Park board chair says bike path painted at Kits Beach is made up
Vancouver park board chair Sarah Blyth would like to clarify a point about the separated bike path proposed for Kitsilano Beach: those white lines that have been painted through the park (pictured above and below), they do not mark the route that’s actually planned.
They can’t mark the exact route, Blyth explained, because the park board hasn’t yet agreed on where the new pavement will go.
“There is partial resemblance to reality, in that the path is going to be going in,” Blyth told the Straight in a telephone interview. “But there hasn’t been a decision on what that is going to look like.
“They just sort of drew a line along there,” Blyth added in reference to the actions of citizens. “But while we’ve made the decision to make the path, exactly how it goes through there is still being worked on.”
On October 7, the park board approved plans to spend $2.2 million on the construction of a separated bike path that will run through Kitsilano Beach and Hadden parks. The lane will complete a continuous path from Canada Place to Jericho Beach.
The section proposed for those parks has attracted a significant number of very vocal opponents—“democracy”, as Blyth put it.
The project remains in the planning stages with the park board discussing proposal details with consultants.
According to a park board report, a designated route should be agreed upon by October 31, and construction completed by May 16, 2014.
Oct 23, 2013 at 4:55pm
Like the nonsense about the path path being dangerous.
There are paths near picnic areas and playgrounds around Vancouver and the world. The current path which bikes are allowed on is closer to the playground than the planned path.
The reality is that the path will be safer for people walking and for beach users by routing bikes away from the busy area.
The opponents also forget that children love to cycle on safe park path. Instead, they want to force families with children to cycle on busy Arbutus Street.
Oct 23, 2013 at 8:06pm
'Hello everyone, I am glad to see so many...I am glad to see so many...I'm sorry, can we please have quiet? I am glad to see so many people--excuse me? No, I am sorry, I still don't know the route but I'm sure...No one is threatening the children's play area, please everyone, please let me continue. I think what we have to keep in mind is that this has been planned for many years--I'm sorry? No, we do not believe this will make the parks a "sinkhole of paved deprivation akin to the wastes of Siberia." No, far from it. In fact, we hope that this park will complete the bike--I'm sorry? No, I am not paid by any "bike lobby." "Prove it"? Uh, I would like to state for the record that donations come in from all kinds of individ--wait, wait, where was I? Oh yes. We hope to complete the cycling network to encourage all users--please, everyone, calm down. No one said anything about a bike superhighway. Why, I imagine we might even see some families making use--I really cannot abide--What? No, we will not be leveling the Kits Point neighborhood any time soon, nor forcing residents to "be prepared to have their homes inspected." I'm sorry, everyone, listen. Listen, please: this is not the time or place to sing "we Shall Overcome."'
Oct 23, 2013 at 9:56pm
I've seen a map of the proposed route. Basically, it runs parallel to the road, then parallel to the current path, then parallel to the road, then parallel to the parking lot, then parallel to the road.
Oct 23, 2013 at 11:51pm
Dear Sarah Blyth.
Reading your statement, written by the Communications Department of City Hall ™, (and I almost pity the poor, miserable plebe who had to write such dross), and crafted to obfuscate and confuse, one can only come to the logical, data driven conclusion: you've been 'outed'.
Bafflegab and bs ain't gonna cut it. Try again. The truth might help. It may even set you free.
Oct 24, 2013 at 7:32am
The Parks Board said the other day that while they didn't mark the path, it was fairly close to what they were proposing. They are backtracking now and congratulations to those who came out in protest. It worked.
To the people who think that reaction by the park users was uncalled for, I believe that if this were in an East Van park then there would've been a much larger outcry and protestations that the Parks Board was trying to exterminate poor people. But since it's on the evil 'west side' then suddenly it's okay.
Oct 24, 2013 at 10:35am
Both Jespar and Blyth are pathetic VPB councillors who are arrogant. Those two need to understand next fall they both will be looking for new careers.
Those two cowards didn't even appear for the concerned citizens at the rally at the Boathouse, to field questions from us, only Barnes and junior showed up.
Pathetic Jespar hasn't tweeted for two days knowing he is going to get more abuse which he deserves, for his flip flopping decisions over the last two years, pathetic you are...!
Oct 24, 2013 at 4:59pm
Not sure why Blyth thinks the lines don't matter. They do accurately reflect the proposed width, and run within feet of the route as outlined in the only public document available. For much of the route their isn't anywhere else they can go, unless you accept the proposal to put them on the street, with a physical barrier as has been used on other bike routes.
It's odd how she keeps on talking about the lines' original instead of addressing the real issues, 54,000 sq feet of asphalt in an already overcrowded park (overcrowding was the no. 1 issue identified in their survey, not the lack of a bike path).
Oct 24, 2013 at 6:01pm
Interesting that the Straight attached a different picture to this story than the picture attached to the story last week wherein the Park Board's press release was printed verbatim(pic at bottom of story). The picture attached to latter story was taken directly from the report adopted an passed by the Vision Park Board Commissioners and indicated a route through Hadden and Kits Beach Park. The picture attached to this story is not from the Parks Board Report and likely is from a more general COV plan that long predates the "consultation" and planning done by the Parks Board staff
Oct 24, 2013 at 7:07pm
We are a metric country. Of course using square feet means a bigger scarier number.
The reality is that the path only amounts to 3% of the area of the park. Meanwhile, over 40% of the people surveyed said they cycle in the park. Give that so many people like to cycling, the path seems like a good use of park space.
And if you bothered to look at the map, you would know that the route avoids the really crowded parts of the park.
Oct 24, 2013 at 9:16pm
Richard Campbell- You miss the point completely. Constructing a 3.5 meter wide asphalt road though pristine grass and treed park areas is a ridiculous idea and a complete waste of money and not 'green' at all. Let's save millions and put in a dedicated bike path on the already existing paved roads in the area and use the remaining $1.9 million to spend on something worthwhile like social housing and care for the mentally ill!