HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2016, 2:15 AM
scooby074 scooby074 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Yep.

These are the last things we should be wasting money on.

Especially when we are still stuck with the cartpath that is the Hammonds Plain Road or the bottleneck that is Bayers Road, shameful.

Fix those and give the vast majority of ratepayers something useful for their money instead of these useless things.
Oh there are definitely better things to spend money on, like improving traffic flow, not restricting it. Heck there are still a lot of potholes to fill and lines to paint

But its not only the money, it's the fact that those bump outs just aren't practical, and cause more headaches than they solve, Ive seen it in person.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2016, 8:13 PM
FuzzyWuz FuzzyWuz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Interesting articles about bike lanes and their effect on public health.


https://www.fastcoexist.com/3065591/...-public-health
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 5:16 AM
Good Baklava's Avatar
Good Baklava Good Baklava is offline
Somewhat Pretentious
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Someplace somewhere
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyWuz View Post
Interesting articles about bike lanes and their effect on public health.


https://www.fastcoexist.com/3065591/...-public-health
An insightful read
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 12:19 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,979
That seems to have been produced by one of those left-wing "fake news" sites that emerged recently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 1:16 PM
Good Baklava's Avatar
Good Baklava Good Baklava is offline
Somewhat Pretentious
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Someplace somewhere
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
That seems to have been produced by one of those left-wing "fake news" sites that emerged recently.
Yes, it's a growing problem, especially on Facebook. So why don't you show us a "Real News" article that disproves the article above?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 5:38 PM
TheNovaScotian's Avatar
TheNovaScotian TheNovaScotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 234
Try clicking on the study from "leftist" Columbia University in the article, you'll notice that thier facts are verified by scientific process.

My guess is that you use that excuse often to discredit things you don't agree with lately but this one is legit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 6:06 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNovaScotian View Post
Try clicking on the study from "leftist" Columbia University in the article, you'll notice that thier facts are verified by scientific process.

My guess is that you use that excuse often to discredit things you don't agree with lately but this one is legit.
There is a difference between "facts" and conclusions. Their conclusion is that some bike lanes are good therefore more are better and too many will be the greatest thing ever. That is unsupported by any facts, just as was the statement by our esteemed Mayor at Council today that "bike lanes are the mark of a 'progressive' city". No, I would say bike lanes are the mark of a trendy city, especially one like Halifax that has been building bike lanes for years but has yet to convince very many people to actually use them. Perhaps instead they are the trademark of a spendthrift city, which HRM certainly is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2016, 11:32 PM
TheNovaScotian's Avatar
TheNovaScotian TheNovaScotian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 234
So what you are saying is that you didn't read the article?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 1:04 PM
Ziobrop's Avatar
Ziobrop Ziobrop is offline
armchairitect
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Halifax
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
There is a difference between "facts" and conclusions. Their conclusion is that some bike lanes are good therefore more are better and too many will be the greatest thing ever. That is unsupported by any facts, just as was the statement by our esteemed Mayor at Council today that "bike lanes are the mark of a 'progressive' city". No, I would say bike lanes are the mark of a trendy city, especially one like Halifax that has been building bike lanes for years but has yet to convince very many people to actually use them. Perhaps instead they are the trademark of a spendthrift city, which HRM certainly is.
1. people use them.
2. more people dont, because it isn't a full network. the cities cheapness is in not more quickly building out this network.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 1:45 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziobrop View Post
1. people use them.
2. more people dont, because it isn't a full network. the cities cheapness is in not more quickly building out this network.
The better the network is, the more people will use it.

The same could be said for transit, actually. Our transit system is not so good right now, but everybody would agree that getting rid of it because it is not good enough would be a dumb idea - transit is required and therefore should be improved to give people an attractive and efficient alternative to driving their cars.

Apply the same principles to bike lanes - if you make them safe and efficient (and more complete), people will use them. The main reason I don't cycle now is because I've become chicken**** of all those inattentive and/or incapable drivers on the roads now and don't want to become another statistic. If there were well-designed, well-maintained bike lanes separated from car traffic, damn right I would use them. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 2:15 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,114
Didn't the new bike counter on Agricola Street show that in September, almost 10 percent of the street's traffic was bicycles?

I recall a news story saying that but can't find it now. If true, that's a high percentage, for a street with no bike infrastructure of any kind. (And which frankly doesn't feel very comfortable to cycle on, with a lot of door-prize-ready parked cars.)

