Vancouver City Hall deemed arrogant, out of touch on street closures

Post by Mike Klassen in

71 comments


Over 2 dozen neighbours gathered on a Friday afternoon to sound off at City Hall (video)

We regularly receive emails from concerned citizens on different issues here at CityCaucus.com. When we can follow-up, it's usually with a phone call or an exchange of emails. Last Monday someone living in a neighbourhood I know well (having grown up nearby) emailed us about a bike route that had been blocked with a concrete barrier. It was a very sincere request, complete with attached images and drawings, so I asked the correspondent if we could meet.

Tom Huong is a thirty-something parent who's grown up in the Killarney area. He told me that he was concerned that the new barriers would re-direct traffic into a school zone, and potentially lead to an accident. We agreed to meet at 2:45pm last Friday, and Tom said "I'll bring a couple of neighbours". So I wrapped up my week a bit early and headed over to our meeting place at Waverly Elementary school at East 46th & Elliott Street.

When I arrived I couldn't believe my eyes. Tom had assembled about 15 people from the community. They were young, old, Italian, Chinese, African, Croation, South Asian – the whole cosmopolitan mix of southeast Vancouver. To a person they were furious at the arrogance of Vancouver City Hall on the matter of the barricade set up at the corner of East 45th & Elliott.

They were all sincerely looking for someone's help, and frankly I looked a little powerless to come to their aid. I suggested that we walk the block over to the corner they were concerned about in order for all of us to see what the problem was. As we walked over the neighbours, most with thick accents of people who have come to this country during their lives, began to introduce themselves to me. All of them felt that City Hall had run right over their wishes.

As we stood on the corner where the barricade was set up, it only took a moment before neighbours living in nearby houses began to join us. Every one of them came out and said, "What the hell are you going to do about this damn thing?" Before you knew it we had about two dozen neighbours standing there all with common cause – to stop Mayor Gregor Robertson and an arrogant City Hall.

I got on the phone with GlobalTV's Ted Chernecki, who had just interviewed me earlier on the Viaduct closure issue – Friday evening's top story on the News Hour. Could we get a camera here? I asked. Within about 15 minutes Ted confirmed a camera was on the way, but it would be about 30 minutes. The neighbours were all willing to wait. I then called the CKNW news room, who also obliged and sent reporter Penny Daflos. The neighbours were happy to know that finally someone was listening to them.

I began asking some of the neighbours to talk to me on camera while we waited. What I could see is that the barricade the City had set up was an unmitigated disaster. The same stupid design was used for a barrier on East King Edward & Windsor Street in my neighbourhood. Back in 2007 a young woman pushing a baby stroller tried to cross at this intersection, and she was hit by a car. She died.

Someone will die as a result of the barrier at 45th & Elliott if it is left to stand.

City engineer Scott Edwards is Vancouver's point man on this disastrous initiative, and he was on GlobalTV Saturday as a result of our efforts to get this out to the public. He was clearly unapologetic at this stupid idea.

One neighbour at the corner of 45th & Elliott said she'd make a City rep a cup of coffee and provide him with a chair to watch the corner. She said you just need to sit there for five minutes to see that someone is going to be seriously hurt. The City rep declined the offer.

As I stood on the corner that Friday afternoon I saw about eight cars attempt illegal u-turns. I watched as cyclists and pedestrians took their lives in their hands entering the intersection as cars whipped through. This used to be a corner controlled by a four-way stop, and it's been that way for about the previous five decades. It worked just fine.

What Vancouver city council is doing is only listening to the tiny but vocal bike lobby, and they are ignoring communities at large. Even a cyclist riding by yelled out, "Whoever thought of this sh*t ought to be fired!" Everyone there agreed.

This story is repeating itself at other locations around the city, such as beside Riley Park on Ontario Street. Mark my words, this "bikes before people" mentality is going to be the undoing of the Vision Vancouver council. I heard it loud and clear on Friday afternoon – Mayor Robertson, listen to us or you're outta here.

– post by Mike

71 Comments

Arrogant. Arrogant. Arrogant. The only way to describe the mayor and his friends at city hall. They don't listen to us. They just force things on us if it helps their bicycle pals. Shame on this mayor. Arrogant, arrogant, arrogant. We will be working hard in this neighbourhood to canvass against him in the next election. He will be defeated!

