Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[dreambrother808]

So you really have nothing to back up your claims then.

[DKaz]

I drive to work once in awhile, Dunsmuir is no worse now than it was before. It used to be buses blocking the right lane especially around Pacific Centre which would screw up traffic, now that the bike lanes are there you no longer have people using the right lane to cut in front of traffic. It's more orderly now. Traffic doesn't move any slower, just that now the @$$holes can't cut through traffic anymore.

Hornby, kinda sucks if you have to turn right but I avoid that route if I have to go east. I've done it a couple of times, had to wait two turn signals at the most, it can be equally as bad turning left at any given intersection. My usual movement is right from Smithe to Hornby then left onto Robson and that one is hardly affected.

[wrenegade]

No I can't offer any besides anecdotal evidence. Since the bike lanes have been implemented I sit in traffic longer than I used to. Merging from Main Street to the viaduct is dangerous (there are still two left turn lanes on Main, but only a very very short section to merge on the viaduct on ramp), I sit at the lights at Citadel Parade and Beatty much more often than I used to, turning right is difficult, it's seems more dangerous to merge from the PC parkade to Dunsmuir, turning right from Nelson to Hornby take longer with only one turn lane, and traffic backs up to Robson trying to turn right from Hornby to Georgia.

No it's not scientific, but that is my experience. I also find it tricky to merge from eastbound Pacific onto the Burrard Street Bridge, but otherwise traffic is unaffected in that direction (in my experience). It does back up the bridge deck in the right hand lane going northbound though. I will admit overall the Burrard Bridge bike lane works pretty well. I was a big opponent but it hasn't been a disaster (apart from an increase in accidents from Pacific to the Bridge, which ICBC has confirmed).

edit: Has it ruined my life? No. I don't drive these routes every day, if I did, I'd probably be a lot more angry.

[dreambrother808]

Thanks for sharing your experiences. There really is no way to add bike lanes to a busy downtown without having some mitigating effects on traffic. That however is not a case against the lanes, themselves.

We all get angry when our personal aims are altered by others or outside circumstances. We must each evaluate the degree to which that anger is selfish or justified.

As a cyclist, I have nothing against drivers (well other than the pollution issue). I just think that I also have rights when it comes to our public roads. The bike lanes seem like a small adjustment in my direction, within a road system that still heavily favours drivers.

[cornholio]

Dunsmuir is a parking lot. If one is traveling to Stanley park the time required for the trip is doubled at almost all times of the day. Before the lights were synchronized and you would make it accross downtown without stopping once every time. Now even outside of peak traffic times it is impossible to make it through without stopping atleast 2 times if not more, each time causing you to wait 3 or so min at a light while idling, and then having to speed up again to the say 20-30km an hour only to stop again a few lights down.

Personally I want the next council to remove these "trial" bike lanes as quickly as possible. That is my number one priority, and may other peoples. Too bad not enough people care or even know about the city elections except for the "nimby" types.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Before the lights were synchronized and you would make it accross downtown without stopping once every time.

If light synchronization needs improvement, so be it. That issue is entirely unrelated to bikes. My personal observation is that traffic backs up at the Citadel Parade & Beatty intersections, which seem to allot too much time for the trivial volume of cross-traffic. Again, that has nothing to do with bikes.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Dunsmuir is a parking lot. If one is traveling to Stanley park the time required for the trip is doubled at almost all times of the day. Before the lights were synchronized and you would make it accross downtown without stopping once every time. Now even outside of peak traffic times it is impossible to make it through without stopping atleast 2 times if not more, each time causing you to wait 3 or so min at a light while idling, and then having to speed up again to the say 20-30km an hour only to stop again a few lights down.

Personally I want the next council to remove these "trial" bike lanes as quickly as possible. That is my number one priority, and may other peoples. Too bad not enough people care or even know about the city elections except for the "nimby" types.

Bwhaha!

