August 4, 2016

Arbutus: Only for some ages and abilities?

Let’s jump right in:
Arbutus
From The Sun:
When finished, it will be nine kilometres of wide, smooth-surfaced path flanked by gravel and trees, blessed with perfect sight lines and ideal for swift riding. But it’s far from everyone’s idea of what a green space should look like — even a temporary one. It’s also well out of step with current trends in landscape architecture, experts say. Though there are competing philosophies over parkland, wilder environments — rather than manicured spaces — are in vogue.
Mark Battersby lives a few blocks from the greenway, which the city bought from the Canadian Pacific Railway a few months ago. When the city began to pour asphalt where the railway tracks once lay, the image that came to Battersby’s mind was of “a bike freeway.”
“We had in mind something that would be much more attractive to walkers and children,” he said.
Battersby, displeased with what he saw, produced a simple video slide show using before and after photos of the greenway:

Maureen Ryan, who also lives near the greenway, shares their concern. Ryan does want to see cyclists in the corridor, but on a crushed-stone surface rather than a paved path, to limit cycling speeds.
“We had a beautiful, beautiful green space,” said Ryan, who is a member of a coalition calling itself the Concerned Residents and Corridor User Group. “What we would like is a surface for bikes and wheelchairs that is, in fact, green.”
 
It’s definitely the shock of the new:
Arbutus 2 (Large)
And it’s another no-win for the City, no matter what they do or don’t.  
Do something too quick, and there’s usual criticism of fait accompli.   (So ironic, since the default criticism of government is usually its lassitude.)  Propose an extensive consultation process, and the criticism is that City Hall is disingenuous.
Do nothing, and there would be complaints about its inaccessibility for the disabled (and look what they achieved with TransLink’s faregates).  Do the absolute minimum and the criticism would be the failure to meet minimum standards.  Do something too expensive, and the criticism would be spending too much on something explicitly meant to be temporary.
Arbutus 3The easiest criticism is the lack of consultation.  For those who believe ‘consultation’ means only process, not outcome, it’s an effective delaying mechanism to retain the status quo.  For those who want change, consultation can be used to reject every alternative than the one they want.  The perfect is the enemy of the merely good.
If Kits Point is the precedent, then once again, long-time residents of a certain age will be fighting to keep things pretty much the same.  Only this time, the City was clear that Arbutus is a transportation corridor, and any design has to be for All Ages and Abilities.  For the moment, that’s what we’re getting.

Posted in

Support

If you love this region and have a view to its future please subscribe, donate, or become a Patron.

Share on

Comments

Leave a Reply to AnonymousCancel Reply

  1. This sort of thing gives Democracy a bad name. It’s temporary. Perhaps the City can do a better job highlighting the process: 1) temporary facility, 2) permanent facility post consultation. But the whinging from some quarters is just painful. Government truly is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t.
    And to think some people complain about public sector salaries with a straight face. Most city employees simply don’t get paid enough to deal with this type of nonsense from the public. I loudly roll my eyes on their behalf.

    1. It was pretty clear to me from my reading of various articles on this that this is just a stop-gap and the permanent greenway will be constructed in a few years. (and a future tram or some such is also a possibility in the next few decades).
      Anyway, from my admittedly limited observations of a single Sunday, it’s being used already by pedestrians and cyclists alike.

      1. So, the $6.4 million walkway on Point Grey Road is a “stop-gap” until the seawall is extended at the seaside, and the black-topped Arbutus Greenway is a “stop-gap” until a formalized design is implemented, and how much did the black-top cost? We are paying for all these extra, stop-gap measures that are just “temporary” fixes within Vision Council’s last term of office. How much are we willing to pay for all these redundant, stop-gap measures that are not wanted by residents and other taxpayers? The waste is extreme.

        1. “The waste is extreme”
          The time waste is extreme too when someone continually highjacks comment threads to push their personal grievance about Pt. Grey Road.

    2. “Perhaps the City can do a better job highlighting the process…” — “Perphaps”? The most major understatement of the current Council’s term of office.

  2. Political issues would have almost vanished if it was 2.5 meters wide rather than 4. Come on Jerry! And Gordon, residents “of a certain age”? Ouch.

