Archives for posts with tag: Vancouver

Here’s something I’ve been asked to promote, and I’m happy to do so. Consultation is always a tricky thing to get right. Hopefully, using Facebook, the City can reach those who would not normally participate in this type of thing. Lets hope its a success.

Want a better commute? So do we.

Join Vancouver drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in a Facebook event where you will give advice to the City of Vancouver, learn and help shape the future of transportation in our city.

Apps.Facebook.com/VanTransportFuture

Starting May 31, residents and commuters will discuss key issues – like health, affordability, economy, and the environment – in small Facebook groups. Each group will work together to evaluate strategies and propose directions for the City’s Transportation Plan, followed by a chance to promote your ideas through Facebook sharing and commenting. The conversation is drawing from public input received during previous public consultations, such as the Greenest City planning process.

The main event is a two-week Facebook discussion (May 31-June 14) followed by public ideas sharing. Sign up closes May 31 so that the discussion groups can start as a team.

Results of the online discussion and other (online and offline) transportation conversations this spring will be integrated into a draft Transportation Plan by the City of Vancouver. For other opportunities to be involved, see http://www.talkvancouver.com/transportation

This Facebook event is a partnership of the City of Vancouver and Greenest City Conversations, a University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University research group. http://www.gcc.ubc.ca

Sign up by May 31 to help create the transportation future you want for Vancouver.

Apps.Facebook.com/VanTransportFuture

Being forced to push your baby out into traffic… feeling like the sidewalk has taken over control of your stroller and is determined to introduce your baby to the fast moving travel lane… having the impression I’m crossing a road when in fact its a lane way.

My wife and I have experienced all this and more in the past year or so as we adapt to life with a baby. We live in downtown Vancouver and use the car only rarely. Thus the stroller gets a LOT of use. Here are my top three annoyances that I’ve observed as we ‘stroll’ around town (although the last one is not stroller specific).

1. The lack of drop curbs where they need to be. This is downtown Vancouver in the 21st century, but even here there are significant minority of intersections (especially in the older West End) that have inadequate drop curbs. The usual problem is that there may be one drop curb on a corner, but it faces the wrong way. So with a stroller, you have to push out into the lane in which vehicles are now travelling. At a four way or two way stop it is unclear which way you’re actually crossing. This can be confusing for vehicle drivers as well as dangerous for pedestrians and their (precious) cargo. ACTION FOR THE CITY: Review and amend drop curbs where necessary.

2. Sloping curb let downs. Sometimes I wonder who truly has priority in this city when I see a curb letdown for a driveway that seems to have totally forgotten that pedestrians might actually use the sidewalk and don’t want to walk at a 45 degree angle to do so. An annoyance without a stroller – dangerous with one. Sometimes with a stroller you’re kind of struggling to keep the thing from veering into the road. The letdown should be within the boulevard zone if possible. Pedestrians are supposed to have priority but this doesn’t seem to be the case. A steeper transition for vehicles over a shorter distance would also act as a traffic calming device to slow their speed as they turn into a site, across a sidewalk. The Institute of Transportation Engineers and The Congress for The New Urbanism agree. Their book, Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares (2010) highlights this and recommends that pedestrians always be given a clear, level (apart from the 2% cross grade) path around the letdown – see diagram below, taken from the book, as well as a photo, from Alberni Street.

ACTION FOR THE CITY: Adopt a standard similar to the above to ensure pedestrians always have a flat path around any letdown.

3. Who has right of way when a lane way and sidewalk meet? The answer is obviously that pedestrians have priority. But you’d be forgiven for thinking it was the other way round. These ‘intersections’ should be designed so that the sidewalk continues uninterrupted with the boulevard again used to transition to street level. This would emphasize the fact that lane ways are not roads and that they’re for access, not through traffic. In slowing drivers down as they enter/ exit a lane way, it might also reduce instances of ‘rat running’ through them. ACTION FOR THE CITY: Alter your design standards to physically give pedestrians right of way, and reinforce the fact that laneways are not roads.

It goes without saying that wheelchair users face the same issues (perhaps even more so) than parents with strollers. However, my experience is with strollers, so  I write from that perspective.

So, that’s my observations and opinion. Do you agree? Am I making a fuss out of nothing? What have I missed? I’d be glad to hear your thoughts.

I attended one of the SFU  City Program’s free lectures last night. The topic was ‘What’s Up With the Viaducts?’ in reference to the fact that the City is now considering what the future of these structures, and more importantly what the future of this area of the City, should be.

