Bayers Road Widening

[halifaxboyns]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I heard a discussion today about "sandwich board" signs which illustrates the matter quite well - businesses who use such signs to promote today's special or whatever, and the usual heavy hand of HRM trying to ban them based upon some alleged threat to public safety or esthetics. Ridiculous.

It's funny you say that; because I know many planners that would want them removed and hate them.

I have a different view, mainly that they make the streetscape more attractive and feel comfortable. The way you keep people safe from them is either make them go up next to the curb edge (where the planters, benches and other street furniture is) or you make them stay against the building. In between is begging for an accident - but I'm getting away from the thread.

For me, as a planner, I've never been of the belief that to practice my field I should tell anyone or have the power to direct anyone to live in a certain way. I can try to persuade you, but that's as far as it goes. I do however feel that when you make a choice to live in a suburban style development, which is a part of a sprawling city (any city), you should be responsible to pay more as it costs more to service your area or any other suburban community for typical services because the land area is bigger, but the population is less. In contrast, I think the taxes in the inner city should be the lowest because you have a far more compact form, with better centralized services.

That's why I struggle with this project because I don't see how even people in the suburbs are going to benefit from it. Yes, for a small period of time the traffic may become better flowing...but then it will just clog up again. So then what? It just seems to me that this project is just another finger in the hole of a damn that's leaking...it's solving one small problem, but not the big issue.

I had to laugh when you said proliteriate - I kept thinking about that comedy sketch, just can't think of it right now...

[Empire]

Many people are against street widening. In some cases it makes sense to widen streets. The Mic Mac rotary/111 was one of them. After the 111 was widened and ramps reconfigured the bottleneck that stretched for a kilometer every night was eliminated. 20 years later there is no backup. The MacDonald Bridge is another example. Every night there was a serious backup on Barrington, Brunswick and Gottingen. After the third lane was introduced and the ramps reconfigured the backup was eliminated. The next area that needs widening is Barrington north. From North St. to the Windsor exchange it is a disaster. Two narrow lanes, no bus turn outs, no bike lanes and no crosswalks. This is a major route into downtown and it is completely ignored.

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...12,297.02,,0,0

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...1.41,,0,0&z=18

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...5.54,,0,0&z=18

[Waye Mason]

Originally Posted by Empire

Many people are against street widening. In some cases it makes sense to widen streets. The Mic Mac rotary/111 was one of them. After the 111 was widened and ramps reconfigured the bottleneck that stretched for a kilometer every night was eliminated. 20 years later there is no backup. The MacDonald Bridge is another example. Every night there was a serious backup on Barrington, Brunswick and Gottingen. After the third lane was introduced and the ramps reconfigured the backup was eliminated. The next area that needs widening is Barrington north. From North St. to the Windsor exchange it is a disaster. Two narrow lanes, no bus turn outs, no bike lanes and no crosswalks. This is a major route into downtown and it is completely ignored.

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...12,297.02,,0,0

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...1.41,,0,0&z=18

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...5.54,,0,0&z=18

Agreed. If Bayers Road is going to cost 292 mil, I'd prefer to reserve the corridor for $5 million, spend maybe $5 mil on making no left turns, etc, and then spend $30-60 million on a train to Bedford, and the rest on projects like Barrington. Barrington drives me crazy... especially now that the Superline closed.... lets get rid of Cogswell, fix the alignment at Brunswick Towers, at Mulgrave, and put four lanes all the way around.

[ILoveHalifax]

I have a problem with people who live on main streets and then protest when progress calls for upgrades to their street.
I live on a very busy downtown street 5 lanes wide and lots of traffic, police, fire, ambulance, lots of sirens, difficulty parking, etc, but I deal with it. It is part of city life.
I am very impressed with the proposal to widen Bayers Rd. I would hope that the residents look at the proposal with an open mind as to what it might do to improve traffic flow, which should improve life along the street. It is not very pleasant now with cars idling in slow moving traffic and it will only get worse as Halifax grows to 500,000 over the next 10 years and 600,000 some time after that.

