Complete Street Policy

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

they fail to look at the amount of GHGs that an idling car gives out. example, look at all the extra idling the buses are doing from the TransLink report. now that cant be at all better for the environment.

but it is better to just do tokenism and "green washing" since it appears something is being done at least.

Buses may get stuck in traffic, but they don't idle. Trolleys have electric engines, and the new non-electric buses have engines that cut out when they stop (at bus stops or traffic lights). Next generation of TransLink buses will probably be all-electric.

[MIPS]

Well, I mean your only other option is to piss off The Bike Lobby, so why not build it now and remove it in 20 years when they stop caring?

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Buses may get stuck in traffic, but they don't idle. Trolleys have electric engines, and the new non-electric buses have engines that cut out when they stop (at bus stops or traffic lights). Next generation of TransLink buses will probably be all-electric.

i didn't realize TransLink only used trolley buses; oh wait they don't. i also didn't realize TransLink was replacing all of their buses soon? i thought they used them for ~15-20yrs, well into the future before the new technology is in the whole fleet. that engine shut-off when stopped wont always work, there is a criteria where it wont work all the time.

plus, we don't know how those battery buses will go, 4 buses on a trial doesn't mean they'll actually work for years and be cost effective. maybe they'll work well, but there is also a chance they may end up costing too much for the cash-strapped company and not work as hoped. we need to live today for now, and adapt to the future as the science allows.

also, i used TransLink as an example. but this works for container trucks, all trucks used in industry, as well it includes all the cars to. not many are electric, just like not many have engine shut-offs when stopped.

in 20yrs i am sure it wont be a problem... but with "ride-hailing" coming, that just means even more traffic idling.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i didn't realize TransLink only used trolley buses; oh wait they don't. i also didn't realize TransLink was replacing all of their buses soon? i thought they used them for ~15-20yrs, well into the future before the new technology is in the whole fleet. that engine shut-off when stopped wont always work, there is a criteria where it wont work all the time.

plus, we don't know how those battery buses will go, 4 buses on a trial doesn't mean they'll actually work for years and be cost effective. maybe they'll work well, but there is also a chance they may end up costing too much for the cash-strapped company and not work as hoped. we need to live today for now, and adapt to the future as the science allows.

also, i used TransLink as an example. but this works for container trucks, all trucks used in industry, as well it includes all the cars to. not many are electric, just like not many have engine shut-offs when stopped.

in 20yrs i am sure it wont be a problem... but with "ride-hailing" coming, that just means even more traffic idling.

Complete Streets is a City of Vancouver initiative, it doesn't apply in most of the rest of the TransLink area. Most of the mileage in Vancouver is covered by Trolleys. The new Nova buses (that turn off when stopped) also operate on the Vancouver non-trolley routes, like the 22. Entire cities in China operate with entirely battery powered fleets; it should be OK here too. BC Transit will be 100% electric in 20 years. The streets where the rapidbus routes will be (West Broadway, Hastings for example) won't be 'complete streets' in the sense that they'll add protected bike lanes until there's an alternative rapid transit system to replace most of the buses.

As has been explained on this site many times, the volume of traffic hasn't significantly increased in the City of Vancouver for several decades, and policy is to anticipate the same volume of vehicles that we see today in the future. To accommodate all the other additional trips that the increasing population and jobs will generate, the City needs to prioritize walking, biking and transit. It seems to be working pretty well so far.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

they fail to look at the amount of GHGs that an idling car gives out.

What the heck does this have to do with improving the bike crossing for the Yukon cycling route? They're not reducing traffic lanes on King Edward. Yes, they're restricting a half-block of Yukon to one direction, but that part of Yukon isn't exactly a big bottleneck for vehicular traffic.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What the heck does this have to do with improving the bike crossing for the Yukon cycling route? They're not reducing traffic lanes on King Edward. Yes, they're restricting a half-block of Yukon to one direction, but that part of Yukon isn't exactly a big bottleneck for vehicular traffic.

if you read what i replied to, you would see i wasn't commenting on this specific case. it referenced Richards St and the city overall, mostly downtown access.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

they fail to look at the amount of GHGs that an idling car gives out. example, look at all the extra idling the buses are doing from the TransLink report. now that cant be at all better for the environment.

but it is better to just do tokenism and "green washing" since it appears something is being done at least.

