Business & Economy
June 30, 2020

Bikes and Business: The Ice Cream Indicator

Jeff Leigh of HUB reports:

My wife and I rode Stanley Park last Monday, and stopped in at the Prospect Point Café.  We spoke with the staff at the concession, who advised they had been very busy serving people on bikes through the weekend.

We typically do not stop at the top of the hill, but head right on down.  Now we have a reason to stop.

Jeff and his wife haven’t been alone.  Here’s the scene last Sunday:

Here’s the line-up just for ice cream:

Prospect Point Cafe was literally surrounded by bikes and riders – most of whom looked to be in the demographic that any restaurant would find rather attractive.  And since these were all Vancouver residents (no tourists, remember), they’re also the ones who, when out-of-town guests return, will be looking for a good place to take them, whether for ice cream or sit-down meals, whether by bike, car or bus.

Honestly, what it is going to take for businesses people to catch on?  Who can they turn to for advice?

Oh yeah, HUB.  Jeff again:

HUB Cycling is already working on promoting businesses in the park.

HUB has a program called Bike Friendly Business,  which has just the type of offerings that businesses new to dealing with people cycling can use, from Business Development services, to certification, to marketing to people who cycle.  If you have a business and want to talk, please reach out.

There are other HUB Cycling programs and events that can help businesses with marketing to people on bikes as well.  Bike to Shop comes up later in the summer.  Volunteers lead group rides to participating businesses, helping those new to transportation cycling learn how to bike to shops, restaurants, and so on.

It is important that businesses who believe their business is solely dependent on motor-vehicle traffic see that there is a whole community of people who cycle for transportation, and who spend money at local businesses.

 

Read more »

Never say PT isn’t open to a range of points of view.  Here’s one by David* – who argues for #stanleyparkforall.  That is, keep the bikes on the seawall (crowding is only evidence of its popularity) and keep both lanes for cars (because of seniors, disabled, business, etc.).

Gotta say, it’s a well-done video.

So, what’s wrong with sharing the road with one lane for each?  David’s response: “we don’t know how it could impact traffic flow or emergency vehicle access”.  Reverse what you did, Parks Board, go back to the way it was – before March 2020 ever happened – and have a conversation.  A long conversation.

Well, David, now we will know how one lane each impacts traffic flow.  And my guess is, after seeing the results so far and by the end of summer, you’ll have to come up with another well-done video.

 

*Tell is more about yourself, and, while you’re at it, what you think those ‘improvements’ to the seawall would be to accommodate the (yes, literally) hundreds of thousands of bike trips being made on Park Drive as a result of the current configuration.

 

 

 

Read more »

Friday, June 9th – just up from the Rowing Club on Park Drive.  Mid-afternoon.

This was what it was like, and won’t be anymore.  That’s okay, everything is changing in these times.

No matter how it turns out, the Spring of the Virus will be remembered as a mix of bliss and dread.  Understandably there’s a desire to return to normality – but at what price and how much of the bliss?

Like this:

 

On the afternoon of June 19th, the cars return, blinkers flashing, as they start to mix with cyclists who variously occupy the asphalt from curb to curb. The parking lots are not yet open.

Here’s a video a moment in the transition: Park Drive at Lumberman’s Arch – June 19th

The signs are up:

Cars rarely drive at 15 km.  Nor do a lot of cyclists when they’re pacing themselves around Park Drive.  Both want to go faster.  Cars like driving at 30 K or more.  Cyclists like a comfortable speed from 15 to 20 K, and more when racing.

Will the expected speed for cars stay at 15, when it probably won’t be for cyclists?   Will the Park Board have to enforce a differential speed limit for users on either side of the barrier?

By the end of June, there will be a new sensibility on Park Drive as the bikes all move over into one lane and the vehicles another – each with less space than they’re used to.  Meanwhile, down on the seawall, the same questions arise: accessibility for whom, and how?

I hope we’ll still see moments like this – a short video of Park Drive at Lumberman’s Arch, as a diverse group of road users wheel by.  Diverse not in ethnicity but in the various ways they wheel.