[Jstaleness]

Originally Posted by Empire

Many people are against street widening. In some cases it makes sense to widen streets. The Mic Mac rotary/111 was one of them. After the 111 was widened and ramps reconfigured the bottleneck that stretched for a kilometer every night was eliminated. 20 years later there is no backup. The MacDonald Bridge is another example. Every night there was a serious backup on Barrington, Brunswick and Gottingen. After the third lane was introduced and the ramps reconfigured the backup was eliminated. The next area that needs widening is Barrington north. From North St. to the Windsor exchange it is a disaster. Two narrow lanes, no bus turn outs, no bike lanes and no crosswalks. This is a major route into downtown and it is completely ignored.

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...12,297.02,,0,0

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...1.41,,0,0&z=18

Very narrow unacceptable route into downtown....Barrington North.
http://maps.google.it/maps?q=Halifax...5.54,,0,0&z=18

Those images of Barrington make it look more like a residential street and not a main artery. It's a shame they just repaved most of it. It would have been a great time to at least add some width and a potential reversing lane.

[alps]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

I have a problem with people who live on main streets and then protest when progress calls for upgrades to their street.
I live on a very busy downtown street 5 lanes wide and lots of traffic, police, fire, ambulance, lots of sirens, difficulty parking, etc, but I deal with it. It is part of city life.
I am very impressed with the proposal to widen Bayers Rd. I would hope that the residents look at the proposal with an open mind as to what it might do to improve traffic flow, which should improve life along the street. It is not very pleasant now with cars idling in slow moving traffic and it will only get worse as Halifax grows to 500,000 over the next 10 years and 600,000 some time after that.

Or the traffic planners could look with an open mind at the myriad of alternatives at their disposal before blowing hundreds of millions on a car-oriented widening that in 10-20 years of additional urban sprawl will be as clogged as it is today.

the idea that the widening should "improve life along the street" is a bit far fetched..

[worldlyhaligonian]

Its alot of money for sure.

The whole argument about cars is somewhat nonsense though, this is pretty far from the core. I live in the west end and Bayers Rd is still a 10 minute bike ride away for me.

The widening will not likely "improve life" along the street, it will be noiser for sure. It will definitely be less congested and buses will move through better.

I've been guilty of making polarizing statements in this debate, but I don't think anybody can disagree that something needs to be done with this road.

Would it be possible for there to be a bus-only lane as the sole purpose of the widening. I know Halifaxboyns thinks we have a BRT here, but its not like a real BRT... nothing is dedicated!

For this kind of money, paving part of the railcut installing a fence to separate this lane from the trains, and putting buses from downtown to the burbs would make alot more sense.

[DB15]

Originally Posted by ILoveHalifax

I have a problem with people who live on main streets and then protest when progress calls for upgrades to their street.
I live on a very busy downtown street 5 lanes wide and lots of traffic, police, fire, ambulance, lots of sirens, difficulty parking, etc, but I deal with it. It is part of city life.
I am very impressed with the proposal to widen Bayers Rd. I would hope that the residents look at the proposal with an open mind as to what it might do to improve traffic flow, which should improve life along the street. It is not very pleasant now with cars idling in slow moving traffic and it will only get worse as Halifax grows to 500,000 over the next 10 years and 600,000 some time after that.

What the fuck are you talking about?

You realize anytime a street is widened it effects entire neighborhoods not just those who live on the said street. People have a right to have traffic kept on roads and not spill onto their front/back yards. So what if it improves traffic flow, at what cost? How does improving traffic flow improve quality of life?

[Empire]

Originally Posted by DB15

What the fuck are you talking about?

You realize anytime a street is widened it effects entire neighborhoods not just those who live on the said street. People have a right to have traffic kept on roads and not spill onto their front/back yards. So what if it improves traffic flow, at what cost? How does improving traffic flow improve quality of life?

So are you saying if you reduce Portland St, Robie St., Quinpool Rd., Bedford Hwy. etc. to 2 lanes that would improve quality of life?

[Jstaleness]

From cbc.ca

Halifax regional council has put off a final decision on the widening of Bayers Road for at least a year.

City transportation officials asked council Tuesday to approve a road network plan that includes a four to six lane expansion over the next 20 years.

The councillors who represent the area wanted to remove that proposal.

Instead, council approved a motion to defer the decision until after a review of the city's regional development plan is complete.

Coun. Jennifer Watts is disappointed by the delay.

"What we could have done today is give a very clear message: we don't want this road widening. There may be other options that we need to look at around the dedicated bus lane," she said.

