Key topics up for discussion: funding for active transportation; Chinatown; the accessibility of City-owned assets; proposed City funding for new police and mental health nurses; and, transport (congestion) pricing.

Park Board – Monday, November 14, 2022 

This is the first official (post-inauguration) meeting of the new Park Board.

General Manager’s Report

No details available on website.

VPSN Comment – For those interested in showing support for the keeping Stanley Park Temporary Bike Lane, community members behind the Love the Lane initiative are suggesting that letters be sent to the new Commissioners. See their website for more information.

City Council – Tuesday, November 15, 2022

Report – Applications to Government of British Columbia Funding Programs

A recommendation that the City pursue funding for related to (1) Flood mitigation around Still Creek, (2) Active transportation improvements as part of the Granville Bridge Connector, and (3) E-bike connections

VPSN Comment – We support these recommendations.

Motion – Urgent Measures to Uplift Vancouver’s Chinatown

As drafted, this motion directs City staff to prepare a draft action plan to “uplift Chinatown” by January 2023. The plan would include “recommendations for enhanced support from Streets & Engineering including robust street, alley, and sidewalk cleaning, litter and needle pick-up, new graffiti removal strategies, place-making, new murals or local artwork, as well as outreach opportunities that include local community groups in graffiti clean-ups, safe walks, and seniors support.” The motion also sets out a request for funding and bylaw changes, as well as “a satellite City office in Chinatown… to provide Mayor and Council with the ability to work from the space and meet with community members as desired.”

VPSN Comment – We support efforts to improve streets and public spaces in the area, as well as the idea of improved outreach and a satellite office. We note that there are many other neighbourhoods in Vancouver that are home to other equity-denied communities with their own rich cultural histories. With a Chinatown Transformation initiative already underway in Chinatown, this motion invites the question: how can the City ensure an equitable approach to other cultural neighbourhoods?

Motion – Accessibility Audit of all City-Owned Assets

City Council adopted the City’s first Accessibility Strategy in July of this year, with a goal to have phase 1 in place by fall 2022. This motion directs City staff “to report back with an update on the City’s Accessibility Strategy by the end of Q1 of 2023, including information on accessibility audits completed to date and an action plan with associated costs to complete accessibility audits of all remaining City facilities and assets.” It also asks staff to include “any and all information that would be relevant to achieving the goal to make Vancouver the most accessible city in the world.”

VPSN Comment – We support this motion, and suggest that it could be strengthened by including the City’s Persons With Disabilities Advisory Committee and Seniors Advisory Committee as part of the review of the update.

Motion – Enabling the Requisitioning and Hiring of 100 New Police Officers and 100 Mental Health Nurses

This motion seeks to “empower the Mayor to write to the Vancouver Police Board (VPB) and the Board of Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH)” … to advise them that funding will made available for hiring 100 new police officers and 100 mental health nurses. The motion further allocates “an initial block of funding” in the amount of $4.5 million for the hiring of new police officers, and $1.5 million for VCH to hire new nurses “on or after January 1, 2023.”

VPSN Comment – We acknowledge the significant challenges that the City is facing in terms of social disorder, and perceptions of safety. Within the context of the pandemic, heightened housing and income insecurity, a poisoned drug supply, and increasing challenges around mental health and well-being, additional supports and action are desperately needed. To this end, we support the hiring of more mental health nurses as part of the solution. However, the prospect of City directly contributing funds to an Provincial service sets a notable and potentially concerning precedent.

We do not support the hiring of more police officers. With about a fifth of the City’s budget already going to policing (one of the highest proportions of any large Canadian city) we do not feel that further increases to the police budget are the best way to deal with the significant and complex challenges outlined above. We feel these funds could better used to invest in alternative, more trauma-informed approaches to dealing with concerns around community well-being.

Finally, we are unclear about the mathematics of the funding set out in the motion – as neither the $4.5m for 100 police OR the $1.5m for 100 mental nurses will cover the costs of these positions. It would be helpful if the motion outlined whether the City would expect to be providing further funding (after the “initial block”), or if the expectation is that the Province would also contribute funding. If the latter – have there been any discussions on this?

