11042 replies to this topic

[Rex Waverly]

Maybe Rex can confirm if the data captures return trips or only origin, ie departing -or- arriving downtown.

 

It's daily trips, both in and out combined.  

 

If you want to see where i got it from, it's page 68 / 69 of the 2011 O/D survey and pages 89/90 of the 2017 O/D survey.

 

2011 survey is here:  https://www.crd.bc.c...vrsn=732165ca_2

2017 survey is here: https://www.crd.bc.c...20180622-sm.pdf

 

They have Daily, AM, and PM numbers, broken down by From District, To District, and Within District.  As stated above, I excluded Within but it's there if you want to compare.  

 

(Another interesting note, the vehicle trips overall have gone down but the AM peak hour have gone up 5%, with inbound drivers going up by 7.7% in the AM peak.)

[rmpeers]

Having taken a rare spin on and around the new Vancouver Street, I will offer a brief review: sh*t sandwich.

[marks_28]

Having taken a rare spin on and around the new Vancouver Street, I will offer a brief review: sh*t sandwich.

However, is it preferable to protected lanes on Cook Street?

[rmpeers]

However, is it preferable to protected lanes on Cook Street?

What would be preferable would be bike friendly streets that don't appear to have been designed by a heavily intoxicated person or persons. This could have happened. A missed opportunity.

[Rex Waverly]

What would be preferable would be bike friendly streets that don't appear to have been designed by a heavily intoxicated person or persons. This could have happened. A missed opportunity.

 

Care to elaborate why you think the design is poor?  Or perhaps, could you provide any examples of a design that, in your opinion, has not been designed by drunk persons? 

 

I've heard a lot of 'this design sucks', which is nice to know i guess but doesn't really explain WHY the design is poor or how it could have been improved. Or is it simply a case of you don't like not being able to use Vancouver St as a through road anymore?

[Ismo07]

Care to elaborate why you think the design is poor?  Or perhaps, could you provide any examples of a design that, in your opinion, has not been designed by drunk persons? 

 

I've heard a lot of 'this design sucks', which is nice to know i guess but doesn't really explain WHY the design is poor or how it could have been improved. Or is it simply a case of you don't like not being able to use Vancouver St as a through road anymore?

 

It is odd when everyone first complains about the two bike lanes on one way streets and now there is a lane on each side and that's not right either..  Almost like people don't like changes...

Edited by Ismo07, 31 December 2020 - 09:37 AM.

[spanky123]

Care to elaborate why you think the design is poor?  Or perhaps, could you provide any examples of a design that, in your opinion, has not been designed by drunk persons? 

 

I've heard a lot of 'this design sucks', which is nice to know i guess but doesn't really explain WHY the design is poor or how it could have been improved. Or is it simply a case of you don't like not being able to use Vancouver St as a through road anymore?

 

Lots of little things that make me question whether the people who designed the bike lanes on Vancouver were intoxicated!

 

Case in point the bike lanes that flare into the car lane when approaching Fort St from the north. Ok I get the bikes may want to turn left but it is not like bikes on Vancouver need a dedicated turning lane. The big risk here is that when it is dark and rainy a car driver might not notice the flare and then hit the curb by simply driving straight. 

 

Other issue is that with Vancouver now blocked to north bound traffic at Meares, traffic has been pushed to Quadra and Cook St (as designed) but the additional traffic now means that it is impossible to turn off of Meares due to the congestion. As a result, cars are now cutting the block between Meares and Fort on Vancouver by going the wrong way down the short section of street. Accident waiting to happen there.

 

And that is just the first section that is complete.

[Mike K.]

It’s the craziest design of them all so far, and I thought Wharf would stand as the title holder.

Every one of these lanes is different and each one infused its own tweaks. If we built roads that way we’d have total chaos.

[Nparker]

The tragedy that is the new Vancouver Street is something for which the CoV should be ashamed for years.