When are they going to start ticketing bikers for running stop signs?
Maybe then the bikers can actually start paying for their share of this.

"When are they going to start ticketing bikers for running stop signs?"

There's been a crackdown during June.

http://www.straight.com/article-330887/vancouver/police-traffic-violation-crackdown-rankles-vancouver-cyclists

When are they going to start ticketing drivers for the same infraction? I see it all the time, along with continued texting/talking on mobile phones, running red lights, speeding, and so forth.

It's too bad in this rush for blood I don't see or hear anyone saying the drivers ignoring the new traffic restriction need to be called to account for their actions. Why is that?

So how is this different from what they have been doing in other areas of the City.

Take a look at the barrier/calming/cycling protection design between the quadrant of 1st and Hastings and Nanaimo & Victoria.

Fire trucks have can't make many of the turns or roundabouts and have to back up and/or take the corner on the 2nd try, there is no seemingly up and over pattern as the barriers are random.

There was a neighbourhood survey and yet when C of V Streets was asked to release the results of the survey on the placement of the "temporary" barriers the response was supposedly overwhelming support so it wasn't an issue.

Funny thing, after canvassing neighbours, very few supported the design and often invoked serious invective towards the idiots that designed it. Many mentioning that laneways are now being used to try to bypass the barriers or cars backing up to try to turn around.

But hey, why plan!...when we can cut kids programs, park programs and city services to benefit our friends.

Remember. some pigs are just more equal than others.


This is classic divide and concrete politics - divide the neighbourhood then install more ugly concrete barriers. Kudos to the local residents for standing up to these types of tactics. They may want to let their voices be heard at the next council meeting while the cameras are rolling tape. The mayor and his team will fold like a bad deck of cards with the smallest amount of media pressure.

One has to ask why the mayor has created civil war between cyclists and pedestrians, car drivers, neighbourhoods, small businesses etc...was all this conflict really necessary when the city had such a good track record of building bike routes with community support? I think not. It might make for good politics but it's terrible community building.

@Chris Keam - the Georgia Straight ticket article is interesting in that all drivers are suppose to treat all stop signs as a stop sign.

Those spots where there are pedestrian controlled lights one direction and stops signs in the other are all over the city and I believe most (drivers and cyclists) see the walk signal as a green light to roll through the stop sign.

My question would something like Elliot and 45th barrier be avoided if the Motor Vehicle Act and/or the city allowed cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs and *if safe to proceed* roll through a stop sign. Drivers of cars would still have to stop.

For a good video explanation see here http://vimeo.com/4140910

The residents of Killarney now know what the residents of False Creek North discovered when the city opened it's no barrier crack houses not once but TWICE in their quiet community. This mayor and the VISION party do not listen because they do NOT give a rats banana about tax paying residents. This party is all about optics - they want to be seen to be doing something for the cyclists, the homeless, the food sovereigntists with their backyard chickens or whatever the angry left wing greenies consider to be today's trend.
They are blindly following dogmatic agendas - they will ignore pedestrians if it helps cyclists - walking isn't cool but cycling is cool in their little minds. But it isn't really about cyclists either - its about appearing to support cyclists - the Dunsmuir viaduct is a perfect example and this barrier in Killarney is another.
The VISION party believes this shows leadership.

Does anyone know where I can get a hold of an NPA membership? It's time to take action against this kind of arrogance. I will be volunteering in the next election to get rid of these bums.

Dear Mike,

Thank you for making the time to do this......several English Bay residents would also really appreciate if you would be willing to meet with them to show you the impact of the Burrard Bridge Lane closure on our neighborhood.

To Chris Keam......Dont you be concerned about the cars getting their share of punishment. The police are making tons of money for this Vision gang to spend on their pet projects, by ticketing cars that, often mistakenly (due to a very small sign), take a right turn onto Hornby St. All in the cause of allowing cyclists to be safe! Meanwhile merchants are forced out of business, once quiet streets have become chaotic and our homes polluted.

All this to help the rare cyclist seen on the BB Bridge and the even rarer sighting of a cyclist going East along Pacific!