Motion – Transport Pricing – “Stopping the Road Tax”

In November 2020, City council approved the Climate Emergency Action Plan, and several actions contained therein focused on reducing transportation related emissions. One part of this work included Council direction “to assess the feasibility of transport pricing” for the city core. This work involved studying the feasibility of imposing “a fee for vehicles to drive into, and through Vancouver’s city centre.” The present motion seeks to suspend all work related to transportation pricing because of concerns around public support.

VPSN Comment – Given the fact that staff were directed to undertake study of this work in 2020, we feel it would be prudent to receive and review the results of this work first, before making any decisions. The climate response needs to be tackled with the benefit of evidence, which this work was aimed at identifying. Given that transport pricing has been used effectively in a number of cities around the world (including London, Stockholm, Milan and elsewhere), a bit more time to review the materials seems more than appropriate.

City Council – Policy & Strategic Priorities Committee , November 16, 2022

No public space related items yet noted; however, requests to speak to any motions on Tuesday, November 11, 2022 may be referred to the Wednesday meeting.

If you’ve walked the Arbutus Greenway lately, you’ve probably noticed that the temporary pathway is all paved now. Every time I go on it, I’m encouraged to see it well used by pedestrians and cyclists alike.

Time for an update.

From January 18 to February 15, the City ran an extensive public consultation gathering feedback on what people wanted from the greenway in its final form. The results are now in, and a comprehensive summary and short video are posted online.

The City also issued an RFP for consultants bidding on engineering, landscaping and other work associated with the permanent path. The RFP, which incorporated the results of the public consultation, closed on April 4.

So what’s the upshot?

What Vancouverites want

In the January–February consultation, the City asked residents for input on what would most entice them to use the greenway. Stakeholders, members of the public and City advisory committees were all involved in this process of articulating values.

The City held online Talk Vancouver and paper questionnaires, three stakeholder meetings, three public open houses, three “Pop-Up City Hall” events, a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” and meetings with four of the City’s advisory committees: children, youth and families; persons with disabilities; urban Aboriginal; and active transportation. The City reports more than 4,000 interactions with participants through these activities, including almost 3,000 responses to questionnaires.

Having participated in the second of the three stakeholder meetings (“Transportation and urban design”), I’m encouraged that the values informing the VPSN’s own advocacy for the greenway going back many months are highly consistent with the main objectives articulated by the public in the recent consultation. As reported by the City, the public wants the greenway to:

• be “a high-quality, accessible public space for walking and cycling”;
• be “a safe, comfortable, and welcoming destination with places for gathering, socializing and relaxing” that would be “not just a corridor, but a destination or series of linked places,” with coffee shops, park space and “perhaps outdoor exhibits”;
• connect “to neighbourhoods, parks and other points of interest … as well as the broader transportation network”; and
• offer green spaces: places for finding tranquility, reconnecting with nature, growing food and nurturing ecosystems and biodiversity.

Residents expressed appreciation that the Arbutus Greenway gives access to green space and community gardens. Shown: gate to the Vancouver Compost Demonstration Garden from the greenway. Photo: Naomi Reichstein

Consensus was strong, evidently, on the points above. The overwhelming majority of participants expressed interest in using the greenway for walking, cycling and/or enjoying nature. Such being the case, it’s unsurprising that reactions toward a future streetcar were somewhat divergent. While some responded favourably, others questioned the necessity or expressed concern that having a streetcar could detract from non-motorized uses. This ambivalence toward streetcar use – and indeed to the corridor’s overall designation as a transportation corridor rather than a green trail – was consistent with the ambivalence on this point that the VPSN has observed in past meetings as well.