If that demand exists on a street with no infrastructure, imagine how many more people would be biking that route with just a simple lane.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 2:47 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,979
[QUOTE=Drybrain;7631178]Didn't the new bike counter on Agricola Street show that in September, almost 10 percent of the street's traffic was bicycles?

No, it did not. But that street is Hipster Boulevard and if there is only a small percentage of use there, imagine how little the ones on Windsor or Hollis get used.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 4:52 PM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,114
[QUOTE=Keith P.;7631204]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain View Post
Didn't the new bike counter on Agricola Street show that in September, almost 10 percent of the street's traffic was bicycles?

No, it did not. But that street is Hipster Boulevard and if there is only a small percentage of use there, imagine how little the ones on Windsor or Hollis get used.
I'm pretty sure it did. And 10% is actually quite high usage, especially with no infrastructure in place to encourage it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 5:19 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,423
Actually a daily average of 144 is actually pretty good for Oct-Nov.

http://www.eco-public.com/ParcPublic/?id=4638

Imagine if the network were more complete and better-designed - it would only grow from there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 6:32 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,979
A single bicycle every 10 minutes! I hope they can handle the congestion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 7:25 PM
Colin May Colin May is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
Actually a daily average of 144 is actually pretty good for Oct-Nov.

http://www.eco-public.com/ParcPublic/?id=4638

Imagine if the network were more complete and better-designed - it would only grow from there.
Not logical.
More airports would not result in more users.
More roads would not result in more traffic.
I am waiting for bike counts from the HRM point man - no reply since my weekend email.
I am interested in the profile of cyclists - age, distance, work/recreation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 7:42 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
More airports would not result in more users.
More roads would not result in more traffic.
Actually that is typically how it works. As you add more infrastructure, the mode of transportation becomes attractive to more people because it offers a quicker trip due to shorter distances or less congestion. But you normally hit diminishing returns in value per dollar spent, assuming your infrastructure priorities are in order. Halifax transportation infrastructure spending is so modest that there are probably lots of great potential projects that would generate a good return on investment.

The question to ask about cycling infrastructure is whether or not the cost is justified. I think it probably is on the peninsula. Cycling infrastructure is cheap and it can be good for everyone, not just cyclists. It's often safer and more efficient to run bikes along designated corridors than have them diffusely mixed throughout traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 8:14 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin May View Post
Not logical.
More airports would not result in more users.
More roads would not result in more traffic.
I am waiting for bike counts from the HRM point man - no reply since my weekend email.
I am interested in the profile of cyclists - age, distance, work/recreation.
Completely logical.
- If there is a demand for more flights than the airport can handle, then you expand the airport or build another in another location. It happens all the time.

- If there is demand for more traffic than the roads can handle, then building roads will result in more traffic from those who were choosing different routes, using other methods to get around or just not driving their car as much because of the congestion.

As population increases, capacities must increase as well. As different modes of transport become more viable, increasing capacities to handle said modes will increase traffic.

This is why the road networks in North America are very different in 2016 than they were in 1916. As cars became the preferred method of transportation over horses and trains, well... you know, I don't have to explain this.

The same principles apply to bicycles as more people look to them as a way to get around. Whether we old codgers like it or not, it's happening.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 9:18 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,979
There is no demand for additional bicycle lanes except from the HCC and from those who wish to perform social engineering.

Aside from the financial cost, the tremendous ill-will these projects create among the majority by removing on-street parking and restricting vehicle traffic even more for the benefit of a virtually non-existent group of users will end up backfiring before long.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2016, 12:58 PM
IanWatson IanWatson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,222
Right now the issue in Halifax isn't the capacity of the bike lanes, it's the completeness of the network.

For a lot of people, riding on the road is just not something they will do. It doesn't help them if they can use the bike lane on Bell Road, but then get thrown out into traffic on Robie; in that case, they just stay home or drive.

To Colin's point, adding a new airport in Halifax wouldn't increase air traffic, just as doubling the width of the Hollis bike lane won't increase bike traffic; that's because those are capacity improvements and those facilities are not at capacity. However, adding a route between Halifax and some non-served city would increase overall flight traffic, because that makes the network is more complete.

You see the same issue with sidewalks when the network isn't complete. If a sidewalk just ends, most people won't even use the portion that exists. Yes, a hardy few will keep walking along the grass, but most people will just avoid that sidewalk in the first place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:00 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.