Darn these guys are smart! Sure know how to rile the citizens!! Is anyone, like me, looking for a GREENER group to run our city?

Victor:

I couldn't care less about punishment. Safety is my chief concern. Safer roads start with drivers observing traffic laws and refraining from poor choices such as making u-turns on busy streets, per the story about 45th and Kerr. If it takes a police crackdown to impress upon them the need to abide by the law for the safety of everyone, then so be it.

Chris, safer roads begin with everyone obeying traffic laws - drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.

Anyone notice the cyclist rolling across the junction there, looking at the protest and not in the direction of traffic?

Seriously, safety on the roads comes from everyone seeing themselves as part of a single community with responsibility for each other and not from the self righteous, divisive, authoritarian attitudes we see in City Hall. Some level of competence would also help.

There is indeed something important happening right across Vancouver &, not just to do with bike lanes. I have not seen such wide spread disaffection since 1972 in this City.

Speaking of bike lanes. Most reasonably thinking people support improving this transportation option but, it is being implemented with the subtlety of Genghis Khan. Where is the public consultation? Where are the comprehensive & neighbourhood plans?

In addition, from the only glimpse I have had, specifically around the Little Mountain project, it appears the intention is to have every 2nd or 3rd street both ways as dedicated bike routes throughout the City. This is complete overkill. Surely this otherwise beneficial initiative can be slowed down to allow rational, community based decision making to occur.

Enlighten us, Chris.

What should the rules be for bikers. There own set of rules? Same as cars?
Change the rules when it suits them?

Of course bikes should have to stop at a stop sign. Bikes are a bigger risk to pedestrians on the bike routes than cars.

I live on the bike route on the west side. Every day I watch pedestrians dodge and weaves the "psycho-bikers' who go flying around traffic circles and skipping stop signs at opposite Red lights. And they are totally unaccountable most of the time.

Make them pay. If they pay attention to the rules of the road I can live with the bike lanes. What I can't handle is bikers who want it both ways whenever it suits them.

On a separate not, congratulations to Surrey's Mayor, Diane Watts who is in the running to named the world’s best mayor.

Watts is one of 25 mayors — out of more than 840 nominations around the world — shortlisted for the 2010 World Mayor Prize.

The award honours outstanding mayors who have served their community well by making their cities great places to live, work and visit.

Perhaps she can tutor Gregor and his gang on the 'how to's' of being a good Mayor.

I think you're missing the point...

Cyclists are not whiter than white yet I'd put money on every single person complaining about how they behave on the road behave no better behind the wheel of their car. How cyclists use the road is exactly the same way that car drivers use the road.

Yes, enforce better road use by cyclists but enforce better road use by drivers, and even pedestrians for that matter.

RF:

At the intersection being discussed in this story it's the auto users creating the danger (by ignoring road rules), not cyclists.

I responded to your initial post because you called for a crackdown on unlawful cycling. I pointed out that it was already underway. Nowhere did I make any suggestions about changes to the current rules, although it's an interesting topic... and certainly one for which I have my own ideas for solutions.

If you are keen to see cyclists better educated regarding the rules of the road, I would suggest a strongly-worded letter to the School Board or Education Ministry calling for school-age programs for cycling education would be an excellent start. With more and more young people taking the government's advice to get active and help the environment, cycling is bound to increase. We'd be doing everyone a favour by making sure kids get the appropriate safety skills at an early age.

cheers,
CK

Just what we need, Chris.

Then you can apply for the job and soon be making $85,000/year + pension for teaching kids how to ride their bikes...

God forbid parents be responsible for anything to do with their kids.

I took Home Ec in high school and got an A. I still can't cook.
I took woodwork and got a B. I can barely build a fire.

Typically it is not small children that are the problem cyclists - it is the adults that feel the 'rules' do not apply to them. Head over to any of the blogs that surround any cycling topic and read, it doesn't take long to see their 'do as I say but not as I do' mentality.

As for the crackdown you mention - giving 'information' tickets didn't work a year ago, why do you think it will work now. Attach the appropriate monetary value to them, then perhaps some of these 'cyclists' will pay attention, when it hits them in the wallet as it does with car drivers.