Construction right now

Though fully paved, the temporary path is still under construction. In a newsletter, the City has announced that the following improvements will be made in the coming months:

• pavement marked with separations for pedestrians and cyclists;
• “minor improvements to street crossings”;
• pollinator seeding; and
• benches

Since the first two of these points have serious safety implications, the VPSN urges that they be treated as pressing. With regard to separations, I’ve had feedback from pedestrians who feel threatened by the speed of bikes and have expressed apprehension that the final design could privilege cyclists over pedestrians by giving them more room. Clearly, the sooner the separations are indicated, the better.

As the VPSN has also argued, the confusion at street crossings is an accident waiting to happen, and I’m not sure what scope is intended under “minor improvements.” We reiterate our keen hope that the City will hasten to provide obvious priority for greenway users. Many times, drivers either disregard the greenway or simply seem unaware that it’s even there. At the intersection with 6th, for instance, I snapped this photo of cars parked across the greenway:

Photo: Naomi Reichstein

Toward a permanent design

Meanwhile, the City is moving ahead with developing a permanent design.

Throughout the RFP, there’s a strong emphasis on transportation as a fundamental component of the greenway’s identity. Beyond that, I’m pleased to see that the values expressed at the consultation – and in the VPSN’s own advocacy – figure explicitly in the RFP’s emphasis on accessible use and safety, community connectivity, amenities, focus on ecology, placemaking opportunities and integration of cultural and heritage elements. 

For example, I’m pleased that the RFP places explicit value on attending to neighbourhood variety: “Early discussions with stakeholders and the public have indicated a desire to reflect the distinct character of each neighbourhood along the greenway. With such a long and linear site, one of the design challenges will be the development of features and elements that can maintain a coherent experience within the physical confines of the entire greenway while allowing for uniqueness within distinct sections of the corridor” (p B-9).

I’m also happy to read that the “City’s expectation is that public art [will become] an integral component within public landscapes throughout the City, including the Arbutus Greenway” and that “the City’s Public Art Program will oversee the preparation of the ‘Arbutus Greenway Public Art Plan’ in conjunction with the Arbutus Greenway’s Project Manager” (p B-23).

Paved now, the Arbutus Greenway retains echoes of its railway past with its track-like quality, running behind the little park at 6th. Photo: Naomi Reichstein

Next up

According to the City, various design options will be developed over the summer, and the public will receive further communications in the fall. After seeking public review and evaluation of these options, the City will provide a detailed update on the one preferred.

Do you have any feedback on the greenway? The VPSN will continue to advocate with the City for its design, so please feel free to get in touch with me at naomi@vancouverpublicspace.ca.

We’ve been following closely the latest developments on the Arbutus Greenway, Vancouver’s 9-km rail-to-trail corridor. On February 2, I was excited to attend the stakeholders’ workshop that the City hosted with the intention of formulating a vision for the greenway’s permanent design. Participants included representatives of Vancouver-based organizations involved with green space, human mobility and health, cycling and public consultation, with students of architecture and landscape design also present.

The intention of the meeting was high-level: to formulate overall “vision” and “values” for the greenway’s design, leaving specific recommendations and troubleshooting to further stages. The City kicked off the workshop with a clear emphasis on the greenway’s purpose as a transportation corridor, reminding participants that this formal status was in fact a condition of the original purchase. The long-range intention is to introduce light rail, though as we’ve described earlier, there’s no timeline for that because the streetcar isn’t funded. The City’s reminder was important, though, in framing the conversation.

After the City’s presentation, we split up into two tables to exchange ideas, then came back together for a discussion as a whole group.

With any major city project, residents will hold out a variety of hopes, some of which may be more compatible than others. Around the room, participants clearly agreed that the new greenway should represent a commitment to ecology, with indigenous plants, habitat for species including pollinators, preservation of quiet green space and the opportunity for non-motorized movement. Equally universal was the feeling that the greenway should both represent and enable social inclusion and interaction, allowing people of all ages and mobilities to come together within the community and engage in healthy physical activity in an accessible public space. Participants likewise agreed on what I call the attractive duality between the quiet seclusion available on parts of the greenway and the relative busyness at neighbourhood hubs. People appreciated and expressed the wish to preserve the way in which the greenway traverses tranquil green areas while occasionally coming upon larger gathering hubs interspersed (such as 6th, 41st and 57th), offering variety and interest over its long course. Supported too was the idea of incorporating plenty of benches for resting, plus cultural elements from street art to preserved railway markers.

