Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[twoNeurons]

I hear ya. The ONLY reason that I decided to buy a bike was because the Central Valley Greenway exists between Braid and East Vancouver as a mostly separated path with some areas completely separated from traffic.

As for locking up a bike on each side, why not just get a folding bike? Cheaper than two bikes.

[aberdeen5698]

> I owned a car in Vancouver but i still biked to work when I could... sure the car was faster but the bike is much more pleasant.

Sure. I own a car too, but still bike, walk or take transit for almost all of my trips. But I don't pay for a transit fare and then ride part of the way by bike, that just doesn't seem sensible to my way of thinking.

But I do sometimes take my bike on transit to get to some particular cycling destination - for example I recently rode the Traboulay Trail in PoCo - it was too far from my house to do the whole thing by bike so I bused to and from it.

Different way of thinking, I guess.


> Remember being a kid and going for a bike ride? You get that same feeling as an adult.

Absolutely. The first week I got back on a bike after a 20-year hiatus I had a huge grin on my face because it really made me feel young again (it still does, but I've gotten used to it now )

I think that opponents of bike infrastructure really don't get this. They seem to believe that you have to be a rabid maniac to want to ride a bike in Vancouver - they really don't seem to have a clue how enjoyable and fun it can be.

[ozonemania]

Hmm - where I used to live (in North Vancouver), it was simply faster and more convenient for me to bike directly to the Seabus terminal to hop on the Seabus than it would've been for me to walk to my nearest bus stop, wait for the bus to arrive, and go through its route to get to the Seabus terminal. Plus, bus frequency isn't always ideal. This would have easily added 15-20 mins to my commute time.

I suppose I was missing out on a 'free' bus ride with my fare but I don't think it would have been worth it given above.

[LeftCoaster]

Well regarding the seabus in particular it is a bit of a different story than a bus just given how awful riding over the LG bridge or second narrows can be. If I lived in lonsdale and worked for example at VGH I would totally ride down to the Quay, seabus over then ride to work rather than ride over to the LG bridge and take it over.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by bardak

I'm all for biking but using two bikes for less than 25% of your commute is a bit over the top. On the other hand does get to avoid 99 B-line.

That guy would probably benefit from the public bikes hopefully coming downtown Spring 2012

If you were doing a hypothetical commute from Surrey to the business area near mountain equipment coop - Link it would take 1H 18min on public transit. Assuming one can get on the bus as in this example a 502 bus is often too full like a 99.

By bike and skytrain:
Bike - 16 min
Skytrain - 33 min
Bike - 7 min

= 56 minutes so it can be a real time saver and one can get exercise.

I agree with the folding bike, it has been great for transit since I got one. It is harder to get a seat though with one. Usually I ride the entire distance to my work on my electric bike. I also have a locker at King George for the winter commute for the nicer days. 6km is a great way to start and finish the day.

Bus/bike combo trips are great. You can do a nice long one way bike ride and then bus back. I rode last weekend with my wife 35km to Fort Langley on the new trails. Then rode the bus back to Surrey.

[bardak]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Well regarding the seabus in particular it is a bit of a different story than a bus just given how awful riding over the LG bridge or second narrows can be. If I lived in lonsdale and worked for example at VGH I would totally ride down to the Quay, seabus over then ride to work rather than ride over to the LG bridge and take it over.

I completely get using transit to help move you and your bike it more the whole two bikes thing and how short each bike leg is overall was what got me. And the fact it was used as an example of poor suburban biking rubs me the wrong way.

Originally Posted by tybuilding

That guy would probably benefit from the public bikes hopefully coming downtown Spring 2012

The fact that Vancouver does not have a bike sharing program is a bit surprising (I sure that the pesky helmet laws have made it a bit less appealing). I hope whoever sets up the bike sharing program works with Translink to integrate Compass support with it.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

As for locking up a bike on each side, why not just get a folding bike? Cheaper than two bikes.