I've been hit twice by cyclists on the sidewalk, neither stopped - one was talking on his cell phone when he hit me from behind, the other jumped a curb and cut me off mid-step at a cross walk.

Cyclists are far from the angels you portray them to be.


Chris, It's not about cycles vs cars. It's about sheer stupidity. Have you ever used this intersection?

It used to be a 4-way stop. That worked well in slowing the traffic past the school on Elliot, and allowed traffic on both 45th and Elliott to feed smoothly through the intersection. But the problem for the city is that meant cars used 45th too heavily (and it's a bike route).

So now, they've blocked off car access across Elliott at 45th, and REMOVED the stop on Elliott.

This makes it dangerous for anyone on 45th to cross Elliott, and it makes the traffic go faster past the school.

Someone is going to get killed here, and it might easily be a cyclist. How is this an improvement for anyone?!

So I take it you will move to surrey, I agree it's much better than Vancouver hopefully you will move there, sounds like your kind of place

Katzenberg:

Honestly, is that the best comment you have to offer?

Thanks for the insightful contribution.

Wow.

Foo:

I haven't used the intersection since the change. Neither have I said anything about this being cars vs cyclists. My chief concern with this topic is that in the rush to judgment the one thing no one seems to want to discuss is the drivers ignoring the new rules and endangering everyone using the intersection.

Max:

I haven't portrayed cyclists as any particular kind of person. There are smart ones and dumb ones, considerate and inconsiderate, just like every other cross-section of the population. Please don't misrepresent my views to bolster your own.

RF:

"God forbid parents be responsible for anything to do with their kids."

Why in the world would you be against giving kids some skills they can use in the real world, that might actually address your concerns? Lots of other places in the world teach road safety, how could it hurt our society to spend a few hours in school on how to behave as a pedestrian, driver, cyclist, etc? Given that you're complaining about the current crop of cyclists... and certainly a lot of drivers seem unclear on the rules of the road, I would think you would welcome any initiative to improve the situation, because by your reckoning, the people raising kids nowadays don't have the knowledge to teach them.

Easy on the pork Kitsilanoberg! We don't want you to get indigestion. Too much Gregor on your plate, eh?

Chris, drivers are required to take a driving test to get their license. Rather than wasting education resources teaching the 4% of the population that cycles how to be a responsible cyclist, why don't we license cyclists and require them to pass a test just like drivers.

Chris Keam, the issues that you are complaining about taking over the discussion are largely the ones you stirred up! Just re-read your previous posts and you will see this.

The article concentrates on a bad and dangerous decision by the city bureaucracy. Whether or not the speculation as to its cause is correct, only good for everyone can result if sense prevails as a result of the publicity.

Chris Keam.

Sigh.

Little children, learning the rules of the road, on their bikes. Yes, yes, splendid idea.

It's not the little kids, I'm worried about.

It's your Critical Mass riders, many who appear to scew 18 -35, who seem to disdain a helmet as much as they disdain any rules of the road.

All you helmetless idiots riding in that crazy ass bike lane, where Kingsway and Main, er, collide. Smarten up!

@ bill

It's interesting that you think teaching people to be responsible cyclists is a waste of resources. I wonder what you consider a good use of resources if being responsible isn't one of them.

Teachers are not parents and are not babysitters - they have a job description and don't need to be taking on those teachings that parents are or should be responsible for.

And some thing should just be common sense.

Children know to wear a bike helmet. They also know not to cross a street at a red light.

It's adults that seem to have problems learning and practicing these basic skills.

Which begs the questions:

"Are you smarter than a 5th grader?"

The point is, this intersection has become more dangerous because one direction no longer has a stop, the neighbourhood didn't ask for this, and is now inconvenienced. Consequences to Vision Vancouver forthcoming given the growing list of dissatisfied Vancouverites who don't like what they have seen at City Hall.

It's people looking for change who will come out to vote. Likely everyone else whether satisfied, betrayed, or can't swallow the options, stay home.

"why don't we license cyclists and require them to pass a test just like drivers."

There's a long list of reasons. Let's consider a few.

1)Because people start cycling at a much younger age. Are we seriously going to send a ten year old kid down to get a license so they can ride over to the community centre? Is it even necessary? Will this just be in Vancouver? How small will a community have to be before we say a license isn't necessary to ride a bicycle down a deserted country road? There IS a world outside of Metro Vancouver you know.