Unsurprisingly, certain values were somewhat at odds. There was a bit of tension between the vision of Arbutus essentially as a green space needing conservation versus its status as a transportation corridor including a streetcar. One view expressed was that a streetcar could eventually reduce the greenway’s appeal as a walking and bike route and its ecological qualities. Other participants advised that designing with the streetcar in mind should play a role from the start so that improvements made now wouldn’t have to be ripped up and redone later should funding for rail come through.

What you can do

The public consultation is happening now. You can participate by taking the survey and dropping in on one of the City’s open houses on February 9 (tonight) or 11. In March, the City will report out on the results of the consultation, including this workshop.

We’ll keep you posted.

The portion of the seawall under consideration dates back to the mid-1970s, and features a series of particularly windy and narrow sections, as well as a variety of surface treatments. It’s also one of the most picturesque areas of the city, and runs adjacent to a number of open spaces (including Charleson Park, Sutcliffe Park, Leg-in-Boot Square and Granville Island) as well as the False Creek south neighbourhood. It’s frequented by locals and visitors alike, and provides stunning views of the Vancouver skyline.

Poster boards detailing the improvements focused on pedestrian and biker safety, especially on designs separating bike and jogging/walking lanes. City staff will be on hand to answer questions and get feedback.

For more details about the plans, check out vancouver.ca/seawall or visit the open house. The event takes place today from 4 to 7pm at CityStudio, 1800 Spyglass Place. You can also provide feedback via a short online questionnaire (deadline: February 19).

As you’ve probably heard, a sizeable component of the discussion is devoted to several new bike lanes that are proposed for the City, including a number in the downtown core.

This is an important step forward for biking in Vancouver, offering further legitimacy and support to cycling as a mode of transportation. However, it also, indirectly, raises some interesting questions about the City’s attention to pedestrian issues and pedestrian infrastructure.

But before we get to that, let’s start by noting some of the many generally favourable articles and posts written about the bike lanes, including CBC and Metro and Vancity Buzz, among others. It’s perhaps equally telling to make note of the articles that aren’t being written. Whereas previous bike lane discussions (Burrard, Hornby, Dunsmuir) have generated all sorts of froth, it’s good to note that the backlash against bike lanes appears to have quieted. Maybe not everywhere, of course, but in a lot of corners. Even former opponents, like the Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association, have now come out in support. Cycling infrastructure is rolling forward indeed.

So, we’ll happily go on record noting our support as well. And we will be writing to Council to say as much. For us the new bike lanes do a number of things:

• Increase the accessibility of safe, health-promoting, all-ages, cycling infrastructure for residents and visitors.

• Enable more room for growth. As the numbers show, we continue to see an upward trend in the use of our bike lanes – and more and better infrastructure will propel further increases. Biking is becoming more of a norm for more people.

• Strengthen the network. The focus on improving the connections between already existing routes is key. Fewer ‘gaps’ means better overall connectivity, better access to key destinations, and a resulting increased efficiency for cycling as a mode of transportation.

• Support more spot improvements to elements of cycling infrastructure that need a ‘quick fix.’ (One suggestion: we’d love to see a transparent and trackable means for the public to identify needed improvements).

• Present a well-conceived choice of routes. The choice of future routes – both downtown and city-wide – reflects good planning around design and location.

But, let’s bike-park the cycling question for the moment.

We also think this is the right opportunity to raise a note of concern about the “Five Year Update”. And it’s not a small note. It’s a fundamental one.

Active transportation is supposed to be about cyclists and pedestrians. With that in mind, the staff report being considered on Thursday, should outline a five year plan for both of these modes of transport – and everything else self-propelled and ‘active,’ including wheelchairs, skateboards, push scooters and more.

