Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[officedweller]

In other bike lane news - I noticed that there are now painted bike lanes on both sides of Yukon from 6th to 12th and parking has been removed from the west side of Yukon.

[GMasterAres]

I'd be hard pressed to agree on the concept that bike lanes in downtown will or have had any long term affect on retail in the area. A retail business in downtown Vancouver should be built around local customers anyway not car based customers. If they get affected due to bike lanes (less vehicle/parking traffic) then they should really move out of downtown and somewhere else but you can't really blame the bike lanes for that.

It would be poor location planning.

On a seperate note, I spent some time in Denmark 2 weeks ago on a trip and Copenhagen. It's been the first time I've travelled through the area and I was amazed at the usage of bikes. From my observations and talking to quite a few locals about it, the main thing going for the city are:

1) It is basically completely 100% flat meaning even a business person in a suite can ride their bike leisurely around without breaking up a sweat, something Vancouver will always have a difficult time dealing with regionally

2) Many of the major roads are designed as I think all major roads in Surrey should be expanded in the future, Sidewalk for Pedestrians, dedicated seperated bike lanes, then dedicated road lanes. They have the space to do that unlike Vancouver which unfortunately has very tight road infrastructure.

What I did observe though is that despite there being 1000s and I mean 1000s of bikes all over the place everywhere, there is still a huge amount of car traffic. That kind of glares in the face of the notion I sometimes hear that bikes will reduce car traffic. Let's face it, in life things expand to fill the space they're given. You take 3 people off the road onto bikes due to traffic, traffic reduces, and 3 more people go "hey traffic is less" and jump into their cars.

I do like the idea of an alternative though especially one that can deal with the slightly too far to walk but slightly too close to drive distances people run into.

The other observation I had is that for the most part you don't notice them aka there is little conflict between pedestrians and cars. We walked all around the city and after a time I didn't even really notice the bikes buzzing around. They have their own lanes, their own lights, and because almost every road has dedicated bike lanes, you don't have 1000 people all on 1 or 2 single road.

Also for the most part the dedicated lanes seemed kept cyclists out of the more pedestrian oriented areas. Now difficult to know for sure how things work on a day to day basis when I was only there a short time, but it was interesting to see it in action.

Again the biggest difference I saw between there and here was geography. Copenhaggen is about as flat as you can have a city. the largest hill I saw was about a 5 foot incline over 4 blocks. So unless we flatted the entire city I can't see biking being as big as over there in Vancouver. Especially amongst commuters.

But I do think the dedicated lanes are not entirely a bad thing where done right.

[go_leafs_go02]

Translink's new bike map has gone live.

http://www.translink.ca/en/Cycling/Cycling-Maps.aspx

[tybuilding]

Vancouver's Separated Network Plan

http://vancouver.ca/pdf_survey/TP-Ph...ing1.2-Map.pdf

In the news today:

Granville Street bridge, lane conversion for Greenway space.

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...-creek-bridges

[Porfiry]

Nice, but I'd rather see a dedicated pedestrian/bike bridge over False Creek between George Wainborn Park and Granville Island. It'd do a lot to revitalize Granville Island.

[Klazu]

I like the Granville Street Bridge idea a lot. The current bridge is wide (8 lanes) and not that busy, so the center lanes could easily be taken into better use. Adding trees on the bridge would make it nice and green. Thumbs up for this proposal from me.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Nice, but I'd rather see a dedicated pedestrian/bike bridge over False Creek between George Wainborn Park and Granville Island. It'd do a lot to revitalize Granville Island.

Yeah, cuz Granville Island is such a desolate wasteland now.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yeah, cuz Granville Island is such a desolate wasteland now.

1) It can always be busier. I don't think any business there is going to complain about having too many customers. Getting to the Island from downtown is circuitous at best, and a fixed link could draw a lot of people over.

2) It's just a f-ing idea. Jesus.

[Porfiry]

Meanwhile in actual news, the CoV will be moving ahead with testing scramble intersections on Robson:

Vancouver to get ‘scramble’ intersection
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/met...307/story.html

The City of Vancouver plans to test a pedestrian “scramble” crossing on Robson Street, creating an intersection where car traffic is stopped in all directions to allow pedestrians to cross in any way, including diagonally.

The test crossing will be evaluated as a possible remedy for pedestrian-vehicle collisions at busy intersections, according to the city’s newly released Transportation 2040 plan.

Robson Street was identified as a good location for scramble crossings — also called ‘X’ crossings, diagonal crossings, pedestrian scramble phases or Barnes dances — because it is one of the city’s busiest areas for pedestrian traffic, said transportation director Jerry Dobrovolny.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

1) It can always be busier. I don't think any business there is going to complain about having too many customers. Getting to the Island from downtown is circuitous at best, and a fixed link could draw a lot of people over.

