problem for rail in Halifax is that the geography is somewhat complicated and there's no single route that would be a "silver bullet" for the transportation network that could justify capital investment in the $1B range.

The latest transit plan is good evidence of this. 4 different BRT routes and 6 ferry routes. BRT didn't even really work for the connection to Bedford, and the peninsula in this plan has unavoidably complicated coverage to serve downtown, the universities, hospitals, North End and naval base/shipyard, etc.

ION in Kitchener-Waterloo neatly connects up major hubs in the metro area with 1 line. There's no such route for metro Halifax.

[Citizen_Bane]

I don't believe any city would lay down tracks to a collection of cul-du-sacs or the equivalents of a Sambro Loop. A silver bullet would be to install rail where dense city population should be. As a taxpayer would you want 50km of track or 100km of track to maintain? Halifax peninsula has a healthy growing population but it does not require rail other than to bring people onto the peninsula and circle around and take them off again while moving peninsula folk on and off the train along the way. I'll add that the cheapest ROW that could be found would be fine as no point on this small peninsula is too far to be considered out of the way. Downtown Dartmouth is totally walkable and doesn't need rail being so close to the ferry and having downtown Halifax as the only 'real' destination that would be considered as a dense travel route. I believe the suburbs beyond Dartmouth do not yet have the density to support rail and why encourage density at that distance when closer off peninsula options exist?

[W.Sobchak]

Originally Posted by someone123

Shannon Park may or may not get a stadium but either way there is a mixed-use development planned with I believe around 10,000 residents eventually.

I am not so convinced about connecting Burnside with downtown. Burnside has almost no residents and no attractions aside from employment, so this would be for people who live in downtown condos and commute to industrial jobs in Burnside? Seems like a small niche. Also, the Wright route would be around 50% longer.

But think of a route from the Bedford waterfront, how much traffic that would take from both the new expressway, and magazine hill. In saying that I feel I need to brace my point with, that a better bus route system in Burnside itslef would be needed. The demographic of Pen residents commuting to Burnside would grow if the opportunity presented itself with decent transit.

I am not convinced that Shannon Park is not going to be a cluster-f with traffic on to/off of the site, while we wait for the 10k+ to eventually move in.

[Citizen_Bane]

With approx. 2000 businesses and 30K workers in Burnside Business Park I am somewhat surprised that Shannon Park was chosen as a site for a major ferry terminal over Wright's Cove. Plenty of room exists at the basin end of Bancroft Lane (foot of Wright's Ave. and south of Seamasters Marine) for a sizable parking structure/terminal. Does anyone know whether parking structures are planed for the new ferry terminals?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by someone123

I think the biggest problem for rail in Halifax is that the geography is somewhat complicated and there's no single route that would be a "silver bullet" for the transportation network that could justify capital investment in the $1B range.

The latest transit plan is good evidence of this. 4 different BRT routes and 6 ferry routes. BRT didn't even really work for the connection to Bedford, and the peninsula in this plan has unavoidably complicated coverage to serve downtown, the universities, hospitals, North End and naval base/shipyard, etc.

ION in Kitchener-Waterloo neatly connects up major hubs in the metro area with 1 line. There's no such route for metro Halifax.

Make a U. Take the tracks from the existing Via Station, all the way around the basin to Alderney Landing. With that, you now are servicing anyone needing to get anywhere within the major urban area. No new tracks laid.

Stations and trains are all you need.
Ironically, the Via Station likely would replace Scotia Square as the terminal. And finally, they could biuld a real terminal instead of side of street stops.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Well Mark, it's like this. Just because you had an acceptable bus ride in the recent past does not mean anything other than that. What I see and hear are the people who find it takes them 90 minutes to get somewhere, or who are stranded when scheduled buses just do not show up or leave them standing at the curb. And while nobody expects a travel experience equating to a European river cruise, the experience here is often of the lowest possible variety - stinky, dirty, loud, overcrowded, what have you. This is based just not on what I hear but also on personal experience taking transit here for decades. You seldom hear any postive raves about Transit. They occasionally may happen and people may comment on them because they are so rare. But the overall experience is generally poor or worse.