Thanks for the reply. Thinking about what you said about a little is better than nothing, but how long will even that last? There will come a choking crunch point and great civic chagrin.
If it ware possible to make them see, for example, the necessity, ($espensive, Have to admit), but great traffic infrastrucure such as London: Hyde Park Tunnel, the Prague freeway short tunnel weave stretches, Alaskan Way safely underground, SF Geary St, expressway, all fast shortcuts guaranteeing a shorter, smoother traffic flow. Why can't we do the same here?
No advocate of plastering the downtown with freeways, but connector tunnels - even short ones, seen in other cities, seem to make the whole "in, out, and around" process faster / easier.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

if you read what i replied to, you would see i wasn't commenting on this specific case. it referenced Richards St and the city overall, mostly downtown access.

Ah, my apologies. And you answered my question: nothing to do with it whatsoever.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

What the heck does this have to do with improving the bike crossing for the Yukon cycling route? They're not reducing traffic lanes on King Edward. Yes, they're restricting a half-block of Yukon to one direction, but that part of Yukon isn't exactly a big bottleneck for vehicular traffic.

Um, you'll want to kick trofirhen's butt for that; Future's just following the spin-off conversation that seems to come every time there's a new lane closure.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

IMO this design looks great. I was just down at first a Yukon today (as a pedestrian for the first time) and I must say these dutch style designs finally achieve something that works for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists.

[West22]

I like this design as an improvement to King Edward. It gives cycling access not by slowing car/bus traffic in any way, but through the elimination of free on-street parking, which is being replaced by underground parking.

If you look at a bike-route map of the city there is an unusually large gap in E-W bike routes between 10th Ave and 29th Ave. (14th Ave has partially shortened the gap, but only for a few blocks). An actual protected lane on King Ed would help, but it doesn't look like there is a plan to extend it much beyond Heather to Ontario. I would like to see a bike route on 22nd Ave, and the installation of a crossing light at Granville and Balfour (which is continuous with 22nd Ave) is a hint that the city might think so too.

If you click down into the Cambie Corridor Public Realm plan you will see that the plan is to have a complete street implementation (with bike lanes) on Cambie St as well. The problem is that this only extends as far north as King Ed, and in Cambie Village where the actual destinations are there is no planned bike lane, but instead a "Connector Lane" on Tupper St, half block to the West. I think this may have the potential to work quite well, but only if they design it right.
https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/cambi...realm-plan.pdf

The weakness of our current system of having bike travel lanes on quieter, non arterial streets is that if I am shopping in Cambie Village and want to move a few blocks North, I first have to ride 2.5 blocks west to Heather St, go 3 blocks north, then 2.5 blocks back to Cambie. Biking becomes much more efficient for multiple stops on a high street when there is a complete street design.

Perhaps this is why all the studies show that business incomes increase when a shopping street is upgraded to a complete street?

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by West22

I like this design as an improvement to King Edward. It gives cycling access not by slowing car/bus traffic in any way, but through the elimination of free on-street parking, which is being replaced by underground parking.

If you look at a bike-route map of the city there is an unusually large gap in E-W bike routes between 10th Ave and 29th Ave. (14th Ave has partially shortened the gap, but only for a few blocks). An actual protected lane on King Ed would help, but it doesn't look like there is a plan to extend it much beyond Heather to Ontario. I would like to see a bike route on 22nd Ave, and the installation of a crossing light at Granville and Balfour (which is continuous with 22nd Ave) is a hint that the city might think so too.

If you click down into the Cambie Corridor Public Realm plan you will see that the plan is to have a complete street implementation (with bike lanes) on Cambie St as well. The problem is that this only extends as far north as King Ed, and in Cambie Village where the actual destinations are there is no planned bike lane, but instead a "Connector Lane" on Tupper St, half block to the West. I think this may have the potential to work quite well, but only if they design it right.
https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/cambi...realm-plan.pdf

The weakness of our current system of having bike travel lanes on quieter, non arterial streets is that if I am shopping in Cambie Village and want to move a few blocks North, I first have to ride 2.5 blocks west to Heather St, go 3 blocks north, then 2.5 blocks back to Cambie. Biking becomes much more efficient for multiple stops on a high street when there is a complete street design.

Perhaps this is why all the studies show that business incomes increase when a shopping street is upgraded to a complete street?

The flip side is that I really don't want to be biking on a street filled with cars right next to me travelling at high speeds. I've biked on 200 and 96 enough times to know what that's like.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The flip side is that I really don't want to be biking on a street filled with cars right next to me travelling at high speeds. I've biked on 200 and 96 enough times to know what that's like.

not to mention that biking on a busier road leads to more pollution in the lungs. i cant imagine that breathing in more pollution is good over the long-term. deeper breathing from cycling means the pollution also goes deeper into the lungs as well. it is never good to breath in anything other than clean air/oxygen.