2) It's just a f-ing idea. Jesus.

No need to call me Jesus, I'm far too modest.

Truth be told, I prefer your idea to tring to refit a high level bridge.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Truth be told, I prefer your idea to tring to refit a high level bridge.

Great

[Dave2]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Meanwhile in actual news, the CoV will be moving ahead with testing scramble intersections on Robson:

Vancouver to get ‘scramble’ intersection
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/met...307/story.html

Some scrambles allow "regular" ped crossings in the non scramble phase, others only allow ped crossings when all vehicle lights are red (not sure what Steveston uses)

>Denver, Colo. eliminated the diagonal aspect of its extensive downtown scramble crossing system — installed in 1952 — in 2011. The intersections still allow for pedestrians to cross both streets at the same time, but the diagonal walk signals have been removed.

That seems pointless. If all vehicular lights are red, why not allow the diagonal ped movement
Denver, pre 2011
http://goo.gl/maps/4t75

[deasine]

Originally Posted by Dave2

Some scrambles allow "regular" ped crossings in the non scramble phase, others only allow ped crossings when all vehicle lights are red (not sure what Steveston uses)

>Denver, Colo. eliminated the diagonal aspect of its extensive downtown scramble crossing system — installed in 1952 — in 2011. The intersections still allow for pedestrians to cross both streets at the same time, but the diagonal walk signals have been removed.

That seems pointless. If all vehicular lights are red, why not allow the diagonal ped movement
Denver, pre 2011
http://goo.gl/maps/4t75

Steveston has one phase of signals for all pedestrian crossings; then one signal for cars but still allowing pedestrians to cross in the same direction of cars.

[officedweller]

Couple articles from The Sun - i.e. focus on bikes this week due to the conference:


Vancouver’s traffic circles, narrow paths create dangers for cyclists
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/V...725/story.html

ICBC backs plan for provincewide bike training standard
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/ICB...726/story.html

[WBC]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Couple articles from The Sun - i.e. focus on bikes this week due to the conference:


Vancouver’s traffic circles, narrow paths create dangers for cyclists
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/V...725/story.html

ICBC backs plan for provincewide bike training standard
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/ICB...726/story.html

When I was in New Zealand we rented a car and drove through the country side. Aside from driving on the left side another major headache was all those traffic circles absolutely everywhere. I used to hate them, but after a while I warmed up to them and started to like them as they allow you not to stop and are faster to navigate once you figure them out then traffic lights and 4 way stops. Smaller towns over there do not have traffic lights or 4 way stops - basically it's all traffic circles. From what I read they are much cheaper then traffic lights and safer in that they prevent high speed T-bone collisions. I can see that they may not be the best thing for the cycles or pedestrians as it is sometimes hard (specially on bigger circles) to figure out where the cars are going to go.

[WarrenC12]

I find traffic circles awesome as a cyclist and driver. So much faster, waaaay cheaper (virtually no maintenance), much more attractive with some reasonable plants in the middle.

Any accidents that occur will also be low speed fender benders, nothing head on, and hopefully no/minimal injuries.

[tybuilding]

I think if Highway 99 tunnel ever gets expanded we should have something like this for cyclists and pedestrians.

http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/08...nel-opens.html





It only would have to be an additional walled section of tunnel precast concrete boxes to separate it from vehicle traffic. It can double as the escape route.

[agrant]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Couple articles from The Sun - i.e. focus on bikes this week due to the conference:


Vancouver’s traffic circles, narrow paths create dangers for cyclists
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/V...725/story.html

ICBC backs plan for provincewide bike training standard
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/ICB...726/story.html

"The city’s website shows various symbols, including a bike with two arrows indicating where cyclists should position themselves on a sharrow, and a bike with one arrow indicating the direction of a traffic circle. But it offers little other guidance on what to do when a cyclist and a driver meet." <<< I've always treated those little neighborhood traffic circles like another four way intersection. And I'm pretty sure you always yield to the person on the right, whether a cyclist or car. It's insane that some people simply race right through barely looking.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by agrant

And I'm pretty sure you always yield to the person on the right, whether a cyclist or car.

Nope.

You are supposed to yield to any traffic that's already in the circle, which means yielding to traffic on the left. Once you're in the circle, everyone else must yield to you.

[agrant]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Nope.

You are supposed to yield to any traffic that's already in the circle, which means yielding to traffic on the left. Once you're in the circle, everyone else must yield to you.

Obviously, but when people arrive at the same time... which I think is what the article was referring to.