It seems clear that Transit has historically been incapable of providing a satisfactory service, and many of their operators seem to take great pleasure in inconveniencing or downright antagonizing their customers. Being protected from any consequence by the ATU, it brings out the worst in some. And the toxic work environment in Transit maintenance and admin operations is well-known and well-documented. It is an organization that needs dismantling, plain and simple. We who are paying for it all deserve better. And given all that, entrusting them and HRM Council with a big bundle of taxpayer cash to fund this plan can only be described as reckless, if not outright foolhardy.

HRM has consistently shown a pattern of wasteful, ill-advised spending under this Council and its immediate predecessor, though the current one is worse. We saw the result in the recent emergency budget deliberations where despite being warned by the CAO that tax revenues will be down for years as the commercial sector takes time to recover from COVID, councillors each clung to their pet causes and wanted to keep money to spend on them. It is the equivalent of a boat taking on water and the officers refusing to throw heavy items overboard to keep the hole above water because they were emotionally attached to them. They just do not get it, which is why I have been saying we need to throw this bunch out, now more than ever.

Fair enough. I know you have reasons for your opinions, but I can't say I agree with them (nor is it a requirement that we all agree).

That said, I can't attest to the internal struggles of Metro Transit, as I have not worked there, so I have no experience to draw from. As mentioned, though, I don't think bus travel is ever going to be considered the pinnacle of transportation, but as long as it's a useful method of getting around, and is reasonably efficient, then it's doing its job.

[Nouvellecosse]

I agree with someone that electrification of the current system does fulfill much of what rail was supposed to accomplish. There are a number of valid, and a number of less valid reasons why a small city might lust after rail. Valid ones are mainly that it may reduce operating cost, increase capacity, and add desirability and a sense of permanence. But the cost savings is much less when comparing rail (especially non-electrified commuter rail) with electric buses. Plus our system isn't crowded enough to need a significant capacity boost beyond what more frequent buses can offer.

Some of the other major reasons people want rail is that we assume rail means dedicated ROW which = speed + ability to bypass congestion. But that isn't necessarily the case because there are many modern LRT and streetcar systems that operate partly or fully in mixed traffic, and there are many bus-based systems in which buses have priority measures such as dedicated lanes or signaling. Another thing is that rail is a status symbol. It's similar to things like major league sports, tall skyscrapers, etc. that symbolize that a city has reached a new level and is no longer a small-fry backwater. While a few crotchety bah-humbug cranks see it as a waste of money, to most of us it signals civic pride, ambition and a willingness to invest in the public realm. This is hard to argue, but the aesthetic advantages can only push the needle so far in terms of cost vs practical utility arguments.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Make a U. Take the tracks from the existing Via Station, all the way around the basin to Alderney Landing. With that, you now are servicing anyone needing to get anywhere within the major urban area. No new tracks laid.

Stations and trains are all you need.
Ironically, the Via Station likely would replace Scotia Square as the terminal. And finally, they could biuld a real terminal instead of side of street stops.

No new tracks laid? They removed one of the two tracks in the railcut so if that's going to accommodate both passenger and freight service with any sort of frequency the second track needs to be added back. There's only a single track through most of Dartmouth as well. Also, there's no track on the magazine Hill part of the "U" since the track from Halifax meets the track from Dartmouth way out in Windsor Jct. The Dartmouth track veers to the northeast just after it passes Burnside rather than continuing northwest to Bedford. Not only would lots of new track be needed, but a whole new corridor would be needed between Burnside and Bedford too.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

While a few crotchety bah-humbug cranks see it as a waste of money, to most of us it signals civic pride, ambition and a willingness to invest in the public realm. This is hard to argue, but the aesthetic advantages can only push the needle so far in terms of cost vs practical utility arguments.

