Vancouver City Hall deemed arrogant, out of touch on street closures

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by p78hub

The thing with 8th and Macdonald is that the median has been there for years and there's a marked crosswalk at that intersection. At 45th and Elliot, it's just the median.

I agree, there needs to be a clearly marked crosswalk.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm not likely to get out that way for the foreseeable future, so it's hard for me to compare. I had a look at Google Street View, and while they didn't have a viewpoint from the position of a pedestrian standing at the corner, it looks to me like you have pretty clear views both ways along MacDonald.

It's not identical. Macdonald has a less extreme curve, but there are other risks. There are three lanes of car traffic, the busy Macdonald & Broadway intersection is just a block away, and you also need to contend with traffic turning directly out of the Safeway parking lot. On balance, it's no better and no worse.

[racc]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Sadly yes and many, myself included, were misled by their propaganda claiming to be a voice of moderation. Well, as the Who said "won't get fooled again".

Why not install a cyclist/pedestrian controlled light at this intersection?

A cyclist/pedestrian light along with the median barrier is probably is the solution. Unfortunately, a light really can't be installed on a trial basis.

The CityCaucus posting was a bit over the top. They even said that someone was killed walking across the street way before before the median barrier was installed. It is obvious that this was a dangerous intersection and something needs to be done. The barrier is a trial to see how it goes. Given that, it is a real stretch to call anyone out of touch over this. As well, this traffic calming campaign was also supported by councillor Anton, so making a big political deal out of it is rather stretching it as well.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by racc

A cyclist/pedestrian light along with the median barrier is probably is the solution. Unfortunately, a light really can't be installed on a trial basis..

Really? TunnelVision Vancouver seems to to specialize in expensive, permanent "trials". No reason it couldn't be done here.

[usog]

Originally Posted by racc

A cyclist/pedestrian light along with the median barrier is probably is the solution. Unfortunately, a light really can't be installed on a trial basis.

The CityCaucus posting was a bit over the top. They even said that someone was killed walking across the street way before before the median barrier was installed. It is obvious that this was a dangerous intersection and something needs to be done. The barrier is a trial to see how it goes. Given that, it is a real stretch to call anyone out of touch over this. As well, this traffic calming campaign was also supported by councillor Anton, so making a big political deal out of it is rather stretching it as well.

So you'd rather trial an unwanted barrier than a light..

[racc]

Originally Posted by usog

So you'd rather trial an unwanted barrier than a light..

That is not what I said. I said that the best permanent solution would be a light and a barrier. The point was that a barrier can be done inexpensively on a trial basis while a light could not be done inexpensively on a trial basis.

Also, don't assume that just because a few people are making some noise, that the barriers are not wanted.

[racc]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Really? TunnelVision Vancouver seems to to specialize in expensive, permanent "trials". No reason it couldn't be done here.

Just take a look at the pictures that were posted. This is obviously an inexpensive trial. The other trials have worked very well and have remained. If they didn't work, it would be reasonable to expect that changes would have been made. Your point is?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by racc

Just take a look at the pictures that were posted. This is obviously an inexpensive trial. The other trials have worked very well and have remained. If they didn't work, it would be reasonable to expect that changes would have been made. Your point is?

My point is that the residents who have far more experience with the intersection than you, me or city bureaucrats feel very strongly that this is an extremely dangerous design. Why wait until someone is injured or killed to do the right thing and install a light? If money can suddenly be found for Moonbeam's pet Dunsmuir bike lane, they can find it for this.

[jlousa]

The problem is only going to get worse with the building of the Clarendon connector in 2011, but I'm sure the different depts are talking to each other.

[nova9]

i frequently drive past that intersection, it's not like it was safe before as so many people blew past stop signs. however, i don't know if the new barriers are an improvement.

that being said, i cannot believe the people on here can get into an argument over an intersection. seriously.

finally, have there been other residents who have complained about the alterations in their own neighbourhoods or intersections? the thinking is that if mayor 'moonbeam' is really that out of touch, has there been other complaints regarding the road 'improvements'?

[cabotp]

First off I realize I'm resurrecting an older thread, been away for a while.

I cycle through that exact intersection at good 2-3 times a week. One of the routes I can take to work. Now I've never gone through there during rush hour recently. Usually it is around 2:30pm. So it is before the school kids get out.

I can't say if the traffic along Elliot/Claredon is quieter now than before at 2:30pm. As I didn't cycle before that thing was put up. Yet there hardly seems to be any traffic coming through there now. 90% of the time I don't even have to stop at the stop sign. In fact I had someone stop for me and I just waved through as I don't think they do have to stop for me.

I can say there is definitely far less traffic on 45th. But it almost seems to me that because people can't get onto 45th, they just have decided to avoid Elliot/Claredon and stick with 41st and 49th.

I know there are counters on 45th on either side of the blockade. I'm also wondering if there are counters on Elliot/Claredon. If so it would be interesting to know if traffic volume is lower. Of course right now is a bad time as it is summer and we would have to wait until people get back from their holidays.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Yet there hardly seems to be any traffic coming through there now.