"But to continue with this larger project...means that we're not really seriously going to have to look at the overall plan of how we move people in and off the peninsula."

Other councillors pointed out there will be municipal elections next fall, so the issue may be left for a new council to deal with.

Halifax traffic planners have said that an extra lane needs to be added to Bayers Road by 2016 to deal with all the cars heading downtown from outside the city.

They also think much of Bayers Road, a major route used by commuters as they make their way onto the peninsula, will need six lanes within 25 years.

Fourteen homes would be affected if the street is widened to five or six lanes between the CN rail overpass and Connaught Avenue.

[Keith P.]

Why did the council chicken not widen the road?

To get to the other side of the election.

What a bunch of lily-livered morons. A punt is what we saw today.

The only bigger moron is Watts, who wants to keep Halifax firmly stuck in the mud by pandering to a bunch of NIMBYs who, like her, don't give a damn about the greater good and prefer to try to keep this burg marooned in the 1950s.

What a useless bunch.

[fenwick16]

Maybe part of the money saved will go towards a stadium(?)

If it is a choice between an economical stadium and widening Bayers Road, what would most people chose? (just out of curiosity)

[someone123]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

Maybe part of the money saved will go towards a stadium(?)

If it is a choice between an economical stadium and widening Bayers Road, what would most people chose? (just out of curiosity)

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by someone123

It is a legitimate question. HRM has a budget, so widening Bayers Road will be at the expense of other projects. There was a story in the allnovascotia.com just last week on how capital projects will be at the expense of infrastructure maintenance.

[hoser111]

I'm with someone123....

I don't think it's a legitimate question at all.

[worldlyhaligonian]

Originally Posted by fenwick16

It is a legitimate question. HRM has a budget, so widening Bayers Road will be at the expense of other projects. There was a story in the allnovascotia.com just last week on how capital projects will be at the expense of infrastructure maintenance.

I see what you are saying fenwick, but people would shit their pants over building a world class stadium (which would be possible given the Bayers rd widening budget) because its seen as "giving money to private, professional sports interests" that "not everybody uses"... even though most of our tax dollars go to fund things that I don't get any use out of. A stadium is slightly more justifiable than a road widening, but hey, a road widening does benefit those who ride the bus.

There is no winning by spending an appropriate amount on a project in the HRM from a political standpoint.

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by hoser111

I'm with someone123....

I don't think it's a legitimate question at all.

But can't you give an explanation? Is this really going to clear up bottlenecks on the peninsula or is it mainly a make-work project. I am pro-development but not just development for the sake of development. Are there other cheaper options?

[fenwick16]

Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian

I see what you are saying fenwick, but people would shit their pants over building a world class stadium (which would be possible given the Bayers rd widening budget) because its seen as "giving money to private, professional sports interests" that "not everybody uses"... even though most of our tax dollars go to fund things that I don't get any use out of. A stadium is slightly more justifiable than a road widening, but hey, a road widening does benefit those who ride the bus.

There is no winning by spending an appropriate amount on a project in the HRM from a political standpoint.

I am really just thinking of an economical stadium in the $60 million dollar vicinity. Even partial HRM funding of such a low-cost stadium will be a stretch come December when it is time to make a decision.

When I look at a map and look at the expansion plans for Bayers Road, the only section that is not currently 4 lanes is between Windsor Road and Connaught Ave. Is that the bottleneck along Bayers Road? Maybe that is the only expansion required over the next 25 years?

[someone123]

Two comments:

1) By the line of reasoning above, every single budget item could be treated as a stadium-related issue (and conversely the stadium thread would be derailed by tangentially related special interest posts). That's just not reasonable in terms of discussion.

2) City expenditures are actually not a zero-sum game and they are not fixed from year to year. Some years the city spends more or less based on opportunities (e.g. FIFA) and decisions. The Bayers Road widening and stadium projects are not mutually exclusive.

[fenwick16]

Where is the current bottleneck on Bayers Road? Is it the 3-lane section between Windsor Street and Connaught Ave? If this one section was expanded would it significantly increase the road capacity?

It seems as though this discussion is one-sidedly in favour of the full expansion without much talk about economics. But unfortunately, economics is a factor. My understanding is that the municipality is not permitted to run a deficit, so one project can delay or de-rail other projects. There are many municipality proposals on hold at this time (the Commons landscaping for example).