Hit the brakes on Creighton St. bikes
I have been an owner/resident in the north end’s Creighton Street neighbourhood for almost 20 years. It has always been an amazing area to live in, and continues to have more services all the time, with new people and businesses settling in and making the area more enriched. HRM did good with its planning to encourage this, and the North Park Street roundabouts eased traffic flow. HRM has been doing good in this neighbourhood.
So it’s alarming to see the plans for a bikeway for Creighton/Northwood Streets, which propose up to a 50 percent parking loss. This is not a reasonable idea. In this historic neighbourhood, where few homes have driveways, we depend on street parking. In one block of Creighton, for example, there are 64 dwellings and only seven driveways. This will only get worse now that you can’t park on one whole side of Gottingen Street.
If I need parking for a tradesperson or a guest, under this new regime the city will have us standing in line down at HRM Customer Service at Scotia Square for visitor parking permits, which is a cumbersome process. And finding an actual available spot will certainly be more challenging. Tradespeople will have to lug tools for blocks. It’s hard enough to find someone to come to your house to do work without this extra hurdle.
We also need parking for couriers (online shopping is only growing in popularity) and essential deliveries like oil. Our elderly need to unload their groceries near their homes. Many residents in this neighbourhood (like hospital workers) work shift work. Would you ask any of your family to walk blocks and blocks when they arrive home late at night? The new HRM Parking Strategy is promoting this concept, and a 50 percent loss of parking will force us further away from our homes. That is what HRM is telling us to do with this new “parking anywhere” scheme.
A friend just emailed me to say her friend left this neighbourhood because it was too hard getting kids in and out of a car with no driveway. What is a neighbourhood without kids?
The other day, a Halifax Water truck parked in the new non-parking lane on Gottingen to service a building and backed up traffic behind it. As a concession local businesses were promised a Transit Corridor Parking Loss Mitigation Plan, which says it recognizes the importance of street parking to businesses and residents of the area. HRM’s own Integrated Mobility Plan acknowledges the importance of replacing lost on-street parking where possible (when parking is lost to buses). So why on one hand acknowledge the importance of street parking and make a plan to mitigate its loss, then turn around and propose to take it away for a bikeway. This makes no sense.
Bikes already use these quiet side streets safely like they have naturally done for the at least the two decades I’ve been here. Why spend taxpayers’ money (on curb extensions and traffic-calming measures that lead to parking loss) if it’s not really needed? My late father taught me if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
This bikeway doesn’t improve the quality of life for residents in this area. Our neighbourhood is not a means to an end (for bikes or buses). It’s our home. Yes to bikes and buses, but not at any cost. I can’t support what the city is proposing at the moment. We can do better. —Robin Stewart, Halifax
This article appears in Nov 15-21, 2018.
I agree wholeheartedly with Robin Stewart! And I would add that I do not think it is coincidence that Creighton and Maynard Streets are disproportionately African Nova Scotian and low income communities. Halifax has a long history of trampling over the rights of those communities for the ‘common good.’
Resisting the loss of parking is not an issue of promoting ‘car culture’ over active transportation. Many of us who live on Creighton and Maynard walk or bike everywhere. Physical activity, reducing environmental effects – those are good things right? But, for example, let’s say kids on Creighton St need a quieter place to play street hockey. So for the common good we are going to make all driveways on some South End streets into public parking, to get the cars off the streets and provide a place for street hockey. No worries, South Enders, you can still park in your driveways, unless someone else gets there first. But surely you’ll find parking within a few blocks.
Or let’s say those of you in Sackville, or Clayton Park, who happen to have front yards: Those of us on Creighton do not have front yards. So if it is all right with you, can we just use your yards for camping in the summer? No? Don’t you support being outdoors, in nature, physical activity and such? Would you really prioritize your right to private property over those things?
In several recent public talks in Halifax, geographer Ted Rutland spoke about his book Displacing Blackness, which traces how urban planning in Halifax has for decades advanced the health and wellness of higher income and white Haligonians at the expense of lower income and Black Haligonians. Africville was just the best-known incident. This sure seems like another such instance — making life far more complicated for citizens in one neighbourhood so those from other areas can pass through it more easily. Surely it is not just for costs to all be borne by one group while benefits go to another group.