Its revealing, then, that the aforementioned report uses the word “pedestrian” only twice in its 16 pages. “Walk” or “walking” fares a little better, showing up 17 times in total. Compare “cycling” (59 uses) and “bike” (66 uses) and you get a sense of the report’s priorities.

There’s more. The word “sidewalk” appears eight times, and if you look at how this term is used, the sense of priorities crystallize a little further. Almost inevitably the references talk about the benefits of bike lanes as a way of improving walkability – because they will, in theory, take bikes (and now skateboards) off of the sidewalk. Now, this is good move, to be sure – but there is a lot more that needs to be done to improve pedestrian infrastructure than just the subtraction of cyclists from city sidewalks.

With very few exceptions, everyone uses pedestrian infrastructure – including cyclists, transit users and car drivers – and we think the present report ought to go further and spell out a more tangible action plan for the most essential, most universal, mode of transportation. There’s much that a ‘5 year Action Plan’ might conceivably say about pedestrians; this present report misses an important opportunity.

Which brings us to a more fundamental discussion taking place at Council on today: on the subject of the 2016 Budget. It’s at this meeting that Council will deliberate over the allocation of hundreds of millions of dollars in capital and operating funding, covering every aspect of municipal operations.

Despite the fundamental – even existential – nature of pedestrian mobility, and notwithstanding the fact that pedestrians are prioritized in the City’s Transportation 2040 plan, the actual municipal investment in qualitative and quantitative improvements to pedestrian infrastructure has flat-lined in recent years. Last year, the City’s budget for sidewalk rehabilitation was a paltry $1million. This year, the figure is the same… and that’s a million that is meant to fund repairs to a civic asset that is 2,100 kilometres in length.

Of course, there are other line items that support walkability. The 2016 budget proposes $875,000 will go to new pedestrian and cycling signals. An additional $325,000 is allocated for new curb ramps. But at several thousand a pop for either of these types of infrastucture, the budgeted funds will not last long. The curb ramp budget, for example, will cover approximately 60 of the 6000 ramps that are estimated to be needed across the city.

The same story holds for the $275,000 in new sidewalk construction funds. The amount sounds like a lot at first blush, but it actually only means between 3-5 kilometres of new sidewalk will be built.

This is problematic enough for safety reasons. Our pedestrian infrastructure may not need to be perfect (a few cracks, a bit of warping from tree roots and you get the addition of character), but it could certainly stand to see more investment. Character aside, the city does have a lot of pedestrian spaces that are in need of real improvement. The annual budgets have been granting very limited means to meet this need.

Finally, there’s yet another angle to consider: the opportunity – the real possibility – to think of our sidewalks as critically important public spaces, not just corridors for people movement. Key sidewalks, especially on our extraordinary high streets ought to be places for gathering. They ought to be beautiful. They should be a key part of making our civic spaces sparkle.

The City’s Transportation 2040 Plan speaks eloquently about the need to make walking “delightful.” That’s a wonderful word for policy… and we should have sidewalks every bit as worthy of that aspiration.

Alas, if we’re after sidewalk widening and the more generous ‘complete street‘ designs that many city’s are experimenting with, the opportunities presented in both policy and budget are likely be constrained, and driven largely by redevelopment opportunities than a more proactive, city-led approach. Similarly, if we want something more than minimalist concrete, a $1 million “rehabilitation budget” means we can kiss any hope of pavers, cobblestone and decent design treatment goodbye. There are exceptions, of course, but the dollars-and-cents reality of the sidewalk budget makes this an impossibility on any decent scale.

It doesn’t have to be that way, of course. We think it’s time to see Active Transportation priorities (and the associated capital allocations that sustain them) focus more meaningfully on the pedestrian realm. Not at the expense of cycling infrastructure, but as a proper compliment to it.

In the past several years, Council has turned the wheel forward with some incredible investments cycling infrastructure and policy. It’s now time to make similar strides with the same rigorous and game-changing investment in our pedestrian realm.