I think there is something to be said for having some civic pride and some infrastructure that isn't completely utilitarian. Different cities have different budgets for this. Part of what's going on its the vanity/fun project with a budget of $X is easier to justify in a metro of 2-3 million than one of 500,000. Demand is only part of the equation.

Electric BRT and a nice ferry system might tick some of those boxes. I think a downtown transit tunnel for electric buses might also be worth it someday. I hope it's not a mistake to build above-ground transit into the Cogswell redevelopment. It's a lot cheaper to put things underground when you're already tearing up roads and utilities. Imagine how great it would be to have an underground bus stop at the new public square near Purdy's, connected up with the pedway system, plus one at the Grand Parade and then 2 more maybe at the library and South Park.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

No new tracks laid? They removed one of the two tracks in the railcut so if that's going to accommodate both passenger and freight service with any sort of frequency the second track needs to be added back. There's only a single track through most of Dartmouth as well. Also, there's no track on the magazine Hill part of the "U" since the track from Halifax meets the track from Dartmouth way out in Windsor Jct. The Dartmouth track veers to the northeast just after it passes Burnside rather than continuing northwest to Bedford. Not only would lots of new track be needed, but a whole new corridor would be needed between Burnside and Bedford too.

I will address the last thing first.

I know it goes way out there. But if you think of it, by going that far, having a train go out that far from each end, it would help get more people into the core on both sides.

The original O-train operated on a single track for decades. Much of it still is. It gets 15 minute frequency. I am almost certain that there isn't enough freight traffic that half hour or better service could be introduced without adding more track.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I agree with someone that electrification of the current system does fulfill much of what rail was supposed to accomplish. There are a number of valid, and a number of less valid reasons why a small city might lust after rail. Valid ones are mainly that it may reduce operating cost, increase capacity, and add desirability and a sense of permanence. But the cost savings is much less when comparing rail (especially non-electrified commuter rail) with electric buses. Plus our system isn't crowded enough to need a significant capacity boost beyond what more frequent buses can offer.

For me, the desirability of rail comes from speed and reliability of service, unaffected by traffic and (for the most part) weather conditions. Plus the smoothness of rail is a nice bonus, not bumping over Halifax's frosth-heaved roads. And, I do have a like for trains in general. The above is going with the assumption of an ROW like using the existing rail cut, which you've addressed below.

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Some of the other major reasons people want rail is that we assume rail means dedicated ROW which = speed + ability to bypass congestion. But that isn't necessarily the case because there are many modern LRT and streetcar systems that operate partly or fully in mixed traffic, and there are many bus-based systems in which buses have priority measures such as dedicated lanes or signaling. Another thing is that rail is a status symbol. It's similar to things like major league sports, tall skyscrapers, etc. that symbolize that a city has reached a new level and is no longer a small-fry backwater. While a few crotchety bah-humbug cranks see it as a waste of money, to most of us it signals civic pride, ambition and a willingness to invest in the public realm. This is hard to argue, but the aesthetic advantages can only push the needle so far in terms of cost vs practical utility arguments.

Actually, these reasons are why I like the ferry service so much. In times past, I had commuted by Halifax-Dartmouth ferry for many years, and it almost always was bang-on for schedule and reliability. Extending that idea to the Basin area, the new ferries will basically have a dedicated ROW, though they would be a little more weather dependent than commuter rail on the cut, due to choppy waters affecting ferry speed (for higher speed units as opposed to the glacially slow current boats).

Additionally, it is a point of pride for a city whose very existence has been dependent upon its oceanside locale. A harbour city like Halifax should definitely have a ferry service, taking advantage of its most prominent geographical feature. Not to mention its history as one of the oldest (or the oldest) continuous ferry services in North America.

https://novascotia.ca/archives/halifax/results.asp?Search=&SearchList1=9

Ferry service has been continuous across Halifax Harbour since 1752.

[Antigonish]

Have people thought seriously about trams in the medium term over LRT? I had this conversation with a planner in Saskatoon when they unveiled their vision 2050 work. They scrapped the idea of LRT because of upfront cost (short-sighted) but instead pushed for BRT instead of trams.

