11042 replies to this topic

[mbjj]

They may have consulted on Richardson but I had just had major surgery and my husband was looking after me at that time. We had other things to think about. As residents, we didn't receive anything in our mail box.

[FogPub]

There were multiple rounds of consultation done in late 2019. Numerous info sessions held at City Hall where staff went over the proposed changes. The city hosted walking tours along Richardson Street to highlight the design. The original plan was for Richardson Street to be an advisory bike lane (like Humboldt) but after a lot of feedback during the consultation period, those plans were scrapped. So the consultation was done, suggestions taken into effect, and a final plan was designed.

The consultation was done, suggestions of 'leave it alone' were ignored, and a final plan was designed...

[rmpeers]

She is in severe damage control mode and must realize she is hurting her own chances of a good job after she leaves Victoria in 2022.

At least its looking unlikely that she will be able to move up to provincial or federal politics. I think she has blocked off that street. Ha!

[On the Level]

So the consultation was done, suggestions taken into effect, and a final plan was designed.

 

To ram it down everyone's throats.  That's how special interest works.   

 

Change doesn't come with keeping the majority intact......just the subset in the gated community of Victoria.

[IPH]

There were multiple rounds of consultation done in late 2019. Numerous info sessions held at City Hall where staff went over the proposed changes. The city hosted walking tours along Richardson Street to highlight the design. The original plan was for Richardson Street to be an advisory bike lane (like Humboldt) but after a lot of feedback during the consultation period, those plans were scrapped. So the consultation was done, suggestions taken into effect, and a final plan was designed.

Yes, two or three open house might be considered "multiple" rounds of consultation but hardly extensive or inclusionary.  There was one session at city hall, and one in Oakland.  But none in Fairfield or Gonzales which will be significantly affected by the Richardson plan.  Or for South Oak bay residents who use Richardson extensively. 

 

I was at the Oakland open house and heard loud and clear from at least 15 cyclists that use Richardson on a daily basis that there was no need to change this route and they all believed advisory bike lanes would create far more risk to cyclists than the current layout.  But staff refused to even engage in any debate, saying they knew more about cyclist safety than the cyclists and council had already made the decision and the plan would not change.  I guess that's how "consultation" is done eh comrade!  

 

As for your claim that the advisory lanes for Richardson were scraped, I don't know where you get that idea.  The plan for Richardson is the exact same as Humboldt.  Parking on both sides, bike lanes on both sides, one center lane for cars and other 4 wheeled vehicles traveling in opposite directions to share in a giant game of Chicken, also known as "Advisory Bike Lanes" 

[mbjj]

A letter from Chris Foord in the paper today stating he will not use the Richardson bike lanes as he considers them too dangerous. I heard him on the radio about ten days ago stating the same.

 

One question I have - if emergency vehicles and buses will be allowed to pass through the "plaza" at the bottom of Lotbiniere, what is to stop us peasants from doing likewise?

Edited by mbjj, 25 July 2020 - 07:15 AM.

[kxl]

In Edmonton and Calgary, on bus-only roads they’ve built these gaps in the road where buses can safely drive through, but passenger cars would fall into the gap and would need to be extracted. (This design won’t work in a plaza.)

[Rex Waverly]

 

 

As for your claim that the advisory lanes for Richardson were scraped, I don't know where you get that idea.  The plan for Richardson is the exact same as Humboldt.  Parking on both sides, bike lanes on both sides, one center lane for cars and other 4 wheeled vehicles traveling in opposite directions to share in a giant game of Chicken, also known as "Advisory Bike Lanes" 

 

The latest Richardson design, approved by council on July 9, does not include advisory bike lanes.  The approved design is for shared use, the same type of design as the Vancouver route.  

 

The approved designs for the Richardson bike route (as well as the Kimta, Kings / Haultain, and Government routes) are available on the city's website: https://www.victoria...on/cycling.html

[Mike K.]

Oh yeah, that’s helpful. Thank you.

[marks_28]

As for your claim that the advisory lanes for Richardson were scraped, I don't know where you get that idea. The plan for Richardson is the exact same as Humboldt. Parking on both sides, bike lanes on both sides, one center lane for cars and other 4 wheeled vehicles traveling in opposite directions to share in a giant game of Chicken, also known as "Advisory Bike Lanes"

That is simply not true. Have you seen the latest designs? There are going to be no advisory bike lanes on Richardson, after strong public feedback opposed them.

Edit: Sorry, saw someone above saying this exact same thing.

Edited by marks_28, 25 July 2020 - 09:13 PM.

[A Girl is No one]

The latest Richardson design, approved by council on July 9, does not include advisory bike lanes. The approved design is for shared use, the same type of design as the Vancouver route.

The approved designs for the Richardson bike route (as well as the Kimta, Kings / Haultain, and Government routes) are available on the city's website: https://www.victoria...on/cycling.html

Their plan drawing is not clear to me. I only see one car lane allowed on the new Richardson design. Can you please explain how it will work?

