Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[officedweller]

Ultimately, the City may have to install right turn traffic lights.

But cyclists should also ride defensively (like drivers should also drive defensively).

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

I think the traffic will adjust in time. People will adjust their behaviour to avoid the congestion by either driving at a different time, using a different route, or using a different mode.

Or they'll just go postal and we'll see more road rage.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

I think the traffic will adjust in time. People will adjust their behaviour to avoid the congestion by either driving at a different time, using a different route, or using a different mode.

ahh yes, because we should always strive for that. making congestion worse, that has no bad effects for anyone. it is only 5mins-15mins. whats that? 3x longer? that's not so bad i guess. only an extra 10mins. so whats that, ~1hr a week? that's nothing. pshhhh

not everyone can drive at different times, not everyone can take a different route because of the water barrier and where they live on the other side, and not everyone has the ability to bike because not everyone lives in a condo downtown.

there are 3 bridges into downtown, 4 if you include Dunsmiur. 2 of those 3, or 3 of those 4, have now been decreased even as the region grows, the city grows, and cars entering downtown remains relatively unchanged. it is not a material change, so it doesn't change peoples decisions; among other reasons.

this isn't how you should be designing a city. it shouldn't be "if we make car driving worse, we will force people to change their mode with gridlock!" a race to the bottom means no one wins, especially the city as a whole.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

ahh yes, because we should always strive for that. making congestion worse, that has no bad effects for anyone. it is only 5mins-15mins. whats that? 3x longer? that's not so bad i guess. only an extra 10mins. so whats that, ~1hr a week? that's nothing. pshhhh

not everyone can drive at different times, not everyone can take a different route because of the water barrier and where they live on the other side, and not everyone has the ability to bike because not everyone lives in a condo downtown.

there are 3 bridges into downtown, 4 if you include Dunsmiur. 2 of those 3, or 3 of those 4, have now been decreased even as the region grows, the city grows, and cars entering downtown remains relatively unchanged. it is not a material change, so it doesn't change peoples decisions; among other reasons.

this isn't how you should be designing a city. it shouldn't be "if we make car driving worse, we will force people to change their mode with gridlock!" a race to the bottom means no one wins, especially the city as a whole.

The number of vehicles entering downtown has decreased 25% in the last 30 years even though population and jobs has increased considerably. The trend is continuing in this direction and will continue to do so with the opening of the Evergreen Line.

It also doesn't take a lot of traffic adjustment to eliminate congestion. You're quite right that not everyone can adjust their schedule, but you also don't need everyone to adjust their schedule. If only 1 in 10 drivers altered their behaviour, it would dramatically reduce congestion.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

The number of vehicles entering downtown has decreased 25% in the last 30 years even though population and jobs has increased considerably. The trend is continuing in this direction and will continue to do so with the opening of the Evergreen Line.

It also doesn't take a lot of traffic adjustment to eliminate congestion. You're quite right that not everyone can adjust their schedule, but you also don't need everyone to adjust their schedule. If only 1 in 10 drivers altered their behaviour, it would dramatically reduce congestion.

Well despite that rather bold claim about reduction in traffic by our completely non biased city engineering department, the independent sources (such as Tom Tom) declare us the 4th most congested city in North America after Mexico City, Los Angeles and San Francisco...So what gives?

[wrenegade]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

I think the traffic will adjust in time. People will adjust their behaviour to avoid the congestion by either driving at a different time, using a different route, or using a different mode.

The only other route to the Cambie Bridge is via Georgia, then along Cambie if one was to try and skip most of the bike lane. And Georgia street is already very congested from Thurlow to Granville for most of the day. As I've said before, with the upcoming traffic closure on Robson Street, the bike route should have gone there (and then to Beatty). It is a far more comfortable route for cyclists and provides a better connection to the east side of the Cambie bridge where the bike lane is.

Originally Posted by domusile

I think it's only a matter of time before a cyclist is hit or nearly hit by a car turning right off of nelson. And with the amount of speed a cyclist could gather down the hill it won't allow them much time (if any) to brake or avoid collision.

I've been saying this exact thing since this was proposed. Riding defensively or not, a car turning right directly in front of you doesn't allow much time for a bike to stop. I'd much rather ride in traffic on Nelson as it is easy to travel at the same speed from Burrard down to the bridge. For the more casual cyclist, neither Smithe nor Nelson has a very good feel with traffic moving quite quickly, and the small curb they've installed doesn't feel anything like the separations provided on Hornby or Dunsmuir (or the dividers on the Burrard bridge).