Brenda Beagan
I have found the entire roll-out of the bus lanes on Gottingen Street to be very poorly executed. Last week the city police were, what I can only describe as “lying in wait” to ticket drivers making the left turn onto Cornwallis from Gottingen. This was happening while the road work was still on going. How about the police directing traffic for a week, handing out warnings or helpful information, but no a $180.00 ticket. There was no indication on the signage when the change was going to take place. Only this week were the large NEW signs affixed below the traffic signs to caution drivers of the change. So the week before the NEW signs were in place the the city was ticketing it citizens. I am curious to know how a 1.5 km stretch of bus lane is going to solve transit woes. We all have to merge before North Street to get on the bridge. The bus lane should be down on Barrington Street. Fix the approach to the bridge with the magic money that is supposed to build the stadium. I’d take a bike lane any day on Gottingen, slow things down, make it more friendly to pedestrians. I truly believe the residents of Creighton Street are about to get screwed over. How is opening up Creighton to two way car traffic and putting in a bike lane making life better for a heavily residential neighbourhood where the majority of homes have no driveways. Good luck with those property values, or selling your home. Seriously lining up at HRM Customer Service for a visitor parking pass, you’ve got to be kidding me. What I’d really like to know is how did Agricola Street get a pass on all this? Why not put a bike lane there, slow traffic down, and give the residents of Creighton Street a break. Oh yes they’ve been designated as a “commercial zone.” I guess that makes all the businesses on Gottingen-“the soon to be looking for a new place to employ people zone.” Last time I checked there were a lot of viable businesses on Gottingen. Not so fun to be strolling with all those diesel buses whizzing by. People get worn down by crap decisions supposedly made in their best interests. Look at that 29 story buliding going in at Quinpool and Robie-whose interest is that serving? Why does no one even speak of the Centre Plan anymore? What is going on with that? Back to the drawing board city council. Lisa Barry
Thanks for your support Brenda! There is also the sewage treatment plant (that should have gone to the railyards in the south end), and then HRM threw half of Gottingen businesses under the bus with the new bus corridor where they cant get deliveries in front of their store (HRM was too cheap to do the right thing and fix the bridge ramp – how is this supporting loca businessesl). I heard of a petition today to put the handicap parking back onto Gottingen because they moved it around the corner, on a hill! How is this good planning. And now this parking loss. Sure I want streets to be safer for bikes but not at any cost…..like the safety of our homes. Ask any firefighter, EMS or police officer if they like traffic calming (as proposed for these bikeways) and see what they say. I for one want emergency responders to come to my home quick not be held up by traffic calming. We are being asked to bear the brunt of way too much to benefit everyone else. I purpose an Option D Bikeway- No loss of parking (zero Percent) just a Multi-use Pathway with no parking loss anywhere. (Bikes and cars in the same street in tandem (as it already is). Creighton/Maynard is a defacto bike route anyway without any alterations (except you cant cross at North at Creighton very easy but have to go up to Maynard and you can cross- just maybe put flashing lights on it). People and cars have been sharing these streets safely for the 20 years I’ve been here, and probably since the invention of the automobile. Our streets are already calm “as-is” as they are narrow, and narrower one way streets with cars parked on both sides naturally slow the traffic without all the expensive traffic calming proposed by HRM. HRM put a multi use bike route on Gottingen, perhaps to sell local businesses on the bus corridor project (see the share signs outside Propellor/Staples and corner of Cornwallis). If a multi use trail is good enough for Gottingen then its good enough for Creighton. Cars and bikes need to respect each other so I say start educating people young, during drivers training about the shoulder check (dutch reach done as a matter of course in The Netherlands) and educate about the “1 meter – I share the road” Maybe the money HRM is spending on this needless bikeway could be spent to supply these bumper stickers to drivers across HRM. These bikeways with 15 to 50 percent parking loss is a waste of tax payers money in my opinion. Save the money and use on something that will help traffic more like a light rail. A recent HRM Citizen Survey says people want Commuter rail more. Do what the people want more. Dont destroy a neighbourhood with no driveways. Thanks again for your support Brenda. Robin Stewart
Forgot to mention….. if you agree that its important that there is no more parking loss in this neighbourhood sign the petition at http://www.change.org/p/save-our-parking
Forgot to mention that I have a petition going with 268 signatures on it from just me going around the neighbourhood the past two weeks and trying to get the word out on this. Its on change dot org/p/save-our-parking Unfortunately North End Business Association (NEBA) got 500 signatures on theirs and HRM didn’t listen, but hoping they’ll listen this time.
I think Brendas observation “Making life far more complicated for citizens in one neighbourhood so those from other areas can pass through it more easily”; well, that pretty much sums it up. That’s exactly what this feels like.
I love living in the Creighton Street neighbourhood. It has been quite remarkable to see so many new people and businesses establish themselves here over the last 15 years or so.
As someone who does feel strongly about the benefits of active transportation, it’s awkward and dismaying to have to refute all three options that HRM proposes for the north end bikeway.