BRT just never will attract enough people to be effective and also isn't a great sell for developers along those corridors and bus routes can be removed or relocated at any time. Trams are more permanent. Trams are far smoother. Trams are sexier. I could go on an on.

It's impossible for the city to expand corridors like Robie St. or Barrington, Chebucto etc, but constructing trams seems like the best middle ground

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I will address the last thing first.

I know it goes way out there. But if you think of it, by going that far, having a train go out that far from each end, it would help get more people into the core on both sides.

The original O-train operated on a single track for decades. Much of it still is. It gets 15 minute frequency. I am almost certain that there isn't enough freight traffic that half hour or better service could be introduced without adding more track.

I've taken VIA rail trips where trains were delayed a good 15-20 minutes getting into or out of town due to interaction with freight traffic, and they run a grand total of three times per week. This isn't rare either as there's almost always some delay even if less severe. If that schedule can't even be maintained without significant delays on the single track, I'm not sure how 1/2 hr bi-directional all day service stands a chance. Whole freight trains only arrive and depart a couple times per day, but there's often lots of activity in the corridor from other operations such as assembling the trains, moving equipment for maintenance, etc. The O-train on the other hand actually has no freight movements during the day so it has the track to itself.

[IanWatson]

Originally Posted by Antigonish

BRT just never will attract enough people to be effective and also isn't a great sell for developers along those corridors and bus routes can be removed or relocated at any time. Trams are more permanent.

This always seemed like a super weird argument to me. I dunno where it originated, but I first heard about it in the e2 episode about Portland. Maybe Portland had trouble convincing developers to invest in areas without transit, but we don't have that problem in Halifax. In my experience, developers want to build as much as they can anywhere they can. Whether or not that location is on a transit line has no bearing, nor does the "permanence" of a transit line.

[Citizen_Bane]

developers want to build as much as they can anywhere they can

This is the 'problem'. Currently in Halifax there is no impetus for developers to build in areas where adequate transit exists which in turn leaves it to the city/tax payers to pick up the tab on building new road lanes or sending additional buses off to wherever a developer may wish to build. Good city planing would be to install the shortest possible desirable transit type system in cost effective corridors thus controlling where future development will occur and thus controlling additional transit/transportation/maintenance cost to the city/tax payer.

Well, this is how I understand it to be.

[Nouvellecosse]

It's true that one of the major responsibilities of planners is to think ahead about how best to provide services and amenities (including transportation) to both new residents of existing communities and to residents of new communities. Growth should never be encouraged (or preferably even permitted if possible) until a strong strategy is in place since it tends to be much costlier and more disruptive to solve problems retroactively than to prevent them proactively. That being said, just because that's how things should be done doesn't mean that's how they always are done.

Right now developers aren't concerned about transit access because even if our ridership is fairly high for a small community, it's still a pretty small proportion. And even if lots of people used transit, if transit is fairly equal everywhere with the only major differences being greater frequency in town, there's little reason to favour one area over another. The only natural reason for a developer to care about it is if they can market proximity to a transit service as a selling point that will attract greater sales/higher prices. Beyond that there's only artificial reasons such as a city zoning for greater density along transit corridors.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Citizen_Bane

This is the 'problem'. Currently in Halifax there is no impetus for developers to build in areas where adequate transit exists which in turn leaves it to the city/tax payers to pick up the tab on building new road lanes or sending additional buses off to wherever a developer may wish to build. Good city planing would be to install the shortest possible desirable transit type system in cost effective corridors thus controlling where future development will occur and thus controlling additional transit/transportation/maintenance cost to the city/tax payer.

Well, this is how I understand it to be.

There is some truth to this since there aren't established transit corridors but the Centre Plan does concentrate development in certain areas, and for years now HRM by Design has encouraged downtown development.

A lot of people downtown get around on foot so that has worked out okay. But as the city grows this strategy won't work as well. Young Street or Quinpool to downtown is not really walkable for example. Thankfully the city seems to have identified Robie as a future transit corridor.