[Rico]

Originally Posted by WBC

Well despite that rather bold claim about reduction in traffic by our completely non biased city engineering department, the independent sources (such as Tom Tom) declare us the 4th most congested city in North America after Mexico City, Los Angeles and San Francisco...So what gives?

A couple of things, I am pretty sure you must remember this debate coming up every time Tom Tom releases their report. Tom Tom measures the difference between the fastest times recorded by their units (free flowing) and the slowest times recorded by their units ('congested'). First this is just a measure of congestion experienced by cars, not walkers, bikers or transit users (so about 1/2 the folks downtown), second it does not tell you anything about wether congestion is getting better or worse....but conveniently enough that horribly biased source statistics Canada does measure average commute times which is probably a better measure of how 'congestion' affects your life. For the record Vancouver as Canadas 3rd largest city has the 3rd longest commute and is the only major city that has had decreasing average commute times....even though it sure doesn't seem like it sometimes.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Rico

For the record Vancouver as Canadas 3rd largest city has the 3rd longest commute and is the only major city that has had decreasing average commute times....even though it sure doesn't seem like it sometimes.

There are a bunch of diverse reasons why the average commute times are going down. Part of it has to do with increased use of congestion-free rapid transit (i.e., Canada Line), part of it is the fruits of the livable region plan's encouragement of regional centers so that not everyone needs to travel downtown to work, part of it is Vancouver's very successful strategy of building lots of downtown housing which allows people to walk to work, and yes - part of it is even an increasing mode share of cycling trips.

It may well be that car commute times are increasing, but IMHO that doesn't mean Vancouver is a failure. Vancouver is trying very hard to provide reasonable options for people and actually seems to be succeeding, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

[idunno]

^^Great post aberdeen5698!

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

There are a bunch of diverse reasons why the average commute times are going down. Part of it has to do with increased use of congestion-free rapid transit (i.e., Canada Line), part of it is the fruits of the livable region plan's encouragement of regional centers so that not everyone needs to travel downtown to work, part of it is Vancouver's very successful strategy of building lots of downtown housing which allows people to walk to work, and yes - part of it is even an increasing mode share of cycling trips.

It may well be that car commute times are increasing, but IMHO that doesn't mean Vancouver is a failure. Vancouver is trying very hard to provide reasonable options for people and actually seems to be succeeding, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

What Vancouver does, thru Mayor Moonbeam & Vision, is give the finger to everyone from outside the city who drives in to work or to spend money. The Bike Lane Theatre is great for the literal handful who were fortunate enough to secure a place close enough to the core and choose to cycle. For everyone else Gregor says "take transit" but don't expect him to have the balls to raise property taxes to pay for it.

The Bike Lobby that has the ear of City Halll will say this is all a "win" that there was no carmageddon. They will conveniently ignore that there are thousands of vehicles idling longer and creating more GHG emissions. They will also ignore that biking largely draws commuters away from transit not cars.

[IanS]

Notwithstanding the complaints about the misconceived bike lanes (mine among them) Vision won the majority on council last election. Unfortunately, we're just going to have to live with the consequences of that vote.

I just hope the drivers stuck in the new, artificially created congestion remember all of this come the next election.

[Large Cat]

Originally Posted by IanS

Notwithstanding the complaints about the misconceived bike lanes (mine among them) Vision won the majority on council last election. Unfortunately, we're just going to have to live with the consequences of that vote.

I just hope the drivers stuck in the new, artificially created congestion remember all of this come the next election.

If you sell your cars you can donate the money to the NPA.

[IanS]

Originally Posted by Large Cat

If you sell your cars you can donate the money to the NPA.

I'm on it!

I never drive anyway, so I hardly need the stupid thing.

[WarrenC12]

I have some questions for those so against these lanes:

1. Did anybody attend the public consultation on the bike lanes?
2. Do you have better suggestions for where bike lanes should be?