    1. I like pretty much what you say in the article Patrick:
      In fact your idea reflects, even in the term used, the ideas expressed by the left/green side in the last parisian election in regard of a similar asset (Petite ceinture)…while the opinion of Gordon price – bland utilitarism with a disregard for the history and specificity of the place- is mirroring the one of the conservative candidate.
      Fortunately for Paris, the later got unsuccesful, and what the current council has implemented so far looks like below:
      https://voony.wordpress.com/#jp-carousel-45890
      see more detail at
      https://voony.wordpress.com/2016/08/05/the-paris-petite-ceinture-in-2-city-hall-elections/

  3. The creme de la creme only wanted a local green pathway and gardens paid for by the rest of the city. What they got, at least at this stage, is a cycle path wide enough for two way bike traffic and watch out pedestrians… As a transportation corridor for other forms of transit-ie Trams/light rail, that would also disturb the quiet of these priviliged citizens, it is a no win. Remember the anger of these people when the rails were considered as a transit line to YVR?

    1. “creme de la creme” is irrelevant — it is not who the people are; it is the waste by this current City Council that is the issue, and the risk to public safety. Have you gone to see this hastily thrown down blacktop? There are no safety curbs but ditches on both sides for cyclists of not the highest ability, or going at too high a speed, to fall into. Haste makes waste, people, and it jeopardizes safety.

      1. No safety curbs AND ditches??? Oh my god those are death traps! Now quickly go tell the various cities around the world that have that as a standard practice on millions of km’s of road cause surely there have been millions of deaths due to these death traps already!

        1. Millions of people are alcoholics and/or are hard drug users, too; large numbers do not make something right, or safe, Don.

      2. Curbs get installed on Point Grey Road, to stop vehicles driving illegally, and susan calls them death traps, due to crashes. No curbs get installed on a pathway (likely due to the trip hazard for pedestrians) and susan claims that is somehow dangerous.
        The pavement is impermeable, and there are claims that that is depriving the ground of needed moisture. All of the run off is collected and returned to the ground along the path, and susan claims this practice is a risk and people will fall into those areas.
        Point Grey roadway is narrowed to two lanes, with new boulevards created, and susan claims that it is more dangerous because it is so narrow. This path (2 m for pedestrians, 2 m for people on bikes, however it gets divided up) susan calls far too wide.
        susan expresses concern about the cost of running an engineering department at City Hall, but has no problem creating work every day for them.

        1. You may not want to collect all that run off, Jeff.
          The oil patch and Rachel Notely might be happy to provide the product but do you want the toxic chemicals?
          Here’s a shocking study.
          The Effect of Asphalt Pavement on Stormwater Contamination
          “Overall, reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) runoff was shown to have higher concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and greater complexity than virgin asphalt. Fluorescence values from the field fluorometer as well as absorbance value integrands from the HPLC and TPH concentrations done by a third party were universally higher in the RAP samples compared to the virgin asphalt samples. This shows that RAP has higher petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations.The most polluted laboratory sample, a shake table sample, had concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons far beyond federal regulations. Given the wide scope of the problems involving hydrocarbons and pavement, there is still much more investigation that can be done into the emerging problem of petroleum hydrocarbons leaching from asphalt pavement. “

        2. Susan, roads with ditches and no curbs has been a safe cross section for centuries if not millennia. There are millions of km’s of this condition today that function safely. Please stop with the over the top, can never be wrong or even concede a point thing you’ve got going on cause it’s just desperate.

        3. Eric: “Here’s a shocking study”
          If you really are shocked by that, it makes your support for the Massey Tunnel Replacement Project even more incredible. Just think: a new roadway, ranging from 10 to 16 lanes wide depending on the location, plus centre dividers and shoulders, put down over a distance of 24 km, through Richmond and Langley. All that pavement. Much thicker than the pavement required for a multi use path, due to the heavy loads expected. And since the amount of contaminants coming off the pavement are a result of wear of that pavement, heavy vehicle traffic produces much more than a walking and cycling path. And it isn’t just the pavement itself, that is a small issue compared to the runoff from all of the contaminants deposited on the roadway by traffic. That deposition isn’t really an issue for bicycles, especially for those using plant based chain oil, but is a significant issue for roads used for motor vehicle traffic.
          Any multi use path that reduces motor vehicle traffic by providing an alternate active transportation route will have a net benefit, through reduction of those by products simply using roads with motor vehicles.

        4. So, Jeff, then where is the Metro plan for a rapid rail link along this corridor and how is the rail line going to cross the river? New bridge, new tunnel or old tunnel?
          I’ve looked over the Metro Plan, the Mayors’ Plan, the 2040, or whenever, Plan, there are loads of them. Which one shows the leadership we’re talking about with a real plan for rapid rail to these fast growing southern municipalities?