More information 

:: City of Vancouver: Active Transportation Update and Pilot for Skateboarding in Protected Bike Lanes
:: City of Vancouver: 2016 Budget and Five Year Financial Plan

The City of Vancouver and TransLink’s Downtown Local Bus Service Review embarked in a series of activities to consult the public on its proposals emerging from its second phase of activites, back in April of this year. They have now made available a report on what they heard in the course of that consultation for Phase 2.

(Haven’t heard about the review? This review is meant to address the impacts on bus transit of changes in travel patterns on the downtown peninsula since service was last reviewed as part of the Local Transit Plan in 2005; and to anticipate the effects of proposed projects like the removal of the Dunsmuir Viaduct. The second, most recent phase of consultation involved 3 potential alterations: the first change had two proposed routes involving the 5, 6, and C23 buses; two possible re-routings of the 17 bus; and buses heading to East Vancouver and regional destinations to the east.)

Owing to our interest and the VPSN’s past work in Robson Square, we have been particular interested in the proposed re-routings that seek to take into account ongoing seasonal (and potentially permanent) pedestrianization of the 800-block of Robson.

L-Shaped Loop concept from Downtown Local Bus Review Phase 2 consultation materials.

Here is what the consultation report has to say about what they heard from people on those two proposals:

1. The L-shaped Loop concept received much more support than the Rectangular Loop concept for its enhanced ability to connect neighbourhoods and regions in the downtown to each other. The Rectangular Loop concept, while easy to understand, was said by almost half of respondents (46%) to be worse or much worse than what exists now.
2. Many remain concerned about being able to continue accessing regional rapid transit or the impact of new routes on bus service reliability.
3. The report also highlights concern that pedestrianization of Robson Street impacts access to destinations near Granville and Robson; and that travel times on transit are impacted.

Rectangular Loop concept from Downtown Local Bus Review Phase 2 consultation materials.

We look forward to continuing to follow the City and TransLink’s work on this topic as they perform final evaluations on the concepts they have identified, and put forth their recommendations for implementation to improve bus service.

Relatedly — this weekend’s Vancouver International Jazz Festival activities also serve as a kickoff to the seasonal pedestrianization for Robson Square. The folks at Viva Vancouver will be putting into place Urban Reef, the winning design from this year’s Robson Redux competition. If you are looking for information about how the 5 bus will be affected, here is the information we have on this, as it’s slightly different from years past:

During events at Robson Square, the 05–Robson/Downtown bus will operate via Burrard and Pender Streets. Also, the necessary trolley overhead work has been completed to allow for the new left turn from eastbound Robson Street to northbound Burrard Street. This service change is scheduled to take effect on June 21^st, 2014 and will resume in early September.

Please note that TransLink’s official quarterly service change signage will not be present at affected bus stops until June 23^rd, however there will be temporary event signage for notification of this detour on June 21^st and 22^nd as the 800-Block of Robson Street will be closed for the Vancouver International Jazz Festival.

You can also download a map showing the re-route.

If you are interested in active transportation (walking, cycling and transit) and its impact on health, take a look at the My Health, My Community survey. It’s a research project involving two regional health authorities (Vancouver Coastal Health and Fraser Health) in collaboration with UBC’s Faculty of Medicine to examine the role community planning plays in our physical health

The My Health My Community survey is an exciting opportunity to learn how our lifestyle, our environment, neighbourhood characteristics and daily interactions affect our health over time.

Their survey is open until June 30 and they are seeking as many and as diverse a range of a participants as possible. Check out their video (embedded below) to learn more and we encourage you to share the survey around. The video is also available on YouTube with Punjabi or Chinese subtitles. (And there is a chance to win a prize for taking the survey too!)

And finally… the big news from late last week was that the Mayor’s Council of TransLink released their vision for the future of regional transportation investment. A lot of interesting and insightful commentary on the plan is out there, both locally and from further afield:

• Frances Bula, Globe & Mail — “B.C. cities approve transit revamp, but funding still unclear“
• Business in Vancouver — “TransLink Mayors’ Council pushes for $7.5-billion transportation plan“
• Andrew Coyne, National Post — “Vancouver’s road pricing proposal a revolutionary fix for gridlock“
• Gordon Price ran a poll on his blog to see how others are feeling about the proposal, and finds that most of us seem pretty optimistic.