2)Riding a bike is easier and less dangerous (esp. to others) than driving. Are we willing to spend the money necessary for a regulation that will probably have little or no impact on safety?

3) If you start down that road you will end up needing a license to do a thousand other activities, from operating a mobility scooter to climbing a ladder, to roller-blading. Why do we require a gun to be registered, but not a machete, or a sling-shot, or a baseball bat?

4) It's not a one-size-fits-all world. What's necessary for automobiles, isn't always necessary for other forms of transportation.

2)Riding a bike is easier and less dangerous (esp. to others) than driving. Are we willing to spend the money necessary for a regulation that will probably have little or no impact on safety?

***************

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the reason for placing the barriers on the Burrard Street Bridge a direct result of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians?

I believe there were 8 accidents in total, with 5 pedestrians being injured of those 8.

As for licensing, when I was a kid you had to have a bike license - you registered it through city hall. You in turn had a plate, a small replica of a license plate that you attached to the back seat of your bike.

It cost $5.00.

"Teachers are not parents and are not babysitters - they have a job description and don't need to be taking on those teachings that parents are or should be responsible for."

Are you serious? I don't know if you've noticed, but there's a lot of bad parenting going on out there. But hey, you want to punish children because their parents aren't teaching them the skills they need to get by in the world, have at 'er.

"Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the reason for placing the barriers on the Burrard Street Bridge a direct result of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians?

I believe there were 8 accidents in total, with 5 pedestrians being injured of those 8."

Uh-huh. And this proves that cycling is harder than driving how?

"As for licensing, when I was a kid you had to have a bike license - you registered it through city hall. You in turn had a plate, a small replica of a license plate that you attached to the back seat of your bike.

It cost $5.00."

What were the competency requirements you had to pass to get this licence?

"The point is, this intersection has become more dangerous because one direction no longer has a stop, the neighbourhood didn't ask for this, and is now inconvenienced."

Thank you Dennis for getting us back on topic. In your opinion, is there a solution that will work to keep cars off the bike route but maintain intersection safety?

'Are you serious? I don't know if you've noticed, but there's a lot of bad parenting going on out there. But hey, you want to punish children because their parents aren't teaching them the skills they need to get by in the world, have at 'er.'

************

There are a lot of bad teachers out there as well - or have you not read the local papers as of late.

I did not know that 'bike riding' is considered a necessary survival skill.....

David Hadaway:

I didn't stir up a darn thing. I pointed out to RF that the thing he was demanding was already going on and away we went on the usual trip down Bash-the-Cyclist Boulevard.

There's two issues here. The change in the road and the choice by drivers to ignore the new rules. How interesting that no one seems to want to take drivers to task for their choice, but instead bring up a host of unrelated issues, all the while blasting City Hall because they didn't get it exactly right on the first try. This problem would probably be non-existent if drivers did two things that they are bound by law to do. Observe the new rules and yield for pedestrians at an unmarked intersection.

Perhaps teachers are not the best resource to teach children about behaving responsibly considering the illegal strike they inflicted on the school system a few years ago.

mayor moonbeam doesnt know anything about street barriers, he has to get booted out, he's to busy being an american hanging out in san francisco and cortes island, hes arrogant he needs to go

"Rather than wasting education resources teaching the 4% of the population that cycles how to be a responsible cyclist,"

Bill:

Half of Canadians own a bicycle. Presumably they use it on occasion. Over 300,000 bicycles were sold out of independent bike shops in 2009, with roughly another million sold at stores such as Canadian Tire, Wal-mart, etc. Add those sales to the existing stock of bikes already on the road and it's obvious that many more than 4% of the population rides at some point. Anyway, my suggestion for education included pedestrians and drivers. Surely you would agree that users of all three forms of transportation would benefit from increased education?

They are temporary measures put in to see what the impacts are. If they don't work, they can be easily adjusted. I'm not sure why everyone is so worked up about all of this. How about waiting to see what the final solution is before making a judgement.

If I didn't already know from everyday experience how abysmally bad a significant number of drivers are I certainly learned it doing crossing patrol at my son's school for a couple of years. One would expect the city's traffic planners to have some awareness of this fact and design road changes according to driving standards as they are, because making all road users what they should be will be a long, long process.

