Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[s211]

Originally Posted by city-dweller

They should just do it. I can't imagine any big changes from the consultation.

How true. In fact, they might as well use another word instead of consultation, or at least come clean and put the word in air quotes.

How I am reminded of Gregor's man-crush for how the Chinese government machine works.

[officedweller]

Here's what I posted to Price Tags:

Nice to see them reinstate two pedestrian sidewalks and the Pacific bike issue finally resolved (which has been dicey for both cyclists and drivers through those 2 blocks).

The key to the north end improvements is the double right turn lanes to Pacific and the widening of Pacific on the former Kettle of Fish block.
It also looks like the bridge itself will be widened – but not so far along as to interfere with the heritage aspects of the towers.

I assume that the City has analysed the south end double right turn lanes and will be applying that knowledge to two double lane right turn movements
– northbound Burrard to eastbound Pacific, and
– eastbound Pacific to southbound Burrard.

Given the extra timing required for the eastbound Pacific to southbound Burrard, I am very surprised that they have not reinstated a right turn from southbound Burrard to westbound Pacific. That movement could coincide with the aforementioned movement, as bikes would have to be stopped for that cycle. It would eliminate the “point of no return” aspect of heading south on Burrard.

One other comment is that they should lengthen the right turn lane on eastbound Pacifc to southbound Howe. There are a lot of right turns at that corner, and if there’s a dedicated right turn signal that will back-up traffic and if there isn’t a dedicated right turn signal, pedestrian traffic (blocking right hand turns) will increase with the Vancouver House Tower, grocery store, etc. slated to be built nearby.

[Large Cat]

I love the proposed upgrade. Brilliant. I'm glad they are thinking of pedestrians too.

[Klazu]

What, no outcry over one lost traffic lane? You guys surprise me sometimes.

[Klazu]

I have always thought that it would be cool to have a bke and pedestrian overpass from the bridge over Pacific and onto Burrard Street. The bridge is so steep that it would make it an ease to cross Pacific without interfering with traffic. It might look a bit odd, but would be great.

[Metro-One]

Looks great.

Unlike some plans in the past this one looks better for everyone, and doesn`t come off as an f-you to vehicle traffic.

It will also be nice to finaly replace those ugly temporary barriers.

I just hope that the road south of the bridge involved with in the sewer replacement is properly resurfaced and does not become a horrid patchwork.

[urbancanadian]

Thanks for the links! I've been looking forward to this, and for the most part I would say the intersection itself is as expected. However the widening of the bridge is a well-thought-out surprise and a nice compromise for motorists turning right onto Pacific. It looks like they will be building an addition to the outside of the bridge up to around Beach Avenue (below).


http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/burrar...n-displays.pdf

One glaring issue is the inability of cyclists heading east to continue across Burrard. And no pedestrian crossing at all.

Generally, I prefer two seperate bike lanes - one on each side of the road, as proposed - instead of both being on the same side (Dunsmuir, Hornby). But along Pacific, I'm not sure that's the way to go. The current Vancouver House plans show them both being on the south side, with space for them to continue west.

Further west (now Beach Ave), the Seaside greenway joins the street, also on the south side. Keeping both bike lanes on the south side would make it easy to connect the two - only a few blocks. But of course, there is no crossing because of the way the signal phasing works out.

Even though the COV is generally opposed to any grade-seperated crossings, I think an exception could be made here, with a short, relatively inexpensive tunnel under Burrard for bikes and pedestrians. Thoughts?

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I just hope that the road south of the bridge involved with in the sewer replacement is properly resurfaced and does not become a horrid patchwork.

I wonder if this could be an excuse to just revamp Burrard completely, extending the bike lanes south to 16th. They do talk about installing new curbs and ramps along the route. This seems like a street that could do without parking... or am I off base here?

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

One glaring issue is the inability of cyclists heading east to continue across Burrard. And no pedestrian crossing at all.

It's pretty easy for cyclists to drop down to Beach or the seawall or even the alley between Beach and Pacific. I mean, it's seems pointless to build a tunnel under the bridgehead when you can just go under the actual bridge. There are two staircases for pedestrians to do this right now.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Klazu

What, no outcry over one lost traffic lane? You guys surprise me sometimes.

That's because the east northbound lane ended just north of Pacific and was really just a right turn lane. The main concern would be queuing all the right turning cars so they don't block the northbound through traffic on Burrard, and they've done that with the double right turn lanes.

The issue that may come up is the introduction of a right turn traffic light, which will cause delays versus the free-flow slip lane (but half the time you'd still have to stop at Hornby, anyways, so if they coordinate the timing of the right turn and the Hornby lights, there shouldn't be much of an issue.

Originally Posted by Porfiry

It's pretty easy for cyclists to drop down to Beach or the seawall or even the alley between Beach and Pacific. I mean, it's seems pointless to build a tunnel under the bridgehead when you can just go under the actual bridge. There are two staircases for pedestrians to do this right now.

