Vancouver city council votes for one-lane reallocation trial on Burrard Bridge
Nineteen out of 21 speakers wanted two lanes on Burrard Bridge dedicated to bicycles and bladers in a six-month trial that will kick off mid-June.
However, Vision Vancouver's eight-member caucus voted instead for a one-lane reallocation seen as inadequate by the vocal crowd in attendance.
This means the southbound curb lane will be used by cyclists and pedestrians will be forced to use the west sidewalk of the span. (The east side access will be barred to foot traffic for the duration.)
"Let's be the 50th Greenest City," yelled two-lane advocate Ron van der Eerden. "There is no 'vision' on council."
The vote also fractured along party lines: Vision councillors Andrea Reimer, Geoff Meggs, George Chow, Raymond Louie, Heather Deal, Tim Stevenson and Mayor Gregor Robertson all voted to support caucus colleague Coun. Kerry Jang's support of A3--the third option presented by council.
COPE councillors David Cadman and Ellen Woodsworth were vehemently opposed, and the latter tried to move an amendment to adopt the two-lane trial.
Only Cadman and Woodsworth supported the amendment, which died 8-2. (NPA councillor Suzanne Anton was absent.)
The main vote also went 8-2 along the same lines for Jang's A3 motion.
"I don't think this is acceptable," Cadman said of the one-lane trial. "This says to pedestrians, 'We're going to force you to one side of the bridge.' This is not the right solution."
In speaking to his own motion, Jang admitted many times,"I'm a driver."
He felt A1 was too radical a step to change behaviours and get people out of cars.
However, all but two speakers were in favour of A1, which would have seen each curb lane dedicated to cyclists.
Former COPE councillor Fred Bass, who was in chambers after the vote, spearheaded a similar concept in 2005.
On April 29, city staff unveiled its hotly-anticipated report about what to do with the 1932 span. On May 5, UBC health researcher Kay Teschke told council that there were eight accidents--related to the difficulty of having pedestrians and cyclists sharing the sidewalks--in a five-month period last year.
Comments
6 Comments
Brent Granby
May 7, 2009 at 8:05pm
Thanks for your story Matt. WERA has posted a story about the decision at Council today as well and can be viewed at: http://wera.bc.ca/index.php?itemid=553
WERA Dierctors have been advocating for two lanes for bikes for since before the 1996 one lane trial. WERA is concerned that today decision is a huge lost opportunity to encourage active life styles that will promote happy and health communities.
WERA will continue to work for positive changes in the built environment of Vancouver.
brent granby
Cormack
May 7, 2009 at 10:28pm
This is crazy, the side walks are more than big enough for both bikes and pedestrians. I cant stand bikes on the road to begin with, I always want to hit them.
Chris Slater
May 7, 2009 at 11:15pm
It's a bit of a weird thing having to ride up onto the side walk to share the space with the pedestrians on the bridge. Everywhere else in the city I imagine we'd be risking getting ticketed and fined. Bikes belong on the road, not the sidewalk.
Angry car drivers need to calm down and be aware of who they share the road with, like how they were taught when they learned how to drive.
Especially those with issues like Cormack.
SPS
May 8, 2009 at 10:05am
Re: "The side walks are more than big enough for both bikes and pedestrians."
Er, no, they're not. Take it from a guy who's nearly hit a number of pedestrians who suddenly wander into the bike lane, and who's nearly been hit by cyclists who use the pedestrian side as a passing lane.
Cormack: I pay the same taxes for the road, and by law I'm just as entitled to use them for my bike as you are for your car.
2020Vancouver
May 8, 2009 at 10:54am
Vision has kept its election promise, but made a poor decision. I was at both <a href="http://www.2020vancouver.com/node/62">Burrard Bridge meetings at City Hall</a>. As the article says, pretty much everyone spoke in favour of a two-lane reallocation option. Staff said that the best choice from the point of view of doing a trial would be the two-lane option as they can collect more data. Difficult to see how herding pedestrians to one side of the bridge through lanes of traffic and signals will succeed in encouraging more people to leave their car at home.
____________________
www.2020vancouver.com
BikerCK
May 8, 2009 at 7:53pm
Cormack:
Not only are you wrong about the sidewalk width (doesn't meet national standards for shared pathways) in a sane world your identity would be traced via your ISP and your licence would be revoked as you clearly are a danger to the rest of us. Either that or you're full of crap and behaving like a typical Internet tough guy. People's lives are not forfeit simply because you can't act like a grown-up. I hope you never lose a family member or friend to a dangerous driver. Despite the fact it would be a fitting lesson for you, no one's life is of so little value that it's worth losing to educate a troll.