Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

The left turn lanes on Knight Street will cost the same amount of money I heard Councilor Meggs say.

During the initial staff presentation the director of engineering said each one of the left turn bays that have been added on Knight street (~$4.5 million each) cost more than the Dunsmuir ($800,000) and the Hornby ($3.2 million) separated bicycle lanes put together. Councillor Meggs quoted him later in the meeting.

[jlousa]

My understanding is that the Feds helped pay for the Knight st upgrades as part of the Pacific Gateway program, it's also normal for ICBC pay for upgrades at high collision intersections, and Translink also chips in on projects like this. Would also be curious to see the breakdown on the quoted number above, as I know the city buys out properties at the intersection to expand the road, but once construction is completed, they resell the remaining land.

Didn't the exact same thing happen with the Dunsmuir bike lane? I seem to recall people stating that construction began before the council meeting, and the workers had to be told to stop and wait.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Who do these guys think they are! The government!? They're behaving as if someone elected them and told them to run the city.

You either have a surprisingly poor understanding of how civic gov't is supposed to work, have forgotten how Gregor & Gang promised more "transparent" gov't or you share the Visionistas demonstrated contempt for the process of listening to the public.

[WarrenC12]

I heard this morning that Hornby is getting re-paved at the same time the bike lane is going in. So there.. fair treatment for car drivers.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Uh oh, just checked in with Citycaucus and its Breaking News Councillor Anton is rescinding her support for the lane for exactly the reasons I outlined in my two posts above. (and for the record, I'm not Suzanne Anton )

I'm disappointed by this. I don't have a problem with her criticizing her fellow councilors on this issue, but that's a separate matter from whether the bike lane should go ahead. None of the issues presented to her with respect to the suitability of the bike lane have changed - so why is she now opposed to it?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm disappointed by this. I don't have a problem with her criticizing her fellow councilors on this issue, but that's a separate matter from whether the bike lane should go ahead. None of the issues presented to her with respect to the suitability of the bike lane have changed - so why is she now opposed to it?

Do you honestly not understand the outrage over this? When you invite the public to make presentations there is the implicit understanding that the public (who voted you in power) will be listened to. It has become clear that no matter what was said, there was absolutely no intention of listening to the public at all at this scheduled meeting. It was purely a sham meeting, to give the illusion of consultation. Add to that the disgraceful behaviour of some of the Vision councillors (Reimer tweeting "here come the theatrics") and the contempt for the public is crystal clear.

You argued that no clear case was made against the lanes at the meeting. Well, what if it had been? There is no way Vision would have changed course given they had printed all the signs, flyers etc.

[aberdeen5698]

> Do you honestly not understand the outrage over this?

I understand it, I just think it's silly. Do you really think that Coun. Anton expected the vote to go any differently? And it's not like governments at all levels (including those she's participated in) have never started implementing their plans before votes were taken.

What I take exception to is her using this as an excuse to withdraw support for the bike lane. She voted based on what was presented to her. None of that has changed. Why does she no longer support it? It seems to me it's because she wants it both ways.


> You argued that no clear case was made against the lanes at the meeting. Well, what if it had been?

Well then I reckon we wouldn't be building bike lanes . Does anyone think that the preparatory work done was so costly that this would have been an issue? Its got to have been trivial compared to the design work, public information sessions, business canvassing, etc. that had already taken place.

And if it turns out that the preparatory work had to be done anyway in order to accommodate re-paving the street, then I'm really failing to understand what the excitement is all about...

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by whatnext

You either have a surprisingly poor understanding of how civic gov't is supposed to work

Likewise. If you were too lazy to make your voice known during the consultation period during August and September, then you have no basis to complain of not being heard.

What this boils down to is that opponents have no legitimate arguments against the lane, because creating sustainable transportation options is the Right thing to do, so all you can do is bicker about procedure.

[tybuilding]

How walkable is your work or home location? Enter your address in an see, my place in Surrey got a score of 68, somewhat walkable. My work location near Edmonds Skytrain got only 43. The site uses Google maps to figure out places you might want to visit by walking.

http://www.walkscore.com

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

You argued that no clear case was made against the lanes at the meeting. Well, what if it had been?

Well then I reckon we wouldn't be building bike lanes . Does anyone think that the preparatory work done was so costly that this would have been an issue? Its got to have been trivial compared to the design work, public information sessions, business canvassing, etc. that had already taken place.

And if it turns out that the preparatory work had to be done anyway in order to accommodate re-paving the street, then I'm really failing to understand what the excitement is all about...

Anton was just on CKNW. Her excuses were pretty weak. But some interesting points were raised. She does support cycling in general. In fact, the city councils of the last 15 years have all been in favour of increasing cycling infrastructure.