Check out the Mayors Council’s vision (involving both what to build and how it will be paid for) online at mayorscouncil.ca. A summary of the process of coming up with the vision and the problems it is trying to address is also available in this video below.

On Monday, March 10, the first public hearing will consider three projects, including the proposed Oakridge Centre rezoning and development. There’s a lot to be discussed on this latter item – higher buildings, new park and plaza space, and key transportation considerations – and it promises to be a lively debate. (Some of the public correspondence is already on-line, and in case you missed it, we outlined some of the public space-specific considerations in a blog post on February 19.)

The following day, Tuesday, March 11, the regular sitting of Council sees a full suite of items.

Curious about how much Mayor and Council took home as pay this year? The 2013 Council Remuneration and Expenses report details salaries, travel and other expenses.

Following that, there’s a number of Motions being proposed in the meeting, including:

• Protecting Vancouver’s Public Green Space – which, if passed, would direct City staff to develop a policy of no net loss of public green space. Interestingly, this idea was proposed by former Park Commissioner Spencer Herbert (now an MLA) back in 2007. It didn’t pass back then, so it will be interesting to see how the discussion goes this time around. (The VPSN wrote in support of the motion back in ’07 and plan to offer our support this time as well). We’ll share more on this item in a few days time.

• Develop an Art Cart Programme – a motion aimed at expanding street vending opportunities for locally made arts and crafts.

• Traffic Safety and Increased Traffic Volume – 4th Avenue West of Macdonald – The Pt. Grey Road active transportation corridor has created some changes in local traffic patterns. While the City is monitoring these impacts, there are reports in some corners that southbound left-turns onto 4th Avenue are becoming more challenging. This motion looks at the possibility of installing traffic signals to respond to these concerns. (Of interest to sustainable transportation enthusiasts: it’s proposed that funding for these signals be “found within found within the up to $6.0 million budget previously approved by Council for Phase 1 of the completion of the Seaside Greenway and creation of the York Bikeway.”)

• Proposed Service Cuts on TransLink Bus Route 49 UBC/Metrotown Station – as part a program of “service optimization,” TransLink is considering changes to the 49 UBC/Metrotown Station bus. This would eliminate key transit service to Champlain Heights, “a community which includes a high proportion of seniors, young families and people with disabilities who rely on transit service to work, go to school and complete essential daily tasks.” The proposed Council motion would direct staff to advise TransLink that the City “opposes any reduction of service” on this route.

Lastly (at least for our update), Wednesday, March 12 features a key City Finance and Service and Services Committee meeting – one which will see Council deliberate over the Downtown Eastside Local Area Plan, an ambitious neighbourhood-scale policy document that will set out land-use directions, social and cultural policy, and public realm considerations for the next few decades. The VPSN is currently reviewing this document and will be presenting our take on it very shortly.

Interested in letting Council know your thoughts on any of these items? Follow this link to find out how you can have your say (either in person, or via letter/email).

Earlier improvements to the Adanac Bikeway

On Wednesday, City Council will be deliberating over a staff report on three ‘active transportation corridor’ improvements:

• Union Street (Gore Street to Carrall Street)
• Cambie Bridge (north end to Beatty Street)
• Canada Line (pedestrian and bicycle connection)

The VPSN has written a letter of support, an excerpt of which can be found below:

We are writing to you to express our support in principle for the proposed upgrades to the Union Street as a part of the Adanac Bikeway. The Adanac Bikeway acts as a type of bicycle artery offering a safe connection appropriate for cyclists of all ages and abilities with relatively little interaction with motor vehicles into the Downtown Peninsula and False Creek from East Vancouver and beyond. However, as it is currently configured, the area on Union Street West of Gore is far less inviting to the cyclist and has a number of potential areas of conflict between cyclists and motorists. Reducing these areas of conflict and creating a more legible streetscape in this relatively small section of a much larger system should be a priority.