The intersection used to be a bottleneck for N/S traffic during rush hour because of the stop sign. The packs of cars released by the signals at 41st and 49th would arrive at the intersection and then trickle slowly through as each car (mostly) stopped before proceeding. That, combined with the alternating required by the former higher level of E/W traffic meant that the intersection used to have cars there almost continuously throughout the rush hour.

Now that the cars don't have to stop, the packs flow through the intersection unimpeded and the percentage of time that the intersection is empty has gone up quite a bit.

Originally Posted by cabotp

I can say there is definitely far less traffic on 45th. But it almost seems to me that because people can't get onto 45th, they just have decided to avoid Elliot/Claredon and stick with 41st and 49th.

...which was exactly what the median was supposed to do, and it's been very effective. But as a pedestrian it feels a lot less comfortable to cross E/W due to the limited N/S visibility along the S-Curve. And as a resident in the area it's a pain in the @ss not being able to turn left at the intersection so I can get to my house via a sensible route.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

.....which was exactly what the median was supposed to do, and it's been very effective. But as a pedestrian it feels a lot less comfortable to cross E/W due to the limited N/S visibility along the S-Curve. And as a resident in the area it's a pain in the @ss not being able to turn left at the intersection so I can get to my house via a sensible route.

I'm curious, did the City do any consultation with the neighbourood on this, or even inform them before it was implemented?

[racc]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The intersection used to be a bottleneck for N/S traffic during rush hour because of the stop sign. The packs of cars released by the signals at 41st and 49th would arrive at the intersection and then trickle slowly through as each car (mostly) stopped before proceeding. That, combined with the alternating required by the former higher level of E/W traffic meant that the intersection used to have cars there almost continuously throughout the rush hour.

Now that the cars don't have to stop, the packs flow through the intersection unimpeded and the percentage of time that the intersection is empty has gone up quite a bit.

...which was exactly what the median was supposed to do, and it's been very effective. But as a pedestrian it feels a lot less comfortable to cross E/W due to the limited N/S visibility along the S-Curve. And as a resident in the area it's a pain in the @ss not being able to turn left at the intersection so I can get to my house via a sensible route.

The city really needs to install a ped/bike activated signal at this intersection. That would solve pretty much all the problems.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I'm curious, did the City do any consultation with the neighbourood on this, or even inform them before it was implemented?

A few weeks before the median was installed we got a letter describing it and saying that it would be in place on a trial basis for a minimum of 6 months.

Several years ago they did a trial of a right-out diverter at the intersection, but that one didn't go over well either and it was removed at the end of the trial period. Somehow I have a feeling that this one is more likely to go ahead unless there's some pretty significant negative impact.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by racc

The city really needs to install a ped/bike activated signal at this intersection. That would solve pretty much all the problems.

I agree, but there's already another pedestrian activated signal only one block south at Waverley school. That light is much better located for the school children, and I don't think it would be a good idea to move it to 45th. That would mean two pedestrian signals only a block apart - I'm not sure how likely that is to fly...

[Alex Mackinnon]

In my experience as a commuting cyclist I generally found that I didn't use ped lights unless it was faster than picking out a spot in traffic. I liked bike islands much better because of this, but a 4 way stop generally works fairly well too as long as cars are expecting cyclists.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

which was exactly what the median was supposed to do, and it's been very effective. But as a pedestrian it feels a lot less comfortable to cross E/W due to the limited N/S visibility along the S-Curve.

As a pedestrian though wouldn't it be safer. By the fact that you can cross one side at a time, there by standing in the middle. You don't have to worry about both directions at the same time. At least that is how I cross on my bike.

And as a resident in the area it's a pain in the @ss not being able to turn left at the intersection so I can get to my house via a sensible route.

I think you hit the nail on the head. People are using the "it isn't safe for pedestrians", when in fact they are just pissed off that they can no longer turn left.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by cabotp

As a pedestrian though wouldn't it be safer. By the fact that you can cross one side at a time, there by standing in the middle.

You could do that, but having cars whiz by at 50 km/h a few feet on either side of you sure doesn't feel safer than having the cars stopped at the stop sign. And if you're a parent herding a small child or two then I don't think it's something you'd want to try.

[p78hub]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

You could do that, but having cars whiz by at 50 km/h a few feet on either side of you sure doesn't feel safer than having the cars stopped at the stop sign. And if you're a parent herding a small child or two then I don't think it's something you'd want to try.

I think the cars are going by faster than 50 km/h. The stop signs at least forced people to slow down...

[racc]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I agree, but there's already another pedestrian activated signal only one block south at Waverley school. That light is much better located for the school children, and I don't think it would be a good idea to move it to 45th. That would mean two pedestrian signals only a block apart - I'm not sure how likely that is to fly...

Well, it is a bicycle route and pedestrians want to cross there. That is the reason for all this controversy in the first place. Plenty of streets in the city have ped lights a block a part.

As it is a ped signal, cyclists don't have to wait for the ped signal to change. They can just stop and go when there is a break in the traffic.

The intersection was not even safe with the four way stop. A woman was killed their a couple of years ago while walking across the street.