        5. I ask that too Eric. I found the Mayors’ Plan to be too timid. It should have had Skytrains to Tsawwassen and Horseshoe Bay.
          What I see missing from this new bridge plan is rapid transit. Sure you can put a dedicated bus lane on it but some rails would be better. Also there’s no cycle lanes. They’re expecting people to cycle on the sidewalk where people are walking. That’s just plain bad design.

  4. In time, it’ll get better. It likely needs a separation between bike and ped pathway, like the seawall in Yaletown or Stanley Park. It will be beautiful, with mini-parks and benches and trees and bushes, in time. It is wide enough to accommodate both .. in time !!

        1. And takes relatively low amounts of labour time and produces an access road that will speed up construction of whatever it determined to permanently be there when the consultation is done.

    1. One design principal is to not normally mix modes of differing speeds. The only time you make an exception is when volumes are very low. With this temporary path, it can be observed how high the volumes are and that aspect of the final design will then be determined.
      And yes, this greenway has the potential to be a really nice thing. In the future we’ll look back and admire the foresight that they had to do it.

      1. Nonsense Adanac,
        The pedestrian volumes are low on Point Grey Road but Vision has approved a $6.4 million dollar inland seawall walkway for non-existent people regardless. Paving Arbutus was no different; just do it regardless of safety, cost, need or appearance — that is Vision’s M.O.

  5. That before/after ‘paving paradise’ video is so disingenuous. Gravel is in no way ‘green’ in a way paving is not, they are both artificial surfaces which obstruct plant growth. The video showed images of grasses and wildflowers and then cut to concrete paving, but it is clear from the images shown that the new pavement covers areas only covered previously by gravel. If there has been a loss of green space, tree and flower space, this video definitely doesn’t clearly make that point or put forward a sensible plan to protect or grow those desirables areas. Typical West-side Boomer nimybism but if they are going to mount a public campaign, those are very thin grounds to build it on.

    1. Well, buried under decades of organics is the original rail bed ballast — all gravel soaked in creosote leachate from the wooden ties.

      1. I agree. Paving is is probably the best move from a public health perspective. Removing the creosote infused ties was probably very beneficial from a public health perspective as well.
        My prediction is that in a few weeks everyone will love the new path and will ask for another equally wide path in order to separate cycling and walking.

      1. For the umpteenth time, this treatment is temporary. Don’t you worry. Every single balloon salesman and his dog will have the opportunity to chime in on their vision for a perfect greenway and how everyone else’s vision is just one horseman short of an apocalypse. This process will take 2-5 years before everyone is ‘satisfied’. The final greenway vision will take another 5-10 years on top of that to build and will cost a lot of money. Until that happy day, the temporary path is usable at relatively low cost. So chill.

        1. I am not chilling; I am angry that my taxpayer dollars are repeatedly being used to create redundant, temporary, unsafe infrastructure, and you should be annoyed too.

  6. To paraphrase Robert Duval; “I love the smell of hot fresh asphalt of a summer’s morning.”
    It’s just like being in Fort Mac.

  7. Even though crushed gravel may limit cycling speed, it is much more dangerous for everyone. It’s a lot harder stop stop or make emergency manuvours on gravel so more people both cycling and walking would get injured. Plus the gravel and gravel dust makes quiet a mess. Just look at the gravel sections of the Seaside Greenway. They are pretty horrible looking.
    It would be great if these folks spent a bit of time doing some research and consulting others before making the protest signs.

      1. So, I was riding my bike on the gravel that’s currently on the route last night and because it’s gravel, it creates ruts. I crashed last night because of the gravel. I’m a cyclist who has been riding for 25 years without major issue, if I can crash, what does it say about folks who are not as adept to riding their bikes. The city was making the route safe and accessible for everyone between 8-80. The route especially from 41st to 70th is not at all either of those things right now, and it’s a shame that we’re likely going to have to wait 2-3 years for anything to be done.