The philosophy behind the transformation of Downtown for the past 30 odd years has been that we are building a community - a city for people. Downtown is not meant to be a place where cars get to just zoom on through. Not only is it destructive to the community around it, it also assumes that movement of single occupancy vehicles is of the utmost priority.

Cars are not going away by any means, but they've lost their priority status long ago and that's a trend that is not going away. Sorry.

[IanS]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Bwhaha!

The philosophy behind the transformation of Downtown for the past 30 odd years has been that we are building a community - a city for people. Downtown is not meant to be a place where cars get to just zoom on through.

Yeah. god.. it's almost like you think there are actual people driving those cars or something. Sheesh.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by IanS

Yeah. god.. it's almost like you think there are actual people driving those cars or something. Sheesh.

Is it people driving cars or cars being driven by people? The difference is subtle, but relevant.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Bwhaha!

The philosophy behind the transformation of Downtown for the past 30 odd years has been that we are building a community - a city for people. Downtown is not meant to be a place where cars get to just zoom on through. Not only is it destructive to the community around it, it also assumes that movement of single occupancy vehicles is of the utmost priority.

Cars are not going away by any means, but they've lost their priority status long ago and that's a trend that is not going away. Sorry.

Yet a majority of the citizens who buy up those shiny condos drive, and drive allot. Oh and if you think cars have lost their priority then you surely need some more growing up to do. Cars have never been as important and used as much as they have the last few years. I would hate to imagine how rapid the increase in kilometers driven per person per year has been and continues to be(trying to measure the number of cars entering downtown does not show the biger picture and as such doesnt say much). Our economy continues to be more and more mobile, that is why even though gas is cheaper then the early 80's, expenditures on fuel for business and people is considerably higher. That is why our economy is much more sensitive to the changes of price of oil.

[cabotp]

If you don't like the traffic on Dunsmuir. Then either don't go downtown or don't drive downtown or drive on a different route.

I wouldn't be surprised if the master plan behind all of this was to hinder traffic flow through downtown. Why so that people will get fed up and either not go down there if they don't need to. Or change their mode transportation and or route.

[IanS]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I wouldn't be surprised if the master plan behind all of this was to hinder traffic flow through downtown.

IMO, this is clearly the plan.

[WarrenC12]

I often drive in and out of the downtown core on Pacific/Expo Blvd. It is never, I repeat NEVER, backed up, except for Canucks games.

Stop using the same roads and complaining every time.

[s211]

Originally Posted by cabotp

If you don't like the traffic on Dunsmuir. Then either don't go downtown or don't drive downtown or drive on a different route.

I wouldn't be surprised if the master plan behind all of this was to hinder traffic flow through downtown. Why so that people will get fed up and either not go down there if they don't need to. Or change their mode transportation and or route.

I'm sorry, but taking what was once an efficient roadway system and bottling it up for nothing more than myopic ideological reasons is nothing short of the height of stupidity, plain and simple.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I wouldn't be surprised if the master plan behind all of this was to hinder traffic flow through downtown. Why so that people will get fed up and either not go down there if they don't need to. Or change their mode transportation and or route.

Wow, what a brilliant plan. I'm sure downtown businesses love it!

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Yet a majority of the citizens who buy up those shiny condos drive, and drive allot.

Well, that's clearly not true. Car trips in and out of the core have naturally declined as the population increased, largely because densification has allowed people to make more trips by walking, cycling, and transit.

The relationship is pretty clear, car use declines as density increases. Ever since I moved from Kits to a "shiny condo" downtown, my car use has gone almost to zero, because everything I need is in walking distance.

[dreambrother808]

Owning a car while living DT is a waste of money, unless you are required to go places which are inconvenient via transit on a regular basis.

As for cornholio's argument about how cars are more important than ever, that's just verbal diarrhea.

[DKaz]

Yea, if I lived downtown I'd just have a transit pass, a bicycle, and Zip Car/Mo-Do membership.