Not necessarily. The cheapest Dahon is about $500. Costco has full bikes for $160 each. Folding bikes are lower-volume products and more complex to manufacture, hence you pay a premium.

[WBC]

So where in Vancouver is the next separated lane going to happen? Any rumors?

[tybuilding]

Finding a better life on two wheels

http://www.bclocalnews.com/greater_v...128019423.html

By Helen Polychronakos - New Westminster News Leader
Published: August 18, 2011 10:00 AM
Updated: August 18, 2011 11:01 AM
Tom Littlewood leads three cyclists along the B.C. Parkway, a narrow bicycle path under the SkyTrain tracks and squeezed between Stewardson Way and some unused Southern Railway tracks.

"Between clouds of truck exhaust and the trucks themselves, it’s not quite idyllic.

Yet Littlewood, owner of Fraser River Bike Tours and Rentals at the River Market, is determined to get cyclists riding the Queensborough cycling loop he’s mapped out.

As he heads towards the Queensborough Bridge, he says the city and Southern Railway could make this stretch of the B.C. Parkway safer by turning one of the old tracks into a bike path, to create distance between cyclists and speeding trucks."

more
--------------
It would be nice to see some improvement under the skytrain west of the Quay. It is bumpy and at one point only a sidewalk width beside the trucks.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

I was going to say, sounds an awful lot like the proposal for 104th LRT in Surrey.

I doubt it. Considering the current trends for cycling infrastructure and every plan I have seen so far only considers on street cycle lanes. Even the study information shows bike lanes at best. 4 lane segment

[tybuilding]

Some article links:

Bicycling infrastructure pays dividends

Case for bicycle infrastructure

In case you missed it:
Translink Cycling Strategy It is a good read.

[whatnext]

A tragic cover story from the Westender on the dangers of not wearing a helmet. Worth a read not just for the message, but because its actually a well written piece.

..Jim and Penny try not to dwell on the hypotheticals, but that last one irks them. They’d been here in April with Dan and rode bikes, Penny asked him about his helmet and now she wishes she’d nagged him more.

There’s no question the accident was Dan’s fault, a needling fact that’s difficult for his loved ones to reconcile themselves with. But the doctors suggested there might have been a chance of meaningful recovery if he’d been wearing a helmet...
http://www.westender.com/articles/en...ews-and-views/

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by whatnext

A tragic cover story from the Westender on the dangers of not wearing a helmet. Worth a read not just for the message, but because its actually a well written piece.

..Jim and Penny try not to dwell on the hypotheticals, but that last one irks them. They’d been here in April with Dan and rode bikes, Penny asked him about his helmet and now she wishes she’d nagged him more.

There’s no question the accident was Dan’s fault, a needling fact that’s difficult for his loved ones to reconcile themselves with. But the doctors suggested there might have been a chance of meaningful recovery if he’d been wearing a helmet...
http://www.westender.com/articles/en...ews-and-views/

It's well-written, but I wouldn't say the piece is about the dangers of not wearing a helmet. I'd say it's more about the dangers of blowing a stop-sign and the story of his life.

After all, it's not the decision to NOT wear a helmet that's DANGEROUS, but rather, the environment he put himself in. The helmet could've helped him, but not wearing it wasn't what put him in danger.

Some might say a 1-year old learning to walk or a 3-year old on a tricycle in the back-yard should wear helmets, too.

Saying all that, I think riding in traffic on roads without a helmet is silly... while I think most would agree that biking along dedicated bike lanes and the seawall is FAR safer without a helmet than biking on roads is WITH one.

[IanS]

Originally Posted by WBC

So where in Vancouver is the next separated lane going to happen? Any rumors?

My guess is we won't hear about specific locations until after November.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Some might say a 1-year old learning to walk or a 3-year old on a tricycle in the back-yard should wear helmets, too.