Diversity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read more »

 

How many times will we go through this?

Hornby Bike Lane.  Burrard Bridge Bike Lanes (three times).  Point Grey Road.

Same arguments – Carmageddon and business catastrophe confidently predicted – and the same results: no serious negative consequences and a better, healthier city.  And once the temporary bike lanes are in, as Commissioner John Coupar noted, we don’t go back.

There’s an obvious reason for that which, oddly, he didn’t articulate: they worked.  They helped build the city we said we wanted.   (Which, if John has his way, will stop at the borders of our parks.)

Last night before the Board of Parks and Recreation Board, it was the same old debate with a twist.  For those who want to return to the way it was, it’s a fight now on the side of the marginalized, the people who, they say, need most of the asphalt in the park to provide access and parking – meaning by default full Motordom for all, forever.  Definitely what Lord Stanley had in mind.

But here’s the one piece of new information that came out that really is important, by way of Park Commissioner Dave Demers: Park Board staff estimate visitation within Stanley Park is up by 50 percent since May 1.  They have counted 350,000 cyclists over the last 67-day period, compared to about 60,000 vehicle trips in the same period last year, a quarter of which were thought to be using Park Drive as a shortcut to bypass the Causeway. Motor vehicles, in other words, were 17 percent of all trips with something involving wheels.

That increase is extraordinary.  And that’s without tourists in the mix.

But what those opposed to providing a separate lane on the drive seem to ignore is this, at least if they presume much of that increase can be accommodated on the seawall:

A shot from the late 1990s prior to the construction of the Seaside Greenway’s separated lanes and still the condition of some parts of the seawall around Stanley Park.

Inducing congestion on the seawall by trying to avoid vehicle congestion on the drive is going to have some unpleasant consequences.

I was wondering whether the NPA commissioners would have anything positive to say about the need to accommodate this desired growth in walking and cycling in a harmonious way.  But no.  The NPA has made a calculated decision to appeal for the support of people who work up a lather in condemnation of taking space from vehicles – people like Nigel Malkin, quoted here in a CBC story:

Read more »

 

“He is not anti-bike, he said.”

That’s NPA Park Commissioner John Coupar in today’s Sun. 

Problem is, he’s not pro-bike either.  And as a commissioner for the Board of Parks and Recreation, he’s been an effective opponent, now along with the other NPA park commissioner and the NPA board, of any change to the status quo, circa 1990, when the City (under an NPA Council) began to make this a more cycling-friendly city by building separated bikeways.  (Best example: the Seaside Bikeway).

For John, perhaps angling for another mayoral run, he’s leading a fight of his own manufacture: “the logical thing to do is to open up (Park Drive) just the way it was. If you are going to make changes in the future take your time, talk to everybody, make it public.” (Emphasis added, if ‘just the way it was’ was Stanley Park circa 1990.)

Consultation and process have served John and the Parks Board well in ensuring that no significant improvement in cycling in any of the parks has occurred since, well, 1990.  PT has documented that extensively.

For the NPA as a whole, an anti-bike-lane agenda, whether explicitly stated or dog-whistled, has not actually served them well; they haven’t won a mayoral election since 2008.  But even today, as they redrink their bathwater, the NPA board itself, not just the NPA park commissioners, has clearly decided the Park Drive closure to vehicles is the issue they want to brand themselves with.

This letter was circulated to their presumed supporters from the board president:

Dear Supporter,

We know Vancouverites are extremely proud of Stanley Park. However, access to the park for all is under attack! We are emerging from this pandemic and it is time to re-open Stanley Park for everyone.

That’s why the NPA has called for an emergency meeting on Thursday, June 18th at 6:30 pm to re-open the park in time for this Father’s Day weekend and for the first weekend of summer.

This is where we need you to come in. If you believe that Stanley Park must be reopened to vehicle traffic immediately please sign up to speak at the meeting here. The meeting is online via the Zoom video conference. We know that the Greens and COPE will have their vocal activists show up, so please consider joining us in fighting for access and inclusiveness for all in the park.