Agreed. Beach Ave. is a reasonable alternative.
There's a steep hill on Hornby, but there's also Homer, which isn't steep.

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/burrar...n-displays.pdf

...

I wonder if this could be an excuse to just revamp Burrard completely, extending the bike lanes south to 16th. They do talk about installing new curbs and ramps along the route. This seems like a street that could do without parking... or am I off base here?

One thing missing from the rendering (on each tower) is a "walking man" silhouette and an arrow pointing to the side.

I doubt they can revamp Burrard completely - since recent construction (Maseratti dealership and a condo on the west side) restrict the width of the right of way.

[officedweller]

Gilmore Diversion multi-use pathway to be built - Still Creek to Canada Way:

http://www.burnabynewsleader.com/new...orks-1.1950218

[wrenegade]

Adding an additional right turn lane for both southbound traffic turning from Pacific and for northbound traffic onto pacific means this bridge means will work as well or perhaps even better for vehicle traffic than before any bike lanes were added. The traffic lights will slow things down a bit, but the backups won't be nearly as long and it will be so much safer. I was extremely sceptical on how the original bike lane would work, and have to admit that it doesn't affect things for me too much. The exception would be merging from Pacific southbound onto the bridge as most people seem too afraid of accelerating into traffic unless it is completely clear. This new change will fix this with both a light and a second lane. It should also prevent pedestrians/cyclists interacting with traffic there.

I love the fact that they are repairing the concrete guardrails and adding the heritage lighting back on the bridge. I would also love to see them remove the chain link fencing that sits outside of the concrete guardrails for most of the length of the bridge and re-open the little lookout/refuge areas for people to stop and take photos.

I have to hand it to the city on this one, the plan is pretty well thought out. I would much much rather see them spend the money on this bridge than the Granville bridge (especially with that asinine plan of running a bike/pedestrian walkway down the MIDDLE of the damn roadway with no views and traffic buzzing by on either side).

As much as the city does to improve the physical infrastructure for cycling though, the two biggest impediments to increasing the ride-share of bicycles as mode of transit are the mandatory helmet law and the general lack of end-of-trips facilities in office buildings.

[urbancanadian]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

It's pretty easy for cyclists to drop down to Beach or the seawall or even the alley between Beach and Pacific. I mean, it's seems pointless to build a tunnel under the bridgehead when you can just go under the actual bridge. There are two staircases for pedestrians to do this right now.

You're right, probably not worth the expense. I guess I would prefer there not be many detours in the network. One of the Vancouver House drawings (can't find it anymore) also indicated a multi-use pathway along Rolston Street (beneath the Seymour off-ramp) between Pacific and Beach. So that's another option.

Originally Posted by officedweller

I doubt they can revamp Burrard completely - since recent construction (Maseratti dealership and a condo on the west side) restrict the width of the right of way.

I was thinking more that they could just replace the parking lane with one for bikes, so there would be 2 car lanes + 1 bike lane each way, and no parking. South of Broadway might not work though.

[Large Cat]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Gilmore Diversion multi-use pathway to be built - Still Creek to Canada Way:

http://www.burnabynewsleader.com/new...orks-1.1950218

Excellent!!!

Then they need to extend the trail from Gilmore station to Hastings.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Gilmore Diversion multi-use pathway to be built - Still Creek to Canada Way:

http://www.burnabynewsleader.com/new...orks-1.1950218

From the article:

TransLink is funding $6.3 million in roadworks and bike trails in Burnaby this year.

Of that, $5.7 million is for operations, maintenance and rehabilitation of roads on major arterials designated as part of the region's Major Road Network, according to TransLink.

...

The transportation authority is also providing $560,800 as its 50 per cent share of capital costs for the Gilmore Urban Trail section in Burnaby of the Sea to River Bikeway.

The new multi-use pathway will be built on the west side of the Gilmore Diversion, from Still Creek Drive to Canada Way.

So compared to how much they spend on roads, a tiny amount is going towards a bike path - that's all of 750m and already has a bike path for part of it.

[West22]

Originally Posted by urbancanadian

You're right, probably not worth the expense. I guess I would prefer there not be many detours in the network. One of the Vancouver House drawings (can't find it anymore) also indicated a multi-use pathway along Rolston Street (beneath the Seymour off-ramp) between Pacific and Beach. So that's another option.



I was thinking more that they could just replace the parking lane with one for bikes, so there would be 2 car lanes + 1 bike lane each way, and no parking. South of Broadway might not work though.

The seawall already provides a good cycle path for slower, recreational traffic. I ride there all the time. For higher speed commuter cycling traffic there should be a direct, higher speed option.

Beach Ave doesn't really solve any problem here, since an East-bound cyclist would have to divert 100m S to Beach, ride 300m E, then divert another 100m N to keep going. A cyclist who has chosen not to ride on the slower seawall will not want to zigzag onto quiet streets. We need to provide fast, direct cycling routes (in addition to the wonderful scenic route on the seawall) to continue to make cycling a reasonable commuting option to more people.