I drive and would happily lock up any driver who killed a child and throw away the key but that wouldn't bring anyone back to life.

So as to rights and wrongs between drivers and cyclists let's just recognize that young pedestrians are the most vulnerable of all, put their needs first and save the recrimination game for another day.

@Richard. Smart idea. Why don't we wait for someone to get killed or seriously injured. Boy, you lose all credibility when you make dumb statements like that. If it is a hazard then remove it immediately. The local residents appear to have a good case here. For once tell your vision friends to listen to the people. Please!

Now we know where Vision Vancouver gets their arrogance from. Clearly it is from Richard and his friends.

Clearly,

The Vision bike lobby and their friends at VACC do not like this post!

on top of all this I heard Geoff Megg's cycling accident was the result of him mowing through a red light smack dab into a the corner panel of a moving Chevrolet.

Is this true? If so was he charged? Was he wearing a helmet?

This morning at 9 am I travelled alongside Geoff's latest brain fart - the Dunsmuir viaduct. I counted 3 bikes using the new lanes. I know that is two more than the Burrard bridge at that hour but still - is that a success?? Why bother spending for a study -even cyclists drive when it rains.

VISION is KooKoo for cocoa puffs

@Omoishiroi - Geoff Meggs was wearing a helmet and riding in a residential neighbourhood (Angus near 51st, I believe). The helmet was cracked into pieces, and he's lucky to be alive. I've not heard anything about whether the driver was at fault, but that person stayed at the scene until emergency services arrived.

To get back on topic, and repeat:

The intersection has been made more dangerous. Motorists are not disobeying any rules. No-one consulted the residents before the changes were made. Many local residents using 45th can no longer do so.

All because the city doesn't like (car) through traffic using 45th. Insane.

Take a pill people, it's a tempoary trial barrier. If drivers follow the rules of the road I don't see a problem. Did this even go to Council or was this the City Engineer's decision? If the neighbourhood squaks enough I'm sure it will be removed.

Wow!

From all below, it appears the Vision Council is just in to much hurry on this as well as STIR & other spot rezonings, Cambie Corridor, simplistic budget cutting, etc. Consequently they don't consult with those affected & don't give staff & consultants time to properly think through & design things like this intersection. If they had done so they might have come to the conclusion it wouldn't work before they spent the money doing it.

It's a radical idea, thinking things through but, it works.

I never said don't do anything. In fact I said that adjustments can easily be made and should be if there is a safety problem. But obviously, it was a dangerous intersection before the barriers were installed and the bicycle route was dangerous due to careless and reckless drivers. From the post above: "Back in 2007 a young woman pushing a baby stroller tried to cross at this intersection, and she was hit by a car. She died."

There is no excuse for dangerous driving like u-turns and speeding. If this is a problem, the VPD should be there.

One option would be to put the stop signs back on Elliott although because there are no longer cars going through on 45th, I expect too many drivers might just blow through.

The best permanent solution may be to place a pedestrian and cyclist activated signal so people can get safely across the street.

And finally, if it were not for a few careless and reckless drivers intimidating people on bicycles, these types of measures would not be needed. Bikeways should be safe for people of all ages to cycle on including families with children.


You have to wonder if anyone posting here in support of the council has ever used this stretch of road.

The intersection was SAFER BEFORE the changes. Everyone had to stop in all directions. Cars, pedestrians, cyclists all filtered through there pretty well and safely, even in the morning and afternoon rushes.

Now you take your life in your hands if you want to cross Elliott at 45th.

I like the idea of a pushbutton-controlled traffic signal. These seem to be better respected than stop signs. But maybe keep the barrier to reduce through-traffic.

Hey Geoff Meggs ! You and your arrogant Happy Planet buddy are delusional if you think a six month "trial" is warranted to learn where stupidity is so clear.
Push the bike thing why don't you?
Why don't you run the stop sign at 45th
and Elliott. You and your thick skull should be slapped with the Stop signs that used to control traffic here just fine until your engineering slaves were forced to put concrete in the way of a perfectly fine shared roadway. If or when a child is injured due to your brainless tunnel "vision" YOU and your bunch should be locked up for directing this negligent imbecilic plan. I'll bet that logical staff were against this and I'll also bet that someone pushed it through anyhow. Will anyone step up to tell the true story on who is behind this push for stupidity?