Although it would be our preference for the 200 block of Union Street to become one way to vehicles to allow for two separated bicycle lanes as originally proposed, we are willing to support the concept of the shared eastbound lane on a trial basis in order to help alleviate the concerns expressed by some of businesses in the 200 block of Union Street. Given that this intersection is considerably influenced by the viaducts, it would be our suggestion that the shared lane be on a trial basis until a decision has been made regarding the future of the viaducts, at which point it could be reviewed.

Some businesses have voiced their concern over the removal of on-street parking on Union Street as well as the change in traffic patterns. The perception that the installation of bicycle infrastructure creates negative impacts on local businesses has been frequently shown to be inaccurate. For example, a 2009 study in Toronto found that the removal of on-street parking in favour of a bike lane would have few negative effects on businesses and that they may actually benefit from lane re-allocation. In fact, it was determined that only 10% of those businesses’ patrons drove and that those that arrived by foot and bicycle visited more often and spent the most money per month.

Alleviating the fears of businesses will be crucial for the continued success of the Adanac Bikeway and other bicycle infrastructure throughout the City. In addition to the works on the Adanac Bikeway, we are also in support of the proposed Cambie Bridge to Beatty and Canada Line connections which we believe will help to increase bicycle and pedestrian use while improving conditions for transit users, pedestrians and cyclists.

We were pleased with the overall result of the Greenest City process and are happy that Council unanimously adopted the recent staff report associated with implementing the initiative, its targets and more. Though there have been murmurings on one side of the mediasphere that the targets are too lofty, and on another that they don’t go far enough… we think they strike a good balance between being ambitious but do-able. 

In particular, we’re keen on:

• The re-energizing of active transportation – walking and cycling – as well as public transit… and that the various actions proposed in this area are clearly linked with the idea that Vancouverites need a quality public realm
• Provisions around ensuring park space is created in the neighbourhoods that need it most
• The plan to bolster our urban forest (150,000 trees to be planted)
• A bigger, richer, bolder urban agriculture strategy for the city – that sees local food infrastructure strengthened to respond to the demand for community gardens, orchards, local markets and more
• The many and various initiatives that will make Vancouver a healthier city – reduced waste, better air quality, etc.

But don’t just take our word for it – there’s a good opportunity for you to weigh in on the results. Until the end of February people can comment on the Greenest City plans, come to a Greenest City workshop or host their own workshop at home with friends and colleagues. Details are all here: http://talkgreenvancouver.ca

A final plug: another thing that is great about the Greenest City report – and the whole process so far – is that it has been strengthened by some strong, idea-generating, social media platforms. The collaborative dimension has been interesting to follow in its own right – with people proposing ideas, commenting on new solutions, and engaging in the sort of debate that leaves one wishing that Web 2.0 could be like this everyday. Better still, the City report shows how the different ideas are being woven into the final… a nice twist for those eager to see the notion of civic transparency strengthened. 

• Visit the website (http://talkgreenvancouver.ca) and read the draft Greenest City 2020 Action Plans, watch the videos, comment on the strategies and prioritize the actions. 
• Come out to a Greenest City event
• Co-host a 1-3 hour workshop with the City of Vancouver and your organization (email greenestcity@vancouver.ca to arrange)
• Host your own workshops by downloading the DIY Kitchen Table Conversations kit (http://www.talkgreenvancouver.ca/sites/default/files/DIY%20Toolkit.pdf)
• Join the online conversation on talkgreenvancouver.ca, twitter and facebook

Stay up to date on all the Greenest City news (including the recent City Council decision to adopt the Greenest City 2020 targets) by:

• Add your email to the Greenest City mailing list (add your name in the footer of http://talkgreenvancouver.ca) 
• Like Greenest City on Facebook
• Follow Greenest City on Twitter
• Watch videos on YouTube
• Check out photos on flickr