Many of the complaints against the bike lanes were of the typical NIMBY variety, the same people who don't want transit in their precious neighbourhoods, etc. From that perspective, it's easier to see why city council pushed this lane through.

As a side note, Anton has to have one of the most annoying voices in politics.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by tybuilding

How walkable is your work or home location? Enter your address in an see, my place in Surrey got a score of 68, somewhat walkable. My work location near Edmonds Skytrain got only 43. The site uses Google maps to figure out places you might want to visit by walking.

http://www.walkscore.com

98 in Yaletown!

[IanS]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

98 in Yaletown!

My Yaletown location is only 94.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Likewise. If you were too lazy to make your voice known during the consultation period during August and September, then you have no basis to complain of not being heard.

What this boils down to is that opponents have no legitimate arguments against the lane, because creating sustainable transportation options is the Right thing to do, so all you can do is bicker about procedure.

Democracy is all about procedure.

I made my voice heard during the consultation period. The period which should have rightly concluded with the meeting. However I didn't bother to register to speak as anyone could tell it was a foregone conclusion.

I have no doubt if it was some lefty cause that was treated this way the usual suspects would be up in arms. However I am perfectly happy to see it all unfold this way as it is driving voters away from Vision in droves. The business community is now on alert that their voices are unimportant with this council. Instead council is beholden to the far left (google Richard Campbell's blog). Vision is making the same mistakes they did when they were COPE-lite, assuming the majority of Vancouver voters share their pet causes. We all know how that turned out.

[mr.x]

It was quite obvious from the beginning, after the previous kerfuffle with Gregor being caught on audio after the city council meeting, that the bike lane consultations would be all theatrics to make it appear that they were actually consulting whether this would be done or not....with fancy looking posters, info bulletins, and long meetings.

Sure, they do planning and preparation but surely not to the extent that they would be able to break ground within hours!!!

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I have no doubt if it was some lefty cause that was treated this way the usual suspects would be up in arms.

As I said, you have no legitimate argument against the lane so you're dancing around trying to stir things up. This isn't a left/right issue (the CFIB was weaselling for handouts for businesses, so that tells you how much they truly believe in the free market and survival of the fittest).

I'm politically pretty right wing. When I pay taxes, I expect to see a benefit. It angers me when my money is spent on services for someone else who is not entitled to them. 4% of trips are made by bicycle, yet cyclists are allocated only 0.5% of the roadspace. That is simply unjust. I have no interest in having my money subsidizing cars, as has been the case for years. I expect my tax money to benefit my life, not yours.

[Porfiry]

How did this slip by unnoticed...?

Plenty of parking is Hornby Street's best-kept secret
http://www.vancouversun.com/Plenty+p...465/story.html

Last week, I walked the length of Hornby Street and counted at least 24 public parkades and parking lots, an average of two per block. The same week, a team of city employees were counting the actual number of off-street spaces available for public parking on or within a block of Hornby:

Eight thousand, four hundred and forty-five.

In other words, if you want to shop or do business on Hornby, you are guaranteed a place to park in the block of your choice. There's a parking glut.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

How did this slip by unnoticed...?

Plenty of parking is Hornby Street's best-kept secret
http://www.vancouversun.com/Plenty+p...465/story.html

Parking in a parkade is superior to on street parking for a traffic flow perspective. I agree digital counters and signs should be implemented.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

98 in Yaletown!

87% for the heart of Metrotown (future center of the universe)

and 92% for my alternate Coal Harbour location...

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

As I said, you have no legitimate argument against the lane so you're dancing around trying to stir things up. This isn't a left/right issue (the CFIB was weaselling for handouts for businesses, so that tells you how much they truly believe in the free market and survival of the fittest).

I'm politically pretty right wing. When I pay taxes, I expect to see a benefit. It angers me when my money is spent on services for someone else who is not entitled to them. 4% of trips are made by bicycle, yet cyclists are allocated only 0.5% of the roadspace. That is simply unjust. I have no interest in having my money subsidizing cars, as has been the case for years. I expect my tax money to benefit my life, not yours.

I have a very legitimate argument against it, and the process that was used to implement it. It is quite apparent you have no problem with anti-democratic tactics used, so I will debate it with you no further.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I have a very legitimate argument against it, and the process that was used to implement it. It is quite apparent you have no problem with anti-democratic tactics used, so I will debate it with you no further.

Your complaints about "anti-democratic tactics" are laughable. The people of Vancouver voted for this Council, and this Council voted for this bike lane. You either do not understand or do not appreciate our democracy. Your idea of democracy, where lobbyists and private interests overrule the people of Vancouver, is an insult.