    1. yes Eric, if Richard has some littterature to back up what it affirms, he should share with us…In the meantimes, the surfacing used at the Tuileries is called “stabilise”…and yes it is widely used on the french “voies vertes” (“greenway” in english).
      In fact it is a recomended surfacing for the greenway (“a greenway is not a road” explains the french national centre for mobility CEREMA, a french equivalent of NACTO) and the national site promoting cyclotourism in France opens with the below picture:
      http://www.francevelotourisme.com/bandeau-page-accueil/viarhona-pistes-cyclables-dans-le-bugey/image
      People as far as Canada go to France to experiment its relaxing voies vertes using a soft surfacing, and that includes people with disabilities:
      http://our-trip-is-your-trip.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Image-1.jpg
      they are ususally delighted by the exhalirating and peacefull feeling of the voie verte, and the choice of the right surfacing is key to it.

      1. What we have in Vancouver is a City Hall cycling culture that imagines that all bike paths have to be Tour de France or Giro d’Italia grade. The Lycra clad bike gladiators have co-opted City Hall.
        They imagine that the roads are not for workers and families to get around but are under the control of the Porsche club, so they want a Velodrome equivalency alongside.

        1. Your comments are useful Eric. It shows that (for you) this isn’t about the road surfaces or ‘getting around’. It’s pure politics. The divisive kind that serves no one particularly well except those with little hope of winning on logic and the promotion of inclusive policies.
          Any doofus with a pair of eyes can see that the city’s cycling infrastructure is home to families and workers and all manner of humans, some of whom may make clothing choices that apparently rile you up. I read only political posturing in your inflammatory and unhelpful remarks. At least there’s none of your new math this time!

        2. I agree Chris. This is probably just politics since it makes no sense. All the workers and families who cycle to work and school and would benefit from this are conveniently ignored.

        3. Chris; what was being discussed with Voony was various surfaces and that a smooth black top is more suited to a racetrack. Is the product HMAC or another formulation of macadam? Perhaps you know.
          This Arbutus Track is certainly not designed for average commuters on their old clunkers. This is for the carbon fibre brigade, all decked out with digital speedometers and maybe a helmet camera.
          You won’t see any Mobi bike share station south of 10th.

        4. Eric, a smooth surface is suited to any wheeled device, and especially so for those devices with smaller diameter wheels such as mobility aids, power scooters, and children’s bikes. The multiuse path is certainly designed for average commuters.
          The carbon fibre brigade, as you term them, are more inclined to use parallel roadways. And those with helmet cams are likely to be transportation cyclists, collecting evidence.
          There are already three bike share stations south of 10th, perhaps you aren’t a member and so didn’t know. There are already two stations on the Arbutus Greenway itself, even with only 36 or so of 150 planned stations, so there are sure to be more.

        5. Bias towards cyclists?? That’s absurd.
          Look at the entire transportation budget and see the tiny sliver of funding for cycling compared to the enormous amount put towards private motor vehicles. (And for the record I’m in favour of continuing the subsidy to motor vehicle infrastructure. I want more choices added to that.)
          I think what’s happening here is a matter of perspective. When nothing is done towards a travel mode for so many years and then when a tiny bit of funding is thrown that way, it appears by comparison to the past that they’re getting too much. Just like when black people in the US could not sit anywhere on the bus but had to be in the back for so long and then when that changed it was said that there was a bias towards black people because they were allowed to sit in any seat and this was oppressing white people.
          Eventually people will become accustomed to more options and be using them themselves and they’ll get over it.

      2. Let’s not be seduced by selective imagery. France isn’t afraid to pave where paving makes sense, and that includes greenways.
        “There are nearly 2,600 km of safe, marked routes on little country lanes, making up around forty dedicated cycle routes – the Voies vertes (Green Routes) – aimed exclusively at family bike excursions covering 20 to 50 km… the Voies vertes (Green Routes), dedicated off-road trails, have been extending their reach over the last 15 years: a well laid strip of bitumen or gravel follows an old railway line, a lakeside shore, a reconverted forest path, a dyke alongside a river or the towpath of a navigable canal.”
        http://www.velodyssey.com/contenus/images/practical-info/biscarrosse-jda9395.jpg/image_mini

      3. Yes Chris….that is the reason I have mentioned the picture is used as a headbar by the french organization promoting cyclotourism and use of greenwasy in France
        the quote you provide come from
        http://uk.france.fr/en/about-france/green-routes-and-cycle-routes-happiness-bike
        you have omitted “pedalling […] at a gentle pace” but see how gravel is advertised as a positive thing…and have you noticed the chosen picture to illustrate the article.
        to be sure, I am not against asphalt here and there (I even think it is a reasonnable option North of 16th, where there is no reasonnable adjacent cycling commuting route at the difference of South) – i am mainly for diversity of experience…but primarly I am against “pave it first and consult later…and the purpose of my comment is to illustrates you don’t need to go all the way to blacktop and its associated politic of fait accompli to make the corridor accessible to people of all age and ability…

