Metro Vancouver Bike & Pedestrian Discussion

[s211]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Anything is better than the current state for pedestrians.

Then show me what the REAL improvement will be, not some hipster/urbanist utopia. Otherwise, they're outright lying and deceptive.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by whatnext

...They already screwed up Burrard Bridge with unsightly jumpers fence...

Actually I think they did a good job of coming up with a fence that fits in pretty well with the bridge's aesthetics.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Actually I think they did a good job of coming up with a fence that fits in pretty well with the bridge's aesthetics.

should have saved 5 million, and gone with no fence.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by s211

Then show me what the REAL improvement will be, not some hipster/urbanist utopia. Otherwise, they're outright lying and deceptive.

I’m surprised a craft brewery food truck wasn’t in the renderings!

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Who the hell wants to walk down the middle of the bridge with busses and trucks whizzing by on either side? They already screwed up Burrard Bridge with unsightly jumpers fence and now this?!

If you've been to New York, the Brooklyn Bridge has a somewhat similar set up. The walkways are no where near the edge of the bridge, though they are much higher above traffic.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by s211

Then show me what the REAL improvement will be, not some hipster/urbanist utopia. Otherwise, they're outright lying and deceptive.

If they can connect to Granville Island, that, since it's not convenient to cycle or walk there from the north side of False Creek.

Note that this is the current sidewalk.

It would also make the island a 15-minute radius from both Yaletown-Roundhouse and Granville-Broadway Station.

Really, this thing is about Granville Island. There is a reason the proposal started off from Granville Island, and expanded from there.

It would also be useful for connecting the proposed Phase 0 Vancouver streetcar to North-side pedestrian traffic, expanding its catchment radius. Considering that was supposed to be connected to the Artubus LRT...

[Metro-One]

I really really hope they mean two through lanes and one add / drop in each direction.

Cutting the bridge lanes in half, from 8 to 4, is a step too far IMO.

If anything on the north side a single lane should go to and from Granville Street and 2 lanes should go to and from the ramps each way.

Also any such project must include the direct connection to Granville Island (elevator / stair system) if not it loses a lot of its attraction.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

If you've been to New York, the Brooklyn Bridge has a somewhat similar set up. The walkways are no where near the edge of the bridge, though they are much higher above traffic.

Yeah but that bridge is over a hundred years old. When you watch pedestrians on the Granville bridge a lot are there taking photos, it is a great vantage point. Who wants to be surrounded on both sides by vehicles?

This seems like a typical project of the Vision Vancouver years, it should be buried with them.

[s211]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yeah but that bridge is over a hundred years old. When you watch pedestrians on the Granville bridge a lot are there taking photos, it is a great vantage point. Who wants to be surrounded on both sides by vehicles?

This seems like a typical project of the Vision Vancouver years, it should be buried with them.

Indeed, and what about the weather element too? I never walk to work over the Cambie Bridge when it's raining. It's just a miserable experience. I'll take transit or drive, in that case. What would make the Granville proposal any superior? Nada. Thanks for showing a utopian render, "planners", but I can see through it in five seconds.

[GenWhy?]

Since the early 90's, Vancouver's Transportation plans have called for action like this in their planning policy and has enacted it, so the City will only see more of these projects and strategies moving forward. If you look back to one of the most "ahead of its time" Transportation Plans around Expo that we see results present today that retrofitted old 50's and 60's infrastrcuture (post freeway plans) there is only a continuation of those policies.

Their road design heirarchy of the last few decades puts private automobiles at the bottom and pedestrians at the top. This bridge design is a product of that.

[Conrad Yablonski]

Originally Posted by whatnext

....This seems like a typical project of the Vision Vancouver years, it should be buried with them.

^ this-sheer idiocy.

Also someone forgot puppy dogs & ice cream in the rendering this time.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Since the early 90's, Vancouver's Transportation plans have called for action like this in their planning policy and has enacted it, so the City will only see more of these projects and strategies moving forward. If you look back to one of the most "ahead of its time" Transportation Plans around Expo that we see results present today that retrofitted old 50's and 60's infrastrcuture (post freeway plans) there is only a continuation of those policies.

Their road design heirarchy of the last few decades puts private automobiles at the bottom and pedestrians at the top. This bridge design is a product of that.

The same thing could be accomplished much cheaper by blocking off the curb lanes for bikes and adding crossing signals at the pedestrian x-ing lights at the offramps.

What irks me about this even more is the removal of the south loops. I have seen many accidents and hear accidents caused by people coming off the bridge and making left turns from 6th up to 15th and not seeing oncoming cars or pedestrian crossing the sidestreets. There should be no left turns and all traffic heading that way should be forced to use the Hemlock loop.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What irks me about this even more is the removal of the south loops. I have seen many accidents and hear accidents caused by people coming off the bridge and making left turns from 6th up to 15th and not seeing oncoming cars or pedestrian crossing the sidestreets. There should be no left turns and all traffic heading that way should be forced to use the Hemlock loop.

Where did you read that there's a proposal to remove the southern loops? City Council has approved the removal of the northern loops, but I've never seen any suggestion that the engineers want to do the same at the southern end of the bridge.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by whatnext

When you watch pedestrians on the Granville bridge a lot are there taking photos, it is a great vantage point. Who wants to be surrounded on both sides by vehicles?

This seems like a typical project of the Vision Vancouver years, it should be buried with them.