[rmpeers]

They appear designed to cause maximum confusion, which (and keep in mind I am not a super-smart transportation expert) is maybe not what you ideally want in a road.

[Brantastic]

Lots of little things that make me question whether the people who designed the bike lanes on Vancouver were intoxicated!

 

Case in point the bike lanes that flare into the car lane when approaching Fort St from the north. Ok I get the bikes may want to turn left but it is not like bikes on Vancouver need a dedicated turning lane. The big risk here is that when it is dark and rainy a car driver might not notice the flare and then hit the curb by simply driving straight. 

 

Other issue is that with Vancouver now blocked to north bound traffic at Meares, traffic has been pushed to Quadra and Cook St (as designed) but the additional traffic now means that it is impossible to turn off of Meares due to the congestion. As a result, cars are now cutting the block between Meares and Fort on Vancouver by going the wrong way down the short section of street. Accident waiting to happen there.

 

And that is just the first section that is complete.

Would you have preferred all of the parking on Vancouver St throughout Fairfield and North Park to be removed and the costs substantially increased for protected bike lanes through the entirety of the street so it could be open to through traffic? Because that was the alternative. Either that or remove lanes on Cook Street to make space for a north-south route there.

Safe bike routes are not just lines on a map. Vancouver Street, as it was, was not a safe bike route. Safe bike routes protect cyclists from the constant threat of being hit by a vehicle. So either we physically separate cars from bikes or we substantially reduce the number of cars on that route. It's one or the other. 

[Rex Waverly]

Lots of little things that make me question whether the people who designed the bike lanes on Vancouver were intoxicated!

 

Case in point the bike lanes that flare into the car lane when approaching Fort St from the north. Ok I get the bikes may want to turn left but it is not like bikes on Vancouver need a dedicated turning lane. The big risk here is that when it is dark and rainy a car driver might not notice the flare and then hit the curb by simply driving straight. 

 

Other issue is that with Vancouver now blocked to north bound traffic at Meares, traffic has been pushed to Quadra and Cook St (as designed) but the additional traffic now means that it is impossible to turn off of Meares due to the congestion. As a result, cars are now cutting the block between Meares and Fort on Vancouver by going the wrong way down the short section of street. Accident waiting to happen there.

 

And that is just the first section that is complete.

 

I assume you're talking the flare on the southeast corner of the Fort St intersection? If it's as shown in the design available online, the bike lane flares there because it follows the existing curb; there's a curb extension on that corner which juts out into Vancouver. And it follows the curb line instead of being a straight line because it curves around the on-street parking / loading zone. The flare shouldn't encroach into the travel lane, only into the parking lane, and the bike lane doesn't get any wider at that point.  Also, have the lane / parking markings been installed yet?

 

 

Edit: uh, never mind the above, I re-read your comment and realize you're talking FROM the north, not northbound so my bad. The online design does not show a flare as you approach from the north; there must be a design change since the online one was posted. Therefore, i'll refrain from commenting until i see it myself.

 

As for Meares, it can takes a little bit of time for traffic to adjust / reroute to big changes; the congestion may die down after drivers learn / internalize the changes and stop using Vancouver. Also, it is usually standard practice after a traffic pattern change to monitor traffic flows for unexpected issues that arise, in case any further mitigations are required. I can't say for sure that the City will be monitoring, but it would be (IMO) irresponsible for them not to be, because yeah, it's a big safety problem if drivers go the wrong way on purpose. Just curious, is Meares at Quadra or at Cook that drivers are not able to turn off of (or both)?

Edited by Rex Waverly, 31 December 2020 - 11:17 AM.

[mbjj]

I'm wondering if there have been problems with that road obstruction on Vancouver St. at MacClure. I notice they've now put some big orange bumper things and one already has a big dent in it. Maybe cars aren't seeing that obstruction in the dark? 