BUT, if you go to the suburbs, car use has gone up dramatically. Surrey, Langley, Coquitlam, etc. has seen such an increase in traffic that they can't build roads fast enough (physically or financially) to keep up. xd_whatever number it is can complain about the roads in his neighbourhood all he wants but he needs to realize the cause of all the new traffic and that there are only so much resources to build roads. Or we could be like the US and stop funding schools and hospitals and build roads and fight wars to secure cheap oil instead.

Sadly, a bike vs. car war has erupted here again. Can't we just get along, seriously?

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Dunsmuir is a parking lot. If one is traveling to Stanley park the time required for the trip is doubled at almost all times of the day. Before the lights were synchronized and you would make it accross downtown without stopping once every time. Now even outside of peak traffic times it is impossible to make it through without stopping atleast 2 times if not more, each time causing you to wait 3 or so min at a light while idling, and then having to speed up again to the say 20-30km an hour only to stop again a few lights down.

Personally I want the next council to remove these "trial" bike lanes as quickly as possible. That is my number one priority, and may other peoples. Too bad not enough people care or even know about the city elections except for the "nimby" types.

Waiting at least 2 lights in a stretch of 11 intersections with lights (to Burrard) and 17 with lights to Stanley Park does not sound bad to me. That actually sounds really good!!

There is no way that the wait at each light is 3 or so minutes. I can't buy that. 90 seconds yes but not 3 minutes. Maybe because of the traffic it sometimes takes 3 minutes to get through a light but I could not see that happening at an off peak time.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Yet a majority of the citizens who buy up those shiny condos drive, and drive allot. Oh and if you think cars have lost their priority then you surely need some more growing up to do. Cars have never been as important and used as much as they have the last few years. I would hate to imagine how rapid the increase in kilometers driven per person per year has been and continues to be(trying to measure the number of cars entering downtown does not show the biger picture and as such doesnt say much). Our economy continues to be more and more mobile, that is why even though gas is cheaper then the early 80's, expenditures on fuel for business and people is considerably higher. That is why our economy is much more sensitive to the changes of price of oil.

I can not find it on the city website but I believe Vancouver's transportation priorities for movement is as follows:

Pedestrians
Cyclists
Public Transportation
Commercial Traffic
Personal Auto

From what I learned from the City of Surrey Engineering Department presentations at the lecture series they put on Surrey's official policy is:

Pedestrians
Public Transport
Cyclists
Commercial Traffic
Personal Auto

While it may seem like the flow of personal auto traffic is the most important (even in Surrey) the city policies are not influencing transportation projects. This is why cities are adding bus/cyclist lane traffic light bypass lanes (96th Ave & King George Bvld) in Surrey and bike lanes in the downtown Vancouver core.

Lets face reality that times are changing favoring discouraging personal auto transportation as additional population is added to city streets that can not expand any more physically in many areas.

***Edit

I found the reference for the priority list: http://www.tac-atc.ca/english/resour.../pdf/Memon.pdf page 4

Notable Quotes:

"The Transportation Plan prioritized the transportation modes in Vancouver.
1. Pedestrian
2. Bike
3. Transit
4. Goods Movement
5. Vehicles "

"The Transportation Plan helped set various transportation policies of the city such as:

ƒ Increased construction of pedestrian infrastructure
ƒ Expansion of the City’s cycling infrastructure
ƒ More bus, rapid bus, and light rail
ƒ Balance the needs of trucks and neighbourhoods
ƒ No new roads or increase in capacity
ƒ Protect Vancouver’s neighbourhoods from vehicle traffic"

"Residential parking standards will be reviewed as necessary to ensure they
reflect the lower levels of car ownership of Downtown residents, and the
objective of promoting transit, cycling and walking as alternatives to cars"

- Not sure if the quote about shinny condo owners driving "a lot" is accurate.

"Outside of Downtown, vehicles entering to the city have declined by 10% in the last 10
years, transit trips have been increased by 20% by the same period."