Pedestrians who want to walk along the outside of the bridge will still be able to do so - there's no suggestion in anything published yet that the outside sidewalks will be removed. Whether the crossings from Granville would remain is less clear - I guess we'll know when the actual proposals are available. The illustration may be slightly misleading. The Vancouver Sun have the contemporary photograph that the drawing seems to be based on, and it looks like there's a bit of perspective cheating to make pedestrians and cyclists bigger than they should be, but the lanes are probably accurate (as it's two driving lanes and the median),

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The same thing could be accomplished much cheaper by blocking off the curb lanes for bikes and adding crossing signals at the pedestrian x-ing lights at the offramps.

What irks me about this even more is the removal of the south loops. I have seen many accidents and hear accidents caused by people coming off the bridge and making left turns from 6th up to 15th and not seeing oncoming cars or pedestrian crossing the sidestreets. There should be no left turns and all traffic heading that way should be forced to use the Hemlock loop.

Then they wouldn't be able to have the Granville Island Elevator, which was the entire point.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Where did you read that there's a proposal to remove the southern loops? City Council has approved the removal of the northern loops, but I've never seen any suggestion that the engineers want to do the same at the southern end of the bridge.

Vancouver already removed one of the loops on the South End... I thought they would expand the Granville Loop Park to the 2nd Loop too, but I haven't found anything.

Though, maybe the South Loops could be useful for the Downtown Streetcar.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Pedestrians who want to walk along the outside of the bridge will still be able to do so - there's no suggestion in anything published yet that the outside sidewalks will be removed. Whether the crossings from Granville would remain is less clear - I guess we'll know when the actual proposals are available. The illustration may be slightly misleading. The Vancouver Sun have the contemporary photograph that the drawing seems to be based on, and it looks like there's a bit of perspective cheating to make pedestrians and cyclists bigger than they should be, but the lanes are probably accurate (as it's two driving lanes and the median),

Why would the outside sidewalks be kept? They're not exactly safe, there'd be no point, and it would give extra room for shoulders.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Why would the outside sidewalks be kept? They're not exactly safe, there'd be no point, and it would give extra room for shoulders.

Could be that they're cantilevered out from the supports and cannot support the weight of vehicles.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Why would the outside sidewalks be kept? They're not exactly safe, there'd be no point, and it would give extra room for shoulders.

Because the outside sidewalks provide access to:
on the south side, Fir St. and West 4th Ave. and Hemlock St.
on the north side, Howe St and Seymour St.

The connections to the central pathway will probably be from Drake & Granville (crosswalk to the middle of the street)
and West 6th & Granville (crosswalk to the middle of the street).
Those access point do not serve all bridge pedestrian users.

[whatnext]

Great takedown of the Granville Bridge proposal renders here, much truth in it:

Whenever we drunkenly walk over the Granville Street Bridge, or any Vancouver bridge for that matter, the predominant thought in our mind as traffic whizzes by us is “You know what would make this better? If traffic was on BOTH sides of us rather than just one — to fully immerse ourselves in Vancouver’s delightful urban experience.”...

...It’s a bold, some might argue impractical, proposal. But we’ve looked long and carefully at the jaunty, futuristic drawing of what the pedestrian/bike path would look like, and we’re rather smitten with it. It also tells us a lot about how the city sees where Vancouver is headed and who inhabits it. Here’s what we discovered:

Hipsters and dandies
Apparently, they’ll still be around when the path is finished, and they still prefer bikes (usually with baskets) as their primary mode of transportation. Plus, look at this charming couple. I bet that a hazy farmhouse ale with rare Norwegian yeast is also in their future...

https://www.vancourier.com/opinion/there...ed-granville-bridge-bike-path-1.23617771

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Great takedown of the Granville Bridge proposal renders here, much truth in it:

Whenever we drunkenly walk over the Granville Street Bridge, or any Vancouver bridge for that matter, the predominant thought in our mind as traffic whizzes by us is “You know what would make this better? If traffic was on BOTH sides of us rather than just one — to fully immerse ourselves in Vancouver’s delightful urban experience.”...

...It’s a bold, some might argue impractical, proposal. But we’ve looked long and carefully at the jaunty, futuristic drawing of what the pedestrian/bike path would look like, and we’re rather smitten with it. It also tells us a lot about how the city sees where Vancouver is headed and who inhabits it. Here’s what we discovered:

Hipsters and dandies
Apparently, they’ll still be around when the path is finished, and they still prefer bikes (usually with baskets) as their primary mode of transportation. Plus, look at this charming couple. I bet that a hazy farmhouse ale with rare Norwegian yeast is also in their future...

https://www.vancourier.com/opinion/there...ed-granville-bridge-bike-path-1.23617771

I liked this one

Cardigan-wearing same-sex couples pointing at things



“Hey, that’s where my apartment used to be before it was torn down and replaced by condos that I can’t afford.”

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Great takedown of the Granville Bridge proposal renders here, much truth in it:

Whenever we drunkenly walk over the Granville Street Bridge, or any Vancouver bridge for that matter, the predominant thought in our mind as traffic whizzes by us is “You know what would make this better? If traffic was on BOTH sides of us rather than just one — to fully immerse ourselves in Vancouver’s delightful urban experience.”...

...It’s a bold, some might argue impractical, proposal. But we’ve looked long and carefully at the jaunty, futuristic drawing of what the pedestrian/bike path would look like, and we’re rather smitten with it. It also tells us a lot about how the city sees where Vancouver is headed and who inhabits it. Here’s what we discovered:

Hipsters and dandies
Apparently, they’ll still be around when the path is finished, and they still prefer bikes (usually with baskets) as their primary mode of transportation. Plus, look at this charming couple. I bet that a hazy farmhouse ale with rare Norwegian yeast is also in their future...

https://www.vancourier.com/opinion/there...ed-granville-bridge-bike-path-1.23617771

It's funny, if nothing else.