        1. Omission was purely for brevity, no editorialization intended. Notably, in googling more info about vois vertes, I came across this:
          “One objective of the French authorities is that, in the long run,
          véloroutes will follow become greenways. Figure 2 below illustrate the difference between greenways and véloroute when it comes to their ground coating.”
          ‘Figure 2’ is on page 10 of the pdf linked below and shows a greenway (bitumen/asphalt path) adjacent to a veloroute (loose dirt/gravel road).
          https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:683014/FULLTEXT01.pdf

      4. Voony, you are being very selective. I have cycled in France and other European countries and gravel cycling or multi-use paths are extremely rare. I have encountered none while cycling in France and very few elsewhere in Europe. I recall only a few km of gravel paths in Italy. In the UK I did cycle on a portion of the #1 national route which deteriorated into a sheep path in one section. The bike paths in the Netherlands are pretty much 100% paved.
        Why is it that people driving cars get paved surface without question, but when people cycling ask for a paved path, it is suddenly frowned upon? Could I use the word “discrimination”?

        1. It really looks like discrimination to me. At the very least a double standard.
          A motorist can kill someone with their vehicle and get no jail time and few repercussions but a cyclist just has to brush past someone too closely and all cyclists are damned.

        2. Arno,
          Yes, you can use the word “discrimination” but only in terms of the current Vancouver City Council toward motorists and necessary motorist infrastructure.

      5. Voony, put that path profile on Arbutus — or any other street on the West Coast — and it’ll be mush by the end of the November monsoons with even a modestly high level of pedestrian and bike traffic.

      6. Thanks for the link Chris, I appreciate the student effort to differentiate the “veloroute” (bikeway) of the “voie verte” (greenway). Beside it error huamane est: Is it possible the student has mislabelled the picture below you refer to?
        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f0/Canal_de_la_Morge_DSC_0401.JPG/1280px-Canal_de_la_Morge_DSC_0401.JPG
        To Assume that the right hand side trail is the bikeway is counter-intuitive, isn’it?
        The middle path if designed as a “greenway” could run against many preferred and recommended good practices by various french organizations such as the CEREMA (equivalent of NACTO). The common denominator of those good practices is that “A greenway is not a road” and its surface treatment should be more reminiscent of a trail than a road (beside the surface material, horizontal signage are considered bad practice for a greenway…)…
        Fortunately the picture comes from wiki, which provide its location (48° 16′ 15.02″ N, 4° 15′ 38.74″ E ) so we can verify by ourselves!
        The middle path is hence the bikeway and there is no greenway there (BTW the surface treatment of the right side trail, could be considered way too substandard for a greenway nowadays, so a veloroute? don’t even think of it! )
        That said Chris is right, what we were seeing built on Arbutus Corridor looks like the middle path: hence a bikeway…not a greenway.
        The public recognized soon enough the city malign intentions, and only naive or disingenuous people have argued otherwise. We should all feel relieved that reason has prevailled at city hall…at least for the time being…
        A couple of words on the gravel surfacing
        Reading, the comments thread, one has to ask: how come in 2016 there is still those “horrendous gravel paths” in Stanley park? what those people have waited for to launch their campaign “pave the park” for the greater good of their fellow citizens?
        More seriously, before jumping at conclusions on a surfacing, people should relax and study a bit the topic…
        there is a full gamut of gravel (or gravel like) path techniques…some more appropriate than other depending on many factors – it is possible that in some case blacktop work betters and it is also possible that the current local practice in regard of gravel paths are not up to best in class standard which is constantly evolving– a fairly new processus called Stabipaq seems now widely used in France (including in Brest area which see as much rain as Vancouver, and on steep slopes, reminder, the arbutus corridor is a railway corridor, so its slopes are fairly gentle). The topic needs to be examined with a cool head to examine the pros and the cons of different solution to be shared in a honest public consultation.
        …In the meantime, the well used gravel path of Burnaby’s Central park offer good rolling condition …and under the rain, they look like it (yes having fenders on your bike is a good idea…on the street too!):
        ttps://www.google.ca/maps/@49.2305161,-123.0184939,3a,51y,187.46h,65.86t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s-VpVEwkTz46I%2FVs5T0zDQpZI%2FAAAAAAAAAuw%2FNzKpxfSRtf0V6Dr2eFahYXUNvUMZhutsACLIB!2e4!3e11!6s%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2F-VpVEwkTz46I%2FVs5T0zDQpZI%2FAAAAAAAAAuw%2FNzKpxfSRtf0V6Dr2eFahYXUNvUMZhutsACLIB%2Fw203-h101-n-k-no%2F!7i7680!8i3840!5m1!1e4