Also, the seawall cycle route under the Burrard Bridge is perhaps the most congested on the whole seawall system. Lots of sharp turns around restaurant patios and dodging pedestrians. It definitely needs a re-route.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Gilmore Diversion multi-use pathway to be built - Still Creek to Canada Way

Thanks for pointing this out to us. I'm very glad they're doing this - the stretch in question is a sorry gap in a route that has a great separated bike path on both ends. It's pretty busy with a fair amount of truck traffic, and a decent bike path is just what's needed to make it a safe and pleasant cycling experience.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Thanks for pointing this out to us. I'm very glad they're doing this - the stretch in question is a sorry gap in a route that has a great separated bike path on both ends. It's pretty busy with a fair amount of truck traffic, and a decent bike path is just what's needed to make it a safe and pleasant cycling experience.

I wonder how this will be done. They would need to widen the Gilmore Way viaduct above the highway if this is to happen. The existing sidewalks are very narrow or not existing on one side if I am not mistaken.

[WBC]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

Adding an additional right turn lane for both southbound traffic turning from Pacific and for northbound traffic onto pacific means this bridge means will work as well or perhaps even better for vehicle traffic than before any bike lanes were added. The traffic lights will slow things down a bit, but the backups won't be nearly as long and it will be so much safer. I was extremely sceptical on how the original bike lane would work, and have to admit that it doesn't affect things for me too much. The exception would be merging from Pacific southbound onto the bridge as most people seem too afraid of accelerating into traffic unless it is completely clear. This new change will fix this with both a light and a second lane. It should also prevent pedestrians/cyclists interacting with traffic there.

I love the fact that they are repairing the concrete guardrails and adding the heritage lighting back on the bridge. I would also love to see them remove the chain link fencing that sits outside of the concrete guardrails for most of the length of the bridge and re-open the little lookout/refuge areas for people to stop and take photos.

I have to hand it to the city on this one, the plan is pretty well thought out. I would much much rather see them spend the money on this bridge than the Granville bridge (especially with that asinine plan of running a bike/pedestrian walkway down the MIDDLE of the damn roadway with no views and traffic buzzing by on either side).

As much as the city does to improve the physical infrastructure for cycling though, the two biggest impediments to increasing the ride-share of bicycles as mode of transit are the mandatory helmet law and the general lack of end-of-trips facilities in office buildings.

Love everything about this. But I though that original estimate for widening the Burrard Bridge sidewalks to accommodate bike lanes was in neighborhood of 50-60 million dollars in 2009. Given how much money was spent on the south side and that they are spending close to 30 million on the north side intersection you would think you could have done this by widening the bridge 6 years ago and avoid all the bike lane controversy...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by wrenegade

As much as the city does to improve the physical infrastructure for cycling though, the two biggest impediments to increasing the ride-share of bicycles as mode of transit are the mandatory helmet law and the general lack of end-of-trips facilities in office buildings.

Agree 100%. If you want employees to bike to work, they need more than just a bike cage. A shower is essential, and a locker for personal items is handy.

That type of infrastructure should be far cheaper than a parking spot in high density areas, but employers don't provide that either, so...

[city-dweller]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Agree 100%. If you want employees to bike to work, they need more than just a bike cage. A shower is essential, and a locker for personal items is handy.

That type of infrastructure should be far cheaper than a parking spot in high density areas, but employers don't provide that either, so...

This is being addressed and the media is picking it up:

Last year: Globe article

And this from a week ago: Metro News

Even found one outside downtown (you need to scroll the pics -I don't know who's they are so that is why I didn't post them):
Colliers

Oxford properties has the coolest walk-through showing their Oceanic Plaza building and the bike storage rooms and the showers.

The MNP towers facilities were documented on Price Tags

But the big change at least for new builds is this years updated building bylaws:

pages 39-40:

Add:
“3.7.2.12. Bicycle Parking Facilities
1) Water closets, wash basins, showers and grooming stations shall be provided to accommodate
Class A bicycle spaces in conformance with Sentences (3) and (4), except that these
requirements do not apply to residential buildings.
2) Despite the provisions of Sentence (1), additional shower and change facilities are not
required if on-site facilities are provided as part of an employee fitness centre provided these
facilities meet or exceed the requirements of Sentences (3) and (4), and are accessible to
employees before and after their work shifts.
3) The number of water closets, wash basins and showers required by Sentence (1) shall conform
to Table 3.7.2.12.
4) There shall be no less than 1 grooming station for each shower provided, and each station
shall be
a) separate from the wash basin area,
b) equipped with a mirror and an electrical outlet, and
40
c) equipped with a counter top with a minimum width of 600 mm and a minimum depth of 250
mm.”

More interesting is the table that guides required number of storage spots, showers, grooming stations: here

The big question is about public facilities. What if I want to bike to a meeting downtown?