This is going to hurt residents and merchants. During the trial period of the Burrard Bridge, several businesses reported losses in profits as much as 40%. That's insane. All to accommodate INTERMITTENT traffic flow of bicycles. Businesses and residents along Hornsby are right in their concerns, absolutely 100% correct that this proposed bike lane will hinder the quality of their lives, their businesses, and their neighbourhoods.

What a shame we let the city be run by such imbeciles.

with herr gregor and his bunch of goons on board, like it or not, hornby street will be getting the bike lane.

r.i.p. downtown businesses.

hopefully we can vote these thugs out of office before they decide to demolish the dunsmuir and georgia street viaducts (the last of the remaining entrances/exits into the downtown core)...

@Matty

Cities all over the world have built separated bike lanes along streets with businesses including hotels and restaurants. They work fine in other cities and there is no reason to expect anything different here. I'm sure that the city will work with the businesses to ensure that they have the access that they need to operate.

To suggest that a bike lane will "hinder quality of their lives, their businesses, and their neighbourhoods." is laughable. The lane on Dunsmuir has slowed down traffic making it much more pleasant and quiet to walk along. The plants lining the lane make the street much more attractive. Residents will also be able to cycle along the street with their children as people are doing along Dunsmuir. I expect that the Hornby bike lanes will have similar positive results.

Regarding the businesses claiming to lose money due to the bike lanes, I expect their losses had more to do with the recession than the bike lanes. If customers aren't willing to drive an extra couple of blocks to a business, the business is in trouble regardless of the bike lanes. I expect that they might have been trying to tie the losses to the bike lanes on the misguided notion that the city might pay them some money.

Apparently members of the Bicycle advisory committee shouted at and harassed anyone who went to the open house to oppose the bike lanes.

Vision's idea of Democracy in action, eh?

@Taxpayer

If you look at other cities that have bike lanes you'll notice something very important, they are gigantic, concentrated metropolises. Not a geographically wide city of 2.5 million people. It is because of concentration that they have programs to lessen the load of the cars and vehicles carrying things in city with millions more people than Vancouver. Take a look at city planning maps and population distribution before you go around acting like a pompous fool. It is called the internet, and you may all information you would need.

'To suggest that a bike lane will "hinder quality of their lives, their businesses, and their neighbourhoods." is laughable.'

Laughing at facts is sad, really.

'The lane on Dunsmuir has slowed down traffic making it much more pleasant and quiet to walk along.'

Idling engines and the noxious smell of exhaust doesn't make anything pleasant.

'The plants lining the lane make the street much more attractive.'

Just about every street in the city has some form of vegetation lining its streets. Point invalid.

'Residents will also be able to cycle along the street with their children as people are doing along Dunsmuir.'

Cycling along a lane that is only used for about 5 hours a day. Go watch it, its more intermittent than Grouse's windmill.

'I expect that the Hornby bike lanes will have similar positive results.'

Theory vs. statistics. Get some.

"Regarding the businesses claiming to lose money due to the bike lanes, I expect their losses had more to do with the recession than the bike lanes."

Well, no, not really. They were already in the recession, and through record keeping just like any other business, could see the ups and downs of profit. They reported losses from when the start of the cycling lane was put in. If a restaurant reports a loss of profit over six months, the same six months from the start of the trial, it is much more than just the recession.

"If customers aren't willing to drive an extra couple of blocks to a business, the business is in trouble regardless of the bike lanes."

We have convenience and in most cases loading zones along Hornsby. If cyclists aren't willing to take the bus or take an alternate route, then cyclists are in trouble regardless of the bike lanes.

"I expect that they might have been trying to tie the losses to the bike lanes on the misguided notion that the city might pay them some money."

Once again, theory vs statistics.

The Hornby bike lanes will improve traffic flow since there will be less people parking cars. Road capacity will greatly increase due to the extra bike lane. The few car parking spots lost can easily be replaced by many more bike parking spots.