  8. Paving it does seem a little odd for an initial, temporary surface. Speaking as a cyclist, it’s hard not to salivate at a straight stretch of asphalt like that, and I’d hate to see the first news story be a pedestrian, jogger, or child clipped by a less-than-responsible cyclist (there are a few) doing 50 kmh down that straightaway.
    I think a compacted surface, like the Richmond dyke trails, might have been a better first step to accommodate ‘all users’ until it’s decided exactly how to develop it.

    1. I’d argue some cyclists are doing 50 down that straight away because there is literally no one else on it right now, You also have to work pretty hard to get to 50- I tried to get to 40 along there and that hurt.

  9. There’s ability and there’s ability. Ask anyone who uses a wheelchair whether they’d prefer pavement or crushed stone along that pathway. Smooth pavement makes this accessible to more people. It frustrates me that in 2016 we continue to treat accessibility as an afterthought, as with the latest Skytrain debacle. This is a rare example of politicians doing the right thing for wheelchair users, whether that was the intention or not.

    1. The City recently completed significant public consultation on improvements to the South False Creek Seaside Greenway. Apart from cycling and active transportation advocates, there was partipation by the senior’s advisory committee, and groups representing people with physical challenges. The City recommended keeping the flagstones around Leg in Boot Square, for cost reasons. There was significant push back on that from the above groups. The flagstones are going, in the end.
      This wasn’t an accident, IMO, it was the result of clear communication by multiple stakeholder groups.

      1. And the City ignored the fact that moving the loading zone many meters away from seniors and disable people living in the area would keep them house-bound, but I guess they do not matter since they can’t ride bikes.

        1. Joe,
          Watch the Minutes from the City Council Meeting of May 4, 2016 (available on City of Vancouver website live video stream) re False Creek Greenway proposed changes and their impacts on seniors and the diabled.

    2. Sure, without curbs of any kind on the hastily paved path, wheelchairs can run right off and tip their users into the ditches on both sides of the path, but that doesn’t matter since they’re not cyclists, right? More Vision lack of vision.

  10. Crazy stuff. Yeah, the City really is unable to do anything without somebody not liking something. Faced with that situation then the only recourse is evidence-based decision making.
    So, in my opinion, this is exactly what is wanted by doing a temporary path. To see what people think of it and get responses. Not just with it’s material but it’s size and placement. We already have a few items just on this comment thread alone. I trust everyone here will be putting those into the consultation process.
    Regarding asphalt making people cycle fast, I ask why is that a problem? Bicycles are not a danger to others. (And you can pick up some pretty good speeds with crushed gravel with the right tires so gravel wouldn’t even slow people down.)
    No, the best way is to design the route so that no matter what speed someone is going at (whether walking, cycling, skateboarding, rollerblading) that they aren’t a problem to someone else going slower than them.

    1. My gosh, this trial and error, let’s build something at great taxpayer cost and then just wait and see what happens! Whatever happened to preliminary studies, proper engineering practices and knowledgeable designing? City engineers have a responsibility to create safe infrastructure, not fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants and make the necessary changes after deaths.

    1. Running alongside the Stanley Park Seawall is a road called Park Drive.
      Running alongside the north False Creek paths is Pacific Blvd.
      Running alongside the South False Creek Seawall is Charleson.
      All are good choices for people on bikes who want to travel faster.
      What is your suggestion?

      1. Suggestion: don’t build redundant infrastructure; it is a disgraceful waste of taxpayer dollars and creates unsafe roadways and gridlock for motorists.