Bike traffic is growing exponentially, and car traffic is flat or falling. If you don't agree with the traffic counts, I'm sorry I can't take you seriously.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What Vancouver does, thru Mayor Moonbeam & Vision, is give the finger to everyone from outside the city who drives in to work or to spend money. The Bike Lane Theatre is great for the literal handful who were fortunate enough to secure a place close enough to the core and choose to cycle. For everyone else Gregor says "take transit" but don't expect him to have the balls to raise property taxes to pay for it.

The Bike Lobby that has the ear of City Halll will say this is all a "win" that there was no carmageddon. They will conveniently ignore that there are thousands of vehicles idling longer and creating more GHG emissions. They will also ignore that biking largely draws commuters away from transit not cars.

When I've driven to downtown Vancouver or near Vancouver City Hall from New Westminster (and yes, during rush hours), the Vancouver portion is always way better than the Burnaby or New West portions. I simply don't see this "giving the finger" that you talk about.

[wrenegade]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I have some questions for those so against these lanes:

1. Did anybody attend the public consultation on the bike lanes?

Yes. As someone who uses this exact commute route (on my way from Olympic Village to West Van) I am one of the targets. However, I am not the typical "commuter" as I race, ride generally 250km+ a week during the summer and am very comfortable in traffic.

2. Do you have better suggestions for where bike lanes should be?

Robson westbound and Helmcken eastbound. The city is already closing Robson between Hornby and Howe to vehicle traffic and with that, vehicle traffic on the whole street will decrease. It's a perfect opportunity for a bike lane. There wouldn't be any conflicts turning either direction onto the Hornby bike lane, and the Richards & Robson intersection is far less busy than Smithe & Richards. Separately, Helmcken already is a bike route! Why not upgrade it to a AAA route. It's a far less busy street. The Chilco bike route runs through a park so I don't see a reason why the Helmcken one couldn't continue through Helmcken park, then down to Pacific and access the Cambie bridge from the loop ramps off of Marinaside/Cooperage way.

I don't see how it helps the city by taking a lane each away from two of the busiest east/west one way streets in the city. It will only increase congestion (it already has). Backing up Robson/Helmcken doesn't really affect traffic getting to/from the Cambie bridge, and the slower moving vehicle on those streets would create a much nicer feel for casual cyclists.

I am all for better cycling infrastructure in this city, but it has to be done while balancing other modes of transportation as well. I still maintain that the two largest obstacles to increasing the number of cyclists as a percentage of all commuters is 1; the mandatory helmet law, and 2; the lack of end of trip facilities. Don't get me wrong, you should probably always wear a helmet when out riding. But, if I'm biking from the west end to my office downtown and I can be on quiet streets and/or separated bike lanes the entire way, I'm not wearing a helmet. For short trips that I wouldn't get sweaty, I don't want to have to get to the office then go to the washroom and spend 10 minutes doing my hair. Call me vain, but otherwise I'd look like a 10 year old kid who just took of a batting helmet on the baseball diamond.

For those of us who have longer commutes, end of trip facilities are paramount. I only bike to work 2-3 days a week as I don't have a shower to change here. I have to leave my car overnight, ride to work, drive to a shower and drive back. It's about an hour to do the whole exercise, even when the ride to work is only 20-25 mins. I have friends who'd bike to work all of the time but work in office towers without showers and some where bikes are also banned in the building. The end of trip facilities only become more important as the weather turns in the fall/winter.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Robson westbound and Helmcken eastbound. The city is already closing Robson between Hornby and Howe to vehicle traffic and with that, vehicle traffic on the whole street will decrease. It's a perfect opportunity for a bike lane. There wouldn't be any conflicts turning either direction onto the Hornby bike lane, and the Richards & Robson intersection is far less busy than Smithe & Richards. Separately, Helmcken already is a bike route! Why not upgrade it to a AAA route. It's a far less busy street. The Chilco bike route runs through a park so I don't see a reason why the Helmcken one couldn't continue through Helmcken park, then down to Pacific and access the Cambie bridge from the loop ramps off of Marinaside/Cooperage way.

I am all for better cycling infrastructure in this city, but it has to be done while balancing other modes of transportation as well. I still maintain that the two largest obstacles to increasing the number of cyclists as a percentage of all commuters is 1; the mandatory helmet law, and 2; the lack of end of trip facilities. Don't get me wrong, you should probably always wear a helmet when out riding. But, if I'm biking from the west end to my office downtown and I can be on quiet streets and/or separated bike lanes the entire way, I'm not wearing a helmet. For short trips that I wouldn't get sweaty, I don't want to have to get to the office then go to the washroom and spend 10 minutes doing my hair. Call me vain, but otherwise I'd look like a 10 year old kid who just took of a batting helmet on the baseball diamond.