[Brantastic]

Saanich has applied for a federal grant to help expedite the expansion of their AAA bike network. This includes:

-Protected bike lanes on McKenzie Ave form Borden to Finnerty (upgraded from current painted bike lanes). This includes removal of a right turn lane onto Cedar Hill X.
-Protected bike lanes on Cloverdale St from the Galloping Goose to Quadra. New and enhanced pedestrian crossings at Bethune and Savannah Streets.
-Advisory bike lanes on Lochside Dr between Royal Oak and Cordova Bay Roads, with raised crosswalks and a pilot closure at Claremont Rd.

According to the document below, the expansion project is expected to be complete by Dec 2021. 

Future phases in what Saanich calls their "minimum grid" AAA network include protected bike lanes on Gorge, Sinclair, Quadra, and Chatterton. I think these changes will be huge for bicycle safety in Saanich and can't wait. I used to bike along McKenzie from Saanich Rd to UVic all the time and it was NOT a comfortable bike ride.

https://saanich.ca.g...ijxLiiF295wTSmo

[Mike K.]

The Lochside connection to Finnerty would have been great 20-years-ago when I cycled to UVic. Taking McKenzie was always pretty unnerving.

[spanky123]

As far as I can tell, bike lane construction on Vancouver St ended about 6-7 weeks ago yet the bike lanes themselves remain closed. Cyclists are now forced to share the narrow single lane with vehicles making it far more dangerous to use then prior to any construction.

[Nparker]

As far as I can tell, bike lane construction on Vancouver St ended about 6-7 weeks ago yet the bike lanes themselves remain closed...

As awful as this project is, I certainly hope the work has not been deemed complete. Surely the intention is to repave the entirety of the surface on Vancouver Street rather than just leave the mess of patches that currently exists.

[Jackerbie]

As far as I can tell, bike lane construction on Vancouver St ended about 6-7 weeks ago yet the bike lanes themselves remain closed. Cyclists are now forced to share the narrow single lane with vehicles making it far more dangerous to use then prior to any construction.

 

City website says Vancouver Street completion is expected in Spring 2021, so maybe they're just taking a reaaaally long holiday break

[North Shore]

Saanich has applied for a federal grant to help expedite the expansion of their AAA bike network. This includes:


-Advisory bike lanes on Lochside Dr between Royal Oak and Cordova Bay Roads, with raised crosswalks and a pilot closure at Claremont Rd.

 

 Perhaps it's just me, but spending scarce tax dollars on tht section of Lochside is a complete WOFTAM, as far as I'm concerned.  It's alredy a defacto bike route, with raised speed bumps, and very little traffic.  The ?one? stop at Claremont isn't really a hardship - just put up a yield sign there for bikes.

I'd perhaps go one further, and say that, as it's pretty much a multi-use trail/road, by discouraging cars even more, you might put pedestrians at risk from speeding cyclists...

[Brantastic]

 Perhaps it's just me, but spending scarce tax dollars on tht section of Lochside is a complete WOFTAM, as far as I'm concerned.  It's alredy a defacto bike route, with raised speed bumps, and very little traffic.  The ?one? stop at Claremont isn't really a hardship - just put up a yield sign there for bikes.

I'd perhaps go one further, and say that, as it's pretty much a multi-use trail/road, by discouraging cars even more, you might put pedestrians at risk from speeding cyclists...

They're advisory bike lanes which are really inexpensive. I assume the Claremont closure is more about reducing traffic volumes on Lochside rather than being about the intersection itself. There was a news story just a couple days ago about a driver on Lochside being fined for going nearly 60km/hr over the speed limit:

https://www.cheknews...saanich-745751/

The section in the article is north of the area with the proposed traffic-calming, but nonetheless, it's a shared vehicle/cyclist/pedestrian stretch just like the Cordova Bay section. Some drivers keep to the 30 km/hr speed limit, but many don't at all. The point is that if it's going to be a shared space, it should be designed in a way that makes it nearly impossible to go 60 km/hr over the speed limit in the first place.