[scottN]

I also prefer the traffic calmed local street bikeways (i.e. Ontario, most of 10th avenue) over separated bike lanes because I think they are safer and I can ride faster. Sometimes they don't connect very well though because of gaps in the street grid.

However my final destination is usually on an arterial road because that's where the businesses are. Complete streets make a lot of sense in high street commercial districts like commercial drive, main street, downtown, etc so you can actually reach businesses by bike. I don't see much purpose in turning arterial roads through largely residential areas into complete streets because the alternative routes are generally better. The plan for cambie is really the opposite of what is required - north of 25th is where a complete street is needed. South of 25th the Heather and Ontario bikeways are perfectly good. I guess they are just doing cambie south of 25th because it's wide and so it's an easy conversion which doesn't require sacrificing parking or travel lanes for motor vehicles.

[officedweller]

I think it's also political - to increase the visibility of cyclists to the travelling public, without regard to those being more dangerous routes (ie with parked cars and many more turning movements by vehicles on and off the arterials).

[scottN]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think it's also political - to increase the visibility of cyclists to the travelling public, without regard to those being more dangerous routes (ie with parked cars and many more turning movements by vehicles on and off the arterials).

Well if they get it wrong what the travelling public sees is empty bike lanes. Then before you know it Wai Young will be mayor.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by West22

I like this design as an improvement to King Edward. It gives cycling access not by slowing car/bus traffic in any way, but through the elimination of free on-street parking, which is being replaced by underground parking.

If you look at a bike-route map of the city there is an unusually large gap in E-W bike routes between 10th Ave and 29th Ave. (14th Ave has partially shortened the gap, but only for a few blocks). An actual protected lane on King Ed would help, but it doesn't look like there is a plan to extend it much beyond Heather to Ontario. I would like to see a bike route on 22nd Ave, and the installation of a crossing light at Granville and Balfour (which is continuous with 22nd Ave) is a hint that the city might think so too.

I decided to check out 22nd avenue, between Windsor and Ontario on my morning commute earlier this week. The result was not good. From Windsor going west, you climb a hill to Fraser, then go right back down on the other side, then climb another hill to Main. My usual route here is along 19th and 20th, both of which are flat near Fraser then climb steadily to Main. Further east it looks like 20th is the flattest, as it stays high around Knight Street and links up nicely with Stainsbury to BC Parkway at Nanaimo Station.

The city's proposed eastward extension of the 14th avenue bike route (actually along 15th east of Prince Edward) is also bad through this section with a drop to Knight Street and steep hills around Clark Park.

One significant problem with all these routes is how do you cross Kingsway? Just about every E-W street is discontinuous. 15th is a rare exception. Perhaps 21st could work as a compromise, with a step up to 20th by crossing Kingsway at Inverness. On the west end it would run into Douglas Park, where it would step over to 22nd Ave and cross Oak Street to link in with Balfour.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by scottN

One significant problem with all these routes is how do you cross Kingsway?

Zagging across Kingsway by having a bike route go from "n" Avenue on one side to "n+1" or "n-1" Avenue on the other side wouldn't be a deal breaker, there are already plenty of bike routes that zag from one street to the next at various points. It's just a matter of selecting a decent pair of streets to use.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The flip side is that I really don't want to be biking on a street filled with cars right next to me travelling at high speeds. I've biked on 200 and 96 enough times to know what that's like.

I think I finally figured out what this short bike lane on King Edward is all about - providing cycling access to the Canada Line station at King Edward and Cambie from the Ontario and Heather Bike routes.

There is a similar feeder (in the form of a painted bike lane) on 49th, and of course the 10th avenue bike route gives reasonably direct access to Broadway - City Hall station. At Marine Drive they use a short separated bike lane running N-S along Cambie Street from 63rd to Kent. Also I believe that the Oakridge redevelopment will also construct a bike lane along the south side of 41st between Heather Street and the Canada Line station and mall entrance at the intersection of Cambie and 41st.

[Feathered Friend]

4. Gastown Places and Spaces 4:45 - 5:00 p.m. Engineering Services, in collaboration with Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability, is in the early stages of developing a comprehensive plan for the streets and overall transportation network in and around Gastown, known as “Gastown Places and Spaces” (originally titled “Complete Streets”

https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/ghapc...ec-16-2020.pdf

From the agenda for today's Gastown Historic Area Planning Committee meeting. Unfortunately, the link to the virtual meeting is broken.