        1. Robert, I agree with you, but it is a challenge given some motorist’s cries of there being a war on the car. The Burrard Bridge changes being done now are a good example of reclaiming a sidewalk for pedestrians. The bike lanes don’t see a significant change, apart from the intersections, but the pedestrian improvements are critical. I think there needs to be space designed into quieter paths for all ages and abilities riders, especially families with children. The roads near those paths are suited for faster cyclists. When we recently worked with the City as part of a focus group on improving the South False Creek seawall (which was about separating the modes, and providing better pedestrian experiences as well as space for people on bikes) we had agreement from all on improving Charleson, as the Seaside Bypass, and not just trying to make the Seawall a one size fits all path. HUB Cycling has already suggested to the City that the planned permanent paths on the Arbutus Greenway should be considered as part of improvements along the Arbutus Corridor, taking that same approach, so that all can be accommodated.

  11. As per usual, the City of Vancouver does exactly what they want. What they know is good for us all. Then allows venting after, disguised as consultations.

    1. So you expect them to be able to predict the future? There are asphalt paths in off road areas all over and nobody ever complained about them.

      1. Darn right they should be able to predict the future of transportation route usage, need and safety. This is called their job.

    2. Eric and Susan, every other city in the Metro is building wide, paved trails. Most are for mixed pedestrian and bike use. Their city councils and press receive only a modicum of critical citizen comments over this issue compared to Vancouver.
      It’s a unique phenomenon. But Vancouver is not that unique, despite your devoted personal attention to making out it is. Is your world really that small?

      1. The Arbutus Greenway has been highly touted by his worship Gregor the Roberson. Cameras and other scribes along with supplicants have been summoned for the photo ops. It has been and still is, big news.
        Suddenly laying a runway-like asphalt petroleum black-top track, which it better suited to drag racing Hemi equipped 800 hp flash-gas, flame blasting rocket buggies did come as a bit of a surprise to the people. Just as gladioli and dalias are coming into bloom too, only served to sear the wound more. Pastoral evening strolls just became obliterated by visions of Lycra clad Vision gladiators. A massive miscalculation.
        No wonder they have backed down and stopped the next scar of black goop.
        At least it does give a suitable location for the next mayoral candidate to remind citizens of yet another Vision slap in their face.

        1. Hemi-equipped top fuel dragsters’ horsepower is typically measured in the thousands fyi. Rocket cars’ power is measured as thrust. Average human cyclist is about 1/4 horsepower on average IIRC. Hate to see good hyperbole dragged down by false information.

      2. And now we will get to see pictures of seniors and people with disabilities, stopped at 16th and 32nd, asking why they can’t use the rest of the path, which will be gravel. And we will see how the gravel path does in the rainy season. We will also get to measure the number of users. At least we will have alternatives available for comparison.

        1. Oh, yes, that’s just bound to happen, Jeff. You let me know when it does, but I won’t be holding my breath.

        2. I can’t wait till the gravel that was laid for asphalt to be laid on top of it starts to get destroyed in the rain- it’s already starting to develop ruts. Potholes galore!

      3. MB – I agree. The three North Shore municipalities and First Nations are cooperating to complete the hugely popular Spirit Trail from Deep Cove to Horseshoe Bay. The standard width is 4m.

        1. The North Shore Spirit Trail is indeed hugely popular. It also has areas of high conflict between people walking, dog walking and cycling, especially where the path goes through parks.
          However, unlike in Vancouver there are no alternative safe bike routes, so most people cycling will choose the Spirit Trail since it is separated from car and truck traffic. Even many road cyclists chose to ride the Spirit Trail through busy Ambleside Park, rather than face riding in heavy traffic on Marine Drive.
          I don’t foresee the user conflict in Vancouver. There are good bike routes near the Arbutus greenway for people who just want to ride quickly from A to B, and not necessarily want a greenway experience. On the North Shore the Spirit Trail seems to be the only safe low level east-west bike route that the municipalities build.

        2. The Spirit Trail is really nice. Of course it needs improvements and to be extended.
          I see nothing wrong with wanting to use a transportation corridor to go quickly to your destination. If there are fears of people “speeding” too close to them then that’s a design issue to make it not a problem to others. One can go very slowly by someone else and they can still feel you’re too fast. What the real problem is though is that you’re too close to them. This means that the cycle/skateboard/mobility scooter path should be not close to the walking/child on tricycle path. Simple solution and more effective than anything else.
          But I suspect that we’re going to have to hear from people proposing all sorts of unworkable things before we end up back to this anyway. The Netherlands tried everything back in the ’70s and learned what works and what doesn’t. Let’s just copy them.
          Discussion of surface treatment is dogmatic and not going to get us anywhere.

  12. Good to see the city quickly created a path that can be used and benefit all Vancouver residents – who pay for the land purchase – and not only nearby residents.