[mbjj]

From what I understand, Richardson will be the same as Humdboldt is now. One lane for vehicles, when you meet face-to-face, you have a stare-down to decide who's going to move over into a bike lane (and maybe hit a cyclist) first. I could even live with that if we could still drive all the way up Richardson. When you actually live on a street, it's hard to avoid driving on it.

[Victoria Watcher]

if you can't figure out how to avoid other cars and bikes while travelling at 30kmh or less you really should turn over your license.

[A Girl is No one]

From what I understand, Richardson will be the same as Humdboldt is now. One lane for vehicles, when you meet face-to-face, you have a stare-down to decide who's going to move over into a bike lane (and maybe hit a cyclist) first. I could even live with that if we could still drive all the way up Richardson. When you actually live on a street, it's hard to avoid driving on it.

That’s what I get from the plans too but others say it’s not the same. Maybe we are misreading the plan?

[Rex Waverly]

From what I understand, Richardson will be the same as Humdboldt is now. One lane for vehicles, when you meet face-to-face, you have a stare-down to decide who's going to move over into a bike lane (and maybe hit a cyclist) first. I could even live with that if we could still drive all the way up Richardson. When you actually live on a street, it's hard to avoid driving on it.

 

The existing road width (curb to curb) remains the same, other than some curb extensions at intersections.  In some places, the travel lane width is being reduced due to the addition of on-street parking; where the existing road is narrower (Vancouver to Lotbiniere - Segment A on the design pdf) which does mean that drivers will have to pull over between parked cars or in driveways to allow others to pass. 

 

This will create what is called a 'yield street,' where drivers cannot pass each other if cars are parked on both sides (that's why there are gaps in the parking to allow passing). This is very common on residential streets in Victoria; drivers should be used to driving these types of roads.  

[Victoria Watcher]

I agree. it’s not rocket science to drive. most streets in Victoria have no centre line marked.

haultain Street for example has no line.

somehow we manage.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 26 July 2020 - 09:45 AM.

[A Girl is No one]

The existing road width (curb to curb) remains the same, other than some curb extensions at intersections. In some places, the travel lane width is being reduced due to the addition of on-street parking; where the existing road is narrower (Vancouver to Lotbiniere - Segment A on the design pdf) which does mean that drivers will have to pull over between parked cars or in driveways to allow others to pass.

This will create what is called a 'yield street,' where drivers cannot pass each other if cars are parked on both sides (that's why there are gaps in the parking to allow passing). This is very common on residential streets in Victoria; drivers should be used to driving these types of roads.

Rex: isn’t that the same as what they just did on Humboldt? This is where I’m confused because you say it’s not (or am I misreading your previous comment?).

[IPH]

That is simply not true. Have you seen the latest designs? There are going to be no advisory bike lanes on Richardson, after strong public feedback opposed them.

Edit: Sorry, saw someone above saying this exact same thing.

Sorry, my neighbour sent me the old plan which was advisory lanes, and you are right they have changed this to shared lanes.  However this design is even worse than Advisory lanes!

 

The section from Vancouver to Lotbiniere is only 9 m wide and the approved shared lanes have parking on both sides with some breaks in the parking.  The City's design standards for off street parking stalls requires that parking stalls be a minimum of 2.6 m wide.  With parking on both sides of the road that eats up 5.2 m of the road width leaving only 3.8 m of road for vehicles and cyclists traveling in both directions to share.  

 

It also only leaves 3.8m of road width for cars to back out of driveways into the street.  Victoria's off street parking bylaw requires a 7m wide isle behind all perpendicular parking stalls for vehicles to back out of in a slow moving parking lot with occasional vehicle traffic, but its ok to only have 3.8m to back out into a street with cars and bikes traveling in both directions?   

 

The City's highway access bylaw requires that a driveway servicing a residential parking lot with 10 parking stalls (again only occasional traffic) be 5.5 to 6 m wide but a road with constant flowing traffic of cars and bikes in both directions is fine at 3.8 wide?  Someone needs to get their head out of their a$$ and face reality rather than making $h!&& up on the fly, just to facilitate their own agenda! 

 

Shared or advisory bike lanes with parking on both sides is simply a horrendously bad engineering decision on a 9 m wide road way!

[Nparker]

...Shared or advisory bike lanes with parking on both sides is simply a horrendously bad engineering decision on a 9 m wide road way!

It's an acceptable engineering decision if the ultimate goal is to socially engineer people out of their cars through sheer frustration. I am sure it will be just as successful as "free" bus passes have been at increasing transit ridership.

[Rex Waverly]

  Shared or advisory bike lanes with parking on both sides is simply a horrendously bad engineering decision on a 9 m wide road way!

 

A 9m roadway with parking on both sides is very common in Victoria. As an example, McClure St and Collinson St (the streets directly north and south of Richardson) are 9m wide with parking both sides (at least between Vancouver and Cook).  Drivers have to drive slow and cautious but that's what you want when it's a local residential road (which is what they are trying to turn Richardson into).