I wish to thank Mike Klassen for coming to the neighbourhood and listen to the local residents' feeling.

The main reason we want the median barrier gone is the safety concern for our children at Waverley Elementary School next block.

There are several reasons why the median is causing a problem for the children enroll in the school.

1. Since the median went up, the school zone has seen increase traffic because limited access for residents to get home.

2. As to the "freeway" comment made by Global News, it is true, because cars are travelling at much faster speed through the school zone since the 4 Way STOP disappeared.

3. Speeding is wrong, especially through school zone. However, Occassional police presence at the school would not deter speeding permanently.

What make it funny is City Engineering Services repeatly told me that speed signs and ticketing is not solving the E45th traffic problem. As a result, for the safety of the cyclists, the City decided to implement the median barrier. I wonder why Scott Edwards and many commentors said it is the solution to Elliott St. traffic problem where drivers disobey the speed signs. It just feel funny and realistically it is not going to work. We got a better chance at "World Peace" before we can eliminate speeding by ticketing.


4. Elliott St. from E45th to E46th is a sharp S curve. Drivers have limited visibility travelling from North to South. Drivers speeding through the S curve only has a split second to react before hitting the school cross-walk. If you see the Harley Davidson biker stepping on his gas pedal and speeding through the S curve on June 26th Global Evening News, you can bet he won't be able to stop when he come out the S curve. If any parents are bringing their children across the 46th school cross-walk at the time, they could easily be hit and seriously injured or killed. Just look at the death bouqet tight to the light post at the stretch of the road. Now you know why we are concern for the safety of our children.

We want the 4 Ways STOP sign back on E45th. Cars travel much slower near the S curve before, because they have to brake for the eventual STOP. Now every car is driving like a freeway and race down the S curve...

Here's a classic from this mornings paper. This is the kind of stuff that would be endorsed if the Keam's of the world totally take over.

"Group representing Vancouver’s drug users is urging the city to change traffic patterns on Hastings Street to stop pedestrian deaths."

Perhaps we need special fenced in lanes so that drug addicts can wander safetly through the DTES. Keams' brothers over in the pedestrian lobby want to suggest that addicts getting hit by cars is the result of bad driving and traffic patterns, not people spinning spastically on crack singing "Whip it".

And the city spent $65,000 to have some marxist survey addicts about it.

Better raise taxes so we can cover more extensive research and be sure that cars are the problem.....

Hi Mike - yes I understand the injuries were very serious. The driver was not charged as I understand the driver was not at fault but the cyclist was.

I guess they are 'out of touch' with backyard chicken keepers as well. Remind me again, how much money was spent on studies and homeless chicken shelters?

What do Vancouverites have against chickens?
VANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980)
Janet Brown | Email news tips to Janet
6/28/2010

There's not exactly a rush on by folks in Vancouver wanting to own a backyard chicken.

Council approved the keeping of the backyard animals three weeks ago and so far only six people have asked for a registration package.

Deputy Chief License Inspector Tom Hammell says the City wasn't sure what to expect since the new bylaw took effect, "It was hard to estimate. We weren't sure how many we were going to get. We didn't think we would be inundated by requests so, you know, it's still early in the program and we are expecting we will receive more."

Still the City needs to hire additional bylaw officers to keep a check on things, "We will monitor it to see what kinds of compliance we get and we'll track that but at this point we don't expect it's going to be a huge issue for us."

I'm going to apply for that chicken coop bylaw officer position. Oversee 6 chicken coops??

Sign me up for that rigorous job, and there better be hazard pay!

Careless and reckless driving is the problem both here and all around the city.

Here is a sobering piece on pedestrian deaths from automobiles:
http://www.vanmag.com/News_and_Features/Deadly_Roads?page=0%2C0

Did you actually read the article? The issue did not tag the whole problem on drivers - there is a shared responsibility on both drivers and pedestrians. Yes there are drivers who do not stop for pedestrians and they should be ticketed. But there are also pedestrians who disregard the crossing signals. Watch at any intersection downtown and count how many pedestrians that ignore the don't walk sign.