I fear that many current driveway-less residents, who love having such a walkable address, but also still require a vehicle, will find it very difficult to remain if the neighbourhood loses even 15% of its parking. The possibility of rebooting the neighbourhood’s population appears to be an acceptable by-product of the project. HRM councillors and staff, please listen and be willing to adapt the proposed plans so that current residents don’t become former residents.
I am sympathetic to the residents of Creighton Street, but the sentiments here strike me as a case of NIMBYism. I am a young professional, and recently moved to the North End of Halifax having lived in many smaller towns and larger cities across Canada. I chose the North End for its walkability, proximity to downtown and small businesses, but was very surprised and disappointed by the lack of cycling infrastructure, considering Halifax’s size and density. In many other cities, the upside of the neighbourhood enrichment raised by Mr. Stewart come with some small downsides, one of which is reduced parking.
Locating bikeways on side streets is based in the best research and evidence, is a strategy adopted by some of the City’s most bike friendly cities, and makes cycling safer and more accessible. It is also an issue of equity. Women are less likely to cycle without dedicated bike lanes. It is further very unsafe for children to cycle without this type of infrastructure, which is a critical gap at a time where schools are promoting active transportation to combat the growing health crisis among young people. I currently use Creighton Street to cycle commute, and disagree that is is currently safe. The presence of bike lanes brings signage and other signals that alert drivers that they are likely to encounter cyclists on the street. This is not presently the case.
For Halifax to attract people to live, work and visit, it needs to have the amenities offered by other modern cities. Time to catch up.
What am i getting from all the new development and tax dollars in the North End? With escalating property assessments in the North End, the city is taking more and more money out of the North End from tax payers, without reinvesting for their benefit. How much more tax are they getting from all the developed buildings on the gottingen strip. What are they doing for those buildings. Cost to service (as per HRMs report) is less expensive in denser neighbourhoods than sprawled communities in the suburbs. Halifaxs historic neighbourhoods, like the Creighton, Maynard, Bauer neighbourhood was not designed around the automobile and as such on street parking is a necessity. And while HRM wants to encourage commuter transit and active transit use, to do so at the cost of removing parking from residential and commercial properties in the inner city districts unfairly penalizes those property owners for the benefit of people who dont live in these neighbourhoods or pay taxes in these neighbourhoods. We are being asked to bear too much. We pay taxes too. More things like roundabouts and ovals and less bus boondoggles. Same with overzealous bikeways that remove parking. A federal Finance Minister once said in 2005 that 50% of Canada’s GDP is generated by small business. So as the wise saying goes: “be careful what you ask for.” We can’t constantly be taking away parking spaces, needed for businesses like mine and those on Gottingen Street.
ImportedH – I appreciate your comments and opinion. I cant say I agree that reduced parking would be a small downside, however possibly having to relocate to another neighbourhood is hardly a small downside. I have lived here almost 20 years so it will be sad to have to say goodbye to my friends and neighbours. For some people currently on Creighton Street, who dont have a driveway but require a vehicle for whatever reason, the removal of parking represents a considerable hardship and might mean looking for a new home.
Ive spoken to some people who say you bought (or rented) your property knowing there was no driveway. (I appreciate that you didnt go there with your comment) Kind of harsh, and not that helpful. This is an issue thats bringing out lots of emotions in many people, myself included. I and many others am genuinely alarmed by what the removal of parking could mean for my livelihood and future.
Your point about equity is fair, but I cant help thinking about women in the neighbourhood who might have to park blocks away from their residence as a result of parking removal and make their way home in the dark.
I also cant help wondering what cyclists are thinking of the new combined bus / bicycle lane on Gottingen. A lot of people are saying that HRM has thrown Gottingen under the bus with that plan, avoiding the investment in making improvements to Barrington Street and the bridge ramp.
I believe we can all agree that we want our neighbourhoods to be safe for residents and commuters, including cyclists, I also believe that HRM can help us make that happen without removing parking for residents. They have made many good decisions and investments in the last few years, but this is not one of them.
Nor is the Gottingen bus lane, which Im afraid will be looked back upon as another boondoggle la Cogswell Interchange. Bring down the Interchange and remove the express lane from Gottingen. Bring back the busses to Barrington, where there is a separate bike lane, and bring bikes back to Gottingen.
Former HRM Councillor Dawn Sloane makes some excellent points in her recent blog post on this subject. https://dawnsloane.blogspot.com/2018/11/residential-parking-under-attack-by-hrm.html
If you havent seen it, Id invite you to check it out.