For those of us who have longer commutes, end of trip facilities are paramount. I only bike to work 2-3 days a week as I don't have a shower to change here. I have to leave my car overnight, ride to work, drive to a shower and drive back. It's about an hour to do the whole exercise, even when the ride to work is only 20-25 mins. I have friends who'd bike to work all of the time but work in office towers without showers and some where bikes are also banned in the building. The end of trip facilities only become more important as the weather turns in the fall/winter.

I also commute and I agree with your primary Issue 1 and 2. I also wear a helmet to commute but don't usually for a weekend ride on the seawall, particularly in this weather. And showers are key. My choice on whether to use a bike any given day also depends on my schedule and what clothing I need to wear. I've found some bags that do an adequate job of keeping a shirt wrinkle-free, but it's a bit of an extra hassle on some days.

As for routing, I agree with Robson, the route should have guided people from the bridge, up Beatty and then west on Robson.

However going eastbound it's less clear. Helmcken is a mess between about Homer and Pacific. I don't know how you get bike traffic on to the bridge from there.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Yes. As someone who uses this exact commute route (on my way from Olympic Village to West Van) I am one of the targets. However, I am not the typical "commuter" as I race, ride generally 250km+ a week during the summer and am very comfortable in traffic.



Robson westbound and Helmcken eastbound. The city is already closing Robson between Hornby and Howe to vehicle traffic and with that, vehicle traffic on the whole street will decrease. It's a perfect opportunity for a bike lane. There wouldn't be any conflicts turning either direction onto the Hornby bike lane, and the Richards & Robson intersection is far less busy than Smithe & Richards. Separately, Helmcken already is a bike route! Why not upgrade it to a AAA route. It's a far less busy street. The Chilco bike route runs through a park so I don't see a reason why the Helmcken one couldn't continue through Helmcken park, then down to Pacific and access the Cambie bridge from the loop ramps off of Marinaside/Cooperage way.

I don't see how it helps the city by taking a lane each away from two of the busiest east/west one way streets in the city. It will only increase congestion (it already has). Backing up Robson/Helmcken doesn't really affect traffic getting to/from the Cambie bridge, and the slower moving vehicle on those streets would create a much nicer feel for casual cyclists.

I am all for better cycling infrastructure in this city, but it has to be done while balancing other modes of transportation as well. I still maintain that the two largest obstacles to increasing the number of cyclists as a percentage of all commuters is 1; the mandatory helmet law, and 2; the lack of end of trip facilities. Don't get me wrong, you should probably always wear a helmet when out riding. But, if I'm biking from the west end to my office downtown and I can be on quiet streets and/or separated bike lanes the entire way, I'm not wearing a helmet. For short trips that I wouldn't get sweaty, I don't want to have to get to the office then go to the washroom and spend 10 minutes doing my hair. Call me vain, but otherwise I'd look like a 10 year old kid who just took of a batting helmet on the baseball diamond.

For those of us who have longer commutes, end of trip facilities are paramount. I only bike to work 2-3 days a week as I don't have a shower to change here. I have to leave my car overnight, ride to work, drive to a shower and drive back. It's about an hour to do the whole exercise, even when the ride to work is only 20-25 mins. I have friends who'd bike to work all of the time but work in office towers without showers and some where bikes are also banned in the building. The end of trip facilities only become more important as the weather turns in the fall/winter.

Again you make perfect sense.

Why the city prioritizes vehicle storage (parking) over actually moving people and goods is mystifying. They are too addicted to parking revenue (while at the same time being anti-car) to ever take street parking away on Robson.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Why the city prioritizes vehicle storage (parking) over actually moving people and goods is mystifying.

A large part of it is because any move to reduce parking raises a huge howl from businesses. Although as we've seen with the Dunsmuir bike lanes they're a lot less dependent on street parking than they think they are.

[officedweller]

Burrard Bridge traffic seems to flow reasonably well despite the construction.
There's probably been a big diversion to Granville Bridge.

My usual route is westbound Pacific, then left onto southbound Burrard Bridge and there seems to be fewer backups than before construction.