Hazzards -like being 'hen pecked'...(LOL)

I think the fact that the city is willing to try different ideas to calm traffic is a great thing! Not every idea will be perfect or in fact work, but without trying then nothing will change or improve. Kudos to the City for the courage to make changes, and to the citizens in that area for speaking out. Productive feedback and dialogue will find the best possible long-term solutions through trials such as these.

Keith Ippel,

Could you please cut the reverse psychology crap that you are pulling in your innocent Kudos BS message?
Thanks.
So, did your Vision controllers actually encouraged you to post here after all?
Have you actually bother to read the posts in here from the people living in the neighbourhood?
Ooops. Look whom I'm talking to! People from Vision don't operate that way.

We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

Kudos to the city for making the 45th ave bike route safer for cyclists. This will also make 45th Ave. quieter for residents and more pleasant for pedestrians. The new configuration is a benefit to most motorists and transit riders using this intersection, since Clarendon/Elliot traffic is no longer obliged to stop.

And there are even more benefits. By improving cycling infrastructure throughout the city, more people will be encouraged to cycle. This has many benefits to society - less pollution, less noise, better health, less ghg emissions, etc. - and is also a benefit to motorists and transit riders. This is because a bicycle takes up less space than a car, so more cyclists means more space on all roadways for cars and buses! This is a win-win all around! Why isn't there more rejoicing?

Ideally, there would be a pedestrian/cyclist operated light at this intersection, as well as the median. An even simpler solution would be to place stop signs on Clarendon/Elliot and remove them on 45th Ave., but this might create too much confusion among the motorists.

I don't get it. This article doesn't explain the actual traffic problem, how it's being addresed, or even clearly explain the layout of the intersection. It's just about people ranting against city hall.

When I hear the slogan "Bikes before people" as a critique of pro-bike policy, I think to myself, "don't bikes have people on them? How can you have bikes without people?" And i conclude, that's a pretty stupid slogan against bikes.

I look around this (or any) city and i see lots and lots of cars parked on the street with no people in them. We're all paying for those parking spots, and for those suburban streets that are mostly empty, most of the time. Cars before people? What a crazy consept - but wia,t it's what we're living in, and have been for 100 years.

@arno. You're kidding right? Have you actually been anywhere near the intersection in the last week? if you had been you'd know it's not safer for cyclists or pedestrians. I sense that a handful of cycling lobbyists have infiltrated this blog and have begun posting dozens of pro-bicycle comments. I wouldn't be surprised if it was at the command of their Imperial leader with his 500 year plan for a better planet.

This article highlights that the most pedestrian v. car accident prone intersection is Main and Hastings......

I'd be curious to see what the stats would be without including the intersection that is a virtual drug bazaar/caberet/spastic karoake corner.

For the uninformed who think this is just ranting, here's some information.

There used to be a 4-way stop at Elliott/45th. That means a stop sign for people on 45th, and a stop sign for people on Elliott. Traffic on each street had to alternate to cross the intersection. Seems easy, doesn't it? Pretty safe too.

Now there's a concrete barrier in the middle of Elliott to prevent cars crossing over Elliott at 45th. And the stop sign on Elliott has been removed.

So cars can just zoom along Elliott. No need to stop at 45th. Anyone using 45th (the designated bicycle route) now has to take their chances crossing here. Particularly when it's busy and the traffic is just flowing on Elliott.

And, as Tom pointed out, the S-curve on Elliott here doesn't help visibility...

Of course, the cyclists could ride down the sidewalk to 46th, cross at the pedestrian controlled lights there, and then ride down the sidewalk back to 45th to continue their journey. That would help make everything safer and easier, wouldn't it?

This is just a complete screw-up by the city. There's no defending it. It has no justification on any grounds. It doesn't make any route safer, it doesn't help cyclists, it doesn't make the planet greener, it's not a question of politics. It's just plain stupid.

Did you even bother to read arno's whole post. At the end he said "Ideally, there would be a pedestrian/cyclist operated light at this intersection, as well as the median." which would solve the whole problem.

where2beforfree-smallbanner
Check out BCWineLover.com!

Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement



Close