The city is doing everyone a great service by encouraging more people to ride bikes. Research from England shows that every person who choses to make some of their trips by bike instead of by car provides a net benefit to society of up to $2000/year. I am sure that this is true for Vancouver as well. By my calculation, cyclists in Vancouver contribute about $40,000,000 per year to society, however expenditures for cycling infrastructure are less than $10,000,000 per year.

More people cycling means a healthier, more vibrant city. More people cycling means less people driving and less people on transit thereby making it easier for those who must drive or take transit to get around the city. This is a win-win-win for everyone!

Surveys conducted by Statistics Canada show that cyclists are the happiest commuters. Cycling is the most enjoyable way to get around the city.

@Matty K.

Might want to use the Internet yourself and take a few logic courses as well.

For starter, two of the best cycling cities in the world, Amsterdam and Copenhagen are similar sizes and have similar densities to that of Vancouver. Same with Portland. Medium density cities like Vancouver are ideal for cycle.

Agreed. Idling cars aren't great but they are far better than speeding cars which are noisier, deadly and emit more pollution. If you don't like idling cars, the obvious solution is car-free streets which would be fantastic.

Taxpayer, interesting you're the one telling me to take logic courses.

"For starter, two of the best cycling cities in the world, Amsterdam and Copenhagen are similar sizes and have similar densities to that of Vancouver."

Copenhagen and Amsterdam were built mainly around the time when pedestrian traffic was necessary, Vancouver was built during a time when vehicles (note: car, truck, etc) were gaining importance in daily life. When vehicles arrived to Copenhagen and Amsterdam those cities were already established in the size of streets and urban planning. As for Portland, have you seen the city planning? Look at the square grids of downtown Portland. Also look at the lovely climate differences, I wonder why a more temperate city would have a higher ridership than one with more rain than sun. Hm, so confusing. Leave no stone unturned Taxi.

"Idling cars aren't great but they are far better than speeding cars which are noisier, deadly and emit more pollution."

Idling cars release the amount of pollution as they are sitting still and the amount of pollution as they are moving. Speeding cars release less pollution as they reach their destination faster, thus releasing less exhaust.

Think of it this way: amount of exhaust from 30 minutes idling to 40 minute driving is 70 minutes of exhaust being released. Whereas 40 minutes of driving on efficient roadway without constrictions (hint: bike lane) is only 40 minutes of exhaust release while maintaining normal speeds. Look at MPG ratings, city driving is less efficient because of stop and go whereas highway driving is more efficient. Thus installing a bike lane which would cause congestion leading to more stop and go is less efficient and does more damage to the environment.

0-step thinkers shouldn't give advice on logic lessons.

"Copenhagen and Amsterdam were built mainly around the time when pedestrian traffic was necessary, "

I love this. As if you don't need to get out of your car anymore in order to go into a shop. Guess all the stores on Hornby are drive throughs?

The reality is that it is bizarre for stores to claim that because of a bike lane they lost traffic. If your customers cannot be bothered to drive around three corners to get to your store then in all likelyhood they weren't really that good of a customer either.

It is bizarre and sad how hostile a lot of people are towards change in this city (and North America in general). I remember the outcry by merchants when the TTC put a separate right of way for the Streetcar in on St. Clair Ave. In the end they actually got more customers. Ooops. So much for the doom and gloom.

likewise: Very few people drive down a street, looking at windows, then on a whim decide to go into the store. The majority of people who drive to a store do so because they know the store has something they want, as such they will find a way to get there.

Meanwhile, pedestrian friendly areas tend to thrive, because, guess what, when you walk past by a store you tend to look into the windows and may see something that you didn't know you were interested in.

Here's something for the city:

- Add more bike lanes.
- Take away (free) Onstreet parking
- Add bus lanes (and enforce them)
- And Translink: Don't even think about the idiocy of building a Skytrain extension to UBC, go with a Streetcar along Broadway and make it grade separated, show some forward thinking for once.