    1. Oh sure: it’s “good” to pay for the same infrastructure twice. Heck, why not pay for it a third or fourth time, like we are doing on Burrard Street. The City engineers still haven’t got it right, repaving and repainting lanes now over and over and over. Heck, when the suicide fence doesn’t decrease the suicide rates in the city, we will likely have to pay for the fence to be taken down and some other equally-useless infrastructure to try to stop the mentally ill. Since when did transportation engineering, and at taxpayers’ expense, become an adjunct of psychoanalysis? City Council needs to examine its own reasoning.

    2. I agree with MB, Susan. You have some strong opinions and appear frustrated. Maybe it’s time to go pro with it and run for office. Then you can maybe have some influence from the inside as well as learn why things are the way they are.

  13. Seems to make some sense to me to use asphalt:
    – impermeable surface prevents water penetration and further leaching of underlying creosote and hydrocarbons deeper into the soil below.
    – asphalt avoids pooling of rainwater on the path (as seen on gravel paths like around Vanier Park).
    – gravel / dirt paths may be susceptible to water erosion / gulleying on hilly segments (this RoW is not flat).
    – asphalt provides a safer braking surface for cyclists to stop on, whereas gravel may cause skidding, especially on hills (i.e. also think municipal liability).
    – asphalt can be easily removed and recycled for application elsewhere after temporary use is over (i.e. asphalt is commonly scraped up, remelted and relaid on roads)
    Asphalt recycling:
    https://youtu.be/0uedm1Myyts

    1. Looking forward to riding this! I think the pavement is a great idea. Cyclists & people in wheelchairs deserve first class, smooth paths. I even prefer walking on them, compared to gravel anyways.

  14. Okay, so now the City has said that they’ll stop paving the temporary path with asphalt. This leaves us with some of it paved and some crushed pressed gravel.
    This gives us a great opportunity to make some comparisons of these two surfaces.

    1. Why stop now. It’s all Other Peoples’ Money anyway, so do a few kilometres in Plastic Composite Decking, then some more in concrete, some in interlocking pavers and some in BC lumber planks. Let’s get a real range of possibilities. Anyone calling for good old fashioned grass? We can make this a comprehensive study that will draw academics and planners from around the world.
      Where else could you possibly find these surfaces?

    2. I would like to see counters on each section, as well as surveys of users as to which surface treatment they prefer.
      The Bike the Night event in September will provide an opportunity to hear from thousands of path users in a single evening.

      1. Jeff. survey is a great idea, however counters are problematic since end points of the paved section do not connect to any bike routes. It would be nice if the city would extend the paved section to between 10th Ave and 37th Ave so that it would integrate with the cycling network.

        1. Agreed, counters won’t be good for measuring total number of users, but they could be very useful for differential counts of the paved and unsaved sections, and the cross traffic.

    3. The first consideration in any publicly funded project like this should be accessibility. Will it be accessible to everyone? If not, then how can we make it accessible to more people?
      I know power wheelchair users who would be on this this pathway tomorrow, were it completely paved. Ask any wheelchair user to describe their last near-death experience with an inconsiderate rush hour driver. Watch someone in a power chair negotiate bone-rattling curb cuts on our sidewalks to appreciate how much a clear, smooth route between the Fraser river and Granville Island would mean. It could be life-altering.
      The greenway project should begin with providing an accessible path for wheelchairs and accessibility scooters. Argue about the details later.

      1. Define “accessible path for wheelchairs and accessibility scooters”; do these include curbs to prevent users flying off into the ditches on both sides of the path, and how are the disabled to be kept safe from the lycra speedway cyclists?

        1. Build the path for the least physically able person you can imagine. Not for the Rick Hansens of the world, but for someone who might only be able to push themself across the room in a manual wheelchair using one arm, or maneuver a slow-moving power wheelchair using head controls. Build that and you open new worlds for people.
          Frankly, I’m not sure what the best way is to mix bikes and wheelchairs, but I see both every day on seawalls all over the city. Doesn’t seem to be a problem really.
          Not sure how you imagine curbs might help.

Subscribe to Viewpoint Vancouver

Get breaking news and fresh views, direct to your inbox.

Join 7,284 other subscribers

Show your Support

Check our Patreon page for stylish coffee mugs, private city tours, and more – or, make a one-time or recurring donation. Thank you for helping shape this place we love.

Popular Articles

See All

All Articles