Sincerely,

David Mawhinney, President, Non-Partisan Association

I do have to admire their strategy to use the language of wokiness – ableism, ageism – to frame the fight as one on behalf of the disabled and seniors against the activists and Lycra-clad.  (Or people like me, for whom Stanley Park is our front yard.  Talk about privileged!)

It’s evident that this a political strategy – and a rather tacky one: proclaim your opponents in favour of something they are not (closure of the park to cars) and then double down on the exaggeration by not correcting the mis-statement when called on it.

Here’s Jeff Leigh, a spokesperson for HUB Cycling:

I have been talking to the media for several weeks now, telling them that I am happy to have a lane allocated for cycling in the park, and for automobiles and delivery vehicles to have a lane, and for people walking to have space to move on the seawall in these times of physical distancing. It is about space for all. Nothing selfish about it.

And their response is typically to post a headline that says something like “cyclists want vehicles banned from Stanley Park permanently” even when the article or interview that follows doesn’t call for that at all. It is tiring.

I’m sure the NPA know their motion won’t pass; it isn’t intended to.  It’s positioning, and it allows them, when staff report back with the modified reallocation (likely opening the park to cars in one lane) to proclaim victory, implying that the inevitable occurred only because of their opposition to something that wasn’t going to happen anyway.

They will appear relevant to their base, but only at the price of reaffirming their backward-looking commitment to a status quo that disappeared utterly when Vancouverites found that cycling was a perfect response to the pandemic: outdoors,

Read more »

I’m trying to figure out what NPA Parks Commissioners Barker and Coupar have in mind.

They want to “take immediate steps to reopen Stanley Park to its pre COVID19 transportation and access plan…”  And do it now, before next week.

Who knew there was a plan to keep Stanley Park in 1960s-style traffic design?  You know, Motordom.

I’m trying to figure out whether they actually intend the cyclists to go back to the seawall and the shared paths.  Since, not wanting to fight it out with the cars and buses on a shared Park Drive, many will be back on the seawall, sharing what had been used only for walking and running while all the bikes were up on the road.

So, is all the return to “sharing” really the outcome the NPA Commissioners want?  Given the likelihood of immediate conflict.

 

There have been months and months of flow-way style cycling in the park.   The peoples of Vancouver found a collective play space.  And this video is what it looked like last week:

Park Drive

 

Imagine a portion of those cyclists back on what have been walk-only paths.   Isn’t this a set-up for immediate conflict?

I doubt that’s really what the NPA commissioners want.

So what is?

Read more »

As the debate heats up and polarizes on how Stanley Park should allocate road space while accommodating everyone in a time of pandemic, here’s the bigger question:

Does access for the disabled and seniors require ‘Full Motordom’ – the default 20th-century road-and-parking design that gave us auto-dependence?

Here are several examples of Motordom design from the park, including this one:

The roads are designed almost exclusively for driving – banked and angled curves, no stop signs, unaligned crosswalks, limited sidewalks.  Of course, no bike lanes.

Some park commissioners and supporters have a new line of defense to prevent change: Motordom is necessary to provide access for the disabled and seniors (who are presumed to be car-dependent), while at the same time implying or accusing those who desire a more balanced approach of demanding a car-fee Stanley Park.  They’re not and it isn’t.

 

Read more »

No matter how many times the NPA lose elections when they include anti-cycling dog whistling, they just can’t stop themselves.  Here’s the latest from NPA Park Commissioner Tricia Barker:

It’s not hard to figure out the underlying assumptions:

  • Seniors don’t cycle.
  • Seniors are so effectively disabled, they are reliant on (and can afford) cars.
  • Seniors need to have Stanley Park returned to its car-dominant allocation of space – “For ALL TIME!”

The implications follow:

  • The interests of cyclists and seniors are opposed.
  • NPA Commissioners will justify their anti-cycling strategy as pro-senior.
  • Cyclists and walkers who reject a return to the status-quo are anti-senior.