There seem to be two main aspects. Firstly, what happens to all the traffic that currently uses the viaducts? Does everything come to a grinding halt if they are removed? The consensus was – no. And to be fair, all the evidence now supports this, including the little experiment the City did in February last year when a small sporting event shut down the viaducts and a few other streets! There is now a fair body of evidence from all over the world which supports the notion of  ‘disappearing traffic’. One of the most notable examples is from Seoul and Gordon Price’s blog has a lot of info on it here. Basically, in this case, they removed 6km of a huge freeway through the city and replace d it with a park. And traffic in surrounding areas did not go up. It has even got the folks in New Westminster grappling with a planned expanded Front Street wandering whether its the right thing to do. Traffic is like a gas, it expands and contracts to fill the space available. Hence also, ‘induced traffic’ where new road capacity is used up quicker than expected. As an aside, the exception to this is if its tolled. I have heard of two examples recently of Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects where new bridges or tunnels have been constructed and tolls and financial models calculated based on a certain number of vehicles using the route (and paying the toll). And the traffic hasn’t come. One of the examples is the Golden Ears Bridge here in Metro Vancouver. I’m sure this wouldn’t have happend a few years ago. Times, they are a changing…

The other part of the debate was what should replace the space that the viaducts currently take. The skytrain weaves up and down around the viaducts at the moment so that’s one challenge, although I personally like the roller coaster feel to this part of the route and think its a feature in its own right. There was an interesting history lesson given as to what was there before the viaducts which acted as a reminder about how much we can loose in the name of ‘progress’. Hogan’s Alley was a thriving black community (Vancouver’s only one) which was wiped out. Someone suggested naming this project Hogan’s Alley Planning Initiative (HAPI) which got a cheer of approval.

This is only the beginning of the debate. So, what do YOU think? As Bing Thom said last night, the City Councillors want to hear from the people, otherwise they don’t really know what to do. So make your voice heard on this blog or elsewhere.

Harbour Air Sea Plane - Instagram by timbarton
Harbour Air Sea Plane – Instagram a photo by timbarton on Flickr.

Based on the premise that the best camera is the one you have with you, here’s a photo I took with my iphone this lunchtime. Its the float plane terminal at Coal Harbour, in Vancouver. The app is called Instagram and it tries to replicate an old style instant camera. What do you think?

A newly installed bicycle stand is left empty in Vancouver. The rider obviously prefers the tried and tested parking meter.

Ellen Dunham-Jones spoke on Next Generation Urbanism on Tuesday evening as part of the SFU City Program, here in Vancouver. She is a new urbanist and member of the Congress For New Urbanism. She co-authored Retrofitting Suburbia. She spoke on many things and I thought it was a thought provoking presentation that was nicely balanced between being theoretical and conceptual, as well as practical and realist. Her main topic was critiquing a new upstart which is challenging new urbanism. This new movement is called Ecological Urbanism. According to Dunham-Jones, while new urbanists like to plan through good design, ecological urbanists don’t. They prefer to set something in motion and see what happens. Kind of more ecology in the city, but it also seems to be more lower density suburbia where, although surrounded by hills and other natural landscapes, most people would still have to drive everywhere. Being a new urbanist, unsurprisingly, she is fairly critical of ecological urbanism, although she did acknowledge that new urbanists can learn something from the less planned, more spontaneous places that seem to be so popular. I asked a question at the end, suggesting Vancouver’s own Granville Island was a good example of this. She hadn’t heard of Granville Island, but I hope she has time to check it out during her stay. Now I don’t know for sure whether Granville Island was unplanned or whether it just appears that way. But Dunham-Jones didn’t seem to think that mattered. The fact that it feels different and looks different, in a good way, is enough.

She also mentioned that post recession, we will have to find cheaper ways of doing things. People may become less consumer focused out of necessity. Will there be a new emphasis on seeking happiness? I thought it interesting that she thinks that as a result we’ll have to find alternatives to retail to enliven our public spaces.

As part of this, she mentioned some small scale examples of temporary things people have done to enliven public spaces. Examples included Parking Day, Build a Better Block, Pop Up City and, one I especially liked the sound of, Pie Day.

And I won a book. ‘Historical Atlas of Vancouver and the Lower Fraser Valley‘ by Derek Hayes. It has a lot of old maps in it – I like it already. Thanks to Gordon Price and the City Program for that. All I did was stand up when asked who had a blog!

