Advocacy, education and outreach in support of Vancouver's public spaces

Question 3. As a general principle, should parks aim to accommodate cycling paths within their boundaries? What are your thoughts on bikes and bike lanes in parks? (Please note: this is not specifically a question about Stanley Park).

Gwen GIESBRECHT – #201 – (COPE): “Yes. In general there has been an uptick in the desire for residents to opt for more active transportation modes for health individually and environmentally. In order to accommodate these trends ways need to be found to allow safety and accessibility for all users. Separating rolling and wheeling traffic from walking or automobile traffic makes sense. No user group is more entitled to enjoy parks than another and over time and with good planning I feel ways can be found for safe enjoyment for everyone, whatever their mobility requirement.”

Tom DIGBY – #203 – (Green): “Parks definitely need cycling paths to and within them. However cycling paths in parks should be for local in-park experience and should not typically be commuter routes. Commuter routes should be encouraged outside of parks, like regular car commuter routes. Regarding Stanley Park specifically, the report I read showed that the new interior bike-lane had created some issues for park users, particularly those with mobility issues, and a variety of other conflicts. But it seems to me that those issues can be resolved with specific improvements, and on balance having the new bike lane is a valuable asset. I will wait for the final mobility report before confirming my views.”

Carla FRENKEL – #204 – (Vision Vancouver): “I think this can be accomplished with a combination of decommissioning roads to create bike paths (like Lilian To Park) and creating well-signed/demarcated paths in parks. Care should be taken to minimize the loss of greenspace. Sufficient and covered bike parking is also needed. As a mother to 3 young cycling children, I see the need to create safe accessible pathways to foster active transportation from an early age.”

Andrea PINOCHET-ESCUDERO – #206 – (Vote Socialist): “We need better bike/roll lane infrastructures in parks, and yes need safe and protected bike and roll lanes so more people can access our parks. Far too many of our city’s “bike routes” are unsafe, with car traffic and often car parking allowed on both sides of narrow roadways. I would like to see a more ambitious effort to catch up to cities like Montreal or many European cities in terms of this multi-modal transportation infrastructure.”

ROLLERGIRL – #211 – (Independent): No answer provided.

John IRWIN – #212 – (Vision Vancouver): “We worked consistently to have bicycles and other active transport modes be fully accommodated in our parks. We were able to have staff make spot improvements to the Kitsilano bike path, and we passed a plan to site a new bike path through the Kits Beach area. I would take the same approach for emerging parks such as Creekside and the Northeast False Creek parks. The Stanley Park mobility study, which was crafted by me and seconded and supported by Chair Mackinnon, is laying the groundwork for more active transportation in Stanley Park.”

Tricia RILEY – #215 – (Green)“Yes, we should accommodate safe cycling paths to and through parks. As a city, we should support and increase active transportation networks, while also accommodating diverse mobility needs and taking a thoughtful approach to design and placement of separated lanes.”


Liam Murphy MENARD – #218 – (Independent): “As a general rule I am in favour of building more bike lanes in Vancouver, as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and connections to a healthier lifestyle benefit all residents. As mentioned in my response to the first question, however, I believe that the current needs of the city’s parks and recreation facilities now stretches beyond simply building an active transportation network. The hubs that the active transportation network had originally been built to connect fell apart as we built the network, and they now need our attention. I believe that thinking about a future placement for a bike lane when building park lands would be wise, as further development of the active transportation network must be in the plans as the population continues to increase. However, the placement of these bike lanes must be done in such a way that it does not intrude on the enjoyment of our parks for those who choose not to use it. Our parks should be accommodating and accessible for all residents, not just those who own and use a bicycle.”

Olga ZARUDINA – #220 – (NPA): “We will make sure that all cycling paths are as much protected as possible, that is key. And that will involve working with civil engineers.”

Kumi KIMURA – #221 – (TEAM): “Yes of course bikes do play a major role in how we commute, however to specifically say we would put in cycling paths with in park boundaries, a blanket statement is just not realistic…there are parks that it would not make sense to put in bike path as the terrain is not flat, there are too many obstacles with in the park…so every situation is unique and need to be looked at stand alone and voted for bike paths if it makes sense and of course need to poll the community, with proper input, as there might be parks where even bikers would not want to bike. Each has to be dealt with on its own.”

Michelle MOLLINEAUX – #223 – (TEAM): “First let’s talk about Stanley Park – there is already three bike lanes and so many people are no longer able to access Stanley Park, business is hurting, tour buses and Taxi drivers are no longer taking tourist to the park. We need to have easy access to the park for everyone which does mean reverting back to the original bike lane format of two lanes. We must ensure we have easy access for everyone.

Bike lanes in Vancouver, we need to build a wonderful and accessible bike lane network across Vancouver. We should be exploring additional greenways and utilizing back alleyway’s for bike lane access.

We must end this toxic conflict between those who use bikes and those who do not.”

James BUCKSHON – #225 – (TEAM): “Generally speaking, it is nice to cycle through our parks and most of them, ranging from Spanish Banks to Kits Beach, incorporate a nonstop cycling network. Kits Beach is unique in that its orientation includes a concentric area where bicycles and pedestrians converge. Therefore, in order to allow for continuous cycling without stopping, It may be possible to design a bike path that runs along the Cornwall side of the park to Arbutus; possibly a lined, shared path with pedestrians, and where it continues past Kits Beach and stays seaside along the road by Vanier Park. In Stanley Park, there is good cycling path along the seawall that is popular to the majority of the people. The last two parks mentioned have complex access issues with each, and discussions should include all modes of transportation for the collective benefit of all.”

Caitlin STOCKWELL – #209Serena Jackson – #213Tiyaltelut Kristen Rivers – #226 (OneCity – Joint Submission): “Yes. Vancouver needs a connected and safe cycling network, and parks should accommodate them. Ideally cycling paths through parks should be distinct from pedestrian paths. Parks should also be cycling destinations and should be equipped with secure bike parking and end-of-trip facilities like washrooms and water fountains.

And while you didn’t ask specifically about it: We support building a permanent bike lane in Stanley Park.”

Tracy D. SMITH – #230 – (Independent)“I would like to see the parks for everyone which includes people who commute and exercise on bike. Other cities around the world have found ways to accommodate various modes of mobility especially for recreation and I would like to see some successful models of sharing our pathways which we can implement in Vancouver.”

Craig STEVEN – #231 – (Independent): “I will not support pouring concrete in the middle of a green space so bikes can go through. If engineers come up with a feasible plan to accommodate more cycling, I would entertain it.”