The NPA have been successful at least in one respect: keeping any new cycling infrastructure built to the City standard out of parks. Other than those places (like the South Shore of False Creek) where the City shares jurisdiction and will design and pay for bikeway-standard improvements, there has been no other significant upgrades within parks.  As a result, the park experience has been worsening for everyone, particularly in the case of Kits and Jericho.

Here’s a Jericho Video which illustrates the lack of adequate space for walkers, cyclists and runners, squeezed together on an unpleasant surface, without separation or signage.

In the three months into the pandemic, the Park Board has done essentially one thing for cycling: limiting vehicle traffic in Stanley Park.  They have done nothing to address crowding in parks elsewhere, leaving it up to the City (thanks to NPA Councillor Lisa Dominato’s Open Streets motion) to do the heavy lifting.

But they have moved fast to open up the parking lots, and now seem determined to get Park Drive in Stanley Park returned to wide-open car use as soon as possible, presumably so that cars and bikes can fight it out for road space. Or even worse, try to squeeze the extraordinary increase in cycling back on to the seawall, making the experience worse for everyone.

But here’s the thing: no cycling advocate that I have heard has suggested that Park Drive not accommodate those with more limited mobility.  Indeed, it’s in the remarks from HUB Cycling member Jeff Leigh:

Read more »

This week the Park Board placed big red jersey barriers to create S-curves on Park Drive on the steep downhill portion from Prospect Point.  No notice, no explanation, but presumably to slow down cyclists, particularly where the Tatlow Trail crosses the road.

Download video here: IMG_5198 (1) – Stanley Park Chicane

 

Dianna has some thoughts:

Well, bless their hearts, after a couple of days observing that the bike slalom course they’d created on the Stanley Park downhill was dangerous, the Park Department has made the chicanes much more rideable. On Wednesday, each of the five chicanes forced cyclists descending Stanley Park Road into a tight S curve to squeeze between a pair of offset plastic barriers. Today, Saturday, the barriers were more widely spaced, so the curve to slide between them was much more gentle. No more squealing brakes or casual riders on the edge of control.

But if the point is to slow riders on the descent, forcing a mix of riders aged eight to eighty, casuals to road warriors into narrow gaps, makes little sense.. The descending road is a wide two lanes. Signs at the top warning of the descent, and advising slow riders to keep to the right, are all that’s needed to reduce or avoid conflicts.

The more urgent need is for signs that keep riders from riding the wrong way on the parks one-way roads. At the bottom of the hill, I met a dozen tourists wandering the wrong way, unsure where to go, and grateful when I got them turned around. There were others, worriedly descending the climb to Prospect Point like salmon swimming upstream. How had they gotten that far without figuring out their mistake? Lack of signs, could it be?

Closing Stanley Park roads to cars, so that walkers, runners and cyclists can exercise and enjoy nature at social distance, is wonderful. Very early last Wednesday, we came upon crews putting up the first barriers. I pointed out that one barrier blocked cyclists from exitIng the park to Beach Drive. As they moved it, they said that the changes were a work in process, and that they expected to make other changes.

But why do this by trial and error? Why not start with experienced consultants to design the best signage and traffic controls? Cyclists and city planners have complained for decades that the Park Board wants cyclists to ride to parks, but not through them. There are examples throughout Vancouver.

The coronavirus has changed that.

Read more »

Good morning, world!  Here we are at Prospect Point shortly after dawn this morning, and you just have to trust that we came up the OTHER direction.

I was riding at the front of our little gang of three, and was so alert for oncoming cyclists, and one car, that I didn’t do much looking around.

We got a few dirty glances from the dozen other riders we encountered (at a safe distance) but only one comment. Just before we peaked, a man called, “Heads up for a coyote at the bottom of the hill. Or maybe a wild dog. I’m not sure.”

I did notice that the damage done to the park during the ’06 windstorm is much more evident from that direction.

And the climb is totally different—steadier and quite gentle rather than the stair steps of the usual route. And woodpeckers! So many. But maybe that was due to the early hour.

 

Read more »