I’m not sure, but this article in the Vancouver Sun by columnist Daphne Bramham makes the case for greater thought to be given to pedestrians by City Council. She highlights infrastructure issues such narrow sidewalks and inadequate pedestrian crossings  as well as statistical data such as pedestrian accident statistics and the fact that we’re an aging population. ‘In the future there will be more walkers with walkers’.

A couple of things recently have brought my attention to the fact that pedestrians are perhaps becoming overlooked in the development of our cities. I know this sounds crazy, but bear with me. They are being overlooked, often, in favour of cyclists. At a recent Gaining Ground workshop that I attended there seemed to be a consensus that while bicycle advocacy was well advanced in some areas (and rightly so) and has achieved some notable victories (Vancouver’s downtown bike lanes for example) there is no one flying the flag for pedestrians.

The City of Vancouver has a Bicycle Advisory Committee which is consulted on major development proposals and capital projects to ensure that cyclists needs have been taken into account. In addition, there is the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition who are the leading cycling advocates in the area and then there is, of course, Critical Mass. All of these bodies do great work (although I sometimes have doubts about critical mass). The point is not that bicycle advocacy has gone too far, but that pedestrian advocacy has, erh… well, not really started yet. The best example in Vancouver of this imbalance  is pedestrian’s losing the eastern sidewalk on the Burrard Bridge to cyclists. Road space should have been taken away from cars, not pedestrians!

I am not the only one to think that pedestrians need a flag waver, and not just in Vancouver. I recently read  Dom Nozzi’s latest blog entry which is on this very subject and he’s located all the way down in Florida. In Vancouver specifically, an SFU professor agrees that a pedestrian advocate is needed. The best Vancouver has at the moment is probably the Vancouver Public Space Network. They do some great work. However, their interest is far larger than just pedestrians. Other cities that Vancouver likes to compare itself against, such as Portland OR have a Pedestrian Advisory Committee. And it was formed in 2000! In case you’re wondering what a body such as this would do, Portland’s Mission Statement reads:

The mission of the City of Portland Pedestrian Advisory Committee is to act as advocates for pedestrians by:

  • Reviewing new projects that effect pedestrians to ensure they meet City of Portland Pedestrian Design Guide standards;
  • Advocating for safe access for pedestrians;
  • Supporting education, outreach, and advocacy of pedestrian issues; and
  • Developing policy and plans to better meet the needs of pedestrians.

So, why isn’t there one in Vancouver? Perhaps it’s because we’re all pedestrians, so we all assume someone else is doing something about it. Or perhaps it’s because everyone assumes pedestrians are doing just fine – give them a sidewalk or a cross walk and that should do it! The example of the Burrard Bridge road space reallocation shows that it doesn’t just happen by itself.  It’s time Vancouver had its own Pedestrian Advisory Committee.

This photo was taken a few weeks ago before one of the ‘Celebration of Light’ fireworks nights, here in Vancouver. As you can see, the crowds get pretty extreme, even hours before the fireworks start. I often wander what tourists think who happen to be in town but don’t know about the fireworks. Do they just think, ‘wow this is busy’!

English Bay is, of course, an example of one of Vancouver’s well used public spaces. It’s a meeting place, a hang out place and is used for events through the (summer) months of the year.

As a little relief from the Olympics I went for a bike ride round some of Vancouver’s neighbourhoods on Saturday morning. Sometimes, living in downtown, you forget there’s a quieter, gentler but just as attractive Vancouver only a few minutes away. (I only mean relatively quieter by the way. If anyone’s from a small town or village they’d think these places were bustling cities.) Anyway, here’s a few photos from my travels.

This first photograph is at Cypress and First Avenue. I love the little independent stores in this area and with the blossom fully out it really does feel like a fantastic area. plus, Fourth Ave is only a couple of blocks south, and the beach is a couple of blocks north. I don’t know if this neighborhood has its own name. Anyone know?

This is at Broadway and Arbutus. I really like the new development at Arbutus Walk, just a block or two south from here. It has a different feel to it than the areas around it, but it fits in well with the original uses on the site (as far as aesthetics and massing goes), it was originally a brewery. It may be too new to call it a neighbourhood though. What do you think? This dry cleaning and laundry store, Fletchers, on the corner of Arbutus and Broadway though, is a throw back to a bygone era. The curved glass on the left is very 50s, complete with revolving sign.

This final photograph depicts everyday life in Chinatown. Now this neighbourhood IS as busy as downtown. It has a very different feel though. When we travel through on the bus we half feel we’ve been transported to China – a little further than we had intended to go!