My toddler bumped his head more learning to sit (and falling sideways/backwards/forwards) than he did learning to walk.

[GMasterAres]

Haven't looked in this thread for a while but I'm happy to see the bike vs the world argument has completely vanished. I'd love to see more bike infrastructure in Surrey specifically even though I'll never be able to bike to work (due to distances and time frames). There's been a lot of improvement but there still needs to be more improvement.

Just like pedestrians, I think all new road infrastructure projects should take into account cars/busses/bikes/pedestrians. ESPECIALLY in the more rural areas of the city where in the past street design has been lazy at best (bad shoulders, lack of sidewalks, no bike infrastructure at all). They shouldn't just be a 'downtown' thing but at the same time it should never be a bikes OR something else design. You need all 3 modes of transportation included.

In 20 years cars won't pollute so the environmental debate will vanish completely. At the same time we're building more dense and sustainably in Metro-Vancouver (well more then in the past) so you have to give people alternatives. SMART alternatives.

As a pedestrian often in Vancouver I'm amazed how many cyclists I still see cycling on either the opposite side of the road to the seperated bike lanes interfering with car traffic (the road HAS million$ bike lanes.. USE THEM!) or cutting through on sidewalks in areas where there are no bike lanes. Build more but also enforce with people cycling the notion that it isn't just a free for all and because you are on a bike it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want whenever and wherever.

We're going to have growing pains but in the future I think we'll be better off.

and I completely agree regarding helmets. It still amazes me how many adults I see riding with no helmets but their kids have them on. Like their head is any stronger to smashing into concrete than their kids. Hope they have great life insurance policies not to mention the horrible parenting being displayed (what kind of an example?) by their pure laziness. You see the same thing on the ski mountains. All the kids and younger generation wear helmets yet adults still refuse to.

Egos.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

It still amazes me how many adults I see riding with no helmets but their kids have them on.

That's because they trust themselves, but not their kids. It's a misplaced trust, of course, because they're just as vulnerable to lapses of judgment as the rest of us are. And, through no fault of their own, they can find themselves in a situation where all the skill and ability in the world can't save them.

[racc]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

That's because they trust themselves, but not their kids. It's a misplaced trust, of course, because they're just as vulnerable to lapses of judgment as the rest of us are. And, through no fault of their own, they can find themselves in a situation where all the skill and ability in the world can't save them.

Please actually do some research before posting. There is much stronger evidence supporting helmet use for children. Their skulls are more vulnerable to injuries. As well, children have trouble judging speed of vehicles and are also more likely to fall off bicycles. In countries in Europe where almost no adults wear helmets, it is quite common to see children wearing helmets.

[racc]

Originally Posted by whatnext

A tragic cover story from the Westender on the dangers of not wearing a helmet. Worth a read not just for the message, but because its actually a well written piece.

..Jim and Penny try not to dwell on the hypotheticals, but that last one irks them. They’d been here in April with Dan and rode bikes, Penny asked him about his helmet and now she wishes she’d nagged him more.

There’s no question the accident was Dan’s fault, a needling fact that’s difficult for his loved ones to reconcile themselves with. But the doctors suggested there might have been a chance of meaningful recovery if he’d been wearing a helmet...
http://www.westender.com/articles/en...ews-and-views/

The doctors are really being jerks by making her feel guilty. There is a good chance that a helmet would not have made much of a difference at all. They are only designed to protect heads from simple falls, not collisions with motor vehicles. Sure, they can stop scraps and cuts but their effectiveness at preventing severe brain damage in collisions with motor vehicles is really questionable.

Anyway, seems like more to blame is the poor visibility due to parked cars near the intersection. "There’s a stop sign there, but the parked cars on Quebec can obscure the view for even rule-abiding cyclists." The city really needs to ban parking near intersection for the the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.

[DKaz]

I crossed Quebec on 8th Ave a couple of times, didn't seem